Intel Joins a Rush of Tech Companies Putting a Freeze On Hiring (fortune.com) 64
Intel, one of the world's leading chipmakers, has responded to global headwinds by joining a string of other tech companies in placing a freeze on new hires as it seeks ways to cut costs. Fortune reports: "Increased focus and prioritization in our spending will help us weather macroeconomic uncertainty, execute on our strategy, and meet our commitments to customers, shareholders, and employees," Intel said in a statement provided to Fortune on Thursday, a day after Reuters reported a leaked internal memo announcing the hiring freeze at Intel.
According to the memo, Intel is placing a two-week hiring freeze on its client computing group, which creates PC chips for desktop and laptop computers. Client computing is Intel's largest division by sales, generating just over 50% of the manufacturer's revenue last quarter. In April, Intel issued weaker-than-expected profit guidance for the second quarter, citing reduced PC chip sales. But Citi's semiconductor analyst, Christopher Danely, predicts Intel will miss its weak second-quarter guidance, following negative comments Intel CFO David Zinsner made at a Bank of America conference on Tuesday.
"Weaker" macroeconomic conditions are "clearly going to impact" Intel's earnings, Zinsner said, adding that "the circumstances at this point are much worse than what we had anticipated coming into the quarter."
According to the memo, Intel is placing a two-week hiring freeze on its client computing group, which creates PC chips for desktop and laptop computers. Client computing is Intel's largest division by sales, generating just over 50% of the manufacturer's revenue last quarter. In April, Intel issued weaker-than-expected profit guidance for the second quarter, citing reduced PC chip sales. But Citi's semiconductor analyst, Christopher Danely, predicts Intel will miss its weak second-quarter guidance, following negative comments Intel CFO David Zinsner made at a Bank of America conference on Tuesday.
"Weaker" macroeconomic conditions are "clearly going to impact" Intel's earnings, Zinsner said, adding that "the circumstances at this point are much worse than what we had anticipated coming into the quarter."
Re: (Score:3)
Could you please stick to one sock puppet account, I'm getting dizzy.
Re: (Score:3)
I guess you will need to argue facts instead of worrying about what account it is.
Since we know what account it is, we know there's no need to waste time arguing facts. That's why anonymous and cowardly comments (and yours) are given short shrift here. You can't tell if it's worth engaging a coward until it's too late. But we know about you.
Re: (Score:2)
All comments are anonymous here
There are other people here on Slashdot who know that I'm a person, and who that person is, and know me personally, etc. You, on the other hand, are just an anonymous coward by another name. You are projecting.
Re: (Score:2)
Because I can already hear the defense smokescreen "Oh, did I say that? I didn't say that, that was something COMPLETELY different! Look at the account!"
Re: (Score:2)
Also very confused about how the world works, but definite in his opinions. It's a weird combination.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I am very confused.
I can tell.
Oh, Orange Man very bad indeed. (Score:1, Insightful)
Tune in for 2 weeks of live hearings to find out how America was nearly turned in to 3rd world shit show by said moron. Luckily his people aren't half as competent as the real Nazis were.
Also, nice fake account you sad fuck.
Re: (Score:2)
The Trump admin was also printing money like crazy. Besides, you should appreciate that the country got a chance to do this kind of A/B testing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also note that inflation and unemployment have historically had an inverse relationship, as displayed by the Phillips curve.
So, which is it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Good fucking lord, is some election coming in the US? Can we again not use Slashdot 'til that pointless bullshit is over.
When is that shitshow spectacle called election so I know when a meaningful discussion can return to this board? You act as if it mattered which of the two corporate whores you elect.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't even have a choice. You essentially have the choice between which corporations get to fleece you. That's the choice you have. That's like having the choice between which street gang gets to mug you. What kind of a choice is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Leftist policies" - there's nowhere in the US where "leftist" policies are being followed in any meaningful amount. Sure, the occasdional prosecutor refusing to prosecute possession cases and shoplifting, but the US has been running on conservative policy for the last 40 years.
The intellectual dishonesty prevalent in current discourse is disgusting.
Re:So, which is it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Weren't tech sector companies just complaining about not being able to find enough workers?
Correction: They weren't able to find enough people willing to work for low wages, under shitty working conditions.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is a good thing, after 30 years of stagnating wages. Thanks kids!
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Canada, average wages are up 3% while inflation is over 6%
Re: So, which is it.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I have convinced my boss that I need 20% or I'm going to leave. He is trying to convince his boss, but my bosses' boss is busy trying to replace all the other guys who have quit, so I'm not sure he's listening.
Nearly record profits though.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, the real problem is the price of the essentials, food, fuel and housing, is going up much faster then other stuff that is easy to put off. And it is looking like it is going to get worse before better.
Re: (Score:2)
And at the same time every shithead sociopathic corporation has decided to make things worse by price-gouging for maximum profits and now we're hearing they all want to stop hiring, THEY are basically increasing inflation and fucking the economy.
Oil and gas are playing a part in this, the sooner we move to a renewable sustainable economy the better.
Re: (Score:3)
Oil and gas are playing a part in this, the sooner we move to a renewable sustainable economy the better.
What makes you think a "renewable sustainable economy" will be any different when the same old sociopathic corporate welfare recipients will still be running the show?
If we ever see sustainability it will simply be taken as licence to plunder more deeply and broadly because "Hey, it's sustainable, right?".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It is simpler than that. Rent price hikes going up have made it unaffordable to work. Why work for a company when you still won't be able to pay rent? The government only has encouraged corporations to buy up buildings and charge monopolistic prices on rent, where even if an apartment complex has 20% occupancy, the rent only goes up every year.
Don't blame generations. Blame the assholes that are buying up real estate and making it impossible for people to even have some type of home other than under a b
Re: (Score:2)
You Bernie bro tech guys have no concept of what low wages and shitty conditions are.
True. I stayed in school, and have been able to get good jobs that pay well, instead of sitting in my Mother's basement calling people "Bernie bro tech guys" on the Internet.
You seem really unhappy.
Re: (Score:2)
Elections matter.
Not in American they don't.
Re: (Score:1)
Weren't tech sector companies just complaining about not being able to find enough workers?
Nearly all the "can't find workers" claims are just blatant lies.
A couple of years ago, when businesses were forced to significantly curtail their operations by the COVID pandemic they learned an important lesson: they can raise prices, completely eliminate all customer service, and just generally treat everyone, customers and employees, like shit. And get away with it.
Now that they have gotten away with it for 2+ years, it has become standard operating procedure for most companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Weren't tech sector companies just complaining about not being able to find enough workers?
They cannot find enough workers at the low price they are willing to pay.
And now they aren't even willing to pay that low price any more.
The Fed is running an experiment (Score:2)
Volcker used disinflation after 5 years of growth, long after the actual stagflation ... by the time Volcker came around it was just inflation. The monetarists says it has to be done at the start during the supply shock straight at the started, the Fed is running the experiment.
I think they are going to create an entirely new economic phenomenon. Depressionflation, worst of all worlds.
Intel says "NO" to layoffs... (Score:3, Insightful)
Like .... *duh*...stupid headline -- the fact that Intel is not laying off employees is positive news, yet the focus I see is that Intel is not blindly continuing with hiring.
So -- hasn't the focus, lately, been on how companies have been having "problems" with finding enough qualified people to *hire*? So instead of trying to hire unqualified people, they are holding off on hiring for a few weeks (temporarily). Like how does someone (some slashdot submitter) turn that logical action into a negative sounding headline?
Should Intel keep trying to hire when they are having problems finding qualified talent? Wouldn't that just create "talent (and wage) inflation? -- Like paying higher wages for lower talent?
Shouldn't headlines be talking about how Intel's hiring-"response" to having problems "finding qualified people to hire", is to not "flail around", (hiring less qualified) people, but to pause hiring until the job market normalizes?
How often has the norm has been to continue hiring past the point of effective returns only to move to layoffs?
If slowing down hiring-inflation, puts off the need for future layoffs, isn't that a good thing?
Re: (Score:2)
hasn't the focus, lately, been on how companies have been having "problems" with finding enough qualified people to *hire*?
That's been the lie, yes. There's been plenty of qualified people to hire. They just don't want to pay them enough. They won't pay the young people enough to live on, they want people to come pre-trained even though they can't afford an education and you can default on gambling debt but not student debt, they won't train, and they won't pay enough to hire the older people who they encouraged to retire because they were making it, and they were tired of paying them. It's not clear where they imagine they wil
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's that's the "rub", *depends* on who you talk to and your definitions of "qualified", and "(re: pay) enough. I'm not looking, but without that info and going off previous posts (that you call "the lie"), that Intel and other companies are "pausing" hiring until their requirements are met, would seem to make sense for the current job market.
I agree, most companies don't want to pay for experience -- they only want to pay f
Re: (Score:2)
One of the sentences in your post contains - according to the text editor I pasted it into - 155 words. Many of your sentences are longer than is usually considered good style for an entire paragraph.
Your knowledge, skill, and accomplishments are impressive - and I mean that in all sincerity. You're obviously smart, and you have a good vocabulary. Might I suggest a writing course? I'm sure you would both enjoy it and benefit from it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that partly it's that companies are too cheap to hire and train, but not as much has I used to think. There's still plenty of that but there's another stupider reason which combines. Companies love to talk "roadmaps" but actually plan on the short term. So suddenly something comes and you get headcount RIGHT THE FUCK NOW so you need someone to start yesterday to get the thing done before the end of the year. But don't dawdle in hiring or you might lose the place.
Well, you don't have a chance to tra
Re: (Score:1)
Better idea (Score:2)
How about they put a freeze on releasing power-hungry CPUs that suck?
But ... (Score:2)
competition (Score:2)
In unrelated news, AMD is kicking Intel's butt in server performance.
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly AMD is trading at a trailing PE of about 37, Nvidia at 50, while Intel is at 6.6. In my opinion none of those are warranted (AMD and NVDA inflated, INTC being given the short shrift).
Yawn (Score:1)
Hiring is usually "frozen" at Intel.
It's the normal situation.