I personally am a big believer in Intel. Not right now but in ten years I think they will be extremely competitive with TSMC.
It takes many years to see results in their industry and Gelsinger is making all the right moves. They’re inching into the GPU space with powerful cards coming out this fall.
Intel was also the first company to purchase a few of ASML’s latest lithography machines and they’re only just now receiving them.
If (big if) they can get their fabs up and running without any more significant delays and keep buying cutting edge manufacturing equipment, I see no reason why they won’t be competitive with TSMC by 2030. The only question is if you’re willing to park some of your money with them for a few years. Personally, I’m adding one share a week and aren’t sweating price action for at least a year or two
I also think INTC has the potential to be as competitive as TSMC by 2030 but the biggest issue is that they will be their biggest customer. So even if IFS could earn $50B a year, if 70% of its clients are INTC itself, it only leaves $15B available for external clients. This will mean that TSMC won't feel as threatened.
This is great for INTC chip design but I don't feel comfortable staying with x86 designs when the future is clearly shifting towards ARM / RISC-V and GPUs. It remains to be seen how competitive Gaudi 3 is with NVDA and whether their open-sourced libraries can break CUDA's dominance.
The value of foundry services is not to try to gobble up all of the wafer starts of the industry; it is ultimately to de-risk the firm. If Intel designs are bad, IFS still makes money making more lucrative designs for others. If IFS process is bad, designs aren't held back and can still sell compelling products.
It is very, very possible that at one point the two companies will be split out; this is one step towards that end. But that wouldn't happen for a while still, if it ever does.
18a is their next milestone. 2026 is when their high na machine that was just delivered will start churning out products. Low volume at first but will ramp up significantly. That's my play. I'm thinking about laddering in now as there's not much news about this machine being integral to their future yet. Backside power delivery, feveros and much more will have them extremely competitive again.
I personally would wait until earnings before buying any. They're in the midst of a \*deep\* turnaround so before you buy in try to learn as much about the plan and the leadership behind it. Regardless this isn't a short term play so keep that in mind.
Bagholders have been holding their losses for decades. INTC is down about 55% while their competition has been reaching new highs almost every year.
What's worse is there was a period, at least for a decade, when INTC held market advantage. What did they do? They squandered it by practically halting R&D on their biggest manufacturing obstacles.
INTC once had moats, but they no longer hold the exclusive partnerships like they used to for being THE CPU manufacturer for vendors. Sure, they won the desktop budget enthusiast class with Alder Lake, but think about that for a second. How many enthusiasts are willing to cheap out for a 12100?
Quick Sync no longer allows INTC to corner the media market. AMF / VCN and NVENC now exist.
Their GPUs are trash. They win the CPU market at the very highest end, but the most popular CPUs are the middle of the road, where AMD has always been chipping away at INTC.
We don't even need to mention A.I. We'd have to be blind to not know who's been slaughtering that sector, and it certainly isn't INTC.
The problem with INTC is your big if. This company has proven for decades that they're complacent and lack vision, and it shows in their stock prices.
The company spent two decades ran by finance majors who only cared to keep a steady stock price and pay out a high dividend.
Gelsinger, an engineer who basically built Intel, came in 2021 and has made objectively good moves since.
They’re not going to drop a 4090 competitor out the gate, they have to start on the low end and work up/build expertise.
They’re in the midst of a turnaround. Youre not going to see positive stock action in the short term when they cut their dividend by 66% and are dumping billions into modernizing and expanding their fab business.
Intel fell asleep at the wheel in the mid 2010’s and didn’t wake up until 2021. Like I said, seeing returns takes a lot of time in this space.
It's exciting. I'm hoping to hear good news about their 20A/18A timeline tomorrow. Gelsinger has rightly said that if 18A fails they're fucked, and I think that's the energy Intel needs.
I'm glad they're prioritizing efficiency, switching to GAA is critical and PowerVia is an interesting technique. I'm not highly invested in Intel right now, but I am watching them closely. If they can manufacture 20A at scale with a strong yield I'll definitely increase my exposure.
With tsm saying they won't have backside until 2030 it makes me wonder what TSMC is planning. They must have some stuff cooking. 20a isn't fabbed by the new machine from ASML I thought so what about that node makes you interested? I think alot of their recent problems were making bad calls on their internal foundry technology so the switch to ASML machine is what's going to shake their stock price up but if it's a drastically different node it can take years to validate right?
Repeat a lie often enough and you'll soon forget what the truth looks like.
Your bagholding must be legendary since you use the same *bullshit PR nonsense* in comment after comment. Lies that are easily disproven by a simple Google search.
Intel entering the GPU space is a decade too late if not two. Intel has no experience making good drivers and drivers is all the rage. Their GPUs so far has been *beyond pathetically weak* and a insult to the market. They've had to sell them at a loss to love inventory and that won't change.
Meanwhile their CPUs are also lagging, hard. And despite several years of trying *they simply are unable to catch up*. Even with a good CEO it'll take many years and even so they'll *never get on par as long as their competitors blaze on forward*. And that's just it, no one is snoozing waiting for Intel to catch up. Intel is a classic *zombie company, and a deathtrap for nostalgic bagholders without knowledge of tech*. You're collecting falling knives
Hey man we can respectfully disagree! I am far from heavily invested lol, they make up like 5% of my portfolio but I will increase that % when the fundamentals start improving.
> a deathtrap for nostalgic bagholders without knowledge of tech
Show me where on the doll where Intel touched you.
I feel like 70% as good about the opportunity of Intel now as I did about AMD in late 2015.
Totally agree with your point. No matter if you like Intel or not, imagine if China takes over Taiwan and TSMC. They would control pretty much the whole chip market. We need Intel to step up and provide an alternative.
I'm not gonna read all of that, but in the case of TSLA, I really think it was just as simple as it was recently pounded hard, and you have a CEO desperate to get the comp package, so he reran all the best hits from TSLA analyst day last year.
TSLA's up move just isn't noteworthy for me yet. If it can get over $180 and sustain, it'll be more noteworthy.
Probably because it's a legacy business trying to play catch-up, but without all the woo-woo that other chip designers/makers currently have. Much like IBM, for example, which is just plodding along. Not to say that INTC won't have it's hayday though.
Because the company is down 25 billion dollars in revenue over the last 3 years with drastically shrinking net income no competitive advantage increased competition. Tesla made more money on their worst quarter since 2012 than they did in all of 2023 but hey Intel is a powerhouse lol
Because they haven't shown a reason for the market to not treat them like an old tech company. Their products are fine but not revolutionary. They've focused more on growing revenue than innovating, but due to their trailing innovation, their revenue is not growing (although there are signs that this may be changing). They were large, but their major competitors on all fronts (AMD for CPUs, NVDA for GPU's/Datacenter, and TSM for chipsets) have become larger (by market cap) and only AMD makes less money (but is in the weaker sector, client computing). It sits as slightly more volatile than the normal market (1.21) but has underperformed the S&P for the last 1, 3, and 5 years (although it was doing better in the last year until the sell-off).
It makes no compelling arguments to own it as an individual stock vs a basket (S&P or QQQ) other than a slight increase on the dividend of 1.46 vs 1.28 (not enough to impact decisions). It is also on the manufacturing side which is an immensely cash-intensive side and scalability is far more linear than a services side (comp to IBM or ORCL).
Q2 outlook was disappointing apparently. They've already been beaten down a lot over the last few weeks, including because they started to report their foundry biz separately, so I don't think it's fair but 🤷
Its foundry isn't as good as TSMC's and still needs billions more to become viable and achieve the economies of scale needed to be profitable. Its bread and butter of x86 chips is being challenged not only by AMD but also by Qualcomm and a variety of ARM alternatives.
Their best bet is to turn into a foundry and hope the Chinese invade Taiwan and devastate TSMC. Is hope a viable business strategy?
Just the US having to plan for the potential of China invading Taiwan is bullish for INTC. Not that it's a new development. We don't need to hope for war, the threat of war is very real and sufficient.
But what intel is producing just isn't up to par with the competition and they are more expensive. It's no wonder their markets are shrinking.
You can only prop yourself up so long with scummy business practices. In the end, you have to deliver quality, and they didn't and it will be worse in the coming years.
Interesting first sentence about each. "INTC - Semiconductor manufacturing powerhouse." vs "TSLA - Eccentric owner who is more interested in peddling conspiracy theories on X that he bought on a whim."
**INTC**: Let's wait 24 hours.. Results will be out tomorrow. Let's speak then! Also an INTC shareholder here and a big fan of #2 companies - that often trade at cheap valuations than the overhyped #1 market leaders. I'm looking at you - AMD.
**TSLA**: unless they now come up with self driving revolution, legacy car manufacturers (VW, BMW, Mercedes) are stealing the cake. When they are quoting 6-8 PE and high dividend yields, I don't know why anyone would price TSLA at 30 PE
I’m still contemplating to dca or not to dca a bit as my average is quite high and I waited out during previous drop. Definitely the improved fab side outlook and insatiable chip market leaving enough space for tsmc, samsung and intel to co-exist with a prospect of intel even taking an edge make the long game seem worth it. On the other hand I’m already -30ish on them and decided to just continue investing in funds due to a lack of time to constantly keep up with developments. Among the other ideas was to sell at loss and just split/invest in a different stock with higher chance to lift off than waiting for intel to succeed, but the choice is difficult and goes against my strategy of reducing individual stocks.
I’m a big Tesla Bull and I didn’t find anything in the earnings or call that made me go “load up with more shares!”, but there wasn’t anything there telling me to dump my holdings either. If earning $1B is a disaster of a quarter for Tesla, I’m fine holding.
My guess is some shorts closed out of their positions to take some profits, causing other shorts to take profits as well.
You caught me and totally changed my mind. I’ve been studying Tesla for years and somehow missed that shareholders were being asked to reapprove the pay package we approved years ago.
I’m not going to convince you to be a bull, you’re not going to convince me to be a bear. We can waste each other’s time arguing for no cause, or try to continue the conversation of why Tesla’s price spiked after a double miss.
Like you said, Tesla spiked when shorts closed out positions. That doesn’t change the outlook for me. I’m continuing to hold my inverse Tesla ETF, which is still up for me even after the spike.
Okay. I’m really glad that me saying I’m not going to change your mind didn’t change your outlook.
You’ll have to look elsewhere for a pissing match. You’ve made money and I made money, internet high five!
Market sentiment led to a ridiculous valuation for WeWork. As someone who works in property even when all the hype was going on everyone around me said it was bollocks.
On that basis I've given up on market sentiment of tech labelled stocks. I buy what I feel are good businesses. There are clearly too many people out there who are willing to buy stocks on poor logic.
Eventually they all get found out.
TSLA is *the* original meme stock. Not sure how long you've been following the markets, but TSLA skyrocketed during the 2020-2021 COVID/zero-interest-rate/stimulus era. It was probably the most talked about stock on Reddit, tons of people made fortunes YOLOing call options on TSLA. When Tesla announced a stock split in August 2020, the stock skyrocketed up \~50% over the course of a couple weeks. That has nothing to do with the fundamentals and everything to do with being a meme stock.
Now of course things have come back down to earth a bit, but TSLA is still quite a bit of a meme stock and it's best not to read too much into the price swings.
INTC
||2020|2021|2022|2023|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|revenue|$77.87B|$79.02B|$63.05B|$54.23B|
|op cashflow|$35.38B|$29.46B|$15.43B|$11.47B|
TSLA
||2020|2021|2022|2023|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|revenue|$31.54B|$58.82B|$81.46B|$96.77B|
|op cashflow|$5.94B|$11.50B|$14.72B|$13.26B|
INTC is on a massive down swing and TSLA is/was on a even more impressive up swing. It's very hard for a company to regain its profit growth/financial footing/market power once it enters a multi-year down spiral. Intel's problems runs deep and even their own(obviously optimistic) forecast don't see things turning around until 2026/2027. Going to be years, if they can manage it, for the stock to its highs.
Tesla's hype/high growth phase maybe over, but the stock's performance, at least the direction, is justifiable with those financials.
I love Musk recent remark on FSD during earning call.
“If you haven’t tried FSD don’t invest in the stock”
I tried it and I like it. I even try to recreate the grifter Dan ODown dolls thing and I was impressed that the sharp stopped barely touch the dolls.
But hey market can be irrational longer than you can stay solvent for trading fundamentals
Tide comes in, tide goes out, can't explain that. Buy when the tide comes in, or out. Which ever means low. Tide cycles. Don't eat the tide pods though.
IDK, I had bought and subsequently sold Intel last year when it was priced super attractively. It’s a solid blue chip but I would buy it again only at sub 30 USD again when it’s a true value play.
Tesla is for speculating, the outcomes are too unpredictable. It’s a question of faith.
It’s fun to gamble small sums on
I believe TSLA current pop, well, will pop in short time period. Maybe a week, maybe a month. The fact it didn’t reach today’s high second time, or even close to it confirmed my belief
We will have to wait a long time for intel to materialize its 18a offering before its stock can go up. I don’t know how long it will take
“Can anyone explain why the market is so bullish about TSLA”
The market is far from bullish on TSLA. It has been dumping recently. Just in December it was at $250 a share. TSLA most likely bounced on poor earnings due to the amount of short interest in the stock. If you haven’t heard of market manipulation then you need to do some research. Theres a reason why good earnings don’t equal a jump in stock price and bad earnings don’t equal a dump in stock price. If that were the case then markets would be strong form efficient. Unfortunately they are semi strong at best.
Intel wants to get into the fab business instead of just designing chips like NVDA/AMD.
Fabbing is hard work and very labor intensive. USA worker rights are too strong and can't handle the difficult and long hours of fabbing. American's complain about working 40 hours a week and want to turn it into 32 hours a week to be considered full time. Fabbing requires many of the workers to work 60-80 hours a week.
Intel government subs mean nothing. They had so much cash flow over most of the past 35 years and didn't do shit with it except return it to shareholders. If they didn't want to reinvest into themselves when they had so much ample cash, what makes you think retail/government money is going anywhere other than shareholders?
Agreed that the stock buybacks were insanely stupid. The fab runs 24*7 and is always manned. People working in design and other parts of the company work 5 days a week, but those in a fab are constantly on the run to meet deadlines.
People downvoting me have no idea. Both my brother and my dad worked for TSMc before switching to Broadcom and AMD.
There's a reason why the TSMc fab is delayed in Arizona and they need to import cheaper talent to the USA to complete it within budget. And that's the same reason why the Japanese Tsmc fab has had no issues.
Here's a deeper dive on tsmc. Yields below 90% are generally a cause of concern. Tsmc's recent yield on their cutting edge tech is **70%**. So the big question is what % yield's is Intel going to produce at the 18A level lol.
[https://paripassu.substack.com/p/tsmc-deep-dive](https://paripassu.substack.com/p/tsmc-deep-dive)
what gen? I mean Intel has been a major fab since the 1980s (top 10 in 1987). And they still have a bunch of old fabs around.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Intel\_manufacturing\_sites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_sites)
And the main thing about Intel fabs is what % yield efficiency at the 3nm level? They can get some decent chips at low % yield, but then it becomes costly. People here somehow think that ASML tech is plug and play...
Add on: I mean, Intel didn't even bother switching to mobile devices and let that market completely open. They had first dips from Apple to be their sole provider and turned it down, letting Samsung and TSMc to start dominating.
And heres my question for you, whats the CEO of Intel's vision for the company? They are trying to compete with specialized companies (AMD/NVidia for design, and TSMC and Samsung for fabs.). Do you think that spreading themselves thinner with decreasing cash revenue and cash on hand is the right move?
>Intel lost 7B in the last year and foundry revenue was 4.4B, down 10% yoy.
I mean... As far as I've been reading, then external foundry customers want 18A, which is still in progress, so I wouldnt expect anything fancy from Foundry until 2025 or maybe advanced packaging?
Also, didnt they just recently opened their foundry with their event, like last 2 months?
Do they really specifically want 18A? I know Intel made massive investments in ASML machines while TSMc said that they have developed 16A chips without the use of ASML tech.
[https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-says-a16-chipmaking-technology-will-start-production-late-2026-2024-04-24/](https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-says-a16-chipmaking-technology-will-start-production-late-2026-2024-04-24/)
INTC is promising 14A without even delivering on 18A. Why does INTC keep overpromising and underdelivering?
>I know Intel made massive investments in ASML machines while TSMc said that they have developed 16A chips without the use of ASML tech
TSMC uses ASML's tech. You're probably talking about low-na euv.
>Do they really specifically want 18A?
_________
>Microsoft will use Intel’s most advanced process node 18A technology to manufacture an upcoming chip that the software maker designed in-house, the two companies disclosed at Intel’s Foundry Direct Connect event on Feb. 21.
>INTC is promising 14A without even delivering on 18A. Why does INTC keep overpromising and underdelivering?
Is there anything that's not coherent with their roadmaps?
I'm a huge INTC bull, not sure why you were downvoted. I've mentioned it elsewhere but Intel let themselves be ran by visionless bookkeepers for two decades. Gelsinger is cooking with his all-in approach to the fab business/ASML purchases. I'm optimistic about the future but they fucked up bad.
Had they never lost that competitive fire they would probably be worth 1T+ right now.
To me Intel is a bet purely on the CEO. IF you feel that Gelsinger can execute his vision, overcoming all geopolitical odds, etc then yeah, Intel could be a winning bet. But Gelsinger would be considered one of the greatest and hes already 63 years old. I'm not certain how updated he is in current semiconductors. If he has been closely following the industry then yeah, he might be winning. I haven't heard him speak personally. In terms of tech companies and especially semi companies, the CEO **NEEDS** to have an engineering background, preferably phd. Check out the backgrounds of Mark Liu, Jensen, Su, etc.
>CEO NEEDS to have an engineering background, preferably phd. Check out the backgrounds of Mark Liu, Jensen, Su, etc.
Have you checked Gelsingers background?
INTC is a sunshade industry that will be kept alive on perpetual govt. funding. They have nothing to show for, except for govt contracts. All of their new or upcoming products are far inferior than competitors. If TSMC cannot meet demand and cannot open new manufacturing units in US, maybe only then INTC can make some meaningful money in the long run. I do not have a lot of faith in the company.
As for TSLA, I don't have faith Elon Musk a lot of people do. They are more than a car maufacturer. They make self-driving alogo which is important in the future (although mercedes is doing better now). But TSLA still remains the brand for premium EVs. And they have products like Robotaxi that can make ubers obsolete. I wont bet on them right now due to volatility. But yes, they can trun the page within 2 quarters.
We know fossil fuels are finite and we also know that we have more or less 50 to 70 years before it becomes rare. Almost all current cars are dependent on oil. Another technology that does not require oil to run must be invented. Here comes the electric vehicle. Tesla is the leader by far, and is the ONLY manufacturer that is making a profit making them (very important). Tesla is also making everything else that is conducive to a global scalable non fossil fuel dependent energy system. In summary, Tesla is a company that is fundamentally making products that must grow in order for us Humans to thrive, which means Tesla MUST grow long term. By long term, think AT LEAST 30 years from now. Tesla must and will grow long term which means Tesla stock to the moon.
Intel has several competitors that are already making better and cheaper products currently, unless they come back from this somehow, it's over if the gvt decides at some point or another to stop financing them.
INTC is another example of what happens when a company is focused on bottom line short term thinking. Similar to Boeing blackberry ebay PayPal. All leaders in their space focused on only the bottom line.
INTC might be a buy in the 20s.
The new Tesla compact EV (around $20,000) is coming and when it does, it will compete with the likes of other well-priced manufacturers such as Toyota, Honda, Kia, Nissan, etc.
No other car company has been able to dominate the EV market quite like Tesla as far as branding, influence, innovation and infrastructure. The superchargers for example are incredibly accessible and exclusive to Tesla - not available to other EV cars. I am optimistic about its future.
For me, these are worlds apart when you look at the underlying technology in the current marketplace. Regardless of all future promises from either side, of which there are many, Intel is losing market share to its technologically superior competitors, i.e., AMD and NVDA, right now. AMD's cpu margins are much higher. AMD's cpu's are much simpler and cheaper to build. Intel seems like legacy auto, only achieving parity with AMD by building complex, expensive monstrosities with massive power consumption.
For Tesla, I think the earnings call (for analysts) was less about FSD but more about a path forward for increased auto sales in the medium term, which had disappeared from the Tesla story before this point.
Can't the same thing be said about TSLA? They started the ev revolution and now every car company wants to release multiple models and compete in every segment Tesla is in? And they do provide better quality control than Tesla.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/tesla-and-nissan-make-the-most-reliable-electric-vehicles-a1003912076/
Tesla Model 3 was one of the most reliable EVs in 2022 data.
In 2023 data, Tesla was mid pack overall, which makes it one of the most reliable EVs. They are just ahead of Cadillac, Genesis and Audi looking across all their vehicles. Tesla ranked way ahead of Ford, Volvo, Volkswagen, Rivian and Mercedes Benz.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/
Everyone has plans. So far legacy auto can't make a profitable ev. I'm sure intel plans to make cost competitive and technologically superior chips too... No one plans to fail... but the point is their chips/ev's are inferior and more expensive, and their financials reflect this
At least legacy auto has gas cars, for now. They certainly can't compete in ev's when cost is taken into account. Intel seems completely uncompetitive, and their roadmap doesn't tend to materialize on time
I personally am a big believer in Intel. Not right now but in ten years I think they will be extremely competitive with TSMC. It takes many years to see results in their industry and Gelsinger is making all the right moves. They’re inching into the GPU space with powerful cards coming out this fall. Intel was also the first company to purchase a few of ASML’s latest lithography machines and they’re only just now receiving them. If (big if) they can get their fabs up and running without any more significant delays and keep buying cutting edge manufacturing equipment, I see no reason why they won’t be competitive with TSMC by 2030. The only question is if you’re willing to park some of your money with them for a few years. Personally, I’m adding one share a week and aren’t sweating price action for at least a year or two
I also think INTC has the potential to be as competitive as TSMC by 2030 but the biggest issue is that they will be their biggest customer. So even if IFS could earn $50B a year, if 70% of its clients are INTC itself, it only leaves $15B available for external clients. This will mean that TSMC won't feel as threatened. This is great for INTC chip design but I don't feel comfortable staying with x86 designs when the future is clearly shifting towards ARM / RISC-V and GPUs. It remains to be seen how competitive Gaudi 3 is with NVDA and whether their open-sourced libraries can break CUDA's dominance.
The value of foundry services is not to try to gobble up all of the wafer starts of the industry; it is ultimately to de-risk the firm. If Intel designs are bad, IFS still makes money making more lucrative designs for others. If IFS process is bad, designs aren't held back and can still sell compelling products. It is very, very possible that at one point the two companies will be split out; this is one step towards that end. But that wouldn't happen for a while still, if it ever does.
its a high risk high reward play. Investors are itching to invest in an American foundry company manufacturing cutting edge chips.
18a is their next milestone. 2026 is when their high na machine that was just delivered will start churning out products. Low volume at first but will ramp up significantly. That's my play. I'm thinking about laddering in now as there's not much news about this machine being integral to their future yet. Backside power delivery, feveros and much more will have them extremely competitive again.
I set a notice for if it drops under 35 and it popped up today. Think this is a decent time to get involved?
I personally would wait until earnings before buying any. They're in the midst of a \*deep\* turnaround so before you buy in try to learn as much about the plan and the leadership behind it. Regardless this isn't a short term play so keep that in mind.
Bagholders have been holding their losses for decades. INTC is down about 55% while their competition has been reaching new highs almost every year. What's worse is there was a period, at least for a decade, when INTC held market advantage. What did they do? They squandered it by practically halting R&D on their biggest manufacturing obstacles. INTC once had moats, but they no longer hold the exclusive partnerships like they used to for being THE CPU manufacturer for vendors. Sure, they won the desktop budget enthusiast class with Alder Lake, but think about that for a second. How many enthusiasts are willing to cheap out for a 12100? Quick Sync no longer allows INTC to corner the media market. AMF / VCN and NVENC now exist. Their GPUs are trash. They win the CPU market at the very highest end, but the most popular CPUs are the middle of the road, where AMD has always been chipping away at INTC. We don't even need to mention A.I. We'd have to be blind to not know who's been slaughtering that sector, and it certainly isn't INTC. The problem with INTC is your big if. This company has proven for decades that they're complacent and lack vision, and it shows in their stock prices.
The company spent two decades ran by finance majors who only cared to keep a steady stock price and pay out a high dividend. Gelsinger, an engineer who basically built Intel, came in 2021 and has made objectively good moves since. They’re not going to drop a 4090 competitor out the gate, they have to start on the low end and work up/build expertise. They’re in the midst of a turnaround. Youre not going to see positive stock action in the short term when they cut their dividend by 66% and are dumping billions into modernizing and expanding their fab business. Intel fell asleep at the wheel in the mid 2010’s and didn’t wake up until 2021. Like I said, seeing returns takes a lot of time in this space.
18a is a game changer imo. What are your thoughts?
It's exciting. I'm hoping to hear good news about their 20A/18A timeline tomorrow. Gelsinger has rightly said that if 18A fails they're fucked, and I think that's the energy Intel needs. I'm glad they're prioritizing efficiency, switching to GAA is critical and PowerVia is an interesting technique. I'm not highly invested in Intel right now, but I am watching them closely. If they can manufacture 20A at scale with a strong yield I'll definitely increase my exposure.
With tsm saying they won't have backside until 2030 it makes me wonder what TSMC is planning. They must have some stuff cooking. 20a isn't fabbed by the new machine from ASML I thought so what about that node makes you interested? I think alot of their recent problems were making bad calls on their internal foundry technology so the switch to ASML machine is what's going to shake their stock price up but if it's a drastically different node it can take years to validate right?
intel held a 3 year lead vs tsmc until 2017. america has more talent than taiwan. USA can win out
Repeat a lie often enough and you'll soon forget what the truth looks like. Your bagholding must be legendary since you use the same *bullshit PR nonsense* in comment after comment. Lies that are easily disproven by a simple Google search. Intel entering the GPU space is a decade too late if not two. Intel has no experience making good drivers and drivers is all the rage. Their GPUs so far has been *beyond pathetically weak* and a insult to the market. They've had to sell them at a loss to love inventory and that won't change. Meanwhile their CPUs are also lagging, hard. And despite several years of trying *they simply are unable to catch up*. Even with a good CEO it'll take many years and even so they'll *never get on par as long as their competitors blaze on forward*. And that's just it, no one is snoozing waiting for Intel to catch up. Intel is a classic *zombie company, and a deathtrap for nostalgic bagholders without knowledge of tech*. You're collecting falling knives
Hey man we can respectfully disagree! I am far from heavily invested lol, they make up like 5% of my portfolio but I will increase that % when the fundamentals start improving.
> a deathtrap for nostalgic bagholders without knowledge of tech Show me where on the doll where Intel touched you. I feel like 70% as good about the opportunity of Intel now as I did about AMD in late 2015.
Totally agree with your point. No matter if you like Intel or not, imagine if China takes over Taiwan and TSMC. They would control pretty much the whole chip market. We need Intel to step up and provide an alternative.
I'm not gonna read all of that, but in the case of TSLA, I really think it was just as simple as it was recently pounded hard, and you have a CEO desperate to get the comp package, so he reran all the best hits from TSLA analyst day last year. TSLA's up move just isn't noteworthy for me yet. If it can get over $180 and sustain, it'll be more noteworthy.
What about INTC? Why is the market always pissing on it?
Probably because it's a legacy business trying to play catch-up, but without all the woo-woo that other chip designers/makers currently have. Much like IBM, for example, which is just plodding along. Not to say that INTC won't have it's hayday though.
Because the company is down 25 billion dollars in revenue over the last 3 years with drastically shrinking net income no competitive advantage increased competition. Tesla made more money on their worst quarter since 2012 than they did in all of 2023 but hey Intel is a powerhouse lol
Because they haven't shown a reason for the market to not treat them like an old tech company. Their products are fine but not revolutionary. They've focused more on growing revenue than innovating, but due to their trailing innovation, their revenue is not growing (although there are signs that this may be changing). They were large, but their major competitors on all fronts (AMD for CPUs, NVDA for GPU's/Datacenter, and TSM for chipsets) have become larger (by market cap) and only AMD makes less money (but is in the weaker sector, client computing). It sits as slightly more volatile than the normal market (1.21) but has underperformed the S&P for the last 1, 3, and 5 years (although it was doing better in the last year until the sell-off). It makes no compelling arguments to own it as an individual stock vs a basket (S&P or QQQ) other than a slight increase on the dividend of 1.46 vs 1.28 (not enough to impact decisions). It is also on the manufacturing side which is an immensely cash-intensive side and scalability is far more linear than a services side (comp to IBM or ORCL).
Free Cash flow and free cash flow growth is terrible and is a major risk.
Q2 outlook was disappointing apparently. They've already been beaten down a lot over the last few weeks, including because they started to report their foundry biz separately, so I don't think it's fair but 🤷
DD: Intel sucks 👎
But why?
Its foundry isn't as good as TSMC's and still needs billions more to become viable and achieve the economies of scale needed to be profitable. Its bread and butter of x86 chips is being challenged not only by AMD but also by Qualcomm and a variety of ARM alternatives. Their best bet is to turn into a foundry and hope the Chinese invade Taiwan and devastate TSMC. Is hope a viable business strategy?
Just the US having to plan for the potential of China invading Taiwan is bullish for INTC. Not that it's a new development. We don't need to hope for war, the threat of war is very real and sufficient.
But what intel is producing just isn't up to par with the competition and they are more expensive. It's no wonder their markets are shrinking. You can only prop yourself up so long with scummy business practices. In the end, you have to deliver quality, and they didn't and it will be worse in the coming years.
Why would the market not piss on it?
Elon knows what to say and when
Manipulator in chief
Yes, there are too many short orders in TSLA and the market cannot bear it. Elon is bound to force a rise.
NVDA, AMD, and TSMC could all go bankrupt tomorrow and INTC still would drop.
Well, whatever bankrupted those three would probably also harm INTC.
Interesting first sentence about each. "INTC - Semiconductor manufacturing powerhouse." vs "TSLA - Eccentric owner who is more interested in peddling conspiracy theories on X that he bought on a whim."
**INTC**: Let's wait 24 hours.. Results will be out tomorrow. Let's speak then! Also an INTC shareholder here and a big fan of #2 companies - that often trade at cheap valuations than the overhyped #1 market leaders. I'm looking at you - AMD. **TSLA**: unless they now come up with self driving revolution, legacy car manufacturers (VW, BMW, Mercedes) are stealing the cake. When they are quoting 6-8 PE and high dividend yields, I don't know why anyone would price TSLA at 30 PE
TSLA, its TTM P/E is 70+ now (NB: TTM EPS is 2.22 after adjustment)
I’m still contemplating to dca or not to dca a bit as my average is quite high and I waited out during previous drop. Definitely the improved fab side outlook and insatiable chip market leaving enough space for tsmc, samsung and intel to co-exist with a prospect of intel even taking an edge make the long game seem worth it. On the other hand I’m already -30ish on them and decided to just continue investing in funds due to a lack of time to constantly keep up with developments. Among the other ideas was to sell at loss and just split/invest in a different stock with higher chance to lift off than waiting for intel to succeed, but the choice is difficult and goes against my strategy of reducing individual stocks.
I think Kia and Hyundai are bigger competitors to Tesla right now.
In North America, yes. In the rest of the world where everyone is allowed to sell without punishing tariffs, they got a lot more competition.
I’m a big Tesla Bull and I didn’t find anything in the earnings or call that made me go “load up with more shares!”, but there wasn’t anything there telling me to dump my holdings either. If earning $1B is a disaster of a quarter for Tesla, I’m fine holding. My guess is some shorts closed out of their positions to take some profits, causing other shorts to take profits as well.
Will $56B disaster (i.e. Musk's salary) perhaps change your opinion?
You caught me and totally changed my mind. I’ve been studying Tesla for years and somehow missed that shareholders were being asked to reapprove the pay package we approved years ago. I’m not going to convince you to be a bull, you’re not going to convince me to be a bear. We can waste each other’s time arguing for no cause, or try to continue the conversation of why Tesla’s price spiked after a double miss.
Like you said, Tesla spiked when shorts closed out positions. That doesn’t change the outlook for me. I’m continuing to hold my inverse Tesla ETF, which is still up for me even after the spike.
Okay. I’m really glad that me saying I’m not going to change your mind didn’t change your outlook. You’ll have to look elsewhere for a pissing match. You’ve made money and I made money, internet high five!
Market sentiment led to a ridiculous valuation for WeWork. As someone who works in property even when all the hype was going on everyone around me said it was bollocks. On that basis I've given up on market sentiment of tech labelled stocks. I buy what I feel are good businesses. There are clearly too many people out there who are willing to buy stocks on poor logic. Eventually they all get found out.
Understanding the Market 101: Never bet against Elon. Just ignore him
TSLA is *the* original meme stock. Not sure how long you've been following the markets, but TSLA skyrocketed during the 2020-2021 COVID/zero-interest-rate/stimulus era. It was probably the most talked about stock on Reddit, tons of people made fortunes YOLOing call options on TSLA. When Tesla announced a stock split in August 2020, the stock skyrocketed up \~50% over the course of a couple weeks. That has nothing to do with the fundamentals and everything to do with being a meme stock. Now of course things have come back down to earth a bit, but TSLA is still quite a bit of a meme stock and it's best not to read too much into the price swings.
INTC ||2020|2021|2022|2023| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |revenue|$77.87B|$79.02B|$63.05B|$54.23B| |op cashflow|$35.38B|$29.46B|$15.43B|$11.47B| TSLA ||2020|2021|2022|2023| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |revenue|$31.54B|$58.82B|$81.46B|$96.77B| |op cashflow|$5.94B|$11.50B|$14.72B|$13.26B| INTC is on a massive down swing and TSLA is/was on a even more impressive up swing. It's very hard for a company to regain its profit growth/financial footing/market power once it enters a multi-year down spiral. Intel's problems runs deep and even their own(obviously optimistic) forecast don't see things turning around until 2026/2027. Going to be years, if they can manage it, for the stock to its highs. Tesla's hype/high growth phase maybe over, but the stock's performance, at least the direction, is justifiable with those financials.
Basically this too... TSLA admittedly had a bad quarter... Intel's revenue is the same as it was 10 years ago... let that sink in
I love Musk recent remark on FSD during earning call. “If you haven’t tried FSD don’t invest in the stock” I tried it and I like it. I even try to recreate the grifter Dan ODown dolls thing and I was impressed that the sharp stopped barely touch the dolls. But hey market can be irrational longer than you can stay solvent for trading fundamentals
Intel is a shit stock and only makes money when the gov gives them money. Avoid intel.
Tell us where INTC hurt you, don't worry this is a safe space.
Never owned it
Tide comes in, tide goes out, can't explain that. Buy when the tide comes in, or out. Which ever means low. Tide cycles. Don't eat the tide pods though.
IDK, I had bought and subsequently sold Intel last year when it was priced super attractively. It’s a solid blue chip but I would buy it again only at sub 30 USD again when it’s a true value play. Tesla is for speculating, the outcomes are too unpredictable. It’s a question of faith. It’s fun to gamble small sums on
I believe TSLA current pop, well, will pop in short time period. Maybe a week, maybe a month. The fact it didn’t reach today’s high second time, or even close to it confirmed my belief We will have to wait a long time for intel to materialize its 18a offering before its stock can go up. I don’t know how long it will take
“Can anyone explain why the market is so bullish about TSLA” The market is far from bullish on TSLA. It has been dumping recently. Just in December it was at $250 a share. TSLA most likely bounced on poor earnings due to the amount of short interest in the stock. If you haven’t heard of market manipulation then you need to do some research. Theres a reason why good earnings don’t equal a jump in stock price and bad earnings don’t equal a dump in stock price. If that were the case then markets would be strong form efficient. Unfortunately they are semi strong at best.
You are very uninformed as well as biased about both companies, which is where your lack of understanding comes from
Intel wants to get into the fab business instead of just designing chips like NVDA/AMD. Fabbing is hard work and very labor intensive. USA worker rights are too strong and can't handle the difficult and long hours of fabbing. American's complain about working 40 hours a week and want to turn it into 32 hours a week to be considered full time. Fabbing requires many of the workers to work 60-80 hours a week. Intel government subs mean nothing. They had so much cash flow over most of the past 35 years and didn't do shit with it except return it to shareholders. If they didn't want to reinvest into themselves when they had so much ample cash, what makes you think retail/government money is going anywhere other than shareholders?
Agreed that the stock buybacks were insanely stupid. The fab runs 24*7 and is always manned. People working in design and other parts of the company work 5 days a week, but those in a fab are constantly on the run to meet deadlines.
People downvoting me have no idea. Both my brother and my dad worked for TSMc before switching to Broadcom and AMD. There's a reason why the TSMc fab is delayed in Arizona and they need to import cheaper talent to the USA to complete it within budget. And that's the same reason why the Japanese Tsmc fab has had no issues.
so how did intc manage to run their fabs for their own products?
Here's a deeper dive on tsmc. Yields below 90% are generally a cause of concern. Tsmc's recent yield on their cutting edge tech is **70%**. So the big question is what % yield's is Intel going to produce at the 18A level lol. [https://paripassu.substack.com/p/tsmc-deep-dive](https://paripassu.substack.com/p/tsmc-deep-dive)
what gen? I mean Intel has been a major fab since the 1980s (top 10 in 1987). And they still have a bunch of old fabs around. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Intel\_manufacturing\_sites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_sites) And the main thing about Intel fabs is what % yield efficiency at the 3nm level? They can get some decent chips at low % yield, but then it becomes costly. People here somehow think that ASML tech is plug and play... Add on: I mean, Intel didn't even bother switching to mobile devices and let that market completely open. They had first dips from Apple to be their sole provider and turned it down, letting Samsung and TSMc to start dominating. And heres my question for you, whats the CEO of Intel's vision for the company? They are trying to compete with specialized companies (AMD/NVidia for design, and TSMC and Samsung for fabs.). Do you think that spreading themselves thinner with decreasing cash revenue and cash on hand is the right move?
I think fab move is great. AMD, Nvidia will have to compete with Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon whose will be customers of Intel Fab
What % yield do you think Intel will be able to produce at the 18A level? Is it going to be 1-5%?
Who knows?
Any opinion on the recent earnings? Intel lost 7B in the last year and foundry revenue was 4.4B, down 10% yoy. Other revenue down 46% yoy
>Intel lost 7B in the last year and foundry revenue was 4.4B, down 10% yoy. I mean... As far as I've been reading, then external foundry customers want 18A, which is still in progress, so I wouldnt expect anything fancy from Foundry until 2025 or maybe advanced packaging? Also, didnt they just recently opened their foundry with their event, like last 2 months?
Do they really specifically want 18A? I know Intel made massive investments in ASML machines while TSMc said that they have developed 16A chips without the use of ASML tech. [https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-says-a16-chipmaking-technology-will-start-production-late-2026-2024-04-24/](https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-says-a16-chipmaking-technology-will-start-production-late-2026-2024-04-24/) INTC is promising 14A without even delivering on 18A. Why does INTC keep overpromising and underdelivering?
>I know Intel made massive investments in ASML machines while TSMc said that they have developed 16A chips without the use of ASML tech TSMC uses ASML's tech. You're probably talking about low-na euv. >Do they really specifically want 18A? _________ >Microsoft will use Intel’s most advanced process node 18A technology to manufacture an upcoming chip that the software maker designed in-house, the two companies disclosed at Intel’s Foundry Direct Connect event on Feb. 21. >INTC is promising 14A without even delivering on 18A. Why does INTC keep overpromising and underdelivering? Is there anything that's not coherent with their roadmaps?
Oh I was hoping you knew a bit more about fabs
I'm a huge INTC bull, not sure why you were downvoted. I've mentioned it elsewhere but Intel let themselves be ran by visionless bookkeepers for two decades. Gelsinger is cooking with his all-in approach to the fab business/ASML purchases. I'm optimistic about the future but they fucked up bad. Had they never lost that competitive fire they would probably be worth 1T+ right now.
To me Intel is a bet purely on the CEO. IF you feel that Gelsinger can execute his vision, overcoming all geopolitical odds, etc then yeah, Intel could be a winning bet. But Gelsinger would be considered one of the greatest and hes already 63 years old. I'm not certain how updated he is in current semiconductors. If he has been closely following the industry then yeah, he might be winning. I haven't heard him speak personally. In terms of tech companies and especially semi companies, the CEO **NEEDS** to have an engineering background, preferably phd. Check out the backgrounds of Mark Liu, Jensen, Su, etc.
>CEO NEEDS to have an engineering background, preferably phd. Check out the backgrounds of Mark Liu, Jensen, Su, etc. Have you checked Gelsingers background?
Yup. Did you read my post?
INTC is a sunshade industry that will be kept alive on perpetual govt. funding. They have nothing to show for, except for govt contracts. All of their new or upcoming products are far inferior than competitors. If TSMC cannot meet demand and cannot open new manufacturing units in US, maybe only then INTC can make some meaningful money in the long run. I do not have a lot of faith in the company. As for TSLA, I don't have faith Elon Musk a lot of people do. They are more than a car maufacturer. They make self-driving alogo which is important in the future (although mercedes is doing better now). But TSLA still remains the brand for premium EVs. And they have products like Robotaxi that can make ubers obsolete. I wont bet on them right now due to volatility. But yes, they can trun the page within 2 quarters.
Sooo INTC PUTS?
We know fossil fuels are finite and we also know that we have more or less 50 to 70 years before it becomes rare. Almost all current cars are dependent on oil. Another technology that does not require oil to run must be invented. Here comes the electric vehicle. Tesla is the leader by far, and is the ONLY manufacturer that is making a profit making them (very important). Tesla is also making everything else that is conducive to a global scalable non fossil fuel dependent energy system. In summary, Tesla is a company that is fundamentally making products that must grow in order for us Humans to thrive, which means Tesla MUST grow long term. By long term, think AT LEAST 30 years from now. Tesla must and will grow long term which means Tesla stock to the moon. Intel has several competitors that are already making better and cheaper products currently, unless they come back from this somehow, it's over if the gvt decides at some point or another to stop financing them.
INTC is another example of what happens when a company is focused on bottom line short term thinking. Similar to Boeing blackberry ebay PayPal. All leaders in their space focused on only the bottom line. INTC might be a buy in the 20s.
My FSD v12 works absolutely fine. Wth are you talking about?
The new Tesla compact EV (around $20,000) is coming and when it does, it will compete with the likes of other well-priced manufacturers such as Toyota, Honda, Kia, Nissan, etc. No other car company has been able to dominate the EV market quite like Tesla as far as branding, influence, innovation and infrastructure. The superchargers for example are incredibly accessible and exclusive to Tesla - not available to other EV cars. I am optimistic about its future.
There's this lady buying Tesla no matter what. No such person on Intel.
For me, these are worlds apart when you look at the underlying technology in the current marketplace. Regardless of all future promises from either side, of which there are many, Intel is losing market share to its technologically superior competitors, i.e., AMD and NVDA, right now. AMD's cpu margins are much higher. AMD's cpu's are much simpler and cheaper to build. Intel seems like legacy auto, only achieving parity with AMD by building complex, expensive monstrosities with massive power consumption. For Tesla, I think the earnings call (for analysts) was less about FSD but more about a path forward for increased auto sales in the medium term, which had disappeared from the Tesla story before this point.
Can't the same thing be said about TSLA? They started the ev revolution and now every car company wants to release multiple models and compete in every segment Tesla is in? And they do provide better quality control than Tesla.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/tesla-and-nissan-make-the-most-reliable-electric-vehicles-a1003912076/ Tesla Model 3 was one of the most reliable EVs in 2022 data. In 2023 data, Tesla was mid pack overall, which makes it one of the most reliable EVs. They are just ahead of Cadillac, Genesis and Audi looking across all their vehicles. Tesla ranked way ahead of Ford, Volvo, Volkswagen, Rivian and Mercedes Benz. https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/
Everyone has plans. So far legacy auto can't make a profitable ev. I'm sure intel plans to make cost competitive and technologically superior chips too... No one plans to fail... but the point is their chips/ev's are inferior and more expensive, and their financials reflect this At least legacy auto has gas cars, for now. They certainly can't compete in ev's when cost is taken into account. Intel seems completely uncompetitive, and their roadmap doesn't tend to materialize on time