- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The US now owns 10% of Intel
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:28 pm
Interesting development
Not sure how it’s structured.
It was originally designed to transfer the grant given under the chips act to an equity purchase.
I can see how this benefits Intel but How do we as citizens benefit?
Not sure how it’s structured.
It was originally designed to transfer the grant given under the chips act to an equity purchase.
I can see how this benefits Intel but How do we as citizens benefit?
10
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:30 pm to SlidellCajun
As I understand it, INTC will start building production facilities in the U.S. and that creates jobs
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:36 pm to bigjoe1
Does this mean we should get stock? Usually when the government gets involved everything goes down the toilet.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:49 pm to SlidellCajun
Oof
Posted on 8/22/25 at 3:56 pm to bigjoe1
quote:
As I understand it, INTC will start building production facilities in the U.S. and that creates jobs
What does any of that have to do with the government taking an equity stake in the company?
Posted on 8/22/25 at 4:19 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
What does any of that have to do with the government taking an equity stake in the company?
Yeah
That could have happened without a multi billion dollar investment
We shouldn’t have to buy stock in companies to get them to employ American workers.
This post was edited on 8/22/25 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 8/22/25 at 4:22 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
That could have happened without a multi billion dollar investment
But, could INTC make the investment without the government?
I'm not all that comfortable about it either. Got a lot of questions how this works long term but, I think it is a national security issue an chip production has to come back to this country
Posted on 8/22/25 at 4:55 pm to bigjoe1
I keep hearing the issue is national security but when it comes to national security, there’s other industry that also enters that realm.
For instance- energy. Serious national security issues there.
For instance- energy. Serious national security issues there.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:01 pm to bigjoe1
quote:
As I understand it, INTC will start building production facilities in the U.S. and that creates jobs
INTC already has a facility in Arizona, Oregon, and was in production to build one in Ohio and New Mexico
However those were put on hold since the yo-yoing of the CHIPS Act
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:02 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
I keep hearing the issue is national security but when it comes to national security, there’s other industry that also enters that realm.
For instance- energy. Serious national security issues there.
No modern weapon or defense systems will work without TSMC or Intel at this point. If Intel was left to go under...
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:10 pm to UltimaParadox
quote:Here's a Fidelity article on the deal LINKFidelity
Daniel Morgan, senior portfolio manager at Synovus Trust, said Intel's ( INTC ) problems are beyond a cash infusion from SoftBank or equity interest from the government.
"Without government support or another financially stronger partner, it will be difficult for Intel ( INTC ) foundry unit to raise enough capital to continue to build out more Fabs at a reasonable rate," he said, adding that Intel ( INTC ) "needs to catch up with TSMC from a technological perspective to attract business."
Lutnick said this week any stake would be non-voting, meaning it would not enable the U.S. government to tell the company how to run its business.
Intel ( INTC ) declined to comment on Friday.
Federal backing could give Intel ( INTC ) more breathing room to revive its loss-making foundry business, analysts said, but it still suffers from a weak product road map and challenges in attracting customers to its new factories.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:34 pm to SlidellCajun
This will either be the last time we do something like this or it will be the first of many.
An otherwise stable company is now owned in part by the US federal government. What a disaster.
An otherwise stable company is now owned in part by the US federal government. What a disaster.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:38 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
I can see how this benefits Intel but How do we as citizens benefit?
This one looks pretty straight forward. They were given a grant, which was subsequently converted to an investment.
The real question is why did Intel just roll over?
Posted on 8/22/25 at 5:44 pm to SlidellCajun
Slippery slope towards fascism
Posted on 8/22/25 at 6:02 pm to AuburnTigers
Time will tell. With the available information the current arrangement is illogical.
If Intel is truly stable, the shareholders should revolt. It’s hard to believe they couldn’t have gotten more favorable terms if they solicited investment from sovereign wealth funds, or threatened to reincorporate to some tax haven like Ireland.
If they’re actually unstable, this is just phase one for an anticipated bailout.
If Intel is truly stable, the shareholders should revolt. It’s hard to believe they couldn’t have gotten more favorable terms if they solicited investment from sovereign wealth funds, or threatened to reincorporate to some tax haven like Ireland.
If they’re actually unstable, this is just phase one for an anticipated bailout.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 6:06 pm to lsuconnman
quote:its all a bailout. These companies are failing to compete in the market place. MP couldnt compete with China and now Intel is falling behind in the AI tech race, so Trump is bailing them out and hooking them up with the technology to stay competitive.
this is just phase one for an anticipated bailout.
This post was edited on 8/22/25 at 6:08 pm
Posted on 8/22/25 at 6:08 pm to SlidellCajun
So in board meeting, do I get citizenry voting power in addition to my shareholder voting power?
Posted on 8/22/25 at 6:32 pm to lsuconnman
quote:
This one looks pretty straight forward. They were given a grant, which was subsequently converted to an investment
You simply listed the transaction. How does this benefit the citizens?
Posted on 8/22/25 at 6:46 pm to Stamps74
Because that money was already granted by the previous administration and had no strings attached… just a single share of stock is an improvement for the citizens.
Posted on 8/22/25 at 8:50 pm to AuburnTigers
quote:
Slippery slope towards fascism
Yeah, I don't agree with the government taking ownership in private/public companies. This seems like a terrible idea.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News