5 ms·

The management team believes this is the case. They have a lot of information on the company and individual performance. Do you have any reason to believe they

The management team believes this is the case. They have a lot of information on the company and individual performance. Do you have any reason to believe they are wrong with this particular choice?

jehb 3y ago
I would counter that this suggests the management team believes layoffs will be beneficial to management. What is beneficial to management may or may not actually be in the best interest of shareholders (and neither incentive necessarily aligns with the interests of either customers or employees).
- anthonyskipper 3y ago
  The dividend keeps the stock price high, which is good for both shareholders and employees. Cutting employment is how you manage to pay the dividend when you losing money. Not paying the dividend would crash the stock price and make lots of things harder. If you believe Intel will be profitable again in the near future then paying the dividend really does make sense. Unfortunately there have been lots of companies that thought that was true when it wasn't and the dividend is how they ran out of runway quick.
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    > If you believe Intel will be profitable again in the near future then paying the dividend really does make sense If you believe your company will be profitable you should reinvest all avaliable capital into the business to grow it. What you are advocating is contrary to every shred of logic and common sence.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > If you believe your company will be profitable you should reinvest all avaliable capital into the business to grow it. No, because being profitable doesn’t mean marginal profits from expansion are available. Your plan would have all profitable firms expanding until they collapse from overextension.
      - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
        Sure, this is true for tabacco companies and oil companies that are milking cashcows in a stagnant market. This should not be true for microchip manufacturer during global computerisation. We now have microchips in sofas and handbags.
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        So you are saying Intel should plow its profits into expanding into crowded, low-margin markets?
        ClumsyPilot 3y ago
        Is Apple M1/M2 low margin? Can intel profuce anything as good as M2? No? Then they are under investing in R&D. It's been a while since M1 came out and intel CPUs still havent caught up. They GPUs are lacking too. Apply has AI inference functionality in their chips and great ML software support. You don't get to tell me that they have nowhwre to invest when they are losing on multiple fronts. I am not even mentioning the fact that they should be finding foundamentally new opportunities ahead of their competitors.
        fvv 3y ago
        Apple doesn't sell chips
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
So you 100% trust the management team is right to fire those people. A month ago, would you would have believed that management team is right hire these people? Did they make a mistake when they were hiring or did they make a mistake now when they are firing? You cant believe both simultaneously. Alternatively, maybe management team is just out for themselves, doesn't care. , and is just riding the wave. Pumo the share price. Or maybe they are incompetent, don't know how to apply a large team, are out of ideas on how to invest 1.6 billion dollars profitably. Now I dont have proof for my hypothesis b, but at least I am mot contradicting myslelf.
- shukantpal 3y ago
  > Did they make a mistake when they were hiring or did they make a mistake now when they are firing? You cant believe both simultaneously. No it's entirely plausible that hiring then was the right decision and firing now is the right decision. There's no universal law that says you must hire people for eternity.
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    Facebook literally fired people they hired a week prior. Why do you feel the urge to make excuses for managerial incompetence. Like when you are a worker, they must be scruitinised to make sure they arent lazy or incompetent, but the day you get promoted to executive you gain godlike immunity from criticism
    - drexlspivey 3y ago
      It’s not up to you to decide if what the management did is right or wrong, it’s up to the shareholders. They own the company and they appoint the management. If they make bad decisions it’s up to them to replace them.
      - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
        Do they really do it? In the past 40 years several FTSE 250 companies have collapsed, gone bancrupt or suffered some other disaster. I can't name any example where shareholders replaced upper management before it was too late. Can you?

The management team believes this is the case. They have a lot of information on the company and individual performance. Do you have any reason to believe they are wrong with this particular choice?

jehb 3y ago

I would counter that this suggests the management team believes layoffs will be beneficial to management. What is beneficial to management may or may not actually be in the best interest of shareholders (and neither incentive necessarily aligns with the interests of either customers or employees).

anthonyskipper 3y ago
The dividend keeps the stock price high, which is good for both shareholders and employees. Cutting employment is how you manage to pay the dividend when you losing money. Not paying the dividend would crash the stock price and make lots of things harder. If you believe Intel will be profitable again in the near future then paying the dividend really does make sense. Unfortunately there have been lots of companies that thought that was true when it wasn't and the dividend is how they ran out of runway quick.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  > If you believe Intel will be profitable again in the near future then paying the dividend really does make sense If you believe your company will be profitable you should reinvest all avaliable capital into the business to grow it. What you are advocating is contrary to every shred of logic and common sence.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > If you believe your company will be profitable you should reinvest all avaliable capital into the business to grow it. No, because being profitable doesn’t mean marginal profits from expansion are available. Your plan would have all profitable firms expanding until they collapse from overextension.
    - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
      Sure, this is true for tabacco companies and oil companies that are milking cashcows in a stagnant market. This should not be true for microchip manufacturer during global computerisation. We now have microchips in sofas and handbags.
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        So you are saying Intel should plow its profits into expanding into crowded, low-margin markets?
        ClumsyPilot 3y ago
        Is Apple M1/M2 low margin? Can intel profuce anything as good as M2? No? Then they are under investing in R&D. It's been a while since M1 came out and intel CPUs still havent caught up. They GPUs are lacking too. Apply has AI inference functionality in their chips and great ML software support. You don't get to tell me that they have nowhwre to invest when they are losing on multiple fronts. I am not even mentioning the fact that they should be finding foundamentally new opportunities ahead of their competitors.
        fvv 3y ago
        Apple doesn't sell chips

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

So you 100% trust the management team is right to fire those people. A month ago, would you would have believed that management team is right hire these people? Did they make a mistake when they were hiring or did they make a mistake now when they are firing? You cant believe both simultaneously. Alternatively, maybe management team is just out for themselves, doesn't care. , and is just riding the wave. Pumo the share price. Or maybe they are incompetent, don't know how to apply a large team, are out of ideas on how to invest 1.6 billion dollars profitably. Now I dont have proof for my hypothesis b, but at least I am mot contradicting myslelf.

shukantpal 3y ago
> Did they make a mistake when they were hiring or did they make a mistake now when they are firing? You cant believe both simultaneously. No it's entirely plausible that hiring then was the right decision and firing now is the right decision. There's no universal law that says you must hire people for eternity.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  Facebook literally fired people they hired a week prior. Why do you feel the urge to make excuses for managerial incompetence. Like when you are a worker, they must be scruitinised to make sure they arent lazy or incompetent, but the day you get promoted to executive you gain godlike immunity from criticism
  - drexlspivey 3y ago
    It’s not up to you to decide if what the management did is right or wrong, it’s up to the shareholders. They own the company and they appoint the management. If they make bad decisions it’s up to them to replace them.
    - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
      Do they really do it? In the past 40 years several FTSE 250 companies have collapsed, gone bancrupt or suffered some other disaster. I can't name any example where shareholders replaced upper management before it was too late. Can you?