Intel Replaces Bob Swan with VMWare’s Pat Gelsinger

[Blade of Grass]

Summary

Bob Swan is out, VMWare’s CEO Pat Gelsinger is in, as of Feb 15 2021. Previously, Pat was also Intel’s first CTO. 

 

Quotes

Quote

Critics have pointed to the fact that Intel's chief executive did not come from a technical background, having previously served as CFO. With Gelsinger, that will no longer be the case. Gelsinger previously worked at Intel, eventually becoming its first Chief Technology Officer.

Intel said the announcement was separate from its financial results and said it expects fourth quarter 2020 revenue and earnings to exceed prior guidance. The company said it "has made strong progress" on its latest generation 7 nanometer chips which it said it would discuss when it reports earnings on Jan. 21.

 

My thoughts

Interesting to see how this transition goes. Intel has some work ahead of them to regain the ground they’ve lost, and having better technical leadership will definitely help them. Pat might be an outsider currently, but his history with Intel should hopefully help accelerate his integration. 
 

Sources

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/intel-ceo-bob-swan-to-step-down-in-february.html

[MatthewSH]

Summary

 

 After his just over 2 years as CEO, Bob Swan will officially be stepping down as Intel's CEO as of February 15th, 2021. VMware's CEO Pat Gelsinger is set to take over as Intel's new CEO. In fact, Gelsinger was Intel's first CTO as well. He left Intel in September of 2009 to join EMC. Gelsinger was with Intel for 30 years prior to leaving and contributed to the creation of technologies such as USB and Wi-Fi.

 

Quotes

Quote

Intel CEO Bob Swan is set to step down effective Feb. 15, the company announced Wednesday. VMWare CEO Pat Gelsinger will take over the position.

Intel’s stock was up about 10% after CNBC’s David Faber first broke the news prior to the announcement. VMWare’s stock was down more than 5%.

Swan was named CEO in January 2019 after serving as interim CEO for seven months.

Source: CNBC

 

My thoughts

Although I personally do not believe Swan is at fault completely for Intel's failures in the recent years, it will be nice to see Gelsinger back with Intel. Also, with him being a former CTO of Intel, it may bring a fresh perspective to the role of CEO that we haven't seen in a long time.

 

Honestly, I agree with many other and even previous WAN show comments that someone with an engineering background in some way should be running a company like Intel. Gelsinger has decades within the IT field, while Swan has degrees in business administration; while an MBA might suit a CEO well in many companies I don't think it suits Intel well. Gelsinger was with Intel for 30 years prior to leaving and helped

 

 

Sources

https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-appoints-tech-industry-leader-pat-gelsinger-as-new-ceo/?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/intel-ceo-bob-swan-to-step-down-in-february.html?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

https://leaderpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/intel-to-replace-ceo-bob-swan-with-vmwares-pat-gelsinger-sources?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/intel-to-replace-ceo-bob-swan-with-vmwares-pat-gelsinger-sources?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-intel-ceo/intel-to-replace-ceo-bob-swan-with-pat-gelsinger-cnbc-idUSKBN29I1W3?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

[TVwazhere]

@MatthewSH looks like @Blade of Grass beat you to the punch by about thirty seconds, the threads were merged.

Edited January 13, 2021 by wkdpaul
merged

[CommanderAlex]

Time to bring some talented people that are not just bean counters at the top of Intel. 

[SavageNeo]

Hope that the new guy can actually help Intel make better cpus.

Right now they do not have that great value, but they are at stock atleast (well 10100f and 10400f are decent value)

 

The rumors about the 11th gen are not promising. I am kinda dissapointed. Single digit gains with the 11900k compared to 10900k but it is 8 core and priced the same as 5900x.

[Master Disaster]

The question I have...

 

Did he jump or was he pushed?

[D13H4RD]

Looking at his portfolio, Pat just might be the kind of guy Intel needs as part of its leadership. Given that competition has been pretty fierce in the CPU space over the last 3-4 years no doubt spurred by AMD's comeback and the rise of ARM as an x86 alternative for the PC, Intel would benefit from a technology-focused leadership style rather than the bean counters that have kept the cogs spinning even as their technology progress largely stagnated.

 

Let's hope we can see results in 2022 or so.

[Guest]

*hears Bob Swam crying on a bed made of millions of dollars*

[Lightwreather]

Ah, you beat me to it. Here's a link you can add: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16419/intel-appoints-pat-gelsinger-as-new-ceo-from-feb-15th?utm_source=notification

Well anyway, I hope this new engineer CEO will steer Intel in the right direction. 

Best of luck to you Intel.

[LAwLz]

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

 

Paul Otellini had no technical background but ran Intel when they became the dominant player and launched things like the first i3, i5 and i7 lineups. 

 

Their previous CEO, Brian Krzanich, was an engineer and he ran Intel from when they were at top (took over after Sandy Bridge) to when AMD knocked Intel out with zen and zen2. 

 

Remember, Bob Swan has only been the Intel CEO for like a year and a half or something like that. 

[Lord Bloobus]

8 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

Sure, but the CEO has influence over the general direction of the company. They need to direct them in the way that puts them into a more competitive piece of silicon.

[CarlBar]

6 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

 

To add to this the new guy came up the Intel technical side at the same time as the people there running things did and they're the one's who dropped the ball and got Intel in this mess. That or the people above them, (i.e. the new guy back when he was CTO), did. Either way it's not a ringing endorsement.

 

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

The question I have...

 

Did he jump or was he pushed?

 

Hard to say. One way or another it's a showmanship move not a practical one. Swan wasn't there long enough to actually do anything which means there's no real basis for getting rid of him on factual grounds. But much like their new CPU launch it's about appearances to shareholders and investors. It makes them look like they're taking decisive action while they wait for their tech issues to straighten themselves out, (which is going to take a long time no matter what). They're keeping up appearances basically. But weather Swan went voluntarily to keep that alive or was pushed to keep it alive, could go either way.

[CarlBar]

2 minutes ago, Lord Bloobus said:

Sure, but the CEO has influence over the general direction of the company. They need to direct them in the way that puts them into a more competitive piece of silicon.

 

Already done some time ago. It's a process node issue and any changes Swan made there, even if he made them the day he became CEO, won't be visible for several more years.

[tim0901]

14 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them.

No, but the hope is that a CEO with a technical background is more likely to give the engineers the resources they need to do the work properly, rather than make everything focused about profit margins.

 

Not that that's remotely assured of course.

[LAwLz]

4 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

No, but the hope is that a CEO with a technical background is more likely to give the engineers the resources they need to do the work properly, rather than make everything focused about profit margins.

 

Not that that's remotely assured of course.

I don't see any reason why that would be true.

 

The engineers are the ones who know what they need, and those don't even directly communicate with the CEO. It is not the CEO's job to provide engineers or other employees with equipment or whatnot.

[spartaman64]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

 

Paul Otellini had no technical background but ran Intel when they became the dominant player and launched things like the first i3, i5 and i7 lineups. 

 

Their previous CEO, Brian Krzanich, was an engineer and he ran Intel from when they were at top (took over after Sandy Bridge) to when AMD knocked Intel out with zen and zen2. 

 

Remember, Bob Swan has only been the Intel CEO for like a year and a half or something like that. 

because they tend to make more product oriented decisions rather than marketing/financial oriented ones

 

[porina]

5 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Did he jump or was he pushed?

Good question. Swan got the job as interim CEO after the CEO before that got pushed. Although the "interim" title got dropped I did wonder if they were still looking for a longer term successor. Don't feel Swan did anything to get pushed, more likely stepping aside for someone more suited to drive the company forward.

 

5 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Let's hope we can see results in 2022 or so.

Add some years onto that before any impact could arguably attributed. 

 

TechTechPotato just went into this in more depth.

[heickelrrx]

14 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

The question I have...

 

Did he jump or was he pushed?

Bob Swan never want to be put as CEO as his permanent position, he was filling the gap as Brian Krazanich Has problematic sudden resignation due to affair with another Intel Employee, after long search, board director basically tired searching and name him as New CEO or they do so to buy some times for searching the new person

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel/intel-ceo-bob-swan

 

 

12 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

 

Paul Otellini had no technical background but ran Intel when they became the dominant player and launched things like the first i3, i5 and i7 lineups. 

 

Their previous CEO, Brian Krzanich, was an engineer and he ran Intel from when they were at top (took over after Sandy Bridge) to when AMD knocked Intel out with zen and zen2. 

 

Remember, Bob Swan has only been the Intel CEO for like a year and a half or something like that. 

 

Bob Swan actually decent guy, he manage to do damage control for Intel sudden loss leadership, Intel problem actually more about Brian Krzanich fault, for his desicion on restructuring the company and desicion making causing long 10nm Delay, not to mention he forced to leave due to affair with another Intel Employee, not kind of respectable way to leave right

Brian Kraznich is an engineer FYI

Bob Swan simply a guy who were CFO at the time, and know how the company financial situation, he appointed to be full time CEO after tiring search, and most likely experience people on this field do not want to take Intel lead at that time due the fact it's so on rough state, 

Bob did make a great thing, during his time they ship 10nm chip at decent volume, and refocusing their business by selling some of their non core division, he trying to refocus the company as a whole again, it seems after Bob manage to do some decisive move, Pat finally agree to take the helm

FYI, Pat was offered CEO position on 2018, and he refuse it, https://www.businessinsider.com/intel-ceo-pat-gelsinger-michael-dell-2018-6?r=US&IR=T 
 

 

 

[LAwLz]

10 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

because they tend to make more product oriented decisions rather than marketing/financial oriented ones

 

I'd like to see some evidence that that's true.

Right now you seem to be just making a massive assumption that it is. 

 

I wonder how many people making comments like "Intel needs an engineer as the CEO" doesn't even know they had an engineer as the CEO when they first started fucking up and lost the lead, and that Bob Swan has only been a CEO for a very short time and had probably not managed to do much change at all yet. 

 

 

Intel's problems aren't CEO related. 

[RejZoR]

10 hours ago, porina said:

Good question. Swan got the job as interim CEO after the CEO before that got pushed. Although the "interim" title got dropped I did wonder if they were still looking for a longer term successor. Don't feel Swan did anything to get pushed, more likely stepping aside for someone more suited to drive the company forward.

 

Add some years onto that before any impact could arguably attributed. 

 

TechTechPotato just went into this in more depth.

So, still pushed, but without shaming and with a bag of money

[heickelrrx]

52 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I'd like to see some evidence that that's true.

Right now you seem to be just making a massive assumption that it is. 

 

I wonder how many people making comments like "Intel needs an engineer as the CEO" doesn't even know they had an engineer as the CEO when they first started fucking up and lost the lead, and that Bob Swan has only been a CEO for a very short time and had probably not managed to do much change at all yet. 

 

 

Intel's problems aren't CEO related. 

Before Bob appointed as full time CEO, he continuedly refuse the full time offer, as he know that he is not the right man to the job, He is CFO and based on information he have he know how the company doing, 

But board director pushing him for it, since they can't convince other candidate to take the role, Intel Problem is CEO related, but not background related, but desicion Related

 

engineer CEO named Brian Kraznich make couple of bad desicion, causing 10nm delay, while making many big budget acquisition

 

 

[Taf the Ghost]

16 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I don't get why people think having a technical background makes you better to run a company. 

It's not the CEO that comes up with new products or develops them. 

 

Paul Otellini had no technical background but ran Intel when they became the dominant player and launched things like the first i3, i5 and i7 lineups. 

 

Their previous CEO, Brian Krzanich, was an engineer and he ran Intel from when they were at top (took over after Sandy Bridge) to when AMD knocked Intel out with zen and zen2. 

 

Remember, Bob Swan has only been the Intel CEO for like a year and a half or something like that. 

A non-engineer can do it, but Otellini wasn't some MBA from a venture capital group. He worked his way up within Intel's structure overseeing engineers. His entire business experience was really making processors at Intel. Engineering is, at the end of the day, a hard but learnable skill. The issue is you can't just learn some of this stuff in a couple of weeks. It's years of being involved with it all that are necessary.

 

That's the real problem when you put someone from Finance over an Engineering company. They can too easily get snowballed on technical aspects along with losing focus of harder, strategic aspects necessary to make an engineering company work. The uptake time they'd need would be several years. For a company like Intel which is also involved in fundamental research, you also need someone that can handle making decisions at the exact cutting edge. I do think Bob Swan was a good choice, but mostly because they needed someone to clean up a mess.

 

Doesn't mean an engineer-CEO will be good. Intel and AMD can both tell you that one. But there's levels of authenticity and trust that go with someone that's had to get a semiconductor product out the door, on time and roughly on budget. We've seen a lot of problems with companies like GE when you get Finance people only at the top. Suddenly the core business segments start falling apart.

 

As for Intel, hiring Pat does seem like the right move. Guy is good. Issue is he turned down the job in 2018, but takes it in 2020. Clearly, something has changed with Intel. (Also, almost no one that could do the Intel job actually wanted it when Bob Swan got the job.) A look at the Board of Directors shows they've flipped most of them in the last 2 years, along with a new Chairman in early 2020. Short answer is that Bob was put in to clean up a massive mess and simply get the ship stabilized. Pat is a serious player and a massive hire. This is actually a good thing for everyone. Intel is a massive company and them driving into a wall was a big problem. 

[Taf the Ghost]

3 hours ago, heickelrrx said:

Before Bob appointed as full time CEO, he continuedly refuse the full time offer, as he know that he is not the right man to the job, He is CFO and based on information he have he know how the company doing, 

But board director pushing him for it, since they can't convince other candidate to take the role, Intel Problem is CEO related, but not background related, but desicion Related

 

engineer CEO named Brian Kraznich make couple of bad desicion, causing 10nm delay, while making many big budget acquisition

 

 

It looks like Intel basically cleaned house at the top. That seems like what Bob's real job was. The TSMC-US Government deal has to be understood in this context. Intel is a massive Government/Military contractor & Nodes are Strategic Assets. There were a lot of big players very pissed at Intel being a mess. It's nice to see them getting into some sort of proper direction.