Intel faces investor backlash for selling 10% stake to Trump admin at discount
Intel faces investor backlash for selling 10% stake to Trump admin at discount

Intel warns investors to brace for losses and uncertainties.

Intel faces investor backlash for selling 10% stake to Trump admin at discount
Intel warns investors to brace for losses and uncertainties.
I hope they lose billions on this deal. I know I'm only going with AMD now. It's not much, but I do buy all the tech for my company. Servers, laptops, etc... will all be AMD going forward.
Not having competition is not a good thing. I hope a third player comes along.
Heck of an industry to break into.
Literally illegal. Only AMD and Intel have the patent cross-licensing rights to make x86 chips. There used to be a third company (Cyrix and subsequently VIA), and (maybe?) still is, but it hasn't been relevant to the desktop CPU market in decades.
The real competition will come from ARM-based computers.
Competitor is already here. Apple and Ampere are making ARM systems that fit most users needs. There are ARM servers. But people don’t want to switch.
Would TSMC be considered a competitor to AMD?
I've been building computers since 1999, and I've noticed that the industry is cyclical. I've purchased CPUs from both Intel and AMD. We need Intel to succeed, otherwise AMD will dominate the x86 processor market.
The architecture is in its swan song anyways. Let AMD ride it into the sunset and bid it good riddance.
intel must still be hanging on purely based on corporate computers? or is there something else they are a large part of?
this just be in my bubble, but i feel like anyone i know over the last 15 years has been exclusively getting AMD, whether theyre tech savvy or just a regular consumer.
15 years? absolutely not. Before Ryzen in 2017 almost no one was buying AMD.
edit:
AMD is at 32.2% unit share of Desktop/Laptop PCs in Q2 2025. Lots of people still buying Intel.
I got a new work laptop recently. First one I've ever had that didn't have an Intel cpu. Company is a decent sized multinational.
I think it's already turning. But at the same time I don't think the US can afford to let Intel fail entirely.
Their new GPU has a pretty solid price/performance.
CPU is shit though
Defense contracting.
They do a a good amount of of military industrial contracting and work for 3 letter agencies on data processing/ high performance computing.
They also got awarded government funding in 2024 to build logic chips for the military in-country.
Not enough to sustain the company, but such "sensitive" programs may not be allowed to show up in revenue reports or have to be assigned to other areas or so.
A lot of people I work with still buy Intel based on brand recognition alone. Most are tech savvy people too.
Can confirm my work laptop has an Intel chip
How is this legal?
Also how is not socialism? Imagine the wailing from Repugnants if the Democrats did this.
Public ownership of companies for the benefit of the public is a form of socialism, but Trump's fascist oligarchy serves only the wealthy elites. Oligarchs hijacking democracy for their own benefit isn't socialism.
Socialism is social ownership of the means of production. This ain’t it. This is Turbo Capitalism.
It's a bailout where the taxpayers actually get something back.
How is it legal to bail out whole banks or other large companies and not get anything in return?
Beyond the greater issues of corruption, at face value there's no reason the government buying up a company with important strategic value should be illegal
It’s basically the GM bailout but with less steps and specifically avoiding bankruptcy which seems more efficient. Not that the gov’t won’t just turn around and run Intel into the ground.
By Trump admin, do we mean the US Federal Government?
Investors should be going after executives who ran the company into the ground.
Also, intel could've refused the money. Nobody forcing them to take 11 billion of taxpayer dollars
Ars is making a mountain out of a molehill.
James McRitchie
Kristin Hull
These are literal activists investors known for taking such stances. It would be weird if they didn't.
a company that's not in crisis
Intel is literally circling the drain. It doesn't look like it on paper, but the fab/chip design business is so long term that if they don't get on track, they're basically toast. And they're also important to the military.
Intel stock is up, short term and YTD. CNBC was ooing and aahing over it today. Intel is not facing major investor backlash.
Of course there are blatant issues, like:
However, the US can vote "as it wishes," Intel reported, and experts suggested to Reuters that regulations may be needed to "limit government opportunities for abuses such as insider trading."
And we all know they're going to insider trade the heck out of it, openly, and no one is going to stop them. Not to speak of the awful precedent this sets.
But the sentiment (not the way the admin went about it) is not a bad idea. Government ties/history mixed with private enterprise are why TSMC and Samsung Foundry are where they are today, and their bowed-out competitors are not.
Would it be the same as if they did the same with Boeing? If they were circling the drain? Since Boeing literally makes military planes for the US goververment, so that means that they can't fail lest say they got bought by some Chinese or XYZ interest outside of the USA. So then those new owners would have access to highly classified designs and schematics that the military uses.
Shrug. The DoD is notorious for trying to keep competition between its suppliers alive. But I don’t know enough about the airplane business to say they’re in a death spiral or not.
The fab business is a bit unique because of the sheer scaling of planning and capital involved.
I dunno why you brought up China/foreign interests though. Intel’s military fab designs would likely never get sold overseas, and neither would the military arm of Boeing. I wouldn’t really care about that either way…
This is just about keeping one of three leading edge processor fabs on the planet alive, and of course the gov is a bit worried about the other two in Taiwan and South Korea.
Really, cos the graph looks like they bounced back to near 12 month highs?
Good point. But would the share price otherwise have been higher without the government discounted purchase? Share dilution, law of supply and demand, etc are all decent arguments the shareholders could make.
And there's now increased risk that the purchase could cause future strategic and market challenges, especially internationally.
Plus it's not just a share price issue. For example, the fact that shareholders have had their voting power diluted is arguably a concern.
Is the 10% new shares issued specifically for the government? I understood they were existing shares so dilution would not apply here.
What backlash, exactly? The stock is up
Think long term. What kind of regulatory capture is going to happen? Protected companies stagnate instead of innovate. That 10%? That's not a cash deal. It's not revenue for the share holders. It's basically the value of all the CHIPS deal and other things that Intel was already getting. They literally gave 10% of the company away for free.
And it's illegal. And it's communism. It's everything Republicans hated when the Obama administration gave Solyndra a loan. This is pure corruption and will end badly for everyone.
The stock is up. But that's not because this is good. It's up because investors didn't think this through. Short term profit vs long term fail.
And it’s communism.
COOOOOOOOMMMUUUUUUNIIIIIIISSSSSMMMMMMMM!!!!!
This ain't gonna be that buddy, this is capitalist maneuvers the whole way. Either funds will be shoveled into private pockets or the value of this will be juiced to support the extrajudicial shit that's going on.
Intel is stagnating since the x86 instruction set because the PC platform default. They have been a drag, along with microsoft on all things computers since the 1980s
I agree with everything you said. But none of it is a rebuttal to what I said