[dismalaf]

> Intel is not profitable.

Did I say they were? Google gross versus net margin.

> If their R+D and Capex investments stopped, the sum total of the existing+legacy cash flows wouldn't nearly cover Intel's substantial liabilities.

You sure? https://www.intc.com/financial-info/balance-sheet

Current assets are $43 billion. Total assets are $192 billion. $30 billion yearly in gross profit. Debt is only $50 billion. They still hold 75% market share. Repeat, they still sell 3 times more chips than AMD.

Yes, their balance sheet isn't as good as some fabless competitors but if TSMC helps them with their 14a yield then it looks like a good investment.

Also, having TSMC on board will surely help with their fab business. Again, between the US government needing them to survive, TSMC on board, plus the fact they still do have a decent core business, I think Intel (and TSMC's investment) will be fine.

[adgjlsfhk1]

It's actually better than that. TSMC wouldn't help intel with their 14a node. They would kill it, fire all of Intel's foundry R&D, and just build TSMCs 14a node.

[dismalaf]

I mean, it's the same thing... So yes.

[imtringued]

You euphemistically called it "help", but all you agreed to was a hostile takeover of a competitor only to gut said competitor. If a company genuinely thinks they are ahead, they don't have to do these petty tricks unless they want to nib a promising competitor in the bud while they are small and cheap. Intel is neither, nor is it a promising purchase. The only thing of value they possess is x86 IP.