Intel hit with lawsuit over $32B loss, shareholders complain company hid problem | Hacker News Reader

Intel hit with lawsuit over $32B loss, shareholders complain company hid problem

tomshardware.com

20 pointsspeckx13 comments

How do such lawsuits work? If they win, where does the money come from? They are the shareholders; it's their own money.

I could see suing the executives, though they don't have 32 billion.

Maybe there's some insurance company that takes the hit?

I've been involved in similar class actions and they always seemed to be the idea of the lawyers, who just needed to convince one shareholder to sue himself out of spite.

From TFA: The proposed class action suit lists Intel, CEO Pat Gelsinger, and CFO David Zinsner as the respondents.

The actual settlement is all but certainly covered under D&O liability coverage. That's directors and officers insurance, a major line of corporate insurance products.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directors_and_officers_liabili...>

<https://www.thehartford.com/management-liability-insurance/d...>

From the latter link:

Directors and officers are sued for a variety of reasons related to their company roles, including: Breach of fiduciary duty resulting in financial losses or bankruptcy, Misrepresentation of company assets, Misuse of company funds, Fraud, Failure to comply with workplace laws, Theft of intellectual property and poaching of competitor’s customers, [and] Lack of corporate governance.

Several of those conditions are directly applicable to this lawsuit.

Is Intel's market essentially restricted to the server space these days? Laptops and Mobile devices are (or are transitioning to in the Windows world) ARM processors, i.e. not Intel. AI is "owned" by NVIDIA. Of course, that could change but Intel doesn't seem to be interested in the AI market. Doesn't that just leave them with servers? As Windows transitions to ARM, and Linux is already available on ARM - how long will the server business last?

Are we witnessing the end of Intel? I just don't see what future they have outside of niche markets that don't support current revenues.

What's the consensus on HN?

Intel has the Gaudi 3 to address the AI market.

https://habana.ai/products/gaudi3/

Intel still has a large part of x86 market share.

They are bleeding money because they are trying to catch up in the Fab business. If they succeed with fabs, they should be very profitable again.

At the moment even they use TSMC to produce their best chips.

What's the future of the x86 market with Microsoft developing a version of Windows to run an ARM? That's what makes me think Intel is on the verge of losing the desktop/laptop market. They may still retain the server market, but as more businesses transition to cloud-based servers, the cloud providers are going to be interested in developing their own ARM-based SoCs to better manage their acquisition costs and decrease their power costs.

If Intel is planning on using their Fabs to make non-Intel devices, then I can see lots of growth in that area. Since TSMC is fumbling with their fab in Arizona, then perhaps Intel can pick up some of that business?

Windows on ARM is over a decade old

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_RT

But it wasn't a full-fledged version of Windows though, right? Isn't what's going on now is Microsoft is developing a full-fledged version of Windows to run on ARM?

What current Intel products are fabbed at TSMC?

Laptops are starting to transition to ARM processors. The process is only beginning to begin; it hasn't really gotten going yet.

I agree about mobile. I agree about servers being in danger over the long haul.

The x86 architecture has been the winner by default for decades. That is still mostly true, but it looks like it may no longer be true fairly soon.

If CPUs become commodity chips, Intel may not have the financial strength to continue to be both a chip design company and a fab company. It may split off the fab business. (This is speculation, not really a prediction.)

The number of non-Apple desktops and laptops running ARM is likely a rounding error, and that's unlikely to change anytime soon. Intel has never had a significant presence in mobile devices in the current smartphone era, and they've survived thus far.

Intel does have a presence in servers, but AMD has been offering vastly superior products for years in that space, and consequently, AMD has significantly eaten into Intel's server market share. The hyperscalers are also investing in ARM server products, but it's unclear what effect this has on the market.

I think we're witnessing the end of Intel as we know it, but not due to ARM. Rather, the current CEO -- Pat Gelsinger -- has bet the company on Intel becoming a foundry for other chip designers. Whether that bet will succeed is up in the air.

My 10-year prediction is that Intel will survive as a foundry -- semiconductor manufacturing is a national security priority and the US government can't afford to let Intel fail -- but the chip design segments of Intel may end up getting spun off into their own company (the inverse of how AMD spun off its fabs into what is now Global Foundries).

I'm having to buy a laptop for a family member and the software they use (DAWs) are not yet compatible with ARM. So it's AMD or Intel of which there are hundreds to choose from.

I was hoping ARM since I hear battery life seems to be better but doesn't seem like it's industry-wide at all.

Intel admitted that they knew about a problem with 13th and 14th gen chips since 2022, and just didn't tell anyone while continuing to sell that stock into 2024.

How is that not a crime against someone? How weak are our laws that you can knowingly sell broken products for two years and the only thing people can do is sue you?

Because of course they did, allegedly.

This is water. Five-second-rule.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com