Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/intel-planning-for-thousands-of-job-cuts-internal-sources-say.7643/page-2
        )

    [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] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

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

Intel planning for thousands of job cuts, internal sources say

Intel appears to be making the classic retreat upmarket, as described by Christensen. In doing so, they are sealing their fate - this is textbook disruption.

How things could unfold, if things continue to proceed by the book:

-Intel attempts to offset volume with price. Cost/performance curve of x86 PCs start to inflect. PC buyers stop seeing performance/dollar improvements.
-Opening is created at the low end of the PC market, as ARM continues to deliver performance/dollar improvements
-Chromebook sales increasingly shift to ARM
-Microsoft forced to respond with version of Windows 10 on ARM
-As performance of x86 alternatives continues to improve, the threat to datacenter becomes even more real

‘Disruption, Disrupted’: A Roundup – Andreessen Horowitz


Intel made a huge mistake 10 years ago. Now 12,000 workers are paying the price
Intel made a huge mistake 1 years ago. Now 12, workers are paying the price. - Vox
 
Intel made a huge mistake 10 years ago. Now 12,000 workers are paying the price
Intel made a huge mistake 1 years ago. Now 12, workers are paying the price. - Vox

But 10 years ago it was indeed impossible to make any money in phone CPU business. It's obviously easier to see now that perhaps it was a mistake. That said, I think the problem is broader than that. Qualcomm supposedly did not make the same mistake (not because they were smarter but because they happened to be in this business) and they are arguably in worse shape than Intel is now with prospects just as grim. And it appears that the amount of profits generated in mobile APU business will most likely go down from here.
 
I really do not see BK as being the right leader for Intel at this time. Same goes for Andy Bryant as Chairman. His time is past.
 
But 10 years ago it was indeed impossible to make any money in phone CPU business. It's obviously easier to see now that perhaps it was a mistake. That said, I think the problem is broader than that. Qualcomm supposedly did not make the same mistake (not because they were smarter but because they happened to be in this business) and they are arguably in worse shape than Intel is now with prospects just as grim. And it appears that the amount of profits generated in mobile APU business will most likely go down from here.

One single mistake ten years ago probably won't hurt Intel badly. The problem is Intel has been making series of mistakes. Some of them I have described in the previous comment in this thread.

https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/f2/i...nal-sources-say-7643-post28616.html#post28616
 
I really do not see BK as being the right leader for Intel at this time. Same goes for Andy Bryant as Chairman. His time is past.

Both of them participated in the wonderful "Contra Revenue" scheme and even convinced many (or some) market analysts that Intel is under the great leadership and on the right direction. Reading the following two years old article is a refreshing experience.

Intel's Contra-Revenue Program Is Not What You Think It Is -- The Motley Fool
 
Mobile appears to be a litmus test for this board. (ie. "Intel doesn't get mobile, therefore, nothing else they do matters"). I don't agree. This is echo-chamber thinking.

Intel CC mentioned innovation repeatedly. I agree with this (and we must hold them to this--"Where is this innovation you speak of, BK?")

It disgusts me that Intel maintains their headcount at 100,000 people by laying off regularly, yet, it is predictable, it's what they do over and over. Then we blame the victims and whisper that they deserved it. The whispers are what REALLY disgust me. Intel employees are the most loyal--many have been there for 20+ years. They absolutely don't deserve this, no way.

Diversification is a good thing for Intel. They are becoming more of a volume memory manufacturer and boutique logic MFG. Time will tell if this works out. I wouldn't be buying Intel stock on the expectation of the same margins going forward.
 
Two observations

Mike Rogoway is first in a lot of happenings at Intel.

Andy Grove passing away has changed things a lot.
 
One single mistake ten years ago probably won't hurt Intel badly. The problem is Intel has been making series of mistakes. Some of them I have described in the previous comment in this thread.

I do think the main continuing mistake is their pride/arrogance to not willing to license ARM and keep with their own architecture. I think it will several more mediocre to bad quarters before they will be prepared to go the ARM route.
 
I do think the main continuing mistake is their pride/arrogance to not willing to license ARM and keep with their own architecture. I think it will several more mediocre to bad quarters before they will be prepared to go the ARM route.

Dr. Morris Chang once told audience at a forum in Stanford University a lesson he learned when he got his first job at Sylvania Semiconductor after graduating from MIT. He said the director he reported to frequently told employees one major problem Sylvania was facing. The problem was that Sylvania can't make the product customers want to buy and at the same time Sylvania can't sell the product Sylvania can make.

Morris then told the audience this is one of the problem he tries to avoid throughout his career in semiconductor industry.

Intel is in this difficult junction. Intel must turn its focus onto customers. Intel's technologies and capabilities are important but without customers those technologies and capabilities are irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top