If Intel is to succeed strategically as the US-based leading edge foundry, I don't see how being acquired can support that. Either you end up with someone who will ruthlessly cost cut (e.g., private equity, Broadcom) or with a company that adds onto the conflict of interest between foundry and customer (e.g., any fabless company). Neither would put Intel into a better position than they are today (apart from additional capital).
Sources Say Intel Is An Acquisition Target
- Thread starter XYang2023
- Start date
Capital and political support would definitely accelerate the transition.
If I were betting I would say Broadcom. They are the only player that I think could integrate a company as complex as Intel. There might be others out there who might be looking to kick the tires, but AVGO is the only company that has a realistic chance of pulling it off.
There is a big question around anti trust, but remember that we are dealing with a totally different administration in the US that might be more open to this sort of thing.
There is a big question around anti trust, but remember that we are dealing with a totally different administration in the US that might be more open to this sort of thing.
Broadcom was a Singapore-based company when they tried to acquire Qualcomm. Later in 2018 Broadcom re-incorporated in Delaware.My two cents since I want to be an 'active member'!I have no more knowledge (and even less technical knowledge) than you....
Broadcom
If Broadcom couldn't snag Qualcomm due to national security concerns (by Trump! source: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/12/tru...ting-broadcoms-bid-to-take-over-qualcomm.html) in 2018. I don't understand how they can get approval from the US government (or China for that matter) to snag Intel...especially given how important the US now views Intel's foundry business. What am I missing here?
The drugs wore off.
I can't believe Tim Cook would ever want the headaches of being a foundry, or even just an IDM. Apple's client and mobile processors are better than Intel's IMO.
Samsung has its own foundry problems, and Intel culture is incompatible with Samsung culture.
Huang is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too smart to acquire Intel whole or even just the product group. Huang buys companies to make Nvidia stronger, not distract Nvidia with turnaround candidates.
Hedge funds want to make money, not lose it for years.Hedge Funds
If the US wants to see Intel die, then by all means let them purchase Intel.The last thing we need is having profit-driven people known for sacrificing long-term success in charge of a critical technology.
It doesn't make sense now, and never did.
IanCutress
Member
Isn't Intel's biggest shareholder Vanguard. The top 25 shareholders are all investment groups.
Currently it's BlackRock, but Vanguard is in the top 3.
I was also thinking about Blackrock.
I also came across it in Couch Investor's video:
In a pre-session check, I noticed that TSLA is positively correlated with the rest of the group when I was curious about who might be a potential suitor.
I like the perspective that Elon could bring a more competitive culture to Intel. Also, TSLA is one of the few U.S. companies that strongly advocates for U.S. manufacturing, which makes this idea even more compelling.
Here’s a related recent news article:
DepthFirst
Member
I just don’t see a purchase of Intel being approved by China, ever. The US has its cards to play in the tech war and China has its own. They would gladly see it die rather than be saved.
He would either turn the place around or burn it to the ground by firing too many people.
Alternatively, just consume all the chips Intel produces. I assume Elon is not limited by power/electricity like other companies.
And according to the new rule, export to China is limited:
And according to the new rule, export to China is limited:
Last edited:
Stacy implied that limiting the scope of Intel's fabs could help turn the company around financially. This aligns with the view expressed by Citi's analyst.
Here’s what I wrote in the comments:
"I think the key point for Intel is to control costs. Even that means less custom foundry revenue. Treats its foundry assets as its OWN insurance for geo-instability. If you only pay for your own insurance and not pay others, you save costs."
In my opinion, PG should have foreseen the risks of expanding the scope too far. Bringing stakeholders to this precarious state is both unnecessary and irresponsible.
I am an Elon Musk fan but I do not think that is a good idea at all. How has Twitter done? Intel is WAY more bloated than Twitter. Hock Tan is the man for acquiring Intel.
Wait, I thought Elon was buying Tick Tock? That I might believe. Merge it with X and give it a go because I do not see X thriving amongst advertisers.
Mooredaddy
Well-known member
wall street is actually braindead. They call themselves smart money but man they are so gullible
hist78
Well-known member
Intel needs a full-time CEO with the authority to work with employees for the next several years. Mr. Musk and the person he hired under his shadow won't be able to do it.
What if there is a consortium to buy Intel, take it private, fire 80% of people, keep the 20% needed to ramp up Intel 18A and 14A and call it a day?
siliconbruh999
Well-known member
It doesn't need to fire 80% people you need to fire around 20% should be around 80-90K employees