Doug M -- Intel's 30% gain is due mainly to the administration's earlier purchase of INTC plus the more recent news that Nvidia will buy a $5 billion stake, presumably on the assumption that Intel can improve its fabs to produce AI chips that meet NVDA needs for highest performance. For years, back in the 1990's, Intel was able to maintain its chip technology lead, but in the past 15 years, it has fallen behind, partly because of its reliance on older x86 designs, rather than RISC architecture. I believe part of the NVDA decision was made to compete with chips designed by ARM and Apple, and possibly even QCOM, as Jim's recent posts have indicated.
Corporate cultures such as Intel's, don't change all that rapidly, however. Intel in my view cannot compete with the precision focused culture of Taiwan Semiconductor. Not even the latest wafer technology and machines from the Netherlands can help overcome Intel's traditional methods of getting things done. Even the rapidly improving chip technology in China, absent the latest chip production equipment, is catching up to Intel and will eventually grab some of the business Intel previously relied on. The recent management change at Intel may be too late to correct the long standing management problems.
Probably the most serious problem facing Intel also could affect Qualcomm and other leading edge technology/semiconductor firms; namely, a struggling domestic economy that could succumb to inept management in the next 12 months, or possibly even earlier. Though I remain optimistic on Qualcomm, part of my reason is its comparatively low P/E, giving it lower downside risk than its peers.
Art |
