Remix.run Logo
▲ anonymous908213 6 hours ago

Huh, I'm used to "stock collapses" headlines being a 2% daily fluctuation. Actually down 50% over the past month. But then again, up 50% over the past year. Sure is great when stocks of companies that are foundationally important to the world economy are being traded like meme stocks.

▲rtp4me 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Considering they were $17/sh in Nov 2024 and $36/sh in Nov 2025, today's price of $67.50 seems like a huge return in just two years.

▲mort96 5 hours ago | parent [-]

For sure, it has been an amazing ride for those using the stock market as a casino.

That's kinda the point; something as important as this shouldn't be a casino.

▲cowlevel 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

My interpretation is that the stock market is just reflecting the rising value of power/influence assets relative to currency, which is to say, the falling value of currency relative to power/influence (which stocks are). Stocks aren't going up because the companies are that much better, they're going up because the macroeconomy is that much more fucked.

▲somenameforme 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I submit exhibit 1: the US monetary supply. [1] We're 'printing' money like there's no tomorrow. Up ~6% in a single year, well over a trillion dollars. That's obviously going to make an economy look increasingly nonsensical.

I increasingly get the same feeling I did as back in the early 2000s when there were endless 'house flipping' shows on TV where somebody would go buy a house on an insta-improved loan, add some granite counter tops and mop the floor, then resell it within a couple of weeks for $20k profit and repeat. Not sure how people didn't see that was basically 'Bubble - The TV Show!'

[1] - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

▲gcr 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How would you differentiate between currency influence and power influence?

▲cowlevel 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Power is being able to get people to do things you want them to do. It's become clear that you can do that a lot better with stocks than within currency, although you can also do it with a huge amount of currency.

▲wyager 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The stock market should reflect reality, and sometimes reality is volatile.

▲antonvs an hour ago | parent [-]

Perhaps it should do that, but it really doesn't, and can never do so in anything like its current form.

It reflects people's perception of reality.

▲8bitsrule 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My long-term opinion is that the stock market is more like a milking-machine.

▲timschmidt 4 hours ago | parent [-]

What do you think a casino is?

▲AnthonyMouse 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In a casino the thing getting milked is the gamblers. In the stock market the thing getting milked is is mostly the customers/employees/taxpayers.

▲ssl-3 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn't that the place where if I win loads of money, they give me lots of free stuff and invite me back? The same place where if I lose loads of money, they give me lots of free stuff and invite me back?

Casinos are awesome! So welcoming. :) (/s)

▲protocolture 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What affect on day to day operations of Intel does speculation on already sold stocks have?

▲sjdh76 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yup we live inside an ever growing noise factory thanks to modern news/social media attention harvesting dynamics. All sides are using it on autopilot.

The systems are optimized for pumping more and more bits out. Not to measure/reduce noise and increase signal.

Individually its easier to tune it out.

Intel was at 15 bucks for multiple years post its peaks.

▲bluegatty 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The people doing most of the buying of most stocks are able to understand what is 'tik tok' and what is real.

The bulk of the buying is done by people who use modelling to derive the valuation, not vibes.

Because Intel is a household names, it's subject to vibes, but it's mostly math.

Underlying swings is usually some kind of new data point that, because there is so much growth involved, implies greater swings in valuation. So the impact of the news is amplified.

▲rtp4me 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Anyone remember when a college student invested $700,000 of his grandmother's inheritance into Intel back in August 2024? He was a huge meme at the time; I bet he was singing a different tune a few weeks back!

▲ssl-3 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't remember that at all so I have no idea what kinds of memes this spurred, but I can look at the price history:

It was ~$22 back in August of '24. It is ~$66 today in November of '26. That's ~3x in a little over two years; that's fairly excellent.

If he had a magic looking glass and sold at the recent-ish July peak of ~$120, then that'd have been even better. But it's still a very good (potential) return if he still holds it today.

▲mrheosuper 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Assume people did not peer pressure him into cutting loss.

▲quixoticelixer- 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not sure it's quite like a meme stock, it's dropping because their earnings were below what was expected.

▲somenameforme 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

He's referring to the magnitude of the drop. Stocks don't generally drop 50% after an earnings miss. Rapid swongs of 50% are like a penny stock, or a meme stock.

▲puzzlingcaptcha 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is still at a forward P/E of 31, on par with AMD's 32 and far above Nvidia's 13.

▲dboreham 5 hours ago | parent [-]

The other two don't actually make chips though, so there's that.

▲dyauspitr 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Im still bullish on them at this price though. The terafab (already under construction) collab with Elon and 14A being the most powerful chip when they get it right has a lot of potential.

▲sterlind 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm still salty at them for fumbling Optane, Gaudi, Altera and the Xeon Phi. the company seems like it's full of talented engineers working under terrible leadership.

▲poxy22 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No. I worked on p1274 and p1276. They didnt take years to hit profitability because of leadership. There was a decade of brain drain and we just could not overcome the technical challenges. But that is heresy to ears of techies. The fact that something is just too hard for the talent at hand is just never offered up. Intel engineers, to put to bluntly: suck. (Me included. I was a senior principal.) There just isn’t enough talent there because they don’t pay enough. I took voluntary retirement and went to work for a smaller instrument maker. I’m way happier.

▲sterlind 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I hear you about the heresy, but are you sure you aren't being too hard on yourself? mismanagement can turn brilliant, passionate people into aimless zombies through demotivation and throwing you at problems that don't fit you.

also, my old boss thought Larabee was cool as hell when he got to play with it at MSR.

▲Grombobulous an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe this is a layperson’s misunderstanding but after seeing Panther Lake hit the consumer scene I have a hard time believing Intel has a talent problem.

I’d even say what Intel is doing with Arc graphics is incredibly impressive. Coming out of nowhere to legitimately compete with a decent set of AMD/Nvidia consumer and workstation graphics cards is no small feat.

▲cheema33 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

ex-Intel engineer here.

> Intel engineers, to put to bluntly: suck.

It hurts, but it is true.

> I took voluntary retirement and went to work for a smaller instrument maker. I’m way happier.

I was not so lucky. I would have loved the voluntary separation package. They did get around to doing straight large layoffs one year. My manager got laid off, I was not so lucky. I wanted the layoff package. I told him I'd happily trade places with him. He tried, but was denied. I ended up leaving anyway. Now, like you, working for a small company and much much happier.

▲Grombobulous an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I replied to another Intel engineer saying something similar: after seeing Panther Lake I just can’t believe that Intel has an engineering problem.

Intel engineers absolutely do not suck.

▲antonvs 3 minutes ago | parent [-]

Even at small companies, there can be huge variance in capabilities across teams.

▲sterlind 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

me and a quarter of my company are looking up the barrel of a voluntary separation package. but I just moved to a team full of brilliant people working on a project that's a zen garden of algorithm design, so I won't go gently into that dark night.

▲antonvs an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The fact that something is just too hard for the talent at hand is just never offered up.

Those of us who've worked at less illustrious companies are all too familiar with that. It's definitely unpopular to mention, but it drives a lot of consulting sales.

▲deaux 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> They didnt take years to hit profitability because of leadership.

Oh, it wasn't leadership?

> There just isn’t enough talent there because they don’t pay enough.

Ah, so it was leadership.

▲kadoban 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The list of shit that Intel was within the ballpark of the right tech or 5 years mistimed from having a huge hit is ridiculous. Fuckers don't have good management, but also must have terrible luck to keep _just_ missing the mark?

▲hparadiz 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a little odd they are completely missing the ddr5 gold rush when they are sitting on fabs.

▲anonymous_user9 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Fabricating memory requires different techniques than logic, and it would take Intel several years to develop a commercially useful DRAM process.

▲layer8 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Memory fabs are quite different from logic chip fabs.

▲Grombobulous an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Panther Lake shows they’ve still “got it.”

Intel ARC is not only impressive just for the mere feat of “almost catching up” this quickly, but Intel absolutely can be an AI GPU supplier of note.

I don’t claim to fully understand the business especially on the enterprise side but I don’t think it’s the sort of company to count out.

▲blueaquilae 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Intel bring the knowledge but doesn't operate and it's not the only partners in talk. They are not tied into the production at any step beyond the blueprints.

▲wonnage 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Knowing them they'll have all this stuff online just as the AI bubble pops. Basically the same thing they did when they belatedly tried to get into mobile chips

▲DiabloD3 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Intel isn't important though.

▲seabird 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's always crazy running into people that are somehow unaware that Wintel has achieved worldwide domination of IT infrastructure (by number of users). This site is like a sealed terrarium of people using macOS on Apple ARM hardware blissfully unaware of the infinite black pit outside the glass.

▲stonogo 4 hours ago | parent [-]

And yet Intel is the one taking a dump here, because it has no moat. People use Wintel because people use Wintel, the same way people bought Gros Michel bananas because people bought Gros Michel bananas. When they went away, people bought something else.

▲cco 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Intel is incredibly important for American sovereignty and that's why they are semi-nationalized. They are a Boeing now.

A country must feed itself, power itself, and in 2026 it must be able to manufacture its own chips (from ore, to refining, to the foundry).

▲Shitty-kitty 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There isn't a single country in the world that can make advanced chips on its own. It takes machines, raw materials an chemicals from over a dozen different countries.

▲cco 4 hours ago | parent [-]

You're absolutely right! And that is why the last couple of years has been fascinating to watch from a geopolitical and trade standpoint.

Watching China push its weight around earlier in the year with REM and REE was crazy. The US, and the rest of the world for that matter, were brought to our knees. Germany's auto industry and weeks of chips left, the US started shipping F35's to allies _without_ radar. Truly astounding trade power to see.

Made it very clear to every nation that you must have a sovereign story to tell about chip manufacturing.

▲melagonster 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

ASML: Am I joking to you?

▲anonymous908213 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It only runs, what, 90% of PCs, laptops, and servers in the world?

▲impulser_ 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe a decade ago, but they have lost market share every year since and currently sits around 60% and it still decreasing.

▲Grombobulous an hour ago | parent [-]

Still, a lot of that lost share went to AMD and that is ultimately a safe thing for Intel compared to losing share to alternative CPU platforms. More than just safe, mutually beneficial for both companies.

Sure, losing Apple was a huge deal, but ultimately Apple still only has ~20% of the consumer PC market and far less in enterprise, and even less than that in more niche applications since their form factors are so limited, and 0% marketshare in data centers.

I’m not sure how hard Intel is trying to get into the enterprise AI data center scene but Intel ARC cards are definitely floating around in the local LLM scene for their stellar value and I’d be surprised if Intel doesn’t see a massive opportunity to take advantage in that area. They are one of three companies who have reasonably modern GPU designs.

▲piyh 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The entire consumer laptop market is about four data centers

▲anonymous908213 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Which one would the world miss more if disappeared overnight?

▲smileysteve 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The average millennial and younger don't use a non work computer, and haven't had one for 10 years.

▲ehnto 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not sure I would put the age cap at millennials, they very much had PCs and laptops at home, uni etc and lived before smartphones were a thing.

▲vel0city 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Key word there is had, while the comment you're replying to is speaking as to today minus ten years roughly.

And yeah, as a millennial I know lots of people who had a shared desktop at home, probably had a laptop in college, used a work laptop, and hasn't had a personal computing device outside an iPad and iPhone for a decade or more. Outside of those who play PC games or other niche hobbies it's getting more and more rare, at least for the people I know.

▲somenameforme 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

This is often said, but incorrect. 81% of households have a desktop/laptop. [1] And the breakdown is basically a proxy for wealth. Only 56% of households with earnings of less $25,000 have a desktop/laptop whereas it's 96% for $150k+. For millennials (approximately - age range 35-44) the rate is 87%.

[1] - https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024/computer...

▲cowlevel 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Depends which four data centers. AWS North Virginia would be missed more than all the world's laptops.

▲codebje 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not by me; I couldn’t tell AWS NV was even missing without my laptop.

▲cowlevel 4 hours ago | parent [-]

You'd open your phone and nothing would work, not even the connection to the cellular network since your phone company has management components running on AWS.

▲lelanthran an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> You'd open your phone and nothing would work, not even the connection to the cellular network since your phone company has management components running on AWS.

I'm pretty confident, sitting here on a different continent, that I wouldn't have that problem at all.

▲codebje 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You might have that problem, but us-east-1 going dark is unlikely to impact my Australian carrier enough to knock cellular service out. But granted, I might notice something is up if I tried to use my phone for much. If us-east-1 vanished at the right time of day I might notice on my phone first, sure.

▲matkoniecz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

All laptops vs 4 (presumably most impactful) data centers?

I would expect that "all laptops dematerialize" would be worse.

▲esseph 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Banks don't run on laptops, so probably that one

▲ an hour ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
▲Vaushite 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

PCs are like 5% of computing devices. Very important for business offices but not outside of that niche. And mass amounts of servers can be adapted to whatever is cheapest. Google wouldn't insist on AMD64 - they'd port to ARM if ARM was cheaper. And if you do want AMD64, AMD currently makes better AMD64 chips.

▲matkoniecz 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> Very important for business offices but not outside of that niche.

you miss at least several other niches

▲rightnutwingjob 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yep, like technicians. Especially technicians that work on, well, everything. Every industrial machine, robot, PLC, industrial vehicle, mining equipment, power plant, etc etc.

▲esseph 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Nah they've been "out of fashion" for 5+ years, and in that time AMD took their datacenter crown, which was also encroached on by various ARM hyperscaler systems.

▲UncleOxidant 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Any company with advanced fabs is important now. We've got shortages of CPUs, GPUs, RAM, etc. Many of these shortages will persist till 2030.

▲stevefan1999 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A fraction of the entire world's servers are running Xeon and it is definitely important.

And keep in mind that Intel literally still holds the rights to issue x86 licenses.

▲sipjca 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

id argue leading edge fab and packaging capacity is importantish

▲sapphire4 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think they should be unlisted and come back if they can profit $1 for two quarters in a row.

▲bluegatty 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

FYI there is a reason for that.

Stocks are valued as the sum total of all the profits they ever make (net present value of future earnings).

So even at $1 profit/year - technically worth infinity.

But due to 'time value of money and risk' (aka some risk free discount rate you can put your money elsewhere at get the same return for zero risk, like your bank account), then the infinite sum of those $1/year becomes some finite sum.

The problem wit this math is when profits grow perpetually higher than the cost of borrowing - the net present value goes to infinity.

A P/E ratio = 1/(cost of capital - growth rate). Assuming no dividends.

An investor with 8% cost of capital, a company growing at 3% per year woudl have a P/E of 20.

At 7% growth the value is p/e 100x ...

Any growth over the 'cost of capital' and the P/E goes to infinity because the infinite sum of all future cash flows does not converge.

What this means is that the valuation math breaks down when there are gigantic swings of in growth at rates of even like 30% more for any extended period; it's extremely hard to value.

Verizon is valued as it is because they have an operational lock on a system; they will never grow that much but their returns are predictable. You can spreadsheet their valuation.

All this AI stuff is 'inherently wild' because growth is high, but opaque. Yes, there is a lot of hyperbole and speculation but this is very different than Space X which is a 'Musk Meme' stock, upheld be retail investors.

Edit: this is the most rudimentary articulation of how stocks are valued. It's not made up hunches, and companies that invest a lot in these things have a lot of numeric justification they have to use to make the assessment - and NPV is at the core of it. That 'math' is the first order concept that underlies valuation and it's the hyperbolic nature of growth beyond cost of capital that makes the it come undone which is the mechanical basis for the wild swings. It's what happens to valuation when you make small adjustments in only a few parts of the model.