Charlie Demerjian Says Intel’s Firing of CEO Brian Krzanich is a Cover Up

DooKey

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
13,551
Good ol' Charlie over at SemiAccurate thinks Intel fired (Intel official story is resignation) CEO Brian Krzanich to cover up for deeper problems at the chip making giant. He opines that the 14nm and 10nm problems pushed the board past the breaking point and something had to be done. Also, it seems some of the picadillo's of the recently released CEO didn't start with him and were common place before he took over. As always there's probably some shreds of truth in Charlie's opinion piece and I'll leave it to you to believe what you want.


Now for the real problem, the public reasonings for the firings are quite simply a pathetic excuse, so what are they covering up? There are three things that SemiAccurate can think of which would lead to this firing, the 10nm failure being the key one. Intel has known how bad things are for quite literally years and hasn’t been telling the truth.
 
If you think about it, they've been THE powerhouse for so long that they were bound to stumble a little.

Intel has been a massive contributor to the very construction of the modern world.
 
Last edited:
Intel has been facing many problems lately, but one does no simply fires a CEO for incompetence, probably it is better to tell a story of a consensual relationship, because in that story, the guy still did his job. The CEO is responsible for the course of the company and all its projects, or you imagine Intel being like "yo shareholders our leader is clueless".

6NfmQ.jpg
 
"It is SemiAccurate’s informed technical opinion that Intel’s 10nm process will never work at a financially viable level".
Click to expand...
I actually believe this is true! :confused:

That Intel will not profit from their 10nm implementation. Certainly this year for sure.
 
Last edited:
Montu said:
Good ol' Charlie over at SemiAccurate thinks Intel fired (Intel official story is resignation) CEO Brian Krzanich to cover up for deeper problems at the chip making giant. He opines that the 14nm and 10nm problems pushed the board past the breaking point and something had to be done.
Click to expand...

Intel has more than enough manpower and money to have offered customers a free delid/relid for the K series (you know, the over-priced CPU's?) ... but they didn't so I'm not interested in how the board reached a breaking point :cautious:
 
Twisted Kidney said:
If you think about it, they've been THE powerhouse for so long that they were bound to stumble a little.
Click to expand...

Last time they stumbled was in the late P3 era with the 1.13Ghz part of much fame and internet review site cooperation and the following while Netburst/P4 architecture.

This led to some brief competition in the marketplace, and it was great until Intel's illegal business practices quashed it.

We are seeing history repeat itself with a resurgent AMD and a stumbling Intel. Hopefully this time around there will be a watchful eye on Intel so they don't repeat their criminal activity.

I don't have high hopes though. We are in a period of time of pushback against common Sense regulation and laws that prevent big business from shady practices, and Intel has a very long history of shady practices and abuse of the courts to try to lock out any competition.

Some might even say that illegal and anti-conpetitive business practices and abuse of the courts is engrained in their corporate culture.

Time will tell if this time is any different. AMD sure needs to grow some balls and hire a competent law firm and Sue the pants off both Intel (if they try things like this again) and Nvidia who have been copying IntelsI modus operandi for over a decade now.
 
I thought it was a coverup for his possible inside-trading troubles. I say possible because he's white and has lots of money and secrets.
 
It's Trump's fault, obviously. Or Clinton's. Or Putin's. Or Merkel's. Hard to keep track these days, but it's somebody's fault other than the obvious, just has to be so.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Last time they stumbled was in the late P3 era with the 1.13Ghz part of much fame and internet review site cooperation and the following while Netburst/P4 architecture.
Click to expand...

Last time? What about the steaming hot Prescott that got shit on? Are you forgetting the oh so horrible Pentium D? What about all the needless chipset and socket changes and incompatible CPUs that just needed pencil mods, etc? Just because, over all Intel has been doing decently doesn't mean they have had plennnty of stumbles along the way. The Pentium 3 instance you talk about is far from their most recent.
 
Mut1ny said:
Too bad your comment isn't accurate
Click to expand...

Oh noes! Please... Charlie spouts about how the skies are falling all the time and how our savior AMD is second coming. The bias on that site has been known for over a decade.
 
NoOther said:
Oh noes! Please... Charlie spouts about how the skies are falling all the time and how our savior AMD is second coming. The bias on that site has been known for over a decade.
Click to expand...

I didn't say there aren't biases. They have biases, you have biases, we all do...my point was that semi-accurate is exactly that. To say they're never accurate or even haven't been a lot of the time is inaccurate.
 
Atearen said:
but one does no simply fires a CEO for incompetence, probably it is better to tell a story of a consensual relationship, because in that story, the guy still did his job.
Click to expand...

You can definitely fire a CEO for incompetence. It's just going to cost you. What you absolutely do NOT do though is make public statements about your upcoming products that can affect your stock price and cannot be corroborated. Because then the SEC might want to talk with all y'all. Saying you have a leading industry process that works when you don't would likely classify.

That being said, I think the SA article missed one of the options, and that what you are alluding to, which is the board pushed the CEO out, and that this story is the poo flinging with the least back splatter. They don't expect the ex CEO to complain about it because it is defensible by being technically true, and because the real story of why management is unhappy with management would be bad for the ex-CEO as well.
 
Mut1ny said:
I didn't say there aren't biases. They have biases, you have biases, we all do...my point was that semi-accurate is exactly that. To say they're never accurate or even haven't been a lot of the time is inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Apparently I now need to start including /s markers in a post with FTFY where it is implied.... :rolleyes:
 
Kinda shitty to cover up with sexual misconduct. It kinda ruins things for him socially.
 
The funny thing about conspiracy theories is that often they decide to completely overlook an obvious question (by design). In this case, the question would be:

Why would they need a cover up? There is no reason not to throw him under the bus for the business' shortcomings. It's much easier for a company to have a fall guy than to make some shit up for said fall guy. I mean, in what world would Intel benefit from having the public give the CEO the benefit of the doubt when it came to the business dealings? Think about it. Intel would be better off telling the public, in so many words, that their CEO was an incompetent shit and had to go. No need for a cover up. If they didn't want to publicly say that, a press release that simply stated he resigned would do just the same. "Citing personal reasons, Intel CEO put in his resignation..."

It's public information that they've delayed 10nm for far too long and the recent bad press on hardware vulnerabilities isn't lost on the public.

Come on, quit the fringe thinking crap. You're not privy to exclusive information if you're connecting dots as answers to questions nobody is asking.
 
Last edited:
vegeta535 said:
Kinda shitty to cover up with sexual misconduct. It kinda ruins things for him socially.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he did. They didn't make it up. From his point, while that reason to get fired has more sting than usual in the current Metoo environment, it's less career ruining than firing him due to being an idiot.

"I took sensitivity classes and will not engage in consensual sex with a woman ever again because it is unfair and abusive to women" will be enough for a smaller company to throw money at him to get him onboard.

If he got fired for being an idiot and dragging stock down, "I done got smarter" will not help him land another job so easily.
 
Croak said:
It's Trump's fault, obviously. Or Clinton's. Or Putin's. Or Merkel's. Hard to keep track these days, but it's somebody's fault other than the obvious, just has to be so.
Click to expand...

The early 2000s called, they want their AMD64 back!
 
mord said:
Yes, but he did. They didn't make it up. From his point, while that reason to get fired has more sting than usual in the current Metoo environment, it's less career ruining than firing him due to being an idiot.

"I took sensitivity classes and will not engage in consensual sex with a woman ever again because it is unfair and abusive to women" will be enough for a smaller company to throw money at him to get him onboard.

If he got fired for being an idiot and dragging stock down, "I done got smarter" will not help him land another job so easily.
Click to expand...

So did he out himself or leak details about his relationship with the employee?

I find it more than hard to believe that the board of directors wouldn’t give two shits about giving him a bad rap for his recent track record.
 
Why are people still shooting the messenger ?

There so few people getting fired for what they did , it is usually the circumstances in which other things happened.

If Intel brings out a press release saying: Our CEO sucks bad he screwed up 10nm and he already admitted that our server segment might/will take a 20% hit .
Will create a lot of problems for share holders ....
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Why are people still shooting the messenger ?

There so few people getting fired for what they did , it is usually the circumstances in which other things happened.

If Intel brings out a press release saying: Our CEO sucks bad he screwed up 10nm and he already admitted that our server segment might/will take a 20% hit .
Will create a lot of problems for share holders ....
Click to expand...

Their stock has already been taking a hit all month. Firing him for incompetence would probably inspire confidence in shareholders than the other way around.

Again, the company’s shortcomings aren’t a secret. Shareholders would get it more than anybody else.

In my head it doesn’t make sense to create a “cover up” story unless the CEO himself decided to control the narrative by getting himself caught rather than be forced to resign.
 
Last edited:
Once AMD beats Intel in IPC, then they're done. AMD will have the better product at that point.
 
Sonicks said:
So did he out himself or leak details about his relationship with the employee?

I find it more than hard to believe that the board of directors wouldn’t give two shits about giving him a bad rap for his recent track record.
Click to expand...

O, they usually would care. They likely voted him in. They dont want to look like they picked a bad leader.

CEO resigning because of a consensual relationship doesn't look as bad on them.

That they are booting a middle aged white CEO for sexual shenanigans will win them all kinds of good will with groups of people they don't want to have to deal with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top