Intel Puts Ohio Fab Groundbreaking Ceremony on Hold, Indefinitely

[TheLostSwede]

The US Congress hasn't been able to agree on passing what is known as the CHIPS Act, which consists of some US$52 billion in subsidies for semiconductor manufacturers and it appears that Intel isn't very pleased. As such, the company is said to have put the brakes on the groundbreaking ceremony for its planned Ohio fab, which was meant to take place on the 22nd of July. Intel allegedly sent out an email to various state and federal lawmakers that it has placed the ceremony on hold, indefinitely due to the lack of progress on the CHIPS Act. In an official response from Intel to the Register, the company said that the event hasn't been rescheduled, which the publications says means that there's no new date planned for the groundbreaking ceremony.

It will apparently still be held at some point, but the Intel spokesperson had no answer when questioned if the ceremony was contingent on the CHIPS Act. However, the Register was told that the planned construction start date remains unchanged, for now. That said, Intel also issued a statement saying "the scope and pace of our expansion in Ohio will depend heavily on funding from the CHIPS Act.", which was also part of the initial press release back in January when the fab plans were announced. If the CHIPS Act doesn't happen, Intel's plan seems to be to focus on countries outside of the US where the company is getting subsidies, although the Ohio fab is still likely to be built, just at a slower pace. Intel's CEO, Pat Gelsinger hasn't been mincing his words either, having told Congress "We've already wasted several quarters since the Senate acted last year, and now it's time for us to move forward rapidly," back in March.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Daven]

If only Intel had leftover money after expenses, let’s call that money ‘profits’ and used it to build its own factories.

Nah that would cut into the executive yacht and private jet bonuses.

Edit: I just looked it up and it turns out profits are a real thing. Intel made $30 billion in profit last year. They said it would take $20 billion to build TWO fabs in Ohio.

Nah still not enough to cover the hookers and blow.

Edit2: I also just looked it up and it turns out the CHIPS Act would be paid for by the poor and middle class. Well they dont need yachts, private jets, hookers or blow. So they have money to spare. Win win!!!

 

[catulitechup]

If only Intel had leftover money after expenses, let’s call that money ‘profits’ and used it to build its own factories.

Nah that would cut into the executive yacht and private jet bonuses.

Yeah them must be cut indecent pat gelsinger salary

Gelsinger took over as CEO of Intel in Feb. 2021, and received a compensation package worth $178.59 million later that year, according to a financial filing.

The compensation included over $1 million in salary, a $1.75 million bonus, over $140 million in stock awards, and nearly $30 million in option awards.

 

[Prince Valiant]

If only Intel had leftover money after expenses, let’s call that money ‘profits’ and used it to build its own factories.

Nah that would cut into the executive yacht and private jet bonuses.

Edit: I just looked it up and it turns out profits are a real thing. Intel made $30 billion in profit last year. They said it would take $20 billion to build TWO fabs in Ohio.

Nah still not enough to cover the hookers and blow.

Edit2: I also just looked it up and it turns out the CHIPS Act would be paid for by the poor and middle class. Well they dont need yachts, private jets, hookers or blow. So they have money to spare. Win win!!!

Reminds me of sports teams that won't pay for their own stadiums.

 

[Gumby]

They did the same thing in Austin Tx, years ago.

 

[AsRock]

If only Intel had leftover money after expenses, let’s call that money ‘profits’ and used it to build its own factories.

Nah that would cut into the executive yacht and private jet bonuses.

Edit: I just looked it up and it turns out profits are a real thing. Intel made $30 billion in profit last year. They said it would take $20 billion to build TWO fabs in Ohio.

Nah still not enough to cover the hookers and blow.

Edit2: I also just looked it up and it turns out the CHIPS Act would be paid for by the poor and middle class. Well they dont need yachts, private jets, hookers or blow. So they have money to spare. Win win!!!

Then they want you to buy there shit again.

 

[Daven]

The irony of all of this: Intel sucks at fabbing chips. Only glofo is worse and thats not saying much.

 

[TheUn4seen]

That's corporate blackmail for ya. Oh, sorry, did I sound like a commie terrorist? Lobbying pressure is, I think, a more corpo-friendly term.

 

[the54thvoid]

Companies that are shareholder owned will always seek to minimise costs. It's why corporations move to low tax states (Texas, for example) to secure tax breaks (which means less money going to the state and therefore to local resources, schools etc). It's why Apple and others moved to Ireland in the EU (again, a huge tax let off). People ought to understand that if you want a big business to play 'fair', you need to level the playing field (by state cash incentives). Or, you stop private ownership and have profit put back into the company and its workforce. If that sounds unpalatabble, and you espouse the freedoms of the free-market, you can say goodbye to 'friendly' businesses. All they seek to do is enrich their shareholders. And often, those that hold huge volumes of shares are CEO's (Geslinger, Musk, Bezos, etc). But, this sort of cut-thoat profiteering is also associated with innovation. So... what do you want? Freedom and corruption, or control (followed by corruption) and stagnation?

 

[Steevo]

So many things to say about this, but really the only thing that encompasses it all is cronyism. A crooked company and political systems exploiting multiple countries and workers to keep profits safe from the average human.

Meanwhile we all in the same boat they say, it’s just that theirs have hot tubs and helipads.

 

[phanbuey]

That's corporate blackmail for ya. Oh, sorry, did I sound like a commie terrorist? Lobbying pressure is, I think, a more corpo-friendly term.

If you see what the commies are doing, its even worse lol. Look @ China's fab subsidies and evergrande coverups, $$ being pumped into Huawei.

 

[zlobby]

Kek!

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

If only Intel had leftover money after expenses, let’s call that money ‘profits’ and used it to build its own factories.

Nah that would cut into the executive yacht and private jet bonuses.

Edit: I just looked it up and it turns out profits are a real thing. Intel made $30 billion in profit last year. They said it would take $20 billion to build TWO fabs in Ohio.

Nah still not enough to cover the hookers and blow.

Edit2: I also just looked it up and it turns out the CHIPS Act would be paid for by the poor and middle class. Well they dont need yachts, private jets, hookers or blow. So they have money to spare. Win win!!!

I couldn't agree more... When it's a corporate subsidy paid for by taxing the working class, it's "normal", but when it's a subsidy to the working class paid for by taxing corporations and the rich, it's "socialism" and "class warfare".

The government should use the stick with Intel instead of the Carrot and tell them that either they build a fab in the U.S. or they lose all their tax breaks, all their subsidies and we audit every executive at Intel.

Companies that are shareholder owned will always seek to minimise costs. It's why corporations move to low tax states (Texas, for example) to secure tax breaks (which means less money going to the state and therefore to local resources, schools etc). It's why Apple and others moved to Ireland in the EU (again, a huge tax let off). People ought to understand that if you want a big business to play 'fair', you need to level the playing field (by state cash incentives). Or, you stop private ownership and have profit put back into the company and its workforce. If that sounds unpalatabble, and you espouse the freedoms of the free-market, you can say goodbye to 'friendly' businesses. All they seek to do is enrich their shareholders. And often, those that hold huge volumes of shares are CEO's (Geslinger, Musk, Bezos, etc). But, this sort of cut-thoat profiteering is also associated with innovation. So... what do you want? Freedom and corruption, or control (followed by corruption) and stagnation?

Stagnation? Those individual engineers at those companies who work hard and create those innovations don't do it for share holders or for capitalist ideology, they do it because they love it, and would arguably do it the same way if it was say, a nationalized industry, which I would argue, that along with certain natural resources, semi conductors should be at least semi-nationalized.... Most of the best accomplishments that have actually helped out humankind were NOT done for profit, like insulin, or even the guy who invented matches. If capitalism is the only thing that keeps us from "stagnation", I suppose we sat around and did nothing prior to thr 300 years capitalism has been around.

If you see what the commies are doing, its even worse lol. Look @ China's fab subsidies and evergrande coverups, $$ being pumped into Huawei.

Let's clarify something, China follows absolutely no communist, e..g marxist/marxist-leninist ideology at this point. After the Tianimen square incident, the completely moved away from Marxist ideology and chose a path toward consumerism to pacify the population (instead of the democracy they were asking for). In any college level comparative politics 200 level course, you'd learn that China is best desribed as a centralized authoritarian state capitalist system. They do not use central control or planning like the Soviet Union and at most tinker with a market system (which all western countries do to, think corporate subsidies), the only vestige of the marxist-leninist system that still remains is Lenins idea of Democratic centralism, where the hierarchy of the party can best be described as concentric circles, where the lowest ranking party members vote for the next level up, then that level votes for the one above them, all the way to the inner circle. China is "communist" in name only, but by no means do they deploy any Marxist or even moaist economic apparatus in the present.

 

[ARF]

Stagnation? Those individual engineers at those companies who work hard and create those innovations don't do it for share holders or for capitalist ideology, they do it because they love it, and would arguably do it the same way if it was say, a nationalized industry, which I would argue, that along with certain natural resources, semi conductors should be at least semi-nationalized.... Most of the best accomplishments that have actually helped out humankind were NOT done for profit, like insulin, or even the guy who invented matches. If capitalism is the only thing that keeps us from "stagnation", I suppose we sat around and did nothing prior to thr 300 years capitalism has been around.

Is there real innovation in the US for the people such as high-speed trains, widely used hydrogen cars, electric cars or hydrogen airplanes?

The semiconductors innovation today is mostly driven by TSMC and ASML, not US companies or US help there involved.


About these people's wealth - are they ever interviewed about this issue? How do they feel with so much money - you know money doesn't buy happiness - today you have this money, tomorrow you may go bankrupt?

 

[phanbuey]

Let's clarify something, China follows absolutely no communist, e..g marxist/marxist-leninist ideology at this point. After the Tianimen square incident, the completely moved away from Marxist ideology and chose a path toward consumerism to pacify the population (instead of the democracy they were asking for). In any college level comparative politics 200 level course, you'd learn that China is best desribed as a centralized authoritarian state capitalist system. They do not use central control or planning like the Soviet Union and at most tinker with a market system (which all western countries do to, think corporate subsidies), the only vestige of the marxist-leninist system that still remains is Lenins idea of Democratic centralism, where the hierarchy of the party can best be described as concentric circles, where the lowest ranking party members vote for the next level up, then that level votes for the one above them, all the way to the inner circle. China is "communist" in name only, but by no means do they deploy any Marxist or even moaist economic apparatus in the present.

As someone who is from and escaped the soviet union, and had a family member disappear from a 3am knock on the door, centralized authoritarianism is the only outcome of 'communism'. It's repeated itself in North Korea, China, USSR, Venezuela, and Cambodia.

I am intimately familiar with the ideology, and with Lenin's writings, as I was taught it every day in school. Communism is centralized authoritarianism wrapped in an ideological lie. It's what a lot of westerners fail to grasp -- the implementation will always lead to a tiny corrupt minority controlling and oppressing the masses in the name of 'good'. Always has, and always will.

 

[skates]

As someone who is from and escaped the soviet union, and had a family member disappear from a 3am knock on the door, centralized authoritarianism is the only outcome of 'communism'. It's repeated itself in North Korea, China, USSR, Venezuela, and Cambodia.

I am intimately familiar with the ideology, and with Lenin's writings, as I was taught it every day in school. Communism is centralized authoritarianism wrapped in an ideological lie. It's what a lot of westerners fail to grasp -- the implementation will always lead to a tiny corrupt minority controlling and oppressing the masses in the name of 'good'. Always has, and always will.

As someone who is from and escaped the soviet union, and had a family member disappear from a 3am knock on the door, centralized authoritarianism is the only outcome of 'communism'. It's repeated itself in North Korea, China, USSR, Venezuela, and Cambodia.

I am intimately familiar with the ideology, and with Lenin's writings, as I was taught it every day in school. Communism is centralized authoritarianism wrapped in an ideological lie. It's what a lot of westerners fail to grasp -- the implementation will always lead to a tiny corrupt minority controlling and oppressing the masses in the name of 'good'. Always has, and always will.

Absolutely correct, China included. China is ruled by one man and a very, very small group, a handful, just like the gang of 4. Nothing has changed with their political institutions.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Not sure why they picked ohio if they expected so much money from washington just pick it then intel wouldn't have to hold their tincup out so far

 

[looniam]

If the CHIPS Act doesn't happen, Intel's plan seems to be to focus on countries outside of the US where the company is getting subsidies, although the Ohio fab is still likely to be built, just at a slower pace.

that might be the register but here in ohio:

“We still had some work to do,” Tierney said. “Certainly we were hoping to have a ceremonial groundbreaking this summer.”

Tierney said DeWine shared in Intel’s frustration over CHIPS funding, but stressed that passage of CHIPS funding would only affect the expansion project, not the initial $20 billion plant.

both the cleveland plain feeler, errr plain dealer and columbus dispatch give more accurate info . . just saying.

btw, google "Bypass Paywalls by Adam"

but yeah, intel is too use to getting their own way in asia for too long. surprised?

 

[RedBear]

I'm sorry for Intel, but politicians just follow the crisis of the moment and right now because of inflation the chip crisis has been already forgotten. Pat should hope that China will follow Russia's example and invade Taiwan soon, then the CHIPS act will become a priority again.

 

[GoldenX]

"Waaa we can't launder money without government help! No party for you!"

 

[PapaTaipei]

Tax payer money for a company that clearly don't need it. Wow.

 

[ARF]

Well since I talk to my family and friends from Russia every weekend, I can tell you with 100% certainty it's not at all about what they want.

They don't get to pick what they want. It's go with the flow or get f*cked.

There is never full 100% happiness. What do they complain about? Lack of justice? Well, there is no justice in the US too, because their oligarchs are actually the same.

I think the best places to live are in Europe - Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovenia...

 

[AusWolf]

Companies that are shareholder owned will always seek to minimise costs. It's why corporations move to low tax states (Texas, for example) to secure tax breaks (which means less money going to the state and therefore to local resources, schools etc). It's why Apple and others moved to Ireland in the EU (again, a huge tax let off). People ought to understand that if you want a big business to play 'fair', you need to level the playing field (by state cash incentives). Or, you stop private ownership and have profit put back into the company and its workforce. If that sounds unpalatabble, and you espouse the freedoms of the free-market, you can say goodbye to 'friendly' businesses. All they seek to do is enrich their shareholders. And often, those that hold huge volumes of shares are CEO's (Geslinger, Musk, Bezos, etc). But, this sort of cut-thoat profiteering is also associated with innovation. So... what do you want? Freedom and corruption, or control (followed by corruption) and stagnation?

Stagnation isn't as bad as some people believe, imo. There was stagnation in the Sandy Bridge refresh refresh +++ era, and everybody cried "ohhh, dear Intel, we want more than 4 cores", but who won in the end? The same people who cried, because they didn't have to buy a new CPU and motherboard for a decade. If stagnation means no Rapid Super Lake refresh refresh ++ every year, I think I'm fine.

It also wouldn't be bad if we didn't generate so much e-waste in the name of progress and performance increase.

 

[Daven]

Stagnation isn't as bad as some people believe, imo. There was stagnation in the Sandy Bridge refresh refresh +++ era, and everybody cried "ohhh, dear Intel, we want more than 4 cores", but who won in the end? The same people who cried, because they didn't have to buy a new CPU and motherboard for a decade. If stagnation means no Rapid Super Lake refresh refresh ++ every year, I think I'm fine.

It also wouldn't be bad if we didn't generate so much e-waste in the name of progress and performance increase.

Most ewaste in computers comes from motherboards. Due to greed and lazy planning, Intel pushes a new socket more than anyone else.

 

[trsttte]

Cool, less money completely wasted on a meaningless photo op.

The irony of all of this: Intel sucks at fabbing chips. Only glofo is worse and thats not saying much.

I think this is not true in the slightest, they have had some problems recently advancing their manufacturing process but they were able to consistently still put products on the shelf and have good yields on their existing process. Their transistor density is still better and to a certain degree power efficiency is also not that far of what Samsung - probably the actual worst fab of the industry lol - or TSMC has (a lot of Intel's power problems come from architecture, not from process)

Hate on Intel all you want, but they actually do pretty nice stuff.

I'm sorry for Intel, but politicians just follow the crisis of the moment and right now because of inflation the chip crisis has been already forgotten. Pat should hope that China will follow Russia's example and invade Taiwan soon, then the CHIPS act will become a priority again.

I guess, all for the better since Intel doesn't really need the government subsidies anyway, they just want to offload the massive development costs to keep their nice high profit margins. It's sad that if Taiwan falls they will get their payday again because politicians are moorons.

Due to greed and lazy planning, Intel pushes a new socket more than anyone else.

It's greed but it's not lazy planning at all, it's been the same constant 2 cpu per socket for years. There are some arguments about preventing consumer confusion with messy bios updates (which are stupid, whoever can't rtfm and handle a basic bios update shouldn't be messing with diy) but yeah, it's mostly greed - why support the old platform when they can just force everyone to buy new!?