Intel’s stock dropped around 30% overnight, shaving some $39 billion from the company’s market capitalization since rumors of a pending layoff first emerged. The devastating results come after the chip giant reported a loss for the second quarter, complained about yield issues with the Meteor Lake CPU, provided a modest business outlook for the next few quarters, and announced plans to lay off 15,000 people worldwide.

When the NYSE closed on July 31, Intel’s market capitalization was $130.86 billion. Then, a report about Intel’s massive layoffs was published, and the company’s market capitalization dropped sharply to $123.96 billion on August 1. Following Intel’s financial report yesterday, the company’s capitalization dropped to $91.86 billion. Essentially, Intel has lost half of its capitalization since January. As of now, Intel’s market value is a fraction of Nvidia’s worth and less than half of AMD’s.

As Intel’s actions look rather desperate, analysts believe that Intel’s challenges are existential. “Intel’s issues are now approaching the existential,” Stacy Rasgon, an analyst with Bernstein, told Reuters.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    When I had to flash my BIOS and pray that it didn’t brick my PC I cursed them, saying “Fuck Intel, I hope their stock plummets!”

    You’re welcome everyone.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Nice to just imagine that this was backlash to the inhumanity of the constant layoffs. It’s not, but would be nice.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Nope. It’s the bad financial results, news of defective CPUs, and most crucially, Intel announcing they’re going to stop paying out dividends that have done this.

      If anything, investors seem to love mass layoffs, unfortunately.

    • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Burst layoffs to polish up earnings reports are “fine” (in terms of stocks), but hemorrhaging workers when your company is already in hot water for product quality complaints smells of “We’re really desperate to make our reports not look devastating”. From a stupid monkey brain point of view, it sounds like they’re throwing sailors overboard to avoid sinking and I wouldn’t want to be a passenger and risk being next, so I’d try to sell what shares I have before they’re worthless.

      I don’t know what heuristics professional traders go with, but I imagine they would follow a more complex and nuanced logic along those same lines. Either way, if enough people do that, it compounds.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    It certainly doesn’t help Intel has been intentionally selling defective product in the 13th and 14th gen lines. People are quite reasonably going to AMD more and more.

    • jws_shadotak@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Does AMD have anything to compete with Intel QSV? I’m looking to upgrade my Plex server and was looking at a newer Intel CPU.

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The latest AMD cpus do have transcoding, but Amd transcode isn’t very good and isn’t very compatible with Linux.

        You can pick up an Intel A310 single slot GPU for $100 and it has AV1 encode, which is something that the igpu QSV doesn’t have. Works very well in my Epyc motherboard with 76 pcie lanes. I definitely recommend going with an ATX 1st gen Epyc cpu+motherboard if you want something that can do NVMe raid.

        • sanpo@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Amd transcode isn’t very good and isn’t very compatible with Linux

          It’s compatible just fine. But the quality… well, it’s not the worst, but definitely not the best quality.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    These fucking idiots. All they had to do was pretend they gave a fuck about the chip debacle and play everything slowly. They couldn’t even do that. They couldn’t even pretend to give a fuck about anyone. Neither their customers nor their employees.

    If they replaced the C-suite with the custodial staff, they would be in a significantly better position than they are now. Executives are always dumb as fuck, with very few exceptions. Pre-requisites for the job: narcisism, sociopathy and idiocy.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If they replaced the C-suite with the custodial staff, they would be in a significantly better position than they are now. Executives are always dumb as fuck, with very few exceptions. Pre-requisites for the job: narcisism, sociopathy and idiocy.

      Are we still talking about Intel, or…?

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The funny thing is that there are executives who know what they’re doing, but they may be outvoted by people who failed upward due to connections or a “good background” (ivy league, internship, etc.).

        I always thought “what does a brand name education prove?” This isn’t the 1800s. Community college now is almost as good as Harvard was in the 1800s. Back then, just being able to read meant that you were educated.

        Also, what does an internship prove? You know how to carry 8 coffees at once? You can wear a cheap suit? No, it’s all cover for connections. If businesses wanted the best people (say the top 10%) you could literally just set up a table outside a subway station and interview random commuters, getting probably 10 good prospects in a day.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Ivy League, internships etc. prove exactly what you are critizising. They prove to have the connections. They prove to be part of the in-group. They prove that you will defend your class interests against the lower classes. And if you are one of the very few people who achieve upwards class mobility, they prove that you will be betraying them.

          This is not about running the best company or running the best economy. It is about maintaining class power and privilege.

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            This is not about running the best company or running the best economy. It is about maintaining class power and privilege.

            I understand your point, but neo-marxist perspectives like this fundamentally misunderstand what companies care about (for obvious reasons). No company cares about “class power” or “privilege” because shareholders only care about their own money.

            Their “class” is not important when it comes to investing. If they could fire all the nepo babies and use AI instead, they would do it in 1 second.

            • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Their “class” is not important when it comes to investing. If they could fire all the nepo babies and use AI instead, they would do it in 1 second.

              Firing the nepo babys remains consistent with being the owning class. And they put the nepo babies so they dont have to put rising middle and lower class people there.

              • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                It’s not. Investors literally only care about money.

                Rich people don’t have “class consciousness” because they all want to be better and richer than other rich people. That’s what “keeping up with the Joneses” (or Kardashians) is. You don’t want the Joneses to improve, because that hurts you.

                It’s a zero-sum game at the top. If your neighbor buys a Mercedes, you need to buy a Maserati. Like I said, neo-marxism fundamentally misunderstands rich people.

  • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s not everyday that I’m thankful that grandma didn’t leave me $700,000 but today is one of those days

      • fatalicus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Just a regular stock buy, so up. Lost around 200k so far.

        But he did say he was going to sit on the stocks for some years, so might get some back.

    • eronth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They share (or shared) a building in STL, so that would be an easy merge there.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    After how horribly they handled the whole hardware defect scandal with their 13th and 14th gen i Series processors, this is 100% deserved.

    Intel is a cautionary tale of what happens when you allow bean counters who care more about EBITDA than their customers and staff to run the show.

    • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      This sounds like a modern day version of the Schlitz mistake back in the seventies where they cut the quality so much, so fast, that the formerly largest brewery in America became a worthless brand that nobody trusted.

      The b-school lesson from this was to drop the quality of your product more slowly so people wouldn’t notice.

      I figured no big company would ever suffer consequences from shitty product ever again because they’d figured out the drip instead of the open floodgates.

      I hope more companies get to enjoy this fate, especially food producers.

  • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    There is absolutely no way intel is going under any time soon. They may drop more but it’s almost certain that they will recover.

    I don’t understand a valuation that puts them under AMD given how poor amd’s market share is in the gpu market (which intel is now a new valid competitor in for the budget space) alongside the fact that intel’s cpu market share is higher than AMD by a large margin.

    I’m saying all this as a huge AMD fan. I have a 5800x3d and a 6800xt. I made our work standard laptop be amd based as I set the standards for my organization in my work role. I know my choice is the minority choice. Even in datacenter intel has an overwhelming lead.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s because the stock market is closer to a casino than a place where fair valuations of businesses are made.

      Also, market cap is just the latest trade price times the total number of shares. It doesn’t mean that anyone is willing to buy or sell the entire business for that amount, just that some shares were traded at a price that extrapolates to that.

      It’s kinda like getting an A on your first assignment in grade 1 and assuming that means you’re a straight A student and will maintain that until you finish your doctorate. Or getting an F and assuming you might as well just drop out.

      The closest thing to reality market cap really says is that investors who are making current trades believe that AMD will surpass Intel at some point. Or that they aren’t comparing either company directly to the other and just go by feeling plus the price history. “I feel more confident in AMD today, therefore the price should be higher than it was yesterday. I feel less confident in Intel today, therefore the price should be lower than it was yesterday.” It doesn’t even really matter if yesterday’s price was accurate, it’s all just relative to itself and fed by fear and greed.

      • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Preach. I’m just worried for when nvidia pops. The grumblings about the machine learning fad are starting to happen but that’s a company that is incredibly likely to lose 80% of revenue in 5 years once businesses see how the huge investments flop.

        There’s some strange belief that chat bots being semi-coherent is going to turn into true AI and take over all the white collar jobs. The more popular chatbots become the poorer the data quality will be. It’s inevitable that all the bots posting on all the social media sites will poison the datasets especially as more and more turn to chatbots to generate content.

        Peoples imaginations are running wild. I think if 2% of the use cases pan out it will be a wild success but ML is not new and entire divisions have been scrapped for failing to turn a profit (looking at Alexa, for sure.) When the pop happens the drop will be so significant the ripples may cause a recession all by itself.

  • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    And some moron on Wallstreetbets just invested his $700k inheritance in shares yesterday. He’s -200k rn

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The stock market is the least stupid way to be addicted to gambling but it’s still one of the dumber addictions to develop.

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Brutal, nearly the lowest since 2008. Makes me want to buy in at this point.

    Edit: I bought a few shares, so now they’re sure to go bankrupt by tomorrow.

    Edit 2: ayyy did I actually catch a falling knife for once? It’s still going up after hours.

  • Bbmin7b5@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    And people will continue to buy the 14900k and have the shocked pikachu face.

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    They also announced they are going to stop paying stock dividends starting Q4.

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/intel-to-suspend-dividend-cut-15-of-staff-upon-big-earnings-miss-d811a220

    Back in ye olden days, you used to buy a stock largely due to its ability to regularly pay you back a dividend, as a more conventional kind of investment, before the more modern idea of ‘buy low sell high’ became the most prevalent investment strategy / market dynamic.

    • Mikina@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve always thought that stocks have to pay dividents, like that’s the whole point of having it? I.e you get paid by the company regularly some of their profit, based on how much stock you have.

      Does this mean that the only way how to make money from their stock now is to sell them to someone else? But then, it has nothing to do with the actual company and money they make, but you are paid by someone totally unrelated - the guy who buys the stock from you. I don’t get it, I suppose I’m missing something.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        At least for the US, yes you are correct that this was the conventional logic that governed the average joe’s investment into a stock, up until… roughly the 60s or 70s.

        I am not going to write a dissertation on the history of American financial investment, but yeah nowadays, the way you invest in the stock market is … you buy a stock, hope that its value increases by more than inflation, and then sell it later for what is called a capital gain, ie, profit from the difference between the price you bought vs the price you sold.

        So yes, your the second half of your post is correct:

        You buy Stock A for 100 from Some Guy 1, then later you hope to be able to sell Stock A to Some Guy 2 for 150.

        The specifics of this can easily get absurdly complicated with exceptionally complex and advanced math and mountains of rules and regulations, but basically, what still holds true is this:

        Literally a goldfish swimming to the left or right side of a tank to indicate what stocks should be bought or sold, this outperforms the average financial ‘wizard’ on wall street making your investment decisions.

        BUT, basically at no time in the past 20 or 30 years has putting your money into a bank’s savings account to earn interest managed to beat the inflation rate, so if you want a chance to actually be rewarded for setting aside money, you put it into stocks, a mutual fund, an index fund, and well if you ever need to pull some cash out for an emergency, you get fucked by fees.

        What you really do is buy real estate. But you have to already have a good deal of money to do that.

        Isn’t capitalism fun?

        • Mikina@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I see, stonks are way more bullshit than I thought. Is there anything else you can do with your stock, other than sell it to someone else? I always thought that crypto is such a scam especially because in the end, it has no value in itself, and the only thing you can do with it is sell it to someone else. If noone wants to buy it, well, you are fucked. Does it mean that stocks are exactly the same concept? I always thought it has something to do with the vaule of the company and the profits it earns, but if there is no way how to cash them out other than selling your piece of paper to someone, then it’s really the same? I suppose that unlike crypto, the stock price increases if the company is turning profit, but you still have to find someone to sell it to, right, so the price is increasing only because the demand from people willing to buy it is increasing due to it turning profit, but it’s not really tied to the actual value of the company, so it’s exactly like crypto? Or is the price set by some different mechanism than crypto is - pure demand from people willing to buy?

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Is there anything else you can do with your stock, other than sell it to someone else?

            This is where it starts to get complicated.

            You can promise to sell you stock by a certain date in the future to someone, at a price the two of you agree upon now.

            If the actual price of the stock goes below the previously agreed price, by that deadline, well then you probably gained money.

            If the actual price of the stock goes above the previously agreed price by the previously agreed date, you probably lost money.

            This gets even more complicated when you take out a loan to buy a stock, and then do the above.

            Theres a whole lot more. Check out investopedia.

            I always thought that crypto is such a scam especially because in the end, it has no value in itself, and the only thing you can do with it is sell it to someone else. If noone wants to buy it, well, you are fucked. Does it mean that stocks are exactly the same concept?

            Its the same in that both crypto and stocks can crater to zero if there are no buyers.

            It is different in that crypto, as you say, is completely digital and nontangible, whereas most businesses on a stock exchange have at least a basis for their stock valuation in real world assets, products, services, revenue flows, profit margins and such.

            Basically, what is more likely to go completely tits up?

            A random NFT scheme?

            A brand new start up IPO?

            A long established industry giant?

            Probably the 1st then 2nd then 3rd.

            Or is the price set by some different mechanism than crypto is - pure demand from people willing to buy?

            Ultimately they are both markets, which have prices ultimately determined by what people feel is a fair price.

            Both involve projecting possible rise or fall in the value of the asset (stock vs crypto coin), but in the case of crypto, there is usually 0 actual underlying fundamentals, there is no business model beyond ‘if we all invest in this it will be worth more money’, which works until the price goes high enough that usually the person or group that invented the crypto sells all of their crypto. This causes panic and everyone else sells off for much less.

            Functionally, that means a whole bunch of people lost money, and the originators made a whole bunch of money.

            A pump and dump scheme, its usually extremely illegal.

            Crypto bros kept acting like the laws governing finance did not apply to them.

            Turns out, the laws do apply to them, and even as bullshit as the stock market is for the average joe, basically the entire crypto sphere collapsed in 6 months after it turned out that they were basically all cooking their accounting books and doing all kinds of fraud.

            While the stock market is largely bullshit in many ways, it is at least regulated to prevent many different kinds of financial fraud, while the crypto sphere is almost entirely comprised of con artists and their suckers.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Most of what that guy said was bullshit, the typical interest rate for a savings account this year was 5%, compared to 3.8% inflation, for example. Most stocks also pay a dividend.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s hilarious how people will shit on NFTs but not non-dividend stocks that are just corporate NFTs without even a jpg of a monkey.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Dude nfts are like worse than digital beanie babies, because at least with the beanie babies there was a trademark restriction.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Nope, not even close.

        NFTs are wildly, wildly more speculative investments than the stock market, having absolutely 0 solid foundation of an actual business with capital and products and services behind them, they have a proven track record of 99% of them losing 99% of their value in a year or two, and 99% of them are just outright scams.

        Go watch a some Folding Ideas videos for a more in depth explanation.

        After a decade plus of watching crypto currencies evolve, the only one that actually does what a crypto currency was originally supposed to do is monero, xmr: Secure, very hard to trace transactions that can be done with anonymity, provided you learn a whole bunch of opsec.

  • KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Fucking good! I know it’s not the primary reason, but it’s by high time that people see laying off 15k people as a bad thing and the company suffering for it.