[cubefox]

> Intel in 2019 had $72 billion in revenue and 110k employees. When he was fired in 2024, Intel had $54 billion in revenue and 124k employees. He also didn't cut dividend until 2024. He nearly put Intel into the grave in 3 years.

That's nonsense. Intel's problems were caused by falling behind TSMC, which was not the fault of Pat Gelsinger. Quite the contrary, he did a lot to turn things around, but this takes time, a lot more than three years.

[aurareturn]

They had far more problems than just falling behind TSMC. See my post here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47706423#47738977

Under Pat, Intel overestimated the covid boom, which nearly put them into bankruptcy. They hired many more employees while their revenue tanked. He went on an IFS spending spree while he lacked execution on actually winning external customers. He didn't stop dividends until 2024 which tells me he lacked awareness of where Intel was as late as 2024.

LBT was hired because he could actually see Intel as what it is today, instead of the Intel dominance that Pat thought he was still operating in.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/INTC/intel/revenue

[phonon]

Pat has been on record many times that he was against dividends but the board declared them anyway.

[saghm]

If having $54 billion dollars is "near bankruptcy", I think a lot of people wish they were nearly bankrupt.

[aurareturn]

Intel’s market cap was trading below their assets. Investors were pricing in bankruptcy risk.

[saghm]

Sure, if they tried to spend all of their assets on buying back all of the existing stock that would be a sign they might be going bankrupt. Alternately, maybe the market cap isn't a perfect representation of how much a company is worth and it's a reflection of a complex array of factors that aren't easily explained away in favor of a simple narrative.