Intel Cuts Jobs out of Embarrassment
From CNet to ZDNet and the Wall Street Journal, the word is Intel Corporation (INTC) will cut between 10,000 to 20,000 of its 100,000 strong (or weak) workforce. My source puts the job cut count already at 3,000 with 13,000 or more coming soon, although Geekygirl seems relatively optimistic about her position at Intel ahead of the official job cut announcement on Tuesday, . That would put the layoff count near the upper range of the estimate, and the jobs being cut most likely won’t be limited to the marketing as reported in the Sacremento Mercury News.After recent competitive pressure from rival Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD), a competition in which Intel is getting their heads handed to them, Intel has been pressured into an “internal efficiency study.” It is obvious that Intel isn’t getting spanked just because they hired too many marketing folks (but then again, if their marketing represents the 10,000-20,000 employees that they are laying off, maybe they did over hire). The truth is a tech company should not and do not live and die by their marketing. Rather, they must rely on their engineering R&D which, for a company of that size with the resources and legacy, is really dogging it. I mean, come on! Every recent chip has been reverse engineered from an AMD chip.
I know engineers who have barely been with Intel for a month when the manager who hired them got booted before they did. Also, teams and such are being “spun off” or “sold,” but its just a fancy way of laying off people and keeping the jobs cut number reasonable. What are all these employees going to do? True, Silicon Valley is once again booming with opportunities like it was 1999, but what about those remote Intel towns like Dupont, Washington? If the whole town loses its job and Intel isn’t hiring, who is going to buy the houses of the laid-off workers so they can hop to Silicon Valley?
C’mon Intel, stop shifting the attention and blame to the little guys, your little guys, when the management at the top can’t put together a decent game plan and manage their human resources. Can we please get some engineers up top so they actually understand their products and how to make the products successful? Yeah, take that from the AMD playbook too…promote some engineers, not fire. If Intel doesn’t do this and soon, there’s no turning around this company no matter how many people they fire, and I’ll be loading up on AMD stock and shorting Intel. Maybe all of you soon-to-be Ex-Intel employees should do the same…Intel can still make you money even if they fired you.
P.S., it is sad that those of us in society who have invested the most time and energy to become technical professionals are at the mercy of such social conditions:
The reality is that job security no longer exists in today’s environment. The best thing we can do is continue to learn new skills and actively work to evolve our areas of expertise staying aligned with the constantly changing technological environment allowing us to remain valuable in our current jobs or as we move on to the next project.
~Geekygirl Dawn Foster
September 2nd, 2006 at 11:13 am
“…those of us in society who have invested the most time and energy to become technical professionals…”
Based on your above satements about R&D, reverse engineering and your opinions on the “real problem”- you obviously do not qualify as a “technical professional”.
Go back to your Circuit City computer aisle, dipshit.
September 2nd, 2006 at 12:15 pm
Why, oh why, is Craig Barrett not being taken to task for his dismal leadership and failed strategy?? Analysts are commenting that it failed, but they aren’t putting his name by their comments.
September 2nd, 2006 at 6:47 pm
I totally agree with the Craig Barrett comment….. the majority of the blame rests on him but no body seems to notice. It was in 1998 that Intel began a regular cycle of layoffs. It was shortly after the 1998 layoffs that Craig said that Intel wasn’t watching its hiring rates and that he would never let it get out of hand again. Well, he didn’t and now every employee is at risk. He should step up and and admit it was him that placed Paul and the company in such a spot. His platform strategy is also failing.
September 3rd, 2006 at 10:25 am
Colin-
What about my “opinions” that disqualify me as a “technical professional”? The recent Duo chips and new Tulsa server chip in the Xeon family are all taken from AMD’s playbook. I call having a product very similar to your competitors with just “slight improvements” a result of reverse engineering. If Intel are designing these products from scratch rather than reverse engineering these, then it is far worse because they are spending far too much time and resources to reinvent the wheel. For Intel to remain competitive and reclaim its Top Dawg position, it can’t keep playing catch-up (like microsoft has been with the Zune music player), but it has to be more innovative.
SammySushi and Nahn-
I don’t know why the responsibility hasn’t been placed on Craig Barrett and the rest of management, I know I do. Obviously they know they have problems as far back as 1998. So, for whatever reason they didn’t address it, whether it be negligence or carelessness, it points to bad management. No matter how great the technology, you can’t have a winning company with bad management.
September 3rd, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Any “technical professional” worth their salt would exhibit a better understanding of the situation. You are framing the problems with your opinions, not with facts.
You only have to read the latest CPU reviews, and the design history, all of which is public - to understand that Intel’s products are currently 40% faster than AMD’s (and not reverse engineered).
If you don’t believe me, go look at the benchmarks and the design diagrams. If you really are a technical professional, than they will be easy for you to understand - and will render your whole post mute.
September 4th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
Colin - I don’t disagree that Intel’s products are far better then AMDs (except at the time being AMDs servers are better). I never said anything about products. I was simply saying that management has not maintained thier promises to keep hiring in check. And that is a fact!
The latest number is 12,000. At least that will be the external number published.
–nahn.
September 5th, 2006 at 3:43 am
I too am an intel employee and your data is f*cked up. I know engineers who work on the new products. You don’t have a freaking clue. The duo core was a drop back to an older cooler faster running Intel core. The speed was gained through the symmetrical processing. As far as I’m concern your credibility is in the crapper.
BTW Sacramento’s only newspaper is the Bee, not the Mercury.
October 1st, 2006 at 2:30 pm
‘fraid I’m gonna have to call this as well.
Intel has put in hours, gone on painful diet, and now has the products and the future pathway to leave AMD in the dust - apart form severs and the bargain basement.
It’s not nice that techies feel the most pain - but this is the way the world is and we a basically used to it.