Craig Barrett, the former CEO of Intel during the years 1998-2005, shared his insights through articles in Fortune regarding the challenges faced by Intel and possible solutions. He disagreed with the idea of splitting Intel into two companies because he believed that Intel is already closely following TSMC’s cutting-edge 2-nanometer technology, making such a move unnecessary. Additionally, Intel now possesses the most up-to-date EUV machinery.
He pointed out that the board’s perspective was that without separating the companies, Intel’s chip manufacturing business would struggle to find clients as no one would trust them since Intel also sells its own chips. However, this issue is more about technology than anything else. TSMC has numerous clients due to its leading-edge technology. If Intel can lead in this regard, their chip manufacturing business would naturally attract clients.
Barrett also mentioned that splitting Intel into two companies would not be easy as the company has hundreds of thousands of employees across various regions globally. If the company aims to maintain its manufacturing base in the United States as per Trump’s policies, Intel should not split. The issues Intel faced in the past were primarily due to being behind in technology compared to competitors. Pat Gelsinger made significant advancements during his tenure as CEO, but now the company has a CFO and a product management division, indicating their interest in splitting Intel into two companies. Their approach is to remove the board of this specific company and reinstate Pat as CEO.
TLDR: Craig Barrett, former Intel CEO, opposed the idea of splitting Intel into two companies due to the company’s cutting-edge technology adoption and the challenge of maintaining trust with clients. He suggested focusing on technology advancement to attract clients and recommended reinstating Pat Gelsinger as CEO.
Leave a Comment