I get the competitive design conflicts history firsthand; Cyrix, NexGen, AMD, decades of antitrust work. Following my federal report press Intel so said created a second legal department for foundry albeit I’m still engaged in a dialogue with the first subject Intel Inside federal, States and general consumer recoveries.

Intel legal a nefarious bunch having infiltrated the public legal market, jurists, judiciary and legislative branch in any state of Intel operation to get Intel’s way. There are placements everywhere. Infiltrating the media parallel Intel marketing, public relations, lobbyists implementing multipoint influence manipulations while Intel media cohorts subliminally condition the masses using all of Intel’s ‘inside’ tricks.

Comply or be boycott and blacklisted. Resistance is futile on losing access and allocation still applies?

Subject Intel Title 48 procurement violations associated Intel Inside procurement ‘price fix’ overcharge theft from the federal government under Title 48, Intel does not qualify for grants, and by law federal contract work until that theft is paid back. That offer has been on the table subject Intel BOD approval for a decade and the time is right pursuant Chip Act for resolution. In parallel there is a legal review at the Appellate and Congressional level looking back on the 30 year record on Intel cartelization of the x86 PC industry systematically taken over by domestic criminal gangs in the 1990s that lead too internation organized crime helping themselves to Intel monopoly spoils. Where throughout the 2000’s into the last decade Intel employees increasingly emulate the mobsters who take over the corporation and from 2010 escalating 2017 into ransacked it. Product laundering theft at DCG, exceeds a billion units of Xeon escaping out the back door suspect primarily funding Intel Asia Pacific and other totalitarian operators.

Faced with the red brick wall employees were literally stripping the enterprise for gratuities? I have very little doubt Intel was sabotaged. I also believe competitive gangs were involved taking matters into their own hands, design tool sabotage primarily, objecting to decades of no United States government regulation, no law enforcement, no governance including at Intel on BODs under Grove, Barrett and Otellini being rotten to the core.

Pursuant Chip Act production equipment tax credits being indirect I can’t see much getting in the way of SEMI and the equipment industry related to Intel capital expenditures.

I too see Intel has having little choice in attempting a legitimate foundry operation. Intel earned a buck a unit in 2023. CFO Zinsner stated in the q1 2023 financial call he was managing an “at cost” operation”. Intel’s legacy monopoly cost structure remains in an overhang position and yet to find its ‘new’ equilibrium. Intel needs to find that equilibrium so Intel can pay back its debts to society which include United States Citizens intel Inside price fix recovery and thereafter remain a good citizen.

There are two distinct political camps. One moving to reconfigure Intel and the other ready to spread Intel’s DNA to the wind.

There are ideological splits between what is industrial fascism on industrial state politics and what is sustaining democratic capitalism and open commerce administered under a rational functioning federalism managed by its operational republics. Intel will have to choose. More so the nation must choose and so will its industries ‘what is legitimate governance’. And under what forms of political regimes. I for one reject corporate and industrial fascism on the Intel Corporation unregulated monopoly, disablement of commerce and cartel examples.

Intel Foundry with what type of fire walls to be determined on CEO Gelsinger’s “dependent and interdependent” [?] framework.

The Intel Foundry potential downfall I see is formation of another form of cartel, a foundry club not unlike at TSMC, where the acquisition of inputs is controlled by top foundry customers and leading process, acquisition, protection of intellectual property now extending to packaging, just like at Intel over the decades, are monopolized. There isn’t a foundry capacity issue. There are access issues and geopolitical imbalances proximate competitive regional markets. There are also the typical intermediate technology and science issues; good, bad and shoddy. Occurring in an economic war zone? Can’t we just get on with the good society?

Moving from one form of monopoly operator to another form, a foundry cartel, Intel will have to prove its open market credo and as always in technology acquisition and maintenance that objective has typically been consumed within its own ‘invented realities’.

Ultimately avoiding those invented realities that have been so consuming and transforming to the common good requires a legitimate governance organization. As always, a question remains, who sets that example and who determines at what society cost price?

Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing

Which is a good argument for spinning them off separately in the long run.

“fans” => “fabs”

It can have closed door meetings, and winking agreements, internal corporate kickbacks, “elevated” error rates fabbing oh, I don’t know, nV and AMD chips should those two ever have to hire Intel. Intel has never been shy about dirty business practices. Repeat after me, Timothy: THIS IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THIS IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. If your tax money is being used to prop up Intel fans then you as a citizen should demand a corporate structure that ensures your money is well spent: divestment of the fans and creation of a contract fab company, not some kind of “We’ll behave, honest!” promise from Intel.

I do. What choice does it have?

You are right about the WTO. But that won’t happen for years.

Still, some may worry that a High-NA diet could pose challenges (compared to low-sodium). But the resulting flavor enhancements, coupled with a high-performance exercise regimen, should prove quite a winning combination, provided chips remain non-sedentary (IMHO). Can’t wait to see them running through their paces! 8^p

Do you honestly believe Intel will treat the design and foundry units as separate and distinct? Fox/henhouse. Intel’s history as a competitor. And I got a bridge I’d like to sell you. Funniest of all will be if TSMC or Samsung or GoSlow takes the US to the WTO on unfair subsidies and wins!