Management fucks up. Management loses money. Management cuts costs.
All those fab workers didn’t make a mistake, the executives did.
Government handouts need to come with some extremely strict rules attached. Alas, our government has been purchased by capitalists, so it will continue to be free money but only for the people who need it least.
They shouldn’t be handouts, they should be share purchases. You want Uncle Sam to deus ex machina your greedy ass? Sure, but Uncle Sam now owns 40% of the company.
I would go a step further and say that it should not be a stock purchase but partial nationalization. The government is not getting shares that will be sold later. The government is getting a right to appoint part of the board of directors. Every time the company issues a dividend, buys back stock, or engages in other activities to return value back to the shareholders, a proportional amount of money must be paid to the treasury. It only makes sense that if a company is so big that its failure is going to hurt society as a whole, it should be owned by society.
Fuck yeah! Their wealthy buddies would start bailing each other out if the alternative was the government buying the company at rock bottom and competing against everyone to build it back up.
Guys, i’m sorry to say that 15 years of avoiding innovation because we were the market share leader has to end. We thought AMD was a joke after so many issues in the 00’s so we got complacent.
So we have to can all of you marketers who are shitposting on our advertising “review” site and hire some R&D people. Maybe we can scalp some from AMD.
Sincerely, Intel Executives
sounds good, lets_eat_grandma
I’d hate to be named Jobs, working at Intel. 🔪
The upper management is scapegoating the workers for their mistakes
You would think that they would move hard to make sure they were hiring the best and more people to ensure bullshit like FRYING THE ONLY COMPONENT PEOPLE WANT FROM YOU BY USING YOUR PRODUCT NORMALLY would be paramount. But no. Fire everyone but the C-Suit, do some stock buybacks, ???, then profit.
Line must go up.
I swear to god if companies don’t realize that the point is to make a product or service that people want to use, I’m gonna sue them in Texas and hope to finally get the corporate death penalty.
That’s the Jack Welch playbook!
I plan on cutting intel out of my purchases for every single computer I make going forward. I bought an effected processor JUST before it came out that all their 13-14 gen processors will fall apart in just a couple months of use.
Planned obsolescence but it’s metastisized
When it was time to upgrade my PC awhile back it took me a long time to decide between the old school equal cores model and the new 12th-gen ones with BIG/little segregated core architecture. I wanted to future-proof my build so it would last a long time, but I chose the more conservative option of the old-school design for a number of reasons.
The Rocket Lake one turned out to be a great choice. I have 8 cores that can hit 5GHz and rock-solid reliability.
If it were a sane world I’d be worried about my Intel stock but investors seem to get hard-ons at news of layoffs so it’ll probably go up.
It’s cute that you think shareholders actually drive stock prices.
Make your point without being demeaning
Stock prices are absolutely determined by investors. As in, that’s the only thing that matters. If more people are selling than buying, line go down. If more are buying than selling, line go up. That’s how it works.
You say “shareholders,” but that’s not accurate. the OP said “investors,” which can mean everything from long-term shareholders to day-traders throwing around options. The former doesn’t determine share prices, those who actively trade the stock do.
Honest question as I’ve been pondering this (and not my orb 😞) recently and I’m not sure if my reasoning makes sense.
You mentioned day-traders making option plays. I can see how that could be used as a signal by the rest of the stock market. Does that have a bigger impact than, for a lack of a better term, mega investors? I’m not a huge investor. My holdings are primarily in ETFs. But I have some money in my portfolio to play around with.
To me it seems like my stocks are affected more by what berkshire hathaway does for example than actual consumer/investor sentiment. To the point where I’m wondering if unless we band together, like GME, we are primarily along for the ride. All while massive firms, insurance companies, tech companies and other large holdings managed by small number of individuals impact stock price a lot more and with that don’t have an insensitive to sell holdings they bet big on.
Those companies are out to make as much money as possible, and I think the simplest explanation is they’re just better at predicting what a stock will do than just one person.
They may well have an entire team of people studying one company, to work out if they are worth investing in.
As for the options guys, anyone taking what they’re doing as gospel is an idiot, there are some spectacular examples on Wallstreetbets of people losing a fortune on options.
Those companies are out to make as much money as possible, and I think the simplest explanation is they’re just better at predicting what a stock will do than just one person.
You’d think.
They mostly don’t really beat the market long term though.
Hedge funds and short sellers control prices. And they cheat.
Those are investors.
This isn’t a retort, and I don’t think short sellers are investors?
It is a retort.
Hedge funds do invest in stocks. On what planet are they not investors? They invest.
Short sellers are certainly a bit more ambiguous in how you’d classify them - but at the end of the day they’re still buying and selling stocks, and therefore investing and divesting. Classify them how you wish.
It’s also true that short positions only make up a small amount of the market.
Saying that there’s no such thing as investors or that stock prices aren’t influenced by the buying and selling of stocks is insane. That’s ultimately the only thing that influences them.
Retail orders don’t hit the lot market, they’re internalized by market makers
It’s kinda of odd watching the early 2000s amd repeat itself with intel
AMD didn’t ship defective CPUs.