IBM Paying Globalfoundries $1.5B to Take Unit in Retreat from Chips

Re:IBM Paying Globalfoundries $1.5B to Take Unit in Retreat ... by x0x0 on Monday October 20, 2014 @03:13AM (#8480985)

This whole thing reeks of financial engineering; playing games shifting numbers from one bucket to another. After all, if ibm still needs chips -- and they're paying $1.5B, plus a 10 year contract -- how does really make sense?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IBM Paying Globalfoundries $1.5B to Take Unit in Retreat ... by frankchn on Monday October 20, 2014 @04:02AM (#8481073)

Perhaps IBM figured that they don't need that many chips to warrant its own fab, which are expensive to maintain/upgrade to keep up with cutting edge process technologies.

I can believe that it made more financial sense for someone else to actually make the chips it wants (like nVidia, Apple and almost everyone else besides Intel and Samsung) than running its own fab in the long run due to economies of scale involved in fabs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IBM Paying Globalfoundries $1.5B to Take Unit in Retreat ... by snsr on Monday October 20, 2014 @09:26AM (#8481977)

You might enjoy Robert Cringely's recent book (essay?) on the decline and slow-motion failure of IBM - http://www.cringely.com/2014/06/04/decline-fall-ibm/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IBM Paying Globalfoundries $1.5B to Take Unit in Retreat ... by cylinder on Monday October 20, 2014 @11:54AM (#8482747)

Look at HP, which has taken a divestment / restructuring charge basically every year for a long time, each time labeling it a one-off thing.

Financial "engineering" is rampant all across listed American companies.

[ Parent | on HN ]