Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/bloomberg-intel-is-seeking-an-investment-from-apple-as-part-of-its-comeback-bid.23688/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2030770
            [XFI] => 1060170
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Bloomberg: Intel Is Seeking an Investment From Apple as Part of Its Comeback Bid

benb

Well-known member
Ryan Gould and Liana Baker
Wed, September 24, 2025 at 4:16 PM CDT 4 min read

(Bloomberg) -- Intel Corp. has approached Apple Inc. about securing an investment in the ailing chipmaker, according to people familiar with the matter, part of efforts to bolster a business that’s now partially owned by the US government.

Apple and Intel also have discussed how to work more closely together, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the deliberations are private. The talks have been early-stage and may not lead to an agreement, the people said.

1758762897631.png

Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan has been lining up partners as part of a turnaround bid.Photographer: Annabelle Chih/Bloomberg

Shares of Intel rose 6.4% to $31.22 on Wednesday in New York after Bloomberg News reported on the discussions. Apple closed down less than 1% at $252.31.

Such a deal would follow a $5 billion investment last week by Nvidia Corp., which plans to work with Intel on chips for personal computers and data centers. SoftBank Group Corp., the Japanese tech giant seeking to expand further in the US, announced a $2 billion investment in Intel last month.

Intel also has reached out to other companies about possible investments and partnerships, the people said.

A deal with Apple, a longtime Intel customer that switched to in-house processors in the past five years, would represent further validation of the chipmaker’s turnaround bid. Still, it’s unlikely that Apple would switch back to Intel processors in its devices. The iPhone maker’s most sophisticated chips are now produced by partner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.

A representative for Intel declined to comment. An Apple spokesperson didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Intel Chief Executive Officer Lip-Bu Tan is attempting a comeback with the backing of the federal government. In an unconventional deal brokered by the Trump administration in August, the US acquired a roughly 10% stake in the chipmaker. Intel is seen as a critical piece of efforts to reinvigorate domestic production — a priority for the White House.

Even with financial support, Intel’s challenges remain daunting. The Santa Clara, California-based company has lost its long-held technological edge and ceded market share to rivals such as Advanced Micro Devices Inc. Moreover, Intel has struggled to capitalize on booming sales of artificial intelligence gear — a specialty of Nvidia.

Once the dominant chipmaker, Intel now has a fraction of Nvidia’s sales and market capitalization. It also has laid off workers and delayed factory expansion plans to cope with its deteriorating finances.

1758763004038.png

Apple CEO Tim Cook has positioned the company as a champion of domestic production.Photographer: Bloomberg/Bloomberg

Still, investors have grown more optimistic about its prospects since the government infusion. The stock is up more than 60% since the beginning of August.

Under former CEO Pat Gelsinger, Intel set out to become a chip foundry — a business that makes semiconductors for outside clients. But the company has struggled to secure enough customers to support its factory expansion plans.

Intel has continued to pursue the foundry strategy under Tan, though more cautiously. He said in July that Intel would only roll out a new cutting-edge production technique — called 14A — if customers committed to it.

Apple and Intel have a long, sometimes strained history together. Apple used Intel chips in its Macs for years but began shifting away from the supplier in 2020 — part of a broader effort to use more in-house components. Apple also acquired most of Intel’s modem chip business in 2019.

These days, Apple has sought to show that it’s investing heavily in the US — even as much of its production remains overseas. At a White House event in August, the company announced plans to spend $600 billion on domestic initiatives over a four-year period, up from a previous pledge of $500 billion. The centerpiece of the expansion was a $2.5 billion investment in Corning Inc., Apple’s longtime glass supplier.

Apple CEO Tim Cook told CNBC’s Jim Cramer that the investments would encourage other companies to add US production, creating a “domino effect.”

When asked about Intel, he said that competition would be good for the chip foundry industry. “We’d love to see Intel come back,” Cook said.

--With assistance from Mark Gurman, Ian King and Mackenzie Hawkins.

(Updates with Intel’s foundry effort starting in 12th paragraph.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can assure you Lip-Bu is talking to Apple. He did the keynote at the GSA US Executive Forum last night in Menlo Park pumping Intel's importance and the road to $1T valuation by 2030. His candor and vision was greatly appreciated.

When do you think the media will stop calling Intel "beleaguered"? Maybe after the rumored Apple $5B investment? Remember back in the day when journalists reported the facts? Now everyone is an over opinionated blogger like me. :ROFLMAO:
 
I can assure you Lip-Bu is talking to Apple. He did the keynote at the GSA US Executive Forum last night in Menlo Park pumping Intel's importance and the road to $1T valuation by 2030. His candor and vision was greatly appreciated.

When do you think the media will stop calling Intel "beleaguered" or other click bate descriptors? Maybe after the rumored Apple $5B investment? I had a heated conversation with a Reuters hack today at OIP about that. Remember back in the day when journalists reported the facts? Now everyone is an over opinionated blogger like me. :ROFLMAO:

The $1Tn valuation?

Is that to be achieved through technical progress or just pumping the share price?
 

What you need to know about the government’s 10% stake in Intel​

Politics Updated on Sep 20, 2025 11:50 AM EDT — Published on Sep 19, 2025 4:20 PM EDT


..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
DeHaven also raised concerns about how long the stake will last and politicization of private industry.

“Just based on how this thing came about, with the president calling for the CEO to be fired, and then he has to tuck tail and come to the White House and bend the knee, and then Trump gets his 10% – it’s already a politicized environment,” DeHaven said.

There’s precedent for that concern. In the 1930s, the federal government’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation bought preferred stock from banks to stabilize the financial industry. In some cases, the RFC used its status as a shareholder to vote to change management or reduce bankers’ salaries.

But there’s also a long history of public-private partnership in the growth of important technologies, Shivakumar said.

“If that partnership doesn’t achieve the right balance, it can also distort markets,” he said. “If the government is weighing in with the partial ownership of some companies and not others, does the support of some companies then disadvantage the others?”

It remains unclear what the legal argument in support of the move is, where the money will go and how it will be spent.

“There are a whole bunch of questions about just the viability of that arrangement going forward. Because there’s so many unanswered questions — markets hate uncertainty,” Shivakumar said.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...hink-about-the-u-s-governments-stake-in-intel
 
Do they care as the goal appears to be the 1Tn valuation however it come about
trying to figure out how much of a wishful thinking on their part, to get to $1T valuation while with a negative margin entity continue to drag along
 
The $1Tn valuation?
Is that to be achieved through technical progress or just pumping the share price?

Good question. The answer is probably both. It would be interesting to see how many politicians bought Intel before and after the US Government investment.

The USG investment is a much hotter debated topic than I expected. Did we have similar "government control" discussions with the CHIPs Act money? I'm a big fan of disruptive moves and the semiconductor industry is full of them. I call them pivots and the most successful companies in Silicon Valley have all done them. I call the USG investment a pivot, I honestly do not see the big deal until there is an administration change. I do have faith in Lip-Bu's ability to navigate political challenges. He gave us a leadership master class in getting the investment after the Tim Cotton letter and resulting uproar.

The consensus in the trenches is that Intel was in much worse trouble than the BoD knew, than Lip-Bu knew, so the pivot he engineered is much more impressive than most people realize. Just my opinion of course.
 
Back
Top