←back to thread

U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

(www.cnbc.com)
607 points givemeethekeys | 9 comments | 22 Aug 25 21:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
jjcm ◴[22 Aug 25 22:36 UTC] No.44990743[source]▶
In general I would rather the government take a stake in corporations they're bailing out. I think the "too big to fail" bailouts in the past should have come with more of a cost for the business, so on one hand I'm glad this is finally happening.

On the other hand, I wish it were a more formalized process rather than this politicized "our president made a deal to save america!" / "Intel is back and the government is investing BUY INTEL SHARES" media event. These things should follow a strict set of rules and processes so investors and companies know what to expect. These kind of deals should be boring, not a media event.

replies(25): >>44990768 #>>44990991 #>>44991008 #>>44991032 #>>44991056 #>>44991094 #>>44991125 #>>44991135 #>>44991142 #>>44991149 #>>44991156 #>>44991177 #>>44991295 #>>44991514 #>>44991586 #>>44991729 #>>44992050 #>>44992377 #>>44992551 #>>44992788 #>>44993446 #>>44993951 #>>44993969 #>>45000356 #>>45063597 #
ch4s3 ◴[22 Aug 25 23:08 UTC] No.44991032[source]▶
I’d really rather we didn’t bail out these companies at all. It clearly creates moral hazard and makes it hard for better run companies to enter markets.
replies(7): >>44991093 #>>44991108 #>>44991331 #>>44991669 #>>44995067 #>>44996633 #>>45000367 #
JustExAWS ◴[22 Aug 25 23:13 UTC] No.44991093[source]▶
Chip manufacturing is too important for the US. We can’t be completely dependent on Taiwan. Nothing against Taiwan, it’s one attack away from being obliterated by China.

No company is going to come out of someone’s garage and build a chip fab.

replies(6): >>44991200 #>>44991277 #>>44991294 #>>44991749 #>>44991893 #>>44992253 #
1. charliea0 ◴[22 Aug 25 23:27 UTC] No.44991200[source]▶
We can definitely offer subsidies for manufacturing in the US - we've already gotten TSMC to open several fabs.
replies(2): >>44991250 #>>44992999 #
2. scarface_74 ◴[22 Aug 25 23:33 UTC] No.44991250[source]▶
And it’s still owned by a foreign country and Taiwan is restricting TSMC from manufacturing their most advanced processors from being manufactured in the US.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/ta...

replies(2): >>44991752 #>>44991800 #
3. gizajob ◴[23 Aug 25 00:38 UTC] No.44991752[source]▶
Same as the US is restricting sale of Nvidia chips to China.
4. 8note ◴[23 Aug 25 00:44 UTC] No.44991800[source]▶
this is not to say that intel will be manufacturing competitive chips to what TSMC is.

are you worried that china will invade taiwan, and then somehow taiwan will still be around to prevent the US fabs from making the best chips?

its a bit far fetched

replies(2): >>44992127 #>>44992145 #
5. raw_anon_1111 ◴[23 Aug 25 01:33 UTC] No.44992127{3}[source]▶
If Intel isn’t manufacturing chips, what US manufacturer comes close? You can’t just build a close to leading edge manufacturing facility in a month
6. Citizen8396 ◴[23 Aug 25 01:35 UTC] No.44992145{3}[source]▶
it's not like the technology to produce these chips are a drop-in replacement

the threat Taiwan faces is existential, and one of the only things that the US has at stake are these chips

7. re-thc ◴[23 Aug 25 03:55 UTC] No.44992999[source]▶
> We can definitely offer subsidies for manufacturing in the US

The very subsidies Intel now has to pay with shares for? How is that a subsidy? Companies now and in the future would be very concerned before taking any US subsidies because the terms can always change after the fact.

replies(1): >>44993776 #
8. AuryGlenz ◴[23 Aug 25 06:34 UTC] No.44993776[source]▶
Are we so sure Intel sees this as a bad thing? The US now has even more reason to prop them up.
replies(1): >>44996009 #
9. re-thc ◴[23 Aug 25 13:54 UTC] No.44996009{3}[source]▶
Yes, does it matter if there are more reasons? If you want to do something, 1 is enough. The rest are excuses.