The problem is that Intel is poorly run. Intel should be printing money, and did for a long time until a string of bad leadership. If they had brought in Gelsinger after Otellini, which they were reported to have considered, the company might be in a much better position.

But alas, Intel is a mega bureaucratic company with a few tiny siloed teams responsible for innovating and everyone else being test and process jockeys. I think Gelsinger wasn't given enough time, personally, and agree with the OP that even someone like Elon would struggle to keep this sinking ship afloat at this point.

BK wanted wearables and Bob Swan wanted to cut costs; neither of them were visionaries nor did they really understand that Intel was a hard tech company. Intel had achieved such dominance in such a in-demand, growing market, that all they had to do was make the technology better (smaller, faster, lower power) and the money would continue to flow. The mandate was straightforward and they failed.

The companies that are big tech today took the risks and are now reaping the rewards. Intel decided not to take the risks, so now it doesn’t reap the rewards.

No one stopped Intel from paying for talent. Intel’s shareholders decided to pay themselves instead of investing in the business by hiring great employees. That’s how you go from being a leader to a laggard.

I am sure Intel has enough cash to hire some good talent (like just offer talented people next-level salary at $FAANG), the problem is deeper in the hiring pipeline -- convincing people of the budget and actually scouting and retaining good people