this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
187 points (99.5% liked)

PC Gaming

10329 readers
478 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Subscript5676@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

“Let’s give the CEO big bonuses instead of investing it back into our failing business that desperately needs that money.”

Says, apparently, no one at Intel.

Edit: I just realized my punchline was off but I’ll leave it as is anyways. You get the point.

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The MBAs are going to extract as much value as they can for themselves while they ride it to the bottom. Private equity will buy it at the bottom, sell off the profitable bits. Then IPO some hollowed out shell to clueless investors who will lose their money. The name will eventually be owned by a Chinese company that will slap it on Temu products.

[–] TTH4P@lemm.ee 117 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 1 points 2 days ago

Thinking about this a bit deeper, and I feel like if someone wasn't a billionaire at first, invested his savings and took loans and grew a business, and did things right (assuming a benevolent fellow paying fair wages and generally being nice to everyone in his company and community, and not doing hanky panky tax bullshit) to become a billionaire over time, and got his rightful regular returns on his investment - that's not the bad guy here. But the CEO who demands a stupidly high compensation going into high millions ,without investing capital, and thinks his skills and intelligence is worth him earning that much - that's the true bad guy.

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 82 points 4 days ago

And in a week, 500 - 2000 people will get laid off to "save money."

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

so weird to pay somebody that much

[–] CallateCoyote@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago

Nobody in the history of humanity has ever worked hard enough to earn that kind of money. There's only 24 hours in a day... bet this cunt spends many of them golfing.

[–] Daelsky@lemmy.ca 19 points 3 days ago

Lmao 69m$ is kinda funny.

Can’t wait to see them not innovate again and be bailed out by the American taxpayers

[–] balssh@lemm.ee 14 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I’m really curious how the new CEO will change things.

[–] alphabethunter@lemmy.world 27 points 4 days ago

Narrator: "He won't"

[–] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 5 points 3 days ago

Apprently he's turned a few companies around before. Intel stock went up last week so people seem to have some confidence in him.

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 days ago

But billionaires pay taxes!

[–] Paddzr@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

At least instead of having 69 million salary, he has to work for the other 68 and deliver? Here's hoping...

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago

Unfortunately as the article points out it’s all buried in terms and conditions

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago

Wanna give me 1 million of that bonus? I deserve it more than you.