We wouldn’t mind the action of continuing to pay dividends and growing them over time if it that didn’t affect their new fab buildouts and turn-around plan.
but isn't capitalism supposed to be perfectly rational actors using their enormous, innovating brains to select the best possible course of action? Would they really undercut their own production just to preserve the income of a few investors who have nothing to do with the manufacturing process? Sounds like capitalism only works in theory.
We were wrong about Pat Gelsinger and his mission for Intel. In the past we wrote how he changed Intel’s strategy and is “Betting The Farm” by investing heavily in their core business.
[excerpt form Oct 2021 article] Intel could follow the path of many other American goliaths such as IBM and General Electric. A slow slide to irrelevancy, spinning off business, and bringing shame to what was once pride for American ingenuity. Instead of that conservative route, they are going to bet the farm, spend every dime they make on investing in more manufacturing, design, and in general catching up in technology.
We even believed that Pat Gelsinger was changing the culture that Intel has and was throwing everything including the kitchen sink at restoring Intel to their former standing. We want to apologize to as we were wrong.
but isn't capitalism supposed to be perfectly rational actors using their enormous, innovating brains to select the best possible course of action? Would they really undercut their own production just to preserve the income of a few investors who have nothing to do with the manufacturing process? Sounds like capitalism only works in theory.
at least they admit it
the anglo-european brainpan is clearly deficient