Intel’s Former CEO Pat Gelsinger Was Against The Company Splitting Up Even Back In 2022, Said Directors Should Hire a “PE Guy” For Such A Decision

Intel’s now “ousted” CEO Pat Gelsinger was apparently against a business split-up from the very start, as evident by a statement given in an interview two years ago.

Intel’s Former CEO Said To Hire A “PE Guy” For Business Split-Up In An Old Interview, Claiming That It Is Against His Strategy

Gelsinger’s sudden “retirement” from a position where he was most optimistic doesn’t sound right to us; hence, digging into the potential reason behind the step-down becomes necessary. Interestingly, Gelsinger’s statement in an interview with Stratechery back in 2022 made us realize that a business split-up might be the trigger behind his stepping down from his CEO position, as it looks like he wasn’t in favor of such a decision. Here’s what Gelsinger had to say when asked about his business strategy:

The first one was I wrote a strategy document for the board of directors and I said if you want to split the company in two, then you should hire a PE kind of guy to go do that, not me. My strategy is what’s become IDM 2.0 and I described it.

– Intel’s former CEO via Stratechery

For those unaware, with Intel witnessing dire financial conditions, the firm is forced to make difficult decisions, and one route that Team Blue can go is a business seperation, which means that the firm divide its manufacturing and chip business into two independent identities, defying Gelsinger’s strategy of what he outlined with IDM 2.0. Gelsinger was a strong advocate for in-house production and manufacturing, which is why Intel Foundry played a key role in his four-year tenure, but his efforts haven’t played out as expected.

So, with Gelsinger’s statement back in 2022, it may be a possibility that the board of directors was pushing a decision for a business split-up. Since this move didn’t align with the former CEO’s “IDM 2.0” strategy, he decided that it was best to step down from his position. Not just this, but Gelsinger’s recent comments on defending Intel’s 18A process showed that he had massive optimism towards IFS, but desperate economic conditions ultimately forced his company to take a step back.

This is one of the few theories behind Gelsinger’s resignation, but the IFS’s sluggish momentum was indeed a crucial factor in contributing to the process. The division started evolving from business to a matter of national interests, which is why Intel and its board of directors did not take its underperformance lightly.