Like many others have mentioned, Intel fell behind by multiple generations. It was busy trying to rule the market as a monopoly when in actuality it was a duopoly. Worse than the consumer sector is the datacenter business where many are choosing AMD's Epyc instead of Intel's Xeon. This is a sector where being second best as a direct competitor means you don't exist.
The Intel trade comes down to: They are making a major pivot. You get to place your bets on whether or not they will succeed. I like their new CEO. They have the right talent. They know the business. The stock is out of favor among techies. All that adds up to something I'd like to have a position in. That's not a prediction. It just means I feel the odds are in favor of the longs over the next 5 years.
I like Intel. Non-insane PE ratio. Pays a dividend. I do not agree with the obsession with FANG stocks.
Those processor nodes are not equal. Intel's 10 nm is competitive with TSMC's 7 nm in terms of transistor density and other performance specs. But in general I agree...Intel fell behind. They were a full process node ahead about a decade ago. Now they are about 1 process node behind. Their CPU design must be good though as they are still competitive in the gaming PC segment. Not sure about Ryzen 7...maybe they fall behind again until they release Gen 13. Personally, I have been buying Intel although my average cost is about $13 higher than the current price. I think it's underpriced. There's only 3 manufacturers in the world that can make the leading edge process technology. Intel is the only one outside of Asia. If nothing else, I would expect geopolitics to bump up Intel's stock price more than it is. If China invades Taiwan, Intel could easily double overnight. Long term though, Intel needs to catch up on their process tech. If you don't think they can, then probably not a good investment. Important question to ask is why did they fall behind? Was it due to lack or talent or just piss poor management? If piss poor management, then that's something that can be fixed. I think the current CEO is the best Intel has had since Grove. I think the entire board should be fired as they along with prior CEOs allowed the company to fall behind. Only 1 person on the board with a science degree last time I checked. $500M to the Olympics while the company was falling behind on process tech was a mistake. CEO is probably right that foundry is the future. ARC sounds like it's doing ok. I would not expect it to beat nVidia's best from the start. If you don't like Intel, look at ASML or LRCX. ASML is the only producer in the world that makes leading edge lithography tools. They literally have a monopoly on the industry. TSMC, Intel, and Samsung have nowhere else to go but them.
Same old story -- crappy management. The previous 2 CEOs were too busy jerking off & lollygagging. Maybe the current CEO can do something but its a long term strategy at best. Foundries are not a good business. They are cost heavy and low margin. That's the reason Intel, IBM, NEC, etc. all abandoned it years ago. For 10+ years Intel relied on the corrupt AMD management to maintain their dominance. Looks like 4-core strategy didn't work after selling that crap for 10 years. If Boeing wasn't an Oligopoly it would be in the same situation as Intel. Their management is even worse thanks to no competition.
Yeh, Boeing management is bad. Only management that I can think of which might be worse is AT&T. TSMC is able to make the foundry model work. Intel never gave it a serious try. The guy pushing the idea the last time Intel tried it is the current CEO, then he left and they abandoned it. One lesson learned here is that being on the board of directors for an S&P500 company looks like a great job. You don't have to be competent, you're not held responsible for your mistakes, you don't have to have skin in the game, and you collect a nice pay check for very little work. Great work if you can get it!
I have a friend who is an optometrist. He was sharing with me about a medical eye condition that is dubbed "CEO eye disease" I don't remember the technical name...And don't want to bother asking him. Maybe somebody knows the term here. He was saying that most people in upper management have learned to control their emotions. They can not fly off the handle and have to remain calm when everything in front of them is screaming "LET IT OUT". They keep it in...But it comes out anyways. It comes out though their eyes...It creates a medical condition where the issues around them causes pressure to build up in their eyes!! Always be in control and see what happens...
Or maybe it's stress and lack of exercise. But I'd love to see research that supports the theory that controlling one's emotions is the predominant cause.