Please be open to feedback and constructive criticism from others, and consider their suggestions and advice when making decisions or forming opinions.
- Manlobbi
Investment Strategies / Mechanical Investing❤
No. of Recommendations: 15
“It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future,” President Donald Trump wrote yesterday afternoon on social media. He took the stake in the company after calling on August 7 for its chief executive officer, Lip-Bu Tan, to step down. When Tan met with Trump on August 11, the president says, he told Tan the U.S. “should be given 10% of Intel.” Tan agreed. Announcing the deal, Trump referred to Tan as “the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company.”
It is wild to see Republicans cheering on a president who publicly threatened a CEO and stated openly that he shook the man down for a major share in his company.
It is even wilder to see Republicans, who since 1980 have held so fervently to the idea of free markets that they have denounced even the most basic regulations as socialism, celebrate the government takeover of a private company.
Not a peep from our resident MAGAs about this. It's been highlighted a couple of times over the past two days, but still.... no word from them.
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
No. of Recommendations: 1
America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL,
Ya, no peep. I'm not against the US owning parts or whole businesses either. I look at Eqinor that Norway owns 60% of and see that as something that needs to be managed, but the USA owning and using it to support Social Security and medicare would be great, I think. I mean we are combined with business in many ways and it looks like we eat the cost and they get the profits. Not a good model to me.
No. of Recommendations: 3
How long before Trump demands a seat at the board table or that he be appointed COB?
No. of Recommendations: 2
he told Tan the U.S. “should be given 10% of Intel.” Tan agreed. Announcing the deal, Trump referred to Tan as “the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company.”Trump keeps touting that the 10% stake was "given" to him/the gov't. But they actually paid for the shares. Is Trump delusional or just a moron?
Intel said in a statement that the US government would make a $8.9bn (£6.6bn) investment in Intel common stock.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg3zpdl3xdo
No. of Recommendations: 3
Just looked for more info and found this.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/intel-resp...
"The government's investment in Intel will be a passive ownership, with no Board representation or other governance or information rights. The government also agrees to vote with the Company's Board of Directors on matters requiring shareholder approval, with limited exceptions," the statement read.Given Trump's record on breaking contracts, treaties, marital vows, etc. how long before he breaks that.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Given Trump's record on breaking contracts, treaties, marital vows, etc. how long before he breaks that.
Also, since ETTD, we might all do well to start selling our Intel shares. Intel wasn't doing so great to begin with being bested by both NVIDIA and AMD.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Funny - Sheeple speaking of lambs.
I did a post well before this - criticizing my side's silence on it.
I'm not a Sheeple.
Try it some time......
No. of Recommendations: 3
Used to work at Intel (almost 14 years). Is still a great company but it had problems.
Long story short, it:
-Has always had fantastic engineers
-In *most* cases they had great leadership at the top
…but they always had this hardened crust of middle management that blocked any good ideas from proceeding. They threw away several ideas that would go on to power other companies because they couldn’t think outside their current business model.
I have a presentation back in the early 2000’s about how Arm chips were going to disrupt their business model. The crust laughed at it. Also later told them that Apple was going to ditch them and make their own chips. They laughed at that, too.
I will say this in the context of this thread:
You libs complaining about this? What did you think the CHIPS act was going to do?
No. of Recommendations: 1
Literally everyone on this board wanted the CHIPS Act. Most of you didn’t know why you wanted it, other than it was leg that Joe Biden was pushing.
But what was it for?
Your truly has told you many times that there are those in the government who believe that 2027 is the year the balloon goes up with respect to China. Ergo, those same folks have been making moves to secure certain critical supply chains and key ingredients.
Nationalizing Intel? Was always a part of the plan.
Since some of you reflexively doubt everything, ask yourself this:
In any conflict with China, what happens to TSMC’s fabs?
No. of Recommendations: 1
In any conflict with China, what happens to TSMC’s fabs?
Those that remain in Taiwan get blown up by Chinese missiles, captured by the Chinese, or blown up by retreating Taiwanese forces.
That’s why TSMC has been moving fabrication to the United States.
Part of the inducement to do so was provided by several billion dollars from the CHIPS Act.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Part of the inducement to do so was provided by several billion dollars from the CHIPS Act.
Ding ding ding!
…and the other part of the CHIPS act was to keep Intel around and healthy.
No. of Recommendations: 1
On TMF, decades ago, I had predicted that China will take Taiwan--either by force OR cy co-opting Taiwann's Sheeple Liberals......
And at that point the only thing you people will do about is .... pass a resolution condemning the action.
CHIPS act is good. Your American asses will be kicked out of yet another sphere...but at least your Ass and Pee 500 will be ok....tis why it got passed and it is somewhat America First.
Hey Sheeple - Nationalism - once again, you follow the Leader.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Not a perfect comparison but -sounds a built like the automotive Big 3 C-suites in Detroit in the 80s and 90s. My I could tell you stories.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Used to work at Intel (almost 14 years). Is still a great company but it had problems.
Every company does. Sold my INTC a long time ago, so don't really follow it much. They never competed against my company, so never a concern after I sold. However, on TMF, I'm seeing a lot of complaints about incompetent management. Not sure of all the details. But it is sounding like they were a great company, but no more. Checking INTC performance, it has been lackluster for at least 5 years. If you bought five years ago, you're actually in the red.
Yes, they do have some awesome engineers. Some of their people would move to our company (less stress), and some of ours would move there (more money). For the most part, they were all really good engineers moving both ways.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Not a perfect comparison but -sounds a built like the automotive Big 3 C-suites in Detroit in the 80s and 90s. My I could tell you stories.
Oh, I bet. At Intel there was a tranche of the hard-core dudes who build the company from zero who got stuff done. Their no-nonsense culture (which would never fly in today's workplace) led to knock-down, drag out fights in conference rooms. But they knew how to "disagree and commit" and exit every workplace brawl (I'm not speaking literally) with a plan.
Their successors weren't as good or as tough -or- the people who Used To Get Things Done moved into upper management. I worked for a guy who would remind everyone he was on the team that Did This One Thing...20 years ago. Even promoted t-shirts with his face on them. He had a great perch and wanted to ride that thing. New idea? Pshaw.
Dudes like him just dotted the senior ranks until they became the majority. They took all the worst parts of the old culture (My way or the highway) and tossed out what used to result in innovative breakthroughs. That began a slow descent into them doing less and less new things over time...and a slow bleed of talent.
They would still have some FANTASTIC VPs. The slide really got going when they put Krazanich in charge - he drove employee morale off the cliff. Then came a caretaker in Swan before they brought Gelsinger back. Pat got a raw deal - the seeds of their semiconductor process woes were planted in 2012-2013 and the bill came due in Pat's tenure.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Some examples of businesses INTC walked away from:
-The iPod
They had a brilliant MP3 player back in the day. Bigger storage and better interface that everything out there (until the iPod showed up). Died in less than a year.
-Intel Toys
They had killer stuff like a CCD microscope, which for $50 was better than a lot of lab grade equipment at the time. Killed in about a year.
-iPad
They had a tablet PC, ready to go...and shelved it. The iPad came out 2 years later.
-Cord cutting
This one's my favorite. They had the notion that people wanted a la carte TV and would be willing to pay for someone to...allow them to pick all the channels they wanted and only pay for what they wanted. You could also - wait for it - automatically record all your content and watch it on demand. This was back in 2011. They hired a guy from the BBC to run it:
https://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/interview-wit...In two years they would sell this group to Verizon. Now, of course, outfits like Google make a lot of money curating ads for YouTubeTV and cord-cutting continues to accelerate.
In all cases they were saddled with the hubris that just because something had worked in the past...it didn't mean it would keep you on top.
