I hope they lose billions on this deal. I know I’m only going with AMD now. It’s not much, but I do buy all the tech for my company. Servers, laptops, etc… will all be AMD going forward.
Not having competition is not a good thing. I hope a third player comes along.
Literally illegal. Only AMD and Intel have the patent cross-licensing rights to make x86 chips. There used to be a third company (Cyrix and subsequently VIA), and (maybe?) still is, but it hasn’t been relevant to the desktop CPU market in decades.
The real competition will come from ARM-based computers.
We don’t need competition in the x86 space, we need competition in the mobile/desktop/server space. That could easily be performance competitive ARM or RISC-v or whatever. Better even with diversity of design.
Or riscv
By Trump admin, do we mean the US Federal Government?
when the trump admin is identical to the us federal govt, there will be no doubt about the matter.
Ars is making a mountain out of a molehill.
James McRitchie
Kristin Hull
These are literal activists investors known for taking such stances. It would be weird if they didn’t.
a company that’s not in crisis
Intel is literally circling the drain. It doesn’t look like it on paper, but the fab/chip design business is so long term that if they don’t get on track, they’re basically toast. And they’re also important to the military.
Intel stock is up, short term and YTD. CNBC was ooing and aahing over it today. Intel is not facing major investor backlash.
Of course there are blatant issues, like:
However, the US can vote “as it wishes,” Intel reported, and experts suggested to Reuters that regulations may be needed to “limit government opportunities for abuses such as insider trading.”
And we all know they’re going to insider trade the heck out of it, openly, and no one is going to stop them. Not to speak of the awful precedent this sets.
But the sentiment (not the way the admin went about it) is not a bad idea. Government ties/history mixed with private enterprise are why TSMC and Samsung Foundry are where they are today, and their bowed-out competitors are not.
Would it be the same as if they did the same with Boeing? If they were circling the drain? Since Boeing literally makes military planes for the US goververment, so that means that they can’t fail lest say they got bought by some Chinese or XYZ interest outside of the USA. So then those new owners would have access to highly classified designs and schematics that the military uses.
Shrug. The DoD is notorious for trying to keep competition between its suppliers alive. But I don’t know enough about the airplane business to say they’re in a death spiral or not.
The fab business is a bit unique because of the sheer scaling of planning and capital involved.
I dunno why you brought up China/foreign interests though. Intel’s military fab designs would likely never get sold overseas, and neither would the military arm of Boeing. I wouldn’t really care about that either way…
This is just about keeping one of three leading edge processor fabs on the planet alive, and of course the gov is a bit worried about the other two in Taiwan and South Korea.
No, I didn’t say that they were, but more like agreeing with the point that if Boeing was in deep financial problems that the FED could do the same because of the strategic concern to National Security if it were to be available to be sold or merge with others in the open market. No way the FED would allow it and would bail them out and a way to do that would be to purchase a physical stake in the company as a way to infuse operating funds into it.
I was agreeing with OP.
