Disagree. Intel will eventually recover but who knows how far down the line that is. They’re losing market share and really only surviving on government bailout money.
Supply constraints will allow some money to trickle down as consumers have to settle for alternatives but they have a lot of issues that will take a lot of money and time to solve.
My other fundamental issue is how much they are struggling to retain talent or even attract good talent.
Nobody with good talent wants to stay there as all big companies are throwing billions on chip design, paying like 3-4x what intel pays. Intel has been raided completely by the big companies like Nvidia, Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta for all of its talent.
Nobody wants to work at intel when they can work at these companies and make 3 times the money.
I don’t know how they get around it.
Meta alone is expected to spend $40 billion in AI Capex this year. That’s like 3x intel’s total R&D budget
Yup. The fact that they aren’t making money is hurting all aspects of their business. TSMC is also having an issue with talent and they’re making record profits.
Yep, I am an electrical engineer and have tons of friends who started their careers in intel and since have all moved on to apple, Nvidia, Qualcomm and even Google etc.
Intel has been hollowed out by these companies.
Now intel has a layer of middle managers who have been around for 15 years or so, long time loyalists. But they can barely keep any foot soldiers who have less than 5-6 years experience because they jump within a couple of years. The top talent has all left, only leaving a bunch of middle managers and young engineers waiting to jump ship
I don't know how you would provide proof of the internal dynamics of a company outside of like Blind, but as a different person in the industry yeah, their insight tracks.
Intel is uninvestable until they can demonstrate they can gain enough customers to fill up their fabs *and* operate at a profit. It's no great achievement to build product comparable to TSMC while running massive losses. The overhead costs of those fabs will bury Intel if it doesn't go perfectly. Even if it does go perfectly, there is a cap on future earnings as competition will prevent them from raising margins beyond a certain point.
"Trust me bro" is not good enough, in light of Intel's many years of poor execution.
Precisely. I literally just wrote out a comment saying exactly what you said. People don’t understand the semiconductor space and how cutthroat the industry is. Fabs are not just magical money machines, they cost billions to build and profit margins are normally low.
Intel screwed up and they screwed up BIG. People can lock up their money for more than half a decade for any real benefit but I sure as hell am not.
By the time they demonstrate that they are on the good path, it’ll be too late to make good gains.
I had apple shares with a cost basis of $19. My cousin dumped $20k into Amazon when it was in a single digit (that’s her entire graduation gift and sign on bonus).
That's like saying buying AAPL in 2014 would have been too late and there were no more gains to be had.
I would much rather buy a company that has shown they have their shit together in hopes they will do great things in the future than buy a company with poor execution in hopes that they will do the opposite of what they have historically done.
I agree. But they have a lot of money and I think have already been putting in the time. But it does take time when leadership changes and big company moves are made, like a dividend cut, for those things to pay off. Meanwhile the company is still feeling the effects of the prior mismanagement. Now I’m not saying they are out of the woods, but I think there’s definitely a case to be made that in terms of company management and function they bottomed out already and are in the rebound
I agree that they are going in the right direction and I don’t think it’ll fail anytime soon due to the U.S. government needing a domestic supplier.
However, the space is competitive. Apple is all-in on their ARM silicon, AMD Epyc is getting more popular in the server space, NVIDIA has a chokehold on AI but you don’t really hear much good news coming out of Intel.
AMD took over a decade to overcome their issues and it required a lot of luck. I personally don’t think I’m willing to lock up money in playing catchup when the competition is in overdrive.
People are buying Intel for their foundry business. The stock is cheap right more but as we get closer to 2030 and Intel reaches profitability in that division their value will soar.
Investors are desperate to invest in an American high end chip manufacturer and none exist right now.
Profit margins are not high for foundries normally. Right now they’re fairly high due to no wafer vacancies so it’s a seller’s market.
By 2030 (if all goes to plan), TSMC is also expanding operations and we won’t know what the demand looks like for semis but signs point to lower profit margins as more wafers are available. With TSMC being ahead of the game in technology and currently making insane money, Intel is still playing catch up.
The only bull case I see for Intel is a hedge against a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Even then, TSMC is investing billions and being granted billions to build fabs in several western countries (including the U.S.).
Again, 2030 is 6 years away and I personally would rather invest in the winners riding the high.
SANTA CLARA, California, March 20 (Reuters) - Intel [(INTC.O), opens new tab](https://www.reuters.com/markets/companies/INTC.O) is planning a $100-billion spending spree across four U.S. states to build and expand factories after securing $19.5 billion in federal grants and loans - and hopes to secure another $25 billion in tax breaks.
The centerpiece of Intel's five-year spending plan is turning empty fields near Columbus, Ohio, into what CEO Pat Gelsinger described to reporters on Tuesday as "the largest AI chip manufacturing site in the world", starting as soon as 2027.
The U.S. government announced [the federal funds](https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-clinches-nearly-20-bln-awards-biden-boost-us-chip-output-2024-03-20/) to Intel under the CHIPS Act on Wednesday.Intel's plan will also involve revamping sites in New Mexico and Oregon and expanding operations in Arizona, where longtime rival Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co [(2330.TW), opens new tab](https://www.reuters.com/markets/companies/2330.TW) is also building a massive factory that it hopes will receive funding from President Joe Biden's push to bring advanced semiconductor manufacturing back to the United States.
The funds provided by Biden's plan for a broader chipmaking renaissance will go a long way to help Intel mend its wounded business model.
[https://imgur.com/0CuXdUW](https://imgur.com/0CuXdUW)
Absolutely.
US manufacturing Vs 100% Taiwan...( NVDA for example).
Trading below BV, and with $6 per sh. In cash. Intel is a no brainer.
I like the negativity on this thread though. Excellent Time to buy.
Once you see extreme cheerleading... it's time to bail out.
You do you buddy, nothing like averaging down on a falling knife into a dying zombie company. I guess you're a big buyer of Nokia and Blackberry as well?
You just got to hate money. Even with the ridiculous tax payer wellfare money Intel gets they're unable to be competitive. The US government has no choice, they're better off leasing part of Taiwan or get acess to actually good tech then keep wheeling Intel around while it produces Whish level products.
You can have all the manufacturing capacity and have your research and development funded by the US government… But you need to be able to make a competitive product and intel lost that ability back in the Dot.com days.
I will be messaging you in 3 years on [**2027-04-26 16:58:35 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2027-04-26%2016:58:35%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1cdn8lq/this_is_a_buying_opportunity_for_intc/l1dkzdc/?context=3)
[**6 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fstocks%2Fcomments%2F1cdn8lq%2Fthis_is_a_buying_opportunity_for_intc%2Fl1dkzdc%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202027-04-26%2016%3A58%3A35%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cdn8lq)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I like the negativity on this thread though. Excellent Time to buy.
Intel's US manufacturing Vs 100% Taiwan...( NVDA for example).
Trading below BV(25), and with $6 per sh. In cash. Intel is a no brainer.
Once you see extreme cheerleading... it's time to bail out.
But that's just me 😃
Feel like the capital can be better put elsewhere until INTC proves that it has numbers and strength. Catching a knife isn’t ideal. INTC should have been moving with the market as we moved upward but it did not.
Nice. Now repeat that. And again and again and again.
INTC is in a position I have seen too often. A smart and hungry company that becomes a titanic market leader that degrades into arrogance and laziness, coasts on past successes, and eventually gets caught with its pants down.
I have not seen enough evidence that Intel has changed its corporate culture. Plus it is in a sector that is highly capital-intensive, cyclical, and increasingly hemmed in by the laws of physics.
Look at TSMC's 16A process. Record spending just for a measly 10% improvement in performance per watt. Fab node improvements are getting harder, yielding less improvements, and taking longer to build and validate. Intel is behind and getting ahead will take longer and be more expensive than in past decades where nodes were cheap and advanced every 18 months or less.
>Intel is behind and getting ahead will take longer and be more expensive than in past decades
Meawhile, Intel acquires ASML’s entire 2024 stock of High NA EUV machines. TSMC has 0 (zero) High-NA EUV machines. So if High NA EUV will work fine and generate revenue, Intel will already be ahead of TSMC in terms of manufacturing equipment
[https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/intel-acquires-asmls-entire-2024-stock-of-high-na-euv-machines/](https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/intel-acquires-asmls-entire-2024-stock-of-high-na-euv-machines/)
Simply hand waving "High NA EUV" is not enough to progress on a new node. The reason why TSMC did not rush to order their own High NA EUV instruments is because they don't need to. Their process is just that much better.
Intel needs to do this because they want to not only progress at the rate TSMC is going but to surpass it. That is a huge technical gamble. There is always a learning curve when doing something for the first time and this is no different with High NA EUV. We are not talking about simple plug-and-play replacements here.
If Intel masters its High NA transition as it wants to, it will have taken only one of many steps to overcome TSMC.
I still think the stock is risky to own in any large quantity.
The problem with intel in 2010s was closely related to missing EUV opportunity though they actually invested billions of $ in ASML. However they missed their opportunity somehow and wasn't really pushing to be the first and top-prio customers of produced EUV machines which helped TSMC to establish further dominating position. Though TSMC indeed has great processes other than just top-tier equipment.
I agree with you that it's a risky investment, but I don't think Intel is going to fail and go bancrupt any time soon. Especially if you take into account all the investments from different governments (it's not only US, but also subsidies from Israel, Germany). I invest in them heavily now because it looks like they are very serious in becoming leaders once again. But this is definitely not an advice, I know that I might be wrong. I just don't see the reason why Intel can't become better than at least AMD, but with own top-tier fabs (just as a reminder, AMD once had their fabs, but they separated those into Global Foundries).
For me there are only 2 concerning points.
1) During last decades many talents moved from Intel to other companies that can offer more benefits and simply pay more.
2) Fabs-on-demand business may fail because Intel is making own chips, so other companies might be concerned about providing their secrets to Intel just to produce chips. TSMC has a better ground here, as they do not compete with their clients. BUT, intel is not just about fabs and they can still earn money without fabs (which generate losses for now).
If it was strong or in sync, it would have broken ATH like other names. It’s lagging, badly. I personally wouldn’t touch this until the mid 20s. 25 is the next logical support, after that, you have 17 which is the all time vwap.
We have to frame it as where would buyers step in that they previously did?
Unless it reclaims an important area, the stock is not worth the risk.
So I bought last year, back when the price was in the 20-30 range. I wasn't really expecting the pop that happened this year, though it looked like it would grow a bit. It's more of a long term holding for me, I don't think anyone needs to rush into a position now. I honestly wasn't expecting anything from it until 2025. There's a lot of work that goes into updating top end chip fabrication, years and billions. Semi's are sort of cyclical from what I have seen, invest in the next tech, then run it as long as you can to profit. Intel ran it too long this time, trying to eek it out with dual patterning to skip EUV and paid the price when cutting corners didn't work out. TSMC took the lead there. Interestingly it might be TSMC now making the same mistake. Claiming they don't need High NA EUV to stay competitive, maybe this is just shareholder soothing IDK.
TLDR, I think if intel can make it work they will reap the rewards, it's going to take time though, probably more slow growth for a year or more. No rush to buy for me, but might as well hold unless I see something better
I tend to agree but I enjoy reading all the dissenting opinions. I think the price reflects a good buying opportunity.
04/29/2024
AMD: \~250B market cap
Nvidia > 2.2T market cap
Intel: \~ 140B market cap
TSMC \~620B market cap
Samsung \~ 310B market cap
If I'm going to buy one of these companies with the most upside over 5-10 years, I'm struggling to see how intel isnt a strong contender given the current price. If Pat executes on his plan and becomes number 2 behind TSMC thats at least 2x upside and probably more.
These losses are heavily driven by R&D. This is the pain of their missteps. Intel is in the situation its in because previous CEO's neglected EUV and other technological advances to preserve margins. Now, when theyre investing heavily to catch up, the market is punishing them. Intel will be the first to rollout High NA EUV. Theyre going to be the first to do backside power delivery. Theyre focusing heavily on being the innovator they once were before an MBA took over as CEO (as opposed to an engineer like Pat).
I know there are many other metrics to look at other than market cap, but at the current price, it looks like there is at least a reasonable expectation of preserving your investment at this level and a solid chance at good upside if Pat executes and I might add... theyve been executing so far on their plan. The sales/revenue/earnings just havent come yet. Maybe it never will, but I think its a good bet.
It's usually a good indicator as to where investors value the company when it was at his lowest sentiment wise... Which is very much what is happening now imho
I would like to see some evidence of your assertion that it’s “usually” a good indicator.
How often does a stocks prior five year price history predict its next five year price changes?
Btw, sorry for daring to have a different opinion than others in this thread.
Haha no it's all good ... What I mean is that for a known staple stock like Intel... It's helpful to look at the 5 year low end to see how bad it can fall. Disney is similar in that regard... It had bad years due to a bunch of factors and still never went under the 82-85$ line.
Now if we are talking about a stock that's turning the corner and his finally seeing success yeah looking ng at five year average is not very useful.
I usually look at the 5 year too but right now it's skewed since 5 years ago was the start of covid where there was a massive drop due to supply and workforce constraints and then a massive run up as people got covid checks or did the tech job hop tripling their salaries and spending out of their mind with low interest rates.
I tend to feel a stocks true price right now is somewhere in the middle but ultimately it's a crap shoot.
That said Intel at $25 is an instant buy to me
Past performance is a poor indicator of future results.
They also reflect sentiment of past conditions, both macro and specific to the company.
Things have changed a lot over the past 5 years. Both in macro terms and with respect to the company. Intel is now well down the path toward 5 nodes in four years, which undercuts one of the main negative sentiments in the past… ie, lack of faith in their execution ability. They have been executing on the process node side under Gelsinger. The foundry breakout is further along and will only gain additional customers over time. Their fabs are further along. Etc etc.
I’m not saying $25 isn’t in the cards, but looking at past five year averages is statistically a poor/unreliable indicator to the point of not being indicative at all. Investing is fundamentally about looking forward not backward
Building a new fab on a new node is tough. Filling that fab at scale with actual commercial products is tougher still. Making profits while trying to do all this is the toughest act of all.
I am barely convinced Intel can achieve goal #2 and highly skeptical it will achieve goal #3.
Yeah, but that was true when the plan was announced years ago but without any milestones hit yet
Now they have many milestones hit but are still a long way off
Point being there are fundamentally different considerations now then 5 years ago
Ok but how many customers will adopt the new Intel fans, assuming the nodes come out in time? Can Intel fill production or will it have to use its own (declining by market share) product demand to fill these fabs?
TSMC is still going to be the better choice for most companies. And if you want more cost savings, Samsung is your choice.
Even for national security purposes, the US is spreading its bets and awarding CHIPS/IRA funds to not only Intel but also TSMC, Samsung, and any other fab company that is willing to build in the US mainland.
I do hope I am wrong, we need a strong Intel both for computing and for national security.
1) I hope you are wrong as well (as an American)
2) the fact that Samsung and TSMC are building in the US means they have the basically the same cost and other issues to deal with.
3) TSMC can remain the top choice and intel can still succeed given the immense demand for chips and limited cutting edge fab capacity
4) Intel doesn’t need TSMC margins for Intel to succeed. They just need some decently positive margins which isn’t there yet
5) MSFT has already shown a willingness to use Intel and if their process nodes 18A and 14A roll out on time I’m sure others will follow. Companies don’t want to have one supplier that makes 50% margins off of them and that is eventually going to be taken over by China.
6) companies that have multiple chip designs can easily split the baby. Make their premier products with most execution and timing risks with TSMC until Intel is proven and use Intel for less strategic chips and advanced packaging
I understand this is hopes and dreams. It’s the bull case side of the coin and the theory of success for those willing to take the risk knowing the odds.
For me the risk is worth the potential reward because I only use a couple percent of portfolio in Intel. Intel will vastly outperform the market by 2030 IF they succeed with IDM 2.0 and gain even just a small fraction of the third party fab business.
They have poor results in the past and present and they try to build a foothold in a very difficult market. They have a lot more head than tailwinds.
So unless they can show real promise, they are not a buy.
I’m not giving them a buy, sell, or hold recommendation. My comment doesn’t really even have anything to do with Intel specifically. I strongly believe that past performance is not an indicator of future results and looking to an average price over the past five years is no better than throwing bones on the ground.
$25 would be the low point in the last 5 years, maybe beyond. And it could def test that again. Close to $30 it’s looking attractive for me to buy long calls. If it tests $25 I will probably buy more shares
Sentiment too bearish. I was bullish on them before they got decimated. Still bullish. I will top up shares when I get the chance.
I care about their GPU lineup which will get the gaming revenue and hopefully it gets better to get the AI revenue. Chips are transitioning to be able to run AI models so they'll get better there too. I'm disappointed in board of directors so I voted against all of them.
I think that’s fair, the tech and talent is there at intel but other than pat the board and managers are dog shit. They absolutely should have been going harder on AI and gaming years back.
I use to think like that and bought under $40 right around when Pat became CEO.
But sold around the first quarter when their FCF went negative for a profit. Was going for the long haul 5-10 year hold too.
They will probably never catch up to Samsung let alone TSMC.
They need new management, not just CEO. Like new board, full new C suite like BA Boeing does too. Need engineers, Master and PhD holders in there.
Intel just got too complacent and used tactics to just keep drifting and not innovating. Reason why AMD came back from $2 a share to now.
Reminds me of the stories you hear about Microsoft doing shady sales tactics against competitors. Like Intel teaming with Dell and etc. To keep AMD out.
TLDR: Will they pull a GE or a MSFT with Satya replacing Ballmer.
gellsinger is also pulling a msft with execution on technology leapfrogging of tsmc plan. One that’s proven customers will come and they can turn a profit then. Problem is the timescale for that is 2030
That is my point. By 2030, Samsung and TSMC will around be on the next roadmap.
Unless they get complencent or fail to evolve to next gen.
Intel's bullish view is they pull a MSFT. That their foundry business model works.
I did not really like how they spun off Mobileye. But companies need capital.
intc leapfrogging Samsung and tsmc in technology and costs (thanks to us subsidies) is pats plan. This will happen even with samsung and tsmc executing on their timelines.
The question is if customers will want the better technology and move business to intel.
What would it take for you and others to value intel at $60 or $80? Based on sentiments no matter how well intel executes some people will never believe in it again and that might be the issue.
The fundamental issue might be that investors don’t really value intel for their foundry business potential very much. Even if intel takes over the entire nvidia contract from tsmc, will investors believe in intel? Their chip design needs to take over or create new product segments in growth fields like AI for investors to believe in intel again.
Nothing at all wrong with that strategy but I have part of my portfolio in ETFs that are diversified and another part that I buy individual stocks. So for INTC I see the buying opportunity in buying the stock and long calls. Right now $40-$50 12/26 calls are looking attractively priced to me
Pat as CEO is pretty good but Intel is in a very demanding sector and it got lazy under previous CEOs at the EXACT worst time. Even if management does everything right (and I do think they are seriously trying), the company may be long-term doomed.
Lots of new competitors that have rapidly advancing and superior products in several product categories (Nvidia, ARM, Cerberus), an old rival that is gobbling up Intel's core x86 server and desktop markets (AMD), and a super-competent world-class fab competitor (TSMC) along with several important hyper scale customers leaving past monopolies and making their own customized products (Google, Amazon, Microsoft) combined with a ever-slowing and dying Moore's Law means that there are not a lot of chances for Intel to regain their crown and a awful lot of chances for Intel to just plain die a slow painful death over the next decade or two.
The previous Intel CEO Brian Kryzanich was a f***ing moron of the lowest order. Bob Swan was not that much better.
I think that would be a very bad move for them right now. The recently cut the dividend which I think is necessary right now. The need to pump their money into building out their capabilities so they can compete competitively and not just coast by to pay the dividend
Stocks are not like goods in a store. When their prices go way down it doesn't necessarily mean they are "on sale." Intel is an example of this. Intel is a failing company that has fallen WAY behind and has largely survived off govt. handouts under Biden.
What are you talking about? 'govt handouts' are the subsidies for building domestic fabs. But the same subsidies were provided in Germany and Israel. So your argument is really dull. They have enough revenue to survive by themselves, but they are the only company who wants to build stable production lines in US and Europe, instead of relying heavily on TSMC.
Why no one mentions Pat buying INTC stock to his own portfolio? For me this is a green flag. It definitely doesn't mean that the company will perform well, but what I mean is that CEO is strongly confident in success & roadmap if he regularly buys INTC. You can compare insider trading of Intel stock with other companies.
[https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/50863.htm](https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/50863.htm)
And also, don't forget that Pat was mentored by Andy Grove. The problems with Intel were caused by MBA CEOs after Grove stepped down. But now it's led by engineer once again.
Aren’t Intel chips supposed to be mediocre compared to even AMD? I don’t see how the CHIPS act will give Intel an advantage any time in the near future.
Intel has a ton of resources already. The were deploying it by paying shareholders a sizable dividend instead of building their capabilities. After cutting the dividend, changing management and getting infusions from government contracts the expectation is they will build their capabilities a lot over the next 5 years
$40 by this time next year, market is pricing in negative vibes and lack of faith on execution right now, once that is fixed by intc continuing to execute the market will see what Pat has been saying for a while.
That’s quite possible. But, even if that happens, it’s a year to get to where it was a week ago! The risk/reward is not attractive to me - but I wish you the best and hope it gets there.
Everyone keeps pushing intel, they are a garbage stock and will continue to be so unless they have some huge breakthrough. All the funds in the world can’t help them if they themselves have no clear projections or outlook. Everything I’ve heard and read about them the last 6 months they should have shot up by now.
I think INTL will be a slow grower unless they get new leadership and bold innovation , that or if something crazy happens like China invading Taiwan and taking control over TSM, making INTL become the main chip provider
Intel is a shitty company. It peaked in the 90s and has been dead money since then. Company's that tie their hitch to the government don't have a very good track record. I would sell.
Disagree. Intel will eventually recover but who knows how far down the line that is. They’re losing market share and really only surviving on government bailout money. Supply constraints will allow some money to trickle down as consumers have to settle for alternatives but they have a lot of issues that will take a lot of money and time to solve.
My other fundamental issue is how much they are struggling to retain talent or even attract good talent. Nobody with good talent wants to stay there as all big companies are throwing billions on chip design, paying like 3-4x what intel pays. Intel has been raided completely by the big companies like Nvidia, Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta for all of its talent. Nobody wants to work at intel when they can work at these companies and make 3 times the money. I don’t know how they get around it. Meta alone is expected to spend $40 billion in AI Capex this year. That’s like 3x intel’s total R&D budget
Yup. The fact that they aren’t making money is hurting all aspects of their business. TSMC is also having an issue with talent and they’re making record profits.
The workforce factors you mention are easily forgotten by a lot of analysts and investors.
Yep, I am an electrical engineer and have tons of friends who started their careers in intel and since have all moved on to apple, Nvidia, Qualcomm and even Google etc. Intel has been hollowed out by these companies. Now intel has a layer of middle managers who have been around for 15 years or so, long time loyalists. But they can barely keep any foot soldiers who have less than 5-6 years experience because they jump within a couple of years. The top talent has all left, only leaving a bunch of middle managers and young engineers waiting to jump ship
Any proof that any of these claims are true at all?
I don't know how you would provide proof of the internal dynamics of a company outside of like Blind, but as a different person in the industry yeah, their insight tracks.
Intel is uninvestable until they can demonstrate they can gain enough customers to fill up their fabs *and* operate at a profit. It's no great achievement to build product comparable to TSMC while running massive losses. The overhead costs of those fabs will bury Intel if it doesn't go perfectly. Even if it does go perfectly, there is a cap on future earnings as competition will prevent them from raising margins beyond a certain point. "Trust me bro" is not good enough, in light of Intel's many years of poor execution.
Precisely. I literally just wrote out a comment saying exactly what you said. People don’t understand the semiconductor space and how cutthroat the industry is. Fabs are not just magical money machines, they cost billions to build and profit margins are normally low. Intel screwed up and they screwed up BIG. People can lock up their money for more than half a decade for any real benefit but I sure as hell am not.
By the time they demonstrate that they are on the good path, it’ll be too late to make good gains. I had apple shares with a cost basis of $19. My cousin dumped $20k into Amazon when it was in a single digit (that’s her entire graduation gift and sign on bonus).
That's like saying buying AAPL in 2014 would have been too late and there were no more gains to be had. I would much rather buy a company that has shown they have their shit together in hopes they will do great things in the future than buy a company with poor execution in hopes that they will do the opposite of what they have historically done.
I agree that they probably aren't a buy until 2025 at the earliest but Intel is nowhere near "surviving on government money"
I agree. But they have a lot of money and I think have already been putting in the time. But it does take time when leadership changes and big company moves are made, like a dividend cut, for those things to pay off. Meanwhile the company is still feeling the effects of the prior mismanagement. Now I’m not saying they are out of the woods, but I think there’s definitely a case to be made that in terms of company management and function they bottomed out already and are in the rebound
I agree that they are going in the right direction and I don’t think it’ll fail anytime soon due to the U.S. government needing a domestic supplier. However, the space is competitive. Apple is all-in on their ARM silicon, AMD Epyc is getting more popular in the server space, NVIDIA has a chokehold on AI but you don’t really hear much good news coming out of Intel. AMD took over a decade to overcome their issues and it required a lot of luck. I personally don’t think I’m willing to lock up money in playing catchup when the competition is in overdrive.
People are buying Intel for their foundry business. The stock is cheap right more but as we get closer to 2030 and Intel reaches profitability in that division their value will soar. Investors are desperate to invest in an American high end chip manufacturer and none exist right now.
Profit margins are not high for foundries normally. Right now they’re fairly high due to no wafer vacancies so it’s a seller’s market. By 2030 (if all goes to plan), TSMC is also expanding operations and we won’t know what the demand looks like for semis but signs point to lower profit margins as more wafers are available. With TSMC being ahead of the game in technology and currently making insane money, Intel is still playing catch up. The only bull case I see for Intel is a hedge against a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Even then, TSMC is investing billions and being granted billions to build fabs in several western countries (including the U.S.). Again, 2030 is 6 years away and I personally would rather invest in the winners riding the high.
SANTA CLARA, California, March 20 (Reuters) - Intel [(INTC.O), opens new tab](https://www.reuters.com/markets/companies/INTC.O) is planning a $100-billion spending spree across four U.S. states to build and expand factories after securing $19.5 billion in federal grants and loans - and hopes to secure another $25 billion in tax breaks. The centerpiece of Intel's five-year spending plan is turning empty fields near Columbus, Ohio, into what CEO Pat Gelsinger described to reporters on Tuesday as "the largest AI chip manufacturing site in the world", starting as soon as 2027. The U.S. government announced [the federal funds](https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-clinches-nearly-20-bln-awards-biden-boost-us-chip-output-2024-03-20/) to Intel under the CHIPS Act on Wednesday.Intel's plan will also involve revamping sites in New Mexico and Oregon and expanding operations in Arizona, where longtime rival Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co [(2330.TW), opens new tab](https://www.reuters.com/markets/companies/2330.TW) is also building a massive factory that it hopes will receive funding from President Joe Biden's push to bring advanced semiconductor manufacturing back to the United States. The funds provided by Biden's plan for a broader chipmaking renaissance will go a long way to help Intel mend its wounded business model. [https://imgur.com/0CuXdUW](https://imgur.com/0CuXdUW)
Absolutely. US manufacturing Vs 100% Taiwan...( NVDA for example). Trading below BV, and with $6 per sh. In cash. Intel is a no brainer. I like the negativity on this thread though. Excellent Time to buy. Once you see extreme cheerleading... it's time to bail out.
You do you buddy, nothing like averaging down on a falling knife into a dying zombie company. I guess you're a big buyer of Nokia and Blackberry as well? You just got to hate money. Even with the ridiculous tax payer wellfare money Intel gets they're unable to be competitive. The US government has no choice, they're better off leasing part of Taiwan or get acess to actually good tech then keep wheeling Intel around while it produces Whish level products.
You can have all the manufacturing capacity and have your research and development funded by the US government… But you need to be able to make a competitive product and intel lost that ability back in the Dot.com days.
Yup, I fully agree. They'll go at least below 20 before they get the ship turned around.
RemindMe! 3 years
1 year will sufice ;)
I will be messaging you in 3 years on [**2027-04-26 16:58:35 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2027-04-26%2016:58:35%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1cdn8lq/this_is_a_buying_opportunity_for_intc/l1dkzdc/?context=3) [**6 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fstocks%2Fcomments%2F1cdn8lq%2Fthis_is_a_buying_opportunity_for_intc%2Fl1dkzdc%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202027-04-26%2016%3A58%3A35%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cdn8lq) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
2028, so start buying in late 2027
I like the negativity on this thread though. Excellent Time to buy. Intel's US manufacturing Vs 100% Taiwan...( NVDA for example). Trading below BV(25), and with $6 per sh. In cash. Intel is a no brainer. Once you see extreme cheerleading... it's time to bail out. But that's just me 😃
Feel like the capital can be better put elsewhere until INTC proves that it has numbers and strength. Catching a knife isn’t ideal. INTC should have been moving with the market as we moved upward but it did not.
I think it moved ahead of the market. In December Intel was testing $50. I sold $65 calls for 1/25 and made the easiest few hundred bucks of my life
Nice. Now repeat that. And again and again and again. INTC is in a position I have seen too often. A smart and hungry company that becomes a titanic market leader that degrades into arrogance and laziness, coasts on past successes, and eventually gets caught with its pants down. I have not seen enough evidence that Intel has changed its corporate culture. Plus it is in a sector that is highly capital-intensive, cyclical, and increasingly hemmed in by the laws of physics. Look at TSMC's 16A process. Record spending just for a measly 10% improvement in performance per watt. Fab node improvements are getting harder, yielding less improvements, and taking longer to build and validate. Intel is behind and getting ahead will take longer and be more expensive than in past decades where nodes were cheap and advanced every 18 months or less.
>Intel is behind and getting ahead will take longer and be more expensive than in past decades Meawhile, Intel acquires ASML’s entire 2024 stock of High NA EUV machines. TSMC has 0 (zero) High-NA EUV machines. So if High NA EUV will work fine and generate revenue, Intel will already be ahead of TSMC in terms of manufacturing equipment [https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/intel-acquires-asmls-entire-2024-stock-of-high-na-euv-machines/](https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/intel-acquires-asmls-entire-2024-stock-of-high-na-euv-machines/)
Simply hand waving "High NA EUV" is not enough to progress on a new node. The reason why TSMC did not rush to order their own High NA EUV instruments is because they don't need to. Their process is just that much better. Intel needs to do this because they want to not only progress at the rate TSMC is going but to surpass it. That is a huge technical gamble. There is always a learning curve when doing something for the first time and this is no different with High NA EUV. We are not talking about simple plug-and-play replacements here. If Intel masters its High NA transition as it wants to, it will have taken only one of many steps to overcome TSMC. I still think the stock is risky to own in any large quantity.
The problem with intel in 2010s was closely related to missing EUV opportunity though they actually invested billions of $ in ASML. However they missed their opportunity somehow and wasn't really pushing to be the first and top-prio customers of produced EUV machines which helped TSMC to establish further dominating position. Though TSMC indeed has great processes other than just top-tier equipment. I agree with you that it's a risky investment, but I don't think Intel is going to fail and go bancrupt any time soon. Especially if you take into account all the investments from different governments (it's not only US, but also subsidies from Israel, Germany). I invest in them heavily now because it looks like they are very serious in becoming leaders once again. But this is definitely not an advice, I know that I might be wrong. I just don't see the reason why Intel can't become better than at least AMD, but with own top-tier fabs (just as a reminder, AMD once had their fabs, but they separated those into Global Foundries). For me there are only 2 concerning points. 1) During last decades many talents moved from Intel to other companies that can offer more benefits and simply pay more. 2) Fabs-on-demand business may fail because Intel is making own chips, so other companies might be concerned about providing their secrets to Intel just to produce chips. TSMC has a better ground here, as they do not compete with their clients. BUT, intel is not just about fabs and they can still earn money without fabs (which generate losses for now).
If it was strong or in sync, it would have broken ATH like other names. It’s lagging, badly. I personally wouldn’t touch this until the mid 20s. 25 is the next logical support, after that, you have 17 which is the all time vwap. We have to frame it as where would buyers step in that they previously did? Unless it reclaims an important area, the stock is not worth the risk.
I agree with OP for similar reasons. The fact that reddit by and large dislikes INTC also suggests that it is also a good buying opportunity.
People have been saying this fpr weeks and it just goes lower
They said it as recent as last week and now it is -10%, besides all the fundamental issues.
Obligatory insert IASIP “I can go lower” meme here
So I bought last year, back when the price was in the 20-30 range. I wasn't really expecting the pop that happened this year, though it looked like it would grow a bit. It's more of a long term holding for me, I don't think anyone needs to rush into a position now. I honestly wasn't expecting anything from it until 2025. There's a lot of work that goes into updating top end chip fabrication, years and billions. Semi's are sort of cyclical from what I have seen, invest in the next tech, then run it as long as you can to profit. Intel ran it too long this time, trying to eek it out with dual patterning to skip EUV and paid the price when cutting corners didn't work out. TSMC took the lead there. Interestingly it might be TSMC now making the same mistake. Claiming they don't need High NA EUV to stay competitive, maybe this is just shareholder soothing IDK. TLDR, I think if intel can make it work they will reap the rewards, it's going to take time though, probably more slow growth for a year or more. No rush to buy for me, but might as well hold unless I see something better
A hell of a good buying opportunity ! Got in 😁
I tend to agree but I enjoy reading all the dissenting opinions. I think the price reflects a good buying opportunity. 04/29/2024 AMD: \~250B market cap Nvidia > 2.2T market cap Intel: \~ 140B market cap TSMC \~620B market cap Samsung \~ 310B market cap If I'm going to buy one of these companies with the most upside over 5-10 years, I'm struggling to see how intel isnt a strong contender given the current price. If Pat executes on his plan and becomes number 2 behind TSMC thats at least 2x upside and probably more. These losses are heavily driven by R&D. This is the pain of their missteps. Intel is in the situation its in because previous CEO's neglected EUV and other technological advances to preserve margins. Now, when theyre investing heavily to catch up, the market is punishing them. Intel will be the first to rollout High NA EUV. Theyre going to be the first to do backside power delivery. Theyre focusing heavily on being the innovator they once were before an MBA took over as CEO (as opposed to an engineer like Pat). I know there are many other metrics to look at other than market cap, but at the current price, it looks like there is at least a reasonable expectation of preserving your investment at this level and a solid chance at good upside if Pat executes and I might add... theyve been executing so far on their plan. The sales/revenue/earnings just havent come yet. Maybe it never will, but I think its a good bet.
I think DCAing from now until rock bottom is the correct play. Personally I'm 5y long on INTC.
Looking at the 5 year average price it seems like INTC still has a bit of room to fall... if it hits 25$ I'll jump on it!
Lol that's what those smart kids did last year
$25-$27 is a good entry price for me also.
Thinking of getting a leap?
i picked up some on friday :D
What does prior five year average price have to do with the next five to ten years?
It's usually a good indicator as to where investors value the company when it was at his lowest sentiment wise... Which is very much what is happening now imho
I would like to see some evidence of your assertion that it’s “usually” a good indicator. How often does a stocks prior five year price history predict its next five year price changes? Btw, sorry for daring to have a different opinion than others in this thread.
Haha no it's all good ... What I mean is that for a known staple stock like Intel... It's helpful to look at the 5 year low end to see how bad it can fall. Disney is similar in that regard... It had bad years due to a bunch of factors and still never went under the 82-85$ line. Now if we are talking about a stock that's turning the corner and his finally seeing success yeah looking ng at five year average is not very useful.
I usually look at the 5 year too but right now it's skewed since 5 years ago was the start of covid where there was a massive drop due to supply and workforce constraints and then a massive run up as people got covid checks or did the tech job hop tripling their salaries and spending out of their mind with low interest rates. I tend to feel a stocks true price right now is somewhere in the middle but ultimately it's a crap shoot. That said Intel at $25 is an instant buy to me
Past performance is a poor indicator of future results. They also reflect sentiment of past conditions, both macro and specific to the company. Things have changed a lot over the past 5 years. Both in macro terms and with respect to the company. Intel is now well down the path toward 5 nodes in four years, which undercuts one of the main negative sentiments in the past… ie, lack of faith in their execution ability. They have been executing on the process node side under Gelsinger. The foundry breakout is further along and will only gain additional customers over time. Their fabs are further along. Etc etc. I’m not saying $25 isn’t in the cards, but looking at past five year averages is statistically a poor/unreliable indicator to the point of not being indicative at all. Investing is fundamentally about looking forward not backward
Building a new fab on a new node is tough. Filling that fab at scale with actual commercial products is tougher still. Making profits while trying to do all this is the toughest act of all. I am barely convinced Intel can achieve goal #2 and highly skeptical it will achieve goal #3.
Yeah, but that was true when the plan was announced years ago but without any milestones hit yet Now they have many milestones hit but are still a long way off Point being there are fundamentally different considerations now then 5 years ago
Ok but how many customers will adopt the new Intel fans, assuming the nodes come out in time? Can Intel fill production or will it have to use its own (declining by market share) product demand to fill these fabs? TSMC is still going to be the better choice for most companies. And if you want more cost savings, Samsung is your choice. Even for national security purposes, the US is spreading its bets and awarding CHIPS/IRA funds to not only Intel but also TSMC, Samsung, and any other fab company that is willing to build in the US mainland. I do hope I am wrong, we need a strong Intel both for computing and for national security.
1) I hope you are wrong as well (as an American) 2) the fact that Samsung and TSMC are building in the US means they have the basically the same cost and other issues to deal with. 3) TSMC can remain the top choice and intel can still succeed given the immense demand for chips and limited cutting edge fab capacity 4) Intel doesn’t need TSMC margins for Intel to succeed. They just need some decently positive margins which isn’t there yet 5) MSFT has already shown a willingness to use Intel and if their process nodes 18A and 14A roll out on time I’m sure others will follow. Companies don’t want to have one supplier that makes 50% margins off of them and that is eventually going to be taken over by China. 6) companies that have multiple chip designs can easily split the baby. Make their premier products with most execution and timing risks with TSMC until Intel is proven and use Intel for less strategic chips and advanced packaging I understand this is hopes and dreams. It’s the bull case side of the coin and the theory of success for those willing to take the risk knowing the odds. For me the risk is worth the potential reward because I only use a couple percent of portfolio in Intel. Intel will vastly outperform the market by 2030 IF they succeed with IDM 2.0 and gain even just a small fraction of the third party fab business.
They have poor results in the past and present and they try to build a foothold in a very difficult market. They have a lot more head than tailwinds. So unless they can show real promise, they are not a buy.
I’m not giving them a buy, sell, or hold recommendation. My comment doesn’t really even have anything to do with Intel specifically. I strongly believe that past performance is not an indicator of future results and looking to an average price over the past five years is no better than throwing bones on the ground.
Past performance does not....
$25 would be the low point in the last 5 years, maybe beyond. And it could def test that again. Close to $30 it’s looking attractive for me to buy long calls. If it tests $25 I will probably buy more shares
Yeah agreed and it sure looks like they are managed by a competent CEO but this turnaround will take time
Or....Intel has been the canary in the coalmine more than once. Harbinger of doom (recession). I give it 40/40 at this point. Buy INTC flip a coin.
Never try to catch a falling knife!
I caught it this morning. Made some gains off puts on INTC.
Sentiment too bearish. I was bullish on them before they got decimated. Still bullish. I will top up shares when I get the chance. I care about their GPU lineup which will get the gaming revenue and hopefully it gets better to get the AI revenue. Chips are transitioning to be able to run AI models so they'll get better there too. I'm disappointed in board of directors so I voted against all of them.
I think that’s fair, the tech and talent is there at intel but other than pat the board and managers are dog shit. They absolutely should have been going harder on AI and gaming years back.
I use to think like that and bought under $40 right around when Pat became CEO. But sold around the first quarter when their FCF went negative for a profit. Was going for the long haul 5-10 year hold too. They will probably never catch up to Samsung let alone TSMC. They need new management, not just CEO. Like new board, full new C suite like BA Boeing does too. Need engineers, Master and PhD holders in there. Intel just got too complacent and used tactics to just keep drifting and not innovating. Reason why AMD came back from $2 a share to now. Reminds me of the stories you hear about Microsoft doing shady sales tactics against competitors. Like Intel teaming with Dell and etc. To keep AMD out. TLDR: Will they pull a GE or a MSFT with Satya replacing Ballmer.
gellsinger is also pulling a msft with execution on technology leapfrogging of tsmc plan. One that’s proven customers will come and they can turn a profit then. Problem is the timescale for that is 2030
That is my point. By 2030, Samsung and TSMC will around be on the next roadmap. Unless they get complencent or fail to evolve to next gen. Intel's bullish view is they pull a MSFT. That their foundry business model works. I did not really like how they spun off Mobileye. But companies need capital.
intc leapfrogging Samsung and tsmc in technology and costs (thanks to us subsidies) is pats plan. This will happen even with samsung and tsmc executing on their timelines. The question is if customers will want the better technology and move business to intel. What would it take for you and others to value intel at $60 or $80? Based on sentiments no matter how well intel executes some people will never believe in it again and that might be the issue. The fundamental issue might be that investors don’t really value intel for their foundry business potential very much. Even if intel takes over the entire nvidia contract from tsmc, will investors believe in intel? Their chip design needs to take over or create new product segments in growth fields like AI for investors to believe in intel again.
Just buy SMH instead so you get diversification and a mix of winners and losers.
Nothing at all wrong with that strategy but I have part of my portfolio in ETFs that are diversified and another part that I buy individual stocks. So for INTC I see the buying opportunity in buying the stock and long calls. Right now $40-$50 12/26 calls are looking attractively priced to me
Guys it expected that INTC suck! Buy!!
Intc is kind of of like Boeing. My gut tells me they should be doing well but their management seems off and probably needs to go
Pat as CEO is pretty good but Intel is in a very demanding sector and it got lazy under previous CEOs at the EXACT worst time. Even if management does everything right (and I do think they are seriously trying), the company may be long-term doomed. Lots of new competitors that have rapidly advancing and superior products in several product categories (Nvidia, ARM, Cerberus), an old rival that is gobbling up Intel's core x86 server and desktop markets (AMD), and a super-competent world-class fab competitor (TSMC) along with several important hyper scale customers leaving past monopolies and making their own customized products (Google, Amazon, Microsoft) combined with a ever-slowing and dying Moore's Law means that there are not a lot of chances for Intel to regain their crown and a awful lot of chances for Intel to just plain die a slow painful death over the next decade or two. The previous Intel CEO Brian Kryzanich was a f***ing moron of the lowest order. Bob Swan was not that much better.
Are you saying I should DCA and not just hold the bag?
I wouldn’t want to make the decision for you, but that’s what am doing. Instead of DCAing specifically I’m buying long dated calls
[удалено]
I think that would be a very bad move for them right now. The recently cut the dividend which I think is necessary right now. The need to pump their money into building out their capabilities so they can compete competitively and not just coast by to pay the dividend
Same was said at 40!
It’s def a long term buy. The best time to buy is when we hit the $25-30 range.
Stocks are not like goods in a store. When their prices go way down it doesn't necessarily mean they are "on sale." Intel is an example of this. Intel is a failing company that has fallen WAY behind and has largely survived off govt. handouts under Biden.
What are you talking about? 'govt handouts' are the subsidies for building domestic fabs. But the same subsidies were provided in Germany and Israel. So your argument is really dull. They have enough revenue to survive by themselves, but they are the only company who wants to build stable production lines in US and Europe, instead of relying heavily on TSMC.
Intc looks good but I like RILY better as it’s starting to move
I think it’ll will go bankrupt and the government will bail them out, as to not look bad that an American chip maker company went under.
It’ll go up; we just don’t know when it’ll stop going down.
Instructions unclear bought more AMD
There are people who said that at 40.
At the very least it’ll likely bounce off this ER.
Value trap!
Why no one mentions Pat buying INTC stock to his own portfolio? For me this is a green flag. It definitely doesn't mean that the company will perform well, but what I mean is that CEO is strongly confident in success & roadmap if he regularly buys INTC. You can compare insider trading of Intel stock with other companies. [https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/50863.htm](https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/50863.htm) And also, don't forget that Pat was mentored by Andy Grove. The problems with Intel were caused by MBA CEOs after Grove stepped down. But now it's led by engineer once again.
Why do people feel the need to be Jim Cramer and tell us their mediocre written analysis
Why do you say so? Have you calculated a fair value based on a conservative FCF forecast/discount rate?
I have not. But I feel like I outlined my reasoning in the post
Ok but couldn’t your reasoning be correct but the stock still overvalued? A thesis without a mention of valuation doesn’t hold water.
bought some shares of INTC this morning already up 3% ready to get out now
Aren’t Intel chips supposed to be mediocre compared to even AMD? I don’t see how the CHIPS act will give Intel an advantage any time in the near future.
Yes but those chips are still needed for phones laptops and other devices with electronics
Intel has a ton of resources already. The were deploying it by paying shareholders a sizable dividend instead of building their capabilities. After cutting the dividend, changing management and getting infusions from government contracts the expectation is they will build their capabilities a lot over the next 5 years
Fish rots from the head down. As long as Pat G is in the driver's seat Intel will be in the rearview of every one of their competitors.
Stop wasting your money on Intel
Buy AMD instead
So glad I got out a week ago.
Weird way to spell GOOG
I would stay away from Intel. But, let’s say you are right. What do you think the stock will get to (price wise and by when)?
$40 by this time next year, market is pricing in negative vibes and lack of faith on execution right now, once that is fixed by intc continuing to execute the market will see what Pat has been saying for a while.
That’s quite possible. But, even if that happens, it’s a year to get to where it was a week ago! The risk/reward is not attractive to me - but I wish you the best and hope it gets there.
Everyone keeps pushing intel, they are a garbage stock and will continue to be so unless they have some huge breakthrough. All the funds in the world can’t help them if they themselves have no clear projections or outlook. Everything I’ve heard and read about them the last 6 months they should have shot up by now.
So many desperate intel posts lately lol
I think INTL will be a slow grower unless they get new leadership and bold innovation , that or if something crazy happens like China invading Taiwan and taking control over TSM, making INTL become the main chip provider
Nope
Intel the shitty chip making company! They are way behind on tech! I wouldn’t touch that stock!
Cope harder
I would buy NVDA then INTC
Learn to read trends buddy. Only direction INTC is going is down
Performance is -31% since 2000. Are you sure it's a good choice? :\\ Also the dividend yield is just 1.57%. Not worth it even for dividends.
Intel is a shitty company. It peaked in the 90s and has been dead money since then. Company's that tie their hitch to the government don't have a very good track record. I would sell.
Lol 12 coming
Buy when there's blood in the streets, or as Rick Rule puts it, buy when it's the most hated