Intel might be too big to fail

The playbook is so fucking obvious. Take over quasi monopolist, loot through stock buybacks, offload to retail, start writing articles calling for rescue

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#5

Post by cj » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:16 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #3

The US needs more chip fab startups. Put the money there.

I’m not so sure. Building chips isn’t like building software.

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#6

Post by nickthegreek » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:21 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #5

echelon wrote: post #3

The US needs more chip fab startups. Put the money there.

I’m not so sure. Building chips isn’t like building software.

It’s ease of completion doesn’t change the calculus of its importance.

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#7

Post by Retric » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:23 PM UTC

nickthegreek wrote: post #6

cj wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not so sure. Building chips isn’t like building software.

It’s ease of completion doesn’t change the calculus of its importance.

Ease of success changes the calculus relative to other options.

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#8

Post by jessfyi » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:24 PM UTC

Any part of "saving" Intel should include a mechanism barring them from putting any more money that should be spent on R&D towards stock buybacks ($152B since 1990 as of September.) That said quoting the former Intel CEO (who still owns 3,245,986 shares) as "[one of the] expert[s] who says breaking up Intel won't do any good" seems like journalist malpractice--and makes me all the more certain it should be subsumed by a company with executives hungry to actually win again.

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#9

Post by exabrial » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:26 PM UTC

Awesome, I can't wait for me the taxpayer to breathe life into the smoldering shell of a company where the executives and unlimited layers of useless middle management used financial engineering to fool investors about the internal situation while extracting as much money as possible and then bailing out on golden parachutes and landing in soft thick piles of bonuses.

Remember when we did this in 2008 under the Obama administration? We gave them $10bil and they paid out "contractually obligated bonuses" with more than half of the money? https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/jul/31/wall-street...

Just let it fail. If you're really paranoid, pass a law preventing and foreign buyers from snapping up the ip or fabs and we'll just fine, but that's probably not even needed.

Re: Intel might be too big to fail

#10

Post by exabrial » Sun, Nov 03, 2024, 2:29 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #5

echelon wrote: post #3

The US needs more chip fab startups. Put the money there.

I’m not so sure. Building chips isn’t like building software.

Competing against state backed cheap labor, with little environmental oversight is incredibly hard. We've had pockets of success using automation; but a lot of the problems we create for ourselves too.