Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 4   >   >>
goafrit
User Rank
Manager
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
goafrit   4/10/2014 1:24:17 PM
NO RATINGS
>> If ARM started making their own SoCs, it would compete directly with all its customers

Good luck to them. I know Google makes tablets and phones even though they own Android. That is not an excuse. We are looking for ways to jack up earnings and return money to shareholders. They can enjoy the cents they get per phone. Good luck to them.

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
goafrit   4/10/2014 1:21:33 PM
NO RATINGS
>> Total valuation is not a useful measure for anything. What matters is growth potential into the future.

No problem. I look forward to the future but I want relevance today. I agree with you and I am not defending Intel for anything. I am saying that today, it is has a higher valuation than ARM and when you go through its history, it was more profitably at the age ARM is today. 

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
goafrit   4/10/2014 1:18:03 PM
NO RATINGS
>> but silly me, I always thought the stock was too expensive...so in my mind ARM valuation was too high ;-)

You are right on the price being high though based on their earning power as based on their present business model.

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
Wilco1   4/7/2014 1:36:02 PM
NO RATINGS
> My point is now largely on the comparison of ARM and Qualcomm valuation.
> I am talking about why ARM may consider to get into making things. I know they
> have more valuable IPs than their current valuation because of their business model

If ARM started making their own SoCs, it would compete directly with all its customers. ARM has no modem IP and no experience selling chips. ARM's business model works so well because they are not really competing with anybody (apart maybe Imagination Technologies).

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
Wilco1   4/7/2014 1:26:25 PM
NO RATINGS
Total valuation is not a useful measure for anything. What matters is growth potential into the future. And the facts point to ARM having a much higher chance to give good returns over the next 10 years than Intel. What Intel did 30 years ago is not relevant today.

What matters today is that Intel's profits are declining, fab costs are increasing fast, TSMC is catching up, Intel missed all opportunities in mobile phones (a miserly 0.2% marketshare after spending many billions over 6 years) and now appears to push a summer student project (Quark) as their IoT chip...

krisi
User Rank
CEO
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
krisi   4/7/2014 1:04:27 PM
NO RATINGS
Good point @wilco1...I was always impressed with ARM and wanted to buy their stock seeing their bright futures...but silly me, I always thought the stock was too expensive...so in my mind ARM valuation was too high ;-)

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
goafrit   4/7/2014 1:03:20 PM
NO RATINGS
>> ARM is already making a lot of money for investors. For example if you invested 10 years ago, you would be sitting on a nice profit of 666%. Compare that to Intel's return of -7%.

That is bad analysis. At the same age, within a decade, Intel returned 5678%. You need to benchmark your time. Also, it does not matter the time of investment, we are looking at total valuation. Look into the future and not the past.

ARM must learn how to make more money like Intel does.

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
goafrit   4/7/2014 1:00:19 PM
NO RATINGS
My point is now largely on the comparison of ARM and Qualcomm valuation. I am talking about why ARM may consider to get into making things. I know they have more valuable IPs than their current valuation because of their business model

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
Wilco1   4/4/2014 9:26:46 PM
NO RATINGS
Selling black gold may still be profitable, but you'd be crazy to invest into dinosaurs today. It's becoming very expensive to get that last carbon out of the ground. Regulations are getting stricter. Subsidies turn into taxes. If you don't feel the wind of change blowing then you'll miss the next big thing.

Wilco1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Intel for IoT. Oh Really?
Wilco1   4/4/2014 9:11:25 PM
NO RATINGS
>>> Can you explain what exactly could ARM learn from Intel, apart from how to make uncompetitive mobile SoCs and huge losses?

>How to make money for investors. Get that $25B valuation to north of $100B. Who cares about the technology, what matters is the money!

ARM is already making a lot of money for investors. For example if you invested 10 years ago, you would be sitting on a nice profit of 666%. Compare that to Intel's return of -7%.

Again, what can ARM learn from Intel?

Page 1 / 4   >   >>


Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Want to Present a Paper at ESC Boston 2015?
Max Maxfield
7 comments
I tell you, I need more hours in each day. If I was having any more fun, there would have to be two of me to handle it all. For example, I just heard that I'm going to be both a speaker ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
12 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).