Read on Twitter
$INTC might be the best short opportunity since Nokia circa 2008. Why?
Black. Magic. Fuckery.
Follow me on the path to Intel's destruction and it all starts with the M1 https://www.singhkays.com/blog/apple-silicon-m1-black-magic/
Black. Magic. Fuckery.
Follow me on the path to Intel's destruction and it all starts with the M1 https://www.singhkays.com/blog/apple-silicon-m1-black-magic/
By all indications the $AAPL M1 is a major breakthrough. A $999 M1 powered Macbook Air blows out of the water a fully fledged $4,000 Intel based Macbook Pro in both performance and battery life. it's completely staggering
Up until now, there was never a viable ARM based computer option. Microsoft tried back in 2012 with the Surface RT but it was DOA and I don't even recall other products
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_RT
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_RT
Why did $MSFT fail so hard? Well, the networks effects are strong. Developers write software for x86, hence ARM based systems will always be at a great disadvantage on the software front. The RT didn't have enough software, it was an inferior product https://mashable.com/2013/07/19/surface-rt-failure/
Apple realized that in order to succeed with the M1 it had to solve the software problem. Apple's approach was to develop an x86 emulator for the M1. If the emulator can run x86 apps on the M1 with good enough performance, you solve the software problem
And what do you know, seems like Apple did just that. The Rosseta emulator can run Intel apps faster on the M1 than they run nativey on the x86. Let that sink for a minute, it's totally mind blowing https://www.imore.com/tests-show-apples-m1-emulates-x86-faster-intel-can-run-it-natively
So it seems like the emulator solves the software problem. Once the software problem is solved we're left with a laptop that costs $999, has better performance than a $4,000 machine and has crazy unprecedented battery life, why would anybody buy an x86 based Macbook ever again?
It's seems pretty clear to me that Intel is about to lose a lot of market share quickly in the Mac world to the M1. Well, Apple has ~10% market share, that surely won't move the needle for $INTC, so why is it so risky for Intel?
What is likely to happen is that once the main players in the Windows ecosystems observe the dynamics in the Mac market they will (as they always do) start to copy Apple
Before long Microsoft will release a comparable emulator and in 1-2 years, Qualcomm will release an inferior but still good enough Snapdragom chip to power Windows computers
Then the floodgates will really open, and $INTC will start bleeding market share fast in the laptop market.
That brings us to Intel's only growing segment - Hyper cloud
That brings us to Intel's only growing segment - Hyper cloud
Intel is growing fast in hyper cloud, but AWS is working hard in order to promote their own ARM based solution - Graviton.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapurna_Labs
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapurna_Labs
Apple's success with the M1 implies that there is a high probability of success for Graviton, and in case that happens, what will surely follow will be a rapid market share bleed in the hyper cloud market as well
So if I'm right, Intel 2 main businesses are about to enter into a terminal decline phase. What does that mean for the stock?
INTC currently trades at about 12x eps and is a dividend "champion", that's the perfect recipe for a value trap
INTC currently trades at about 12x eps and is a dividend "champion", that's the perfect recipe for a value trap
