How Intel Stock Falls to $10

hist78

hist78

Well-known member
"Intel stock (NASDAQ:INTC) has barely moved this year, up just 2%, as the company continues to struggle with shrinking relevance in its core CPU market and underwhelming progress in its foundry ambitions, despite investing over $50 billion in the space. Revenue has collapsed from $79 billion in 2021 to $53 billion in 2024. While the broader PC market is showing signs of stabilization, Intel’s top line is projected to decline again this year - suggesting revenue stagnation could become the norm. Meanwhile, stocks of competitors like AMD and Nvidia are soaring, up 43% and 24% respectively in 2025. Could Intel stock plunge to $10 - half its current value? It may seem extreme, but given the steady erosion of its fundamentals, it’s no longer unthinkable. Below, we provide a scenario considering three key metrics, namely revenues, net margins, and price-to-earnings multiple. That said, if you want upside with a smoother ride than an individual stock, consider the High Quality portfolio, which has outperformed the S&P, and clocked >91% returns since inception."


www.forbes.com

How Intel Stock Falls To $10

Intel’s top line is projected to decline again this year - suggesting revenue stagnation could become the norm.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
I agree I'm not seeing much action or a path to improve their top line revenue in the next couple of years.

They're a token player in AI, though at least starting to take action. Local-on-CPU AI for average users doesn't seem to bring any special value yet, so no reason for businesses or users to refresh their "old PCs" with "NPU laden" PCs.

They're still losing and on track to continue losing market share to AMD in Datacenter.

The Foundry not winning any new customers means.. no growth there.

They're spinning off/have spun off some groups - MobileEye, "Networking and Edge", etc. = less revenue from alternate sources.

The discrete GPU market appears to be ~ $20-22B as of last year... a hard push from Intel might get them to 10% market share in another year, or if miracles line up - a 20-25% share in 2-3 years, but that's not nearly enough to offset their current trajectory.

What am I missing?

(Disclaimer - I don't own any direct stocks of INTC or it's competitors, though mutual funds that do..)
 
Xebec said:
a hard push from Intel might get them to 10% market share in another year, or if miracles line up - a 20-25% share in 2-3 years, but that's not nearly enough to offset their current trajectory.
Click to expand...
Intel has been trying in the discrete GPU market for several years and has their 2nd gen Battlemage out. But even with that, they don't have anything competitive. So, Intel's current market share is still less than 1%. Thus, the 10% share possibility would fall into your "miracles line up" category.
 
Catchy title for sure. In my opinion the great Intel hope is to get manufacturing back integrated with design. Can Intel really compete with AMD on design when AMD has a much closer relationship with TSMC? We all know how important a close link between design and manufacturing is, right? Just ask Apple. Can Intel compete with customers when they are making their own silicon using TSMC and they are writing some very big checks to get the best silicon possible?

I just do not see Intel being an industry leader again without manufacturing. Not with the likes of AMD, Nvidia, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Tesla competing with them. And now Tesla has a manufacturing deal backed by the richest person in the world. My advice to Intel is to do something very very clever and get back into technology innovation, both software and silicon.
 
Historically, Because it's AMD because it's Intel...
Another way is to increase the number of X86 companions.
This must be considered with Intel, which has a cross license, but there is room for consideration.
siliconbruh999 said:
AMD can't rely on another party to maintain their software like in the case of CPUs(x86).
Click to expand...
 
I think if Intel manages to offload or spin out it's fab business and become a fabless company the stock will turn around. Until then it'll continue to fall.
 
count said:
I think if Intel manages to offload or spin out it's fab business and become a fabless company the stock will turn around. Until then it'll continue to fall.
Click to expand...

Do you think, without fabs, Intel will be a clear leader against AMD and Nvidia? Or just another horse in a big horse?

I agree with you by the way, the safe bet would be to off load manufacturing and milk the x86 cow. But safe bets do not get you maximum stock value over the long run.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
Do you think, without fabs, Intel will be a clear leader against AMD and Nvidia? Or just another horse in a big horse?

I agree with you by the way, the safe bet would be to off load manufacturing and milk the x86 cow. But safe bets do not get you maximum stock value over the long run.
Click to expand...
I bet this way the Intel's market cap is at least half that of AMD in 2-3 yrs. That's 50% up from today's value.
The stock could go even higher if IFS can fetch a good price.
 
count said:
If it came with the IP and a 5 year wafer agreement with Intel, I am sure someone would buy it.
Click to expand...

Someone like Silver Lake? The company who bought 51% of Altera? I just do not see how they can run Intel Foundry better than Lip-Bu. Unless, of course, a coalition of companies such as Qualcomm, Broadcom, Apple, invested in it. Of course they could do that as customers. :cool:
 
Daniel Nenni said:
Someone like Silver Lake? The company who bought 51% of Altera? I just do not see how they can run Intel Foundry better than Lip-Bu. Unless, of course, a coalition of companies such as Qualcomm, Broadcom, Apple, invested in it. Of course they could do that as customers. :cool:
Click to expand...
Lip Bu is still a human who has a lot on his plate and is fallible. If he was 100% dedicated to IFS maybe you could make that argument that he's the best person to run it.

You were saying similar things about Pat G being the best person to save Intel and we know how that turned out in retrospect. IFS does not need some rockstar CEO to save it. It needs someone who is focused 100% on foundry as a stand alone business without conflicts of interest all over the place.
 
count said:
Lip Bu is still a human who has a lot on his plate and is fallible. If he was 100% dedicated to IFS maybe you could make that argument that he's the best person to run it.

You were saying similar things about Pat G being the best person to save Intel and we know how that turned out in retrospect. IFS does not need some rockstar CEO to save it. It needs someone who is focused 100% on foundry as a stand alone business without conflicts of interest all over the place.
Click to expand...

I did support Pat G and his IDM 2.0 100%. That was short lived however due to Pat's rantings. I still think IDM 2.0 can succeed but there cannot be any more over-promising. I know Lip-Bu, he sets realistic expectations and exceeds them, he does not overpromise.

I was shocked that Lip-Bu took the Intel job. As you said, he is a busy man and his legacy is at stake. Why would he risk it when he is already golden in the EDA and semiconductor VC world? Lip-Bu clearly has a plan for Intel and I am looking forward to seeing it through. He still has my full support.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
I did support Pat G and his IDM 2.0 100%. That was short lived however due to Pat's rantings. I still think IDM 2.0 can succeed but there cannot be any more over promising. I know Lip-Bu, he sets realistic expectations and exceeds them, he does not overpromise.

I was shocked that Lip-Bu took the Intel job. As you said, he is a busy man and his legacy is at stake. Why would he risk it when he is already golden in the EDA and semiconductor VC world? Lip-Bu clearly has a plan for Intel and I am looking forward to seeing it through. He still has my full support.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why he took the job, high preforming leaders are attracted to big challenges, but that doesn't always mean they are going to be able to fix them. He probably didn't know the exact scale of the challenge he was getting into.

Personally I think the verdict is still out... I think Intel can be saved if they ditch the broken IDM model, and there are some signs that Lip Bu is coming to this realization as well based on his comments that 18A will be internal use only and they will not go forward with 14A unless they get a big customer commitment. So lets say we end up in that situation where Intel does not do 14A, that means they are probably on TSMC instead. If that happens what happens with the legacy fabs? I think if you keep going down this line of questioning you start to get to the answer that IFS will be spun out or sold. There is a lot of valuable equipment, IP, and knowledge in Intel IFS, and if a buyer gets a 5 year wafer agreement, it gives a would be buyer enough financial runway to figure out what to do with those assets.

They buyer could be private equity like silver lake, it could be a company like GFS or Tower semiconductor which would give them the capability to manufacture more advanced nodes, it could be a memory company like Micron that could expand into logic. There are options. And the way Intel is valued today, it could give away IFS for almost nothing and it would still be a net positive.
 
count said:
Personally I think the verdict is still out... I think Intel can be saved if they ditch the broken IDM model,
Click to expand...
FWIW, We have a preview of that with Arrow Lake and Lunar Lake.

Lunar Lake is relatively good, but Arrow Lake has been pretty underwhelming. Arrow Lake's launch shows that the product and marketing divisions need serious internal process (and leadership) improvements, and the chips performance doesn't seem indicative of being 'two full nodes ahead of Intel 7' when you compare it to 14th gen.

Dropping the IDM model won't fix the problems with Intel's products... IMO, It's a separate issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top