You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The plan was to move to outsourcing model closer to AMD. The product groups wanted this as well. Intel doesnt publicly comment on strategy plans under consideration .... But if you don't think I am correct, feel free to ask former Intel Execs/board members. Reminder I published notes on this and predicted the outcome between 2021 and 2023
Instead Intel went all in on foundry and Fabs with end goal of 18A being unquestioned leader. and the stock crashed.
If Intel did not have any foundry, and it had all its CCG, DCAI revenue. what would the stock price be? 80% More revenue than AMD..... Assume same product cost GM as AMD.
For the stock price - I agree it would be a *little* better, but probably not signficantly as their products haven't been competitive. There could certainly have been a bump for the 'bold move', though some investors might have also seen that Intel had no path to better cost margins than AMD without the fabs. (Yes - counter argument on stronger scale.. but.. not inner circle with TSMC, etc.)
With or without fabs, there is a clear narrative that Intel has been consistently losing market share in high margin areas (workstation, server) for 5 years running now. Though they might have had enough cash to keep the dividend scheme a little longer..
...
For the fabs vs fabless I was just curious if anyone knows for sure what Swans plan was. Did Intel actually have an internal plan to stop fab development after a certain year or node (and what was that criteria). I know this is not likely ever to be public, but.. based on your comments I'm curious .
.