Replies to post #49900 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[TomH7259]

Besides, it is usual to undertake semantic contortions to avoid the word layoffs. I did not find something really innovative in Intels recent communication in this respect.


Not true. The fact is, that intel has specifically said layoff and redeployment in the past when doing so, just like in the previous Ireland layoff article that you referenced. So, I don't believe that your conclusion is correct, since that conclusion does not appear to be supported by the current statement by intel I referenced.

Perhaps you are thinking of AMD doublespeak? There does seem to be quite a bit of that around lately, so I'm not surprised some people might be confused between what they read, and what they want to read ;-)

[Elmer Phud]

Klaus, for once you are making some sense. Not a lot but a little. Perhaps it's just early in the day still and you haven't started celebrating yet?

I agree that Intel is still looking to cut costs but I wouldn't interpret that to mean that it's a result of business conditions, which some analysts have concluded. It is an ongoing thing to get leaner and more efficient. AMD needs to do the same thing.

[tecate]

What exactly did he say for 2008? I cannot find anything specifying headcount changes in 2008.