Intel stock triples under Lip-Bu Tan as Trump, Musk, and Apple relationships outpace the manufacturing execution the company still needs


TL;DR

Intel’s stock has tripled under Lip-Bu Tan, who has won over Trump, partnered with Musk, and attracted Apple’s interest. The question is whether the relationships will produce the manufacturing execution that Intel has failed to deliver for a decade.

 

Intel’s stock has tripled in twelve months. Its chief executive still has not told most of his employees what the plan is.

Lip-Bu Tan, who became CEO in March 2025, has spent the first fourteen months of his tenure building relationships outside the company rather than restructuring the one inside it. He has won over Donald Trump, struck a partnership with Elon Musk, attracted interest from Apple, and turned the United States government into Intel’s third-largest shareholder. The stock hit a record in April, surging 24 per cent in a single day, its best performance since 1987. In April alone, shares rose 114 per cent, the best month in Intel’s 55 years on the Nasdaq.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

The question is whether the relationships will produce the manufacturing execution that Intel has failed to deliver for a decade. More than a dozen current and former employees told Bloomberg that Tan has not widely explained his specific plan to fix products and manufacturing. The fundamental problems remain: Intel needs products that can win back lost market share, and manufacturing that is good enough to convince rivals to pay billions for access to it. Neither is guaranteed.

The relationships

The US government invested 8.9 billion dollars in Intel in August 2025, acquiring a 9.9 per cent stake at 20.47 dollars per share that is now worth approximately 36 billion dollars. The deal, which combined CHIPS Act grants with a secure chip programme investment, made the federal government a major Intel shareholder. It followed a White House meeting in which Tan turned a public confrontation with Trump into an agreement, reportedly calling on Michael Dell and other industry figures to vouch for him.

The Terafab partnership with Musk’s SpaceX, xAI, and Tesla is a scheme to build a massive chip factory complex in Texas with an initial investment of 55 billion dollars and a total cost that could reach 119 billion. The deal was the result of Tan chatting with Musk personally over time, and took most of Intel’s other leaders by surprise. Tesla plans to use Intel’s next-generation 14A manufacturing process, and xAI’s AI5 chip is among the first products targeted for the facility.

Apple has held exploratory discussions with Intel and Samsung about producing its main device chips in the United States, a development that would be transformational for Intel’s foundry business if it progresses beyond the early-stage talks reported this week. Apple currently manufactures virtually all of its processors at TSMC in Taiwan. Any diversification would represent the most significant validation of Intel’s manufacturing ambitions since Tan took the job.

In his first interview as CEO, Tan acknowledged the external focus. “Intel has the technology, talent and scale to lead again, but leadership is earned through execution,” he said. He is targeting the end of June to complete a recruitment drive for the internal leadership team he says he can trust to deliver.

The factory

The execution challenge is quantifiable. According to New Street Research, Intel’s cost per chip is approximately three times that of TSMC, the industry leader. The largest component of that gap, more than 40 per cent, is tied to yield, the proportion of usable chips produced per manufacturing run. Intel’s yield rate is approximately 65 per cent. TSMC’s exceeds 80 per cent. Only 8 per cent of the cost difference is attributable to higher US labour costs.

Intel’s 18A manufacturing process, the technology on which the company’s foundry future depends, is improving but not yet competitive. Intel is building its Computex 2026 lineup around 18A, including Panther Lake mobile chips and 288-core Clearwater Forest server processors, but yields are expected to reach industry-standard levels only in 2027. The company missed demand in its most recent quarter partly because it had not allocated enough production capacity for resurgent data centre chip orders.

Naga Chandrasekaran, who has led Intel’s factory business for nearly two years after joining from Micron, said one of his first goals is winning back Intel’s own product teams, which currently outsource some of their most important chips to TSMC. But even recapturing internal demand will not be sufficient. “Intel products alone, even in a wildly successful scenario, cannot fund the capital and filling the fabs and the scale that’s needed to be successful enough in a silicon business today,” he said.

The candour is unusual for a company that spent years under previous leadership presenting its decline in optimistic terms. Under Pat Gelsinger, who preceded Tan, three years of losses and a 33 per cent revenue decline from the 2021 peak were not characterised as dire, according to Chandrasekaran.

The culture

Kevork Kechichian, whom Tan brought in to run Intel’s server chip unit after a career at Qualcomm and Arm, described an internal culture that has normalised schedule slippage. When teams fell behind on deadlines by a couple of weeks, he asked for a recovery plan. They responded by adjusting the schedule to accommodate the delay. “I said, ‘What’s the recovery?’ and they came back with, the recovery is they adjusted the schedule to go another two weeks,” he said.

Getting at least 80 per cent of the organisation to believe in the need for urgency is one of the management team’s priorities. The challenge is structural as much as cultural. Intel was built to lead the semiconductor industry with a near-monopoly in data centre processors. It held 99 per cent of that market. The skills required to compete from behind, to win orders on price, yield, and delivery against a dominant incumbent, are different from those required to set the industry’s agenda.

Tan’s management style, described by those who know him, mirrors his venture capital background. He hires based on high-level industry conversations rather than detailed business plans, backs the people he trusts, and devotes his energy to opening doors rather than scrutinising strategies. In venture capital, the approach works because the cost of failure on any individual bet is contained. In semiconductor manufacturing, where factories cost tens of billions of dollars and a single process generation that fails to achieve target yields can consume years of investment, the tolerance for imprecision is lower.

The bet

Intel’s first-quarter 2026 results beat Wall Street expectations by more than a billion dollars, with revenue of 13.6 billion dollars against a consensus estimate of 12.3 billion. Data centre and AI revenue grew 22 per cent year over year. The stock surge that followed reflected not just the earnings beat but a broader reassessment of Intel’s position in the AI ecosystem, driven in part by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s public statements that CPUs will play a major role in AI data centres alongside GPUs.

The optimism is real but conditional. Investors who bid up the stock are pricing in a future in which Intel’s manufacturing becomes competitive, Apple and other customers place orders, the Terafab project delivers on its ambitions, and the 18A process achieves the yields necessary to make the foundry business economically viable. Each of those outcomes is possible. None is certain.

Tan said he has plans for where he wants Intel to be in two years, five years, and ten years. “Credibility comes from results,” he said. The results so far are a stock chart that reflects relationships and a factory floor that reflects reality. The gap between the two is where the next twelve months of Lip-Bu Tan’s tenure will be decided. As Jon Bathgate, a fund manager at NZS Capital, put it: “As much as I believe in Lip-Bu, I think he was dealt such a difficult hand. I think he’s got as good a shot as anyone has of making it work.”



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews



In short: Accel has raised $5 billion in new capital, comprising a $4 billion Leaders Fund V and a $650 million sidecar, targeting 20-25 late-stage AI investments at an average cheque size of $200 million. The raise follows standout returns from its Anthropic stake (invested at $183B, now valued near $800B) and Cursor (backed at $9.9B, now reportedly around $50B), and lands in a Q1 2026 venture market that deployed a record $297 billion.

Accel, the venture capital firm behind early bets on Facebook, Slack, and more recently Anthropic and Cursor, has raised $5 billion in new capital aimed squarely at AI. The raise, reported by Bloomberg, comprises $4 billion for its fifth Leaders Fund and a $650 million sidecar vehicle, positioning the firm to write average cheques of around $200 million into late-stage AI companies globally.

The fund lands in a venture capital market that has lost any pretence of restraint. Q1 2026 saw $297 billion flow into startups worldwide, 2.5 times the total from Q4 2025 and the most venture funding ever recorded in a three-month period. Andreessen Horowitz has raised $15 billion. Thrive Capital has closed more than $10 billion. Founders Fund is finishing a $6 billion raise. Accel’s $5 billion is substantial but not exceptional in a market where the biggest funds are measured in the tens of billions.

The portfolio that made the pitch

What distinguishes Accel’s fundraise is the portfolio it can point to. The firm invested in Anthropic during its Series G at a $183 billion valuation. Anthropic has since closed a round at $380 billion and is now attracting offers at roughly $800 billion, meaning Accel’s stake has more than quadrupled in value in a matter of months. Anthropic’s annualised revenue has hit $30 billion, a trajectory that no company in history has matched.

The firm’s bet on Cursor has been similarly well-timed. Accel backed the AI code editor in June 2025 at a $9.9 billion valuation. By November, Cursor had raised again at $29.3 billion. By March 2026, the company was reportedly in discussions at a valuation of around $50 billion. For a developer tool that barely existed two years ago, the appreciation is extraordinary.

Accel’s broader AI portfolio extends beyond these two headline positions. The firm has backed Vercel, the frontend deployment platform; n8n, an AI-powered automation tool; Recraft, a professional design platform; and Code Metal, which builds AI development tools for hardware and defence applications. In March 2026, Accel launched an Atoms AI programme in partnership with Google’s AI Futures Fund, selecting five early-stage companies from what it described as a global applicant pool focused on “white space” opportunities in enterprise AI.

The Leaders Fund model

Accel’s Leaders Fund series is designed for later-stage investments, the kind of large cheques that growth-stage AI companies now require. With an average investment size of $200 million and a target of 20 to 25 deals from the new $4 billion fund, the strategy is concentrated: a small number of high-conviction bets on companies that have already demonstrated product-market fit and are scaling revenue.

This is a different game from traditional venture capital. At $200 million per cheque, Accel is competing less with seed and Series A firms and more with the mega-funds, sovereign wealth funds, and corporate investors that have flooded into late-stage AI. The firm’s argument is that its early-stage relationships and technical evaluation capabilities give it an edge in identifying which companies deserve capital at scale, and in securing allocations in rounds that are massively oversubscribed.

Founded in 1983 by Arthur Patterson and Jim Swartz, Accel built its reputation on what the founders called the “prepared mind” approach, a philosophy of deep sector research before investments materialise. The firm’s most famous prepared-mind bet was its 2005 investment of $12.7 million for 10% of Facebook, a stake worth $6.6 billion at the company’s IPO seven years later. The question now is whether Accel’s AI bets will produce returns of comparable magnitude.

What the market is pricing

The sheer volume of capital flowing into AI venture funds reflects a market consensus that artificial intelligence will be the dominant technology platform of the next decade. The numbers are difficult to overstate. OpenAI raised $120 billion in 2026. Anthropic has raised more than $50 billion. xAI closed $20 billion. Waymo secured $16 billion. These are not venture-scale numbers; they are infrastructure-scale capital deployments that would have been unthinkable outside of telecommunications or energy a decade ago.

For limited partners, the investors who commit capital to venture funds, the logic is straightforward: the returns from AI’s winners will be so large that even paying premium valuations will generate exceptional multiples. Accel’s Anthropic position, where a single investment has appreciated several times over in months, is exactly the kind of outcome that makes LPs willing to commit $5 billion to a single firm’s next fund.

The risk is equally visible. Venture capital is a cyclical business, and the current fundraising boom has the characteristics of a cycle peak: record fund sizes, compressed deployment timelines, and a concentration of capital in a single sector. The last time venture capital raised this aggressively, during the 2021 ZIRP era, many of those investments were marked down significantly within two years. AI’s commercial traction is far stronger than the crypto and fintech bets that defined that earlier cycle, but the valuations being paid today leave little margin for error.

The concentration question

Accel’s fund also highlights a structural shift in venture capital. The industry is bifurcating into a small number of mega-firms that can write cheques of $100 million or more and a long tail of smaller funds that compete for earlier-stage deals. The middle ground, the traditional Series B and C investors, is being squeezed by mega-funds moving downstream and by AI companies that skip traditional funding stages entirely, going from seed round to billion-dollar valuations in 18 months.

For a firm like Accel, which operates across offices in Palo Alto, San Francisco, London, and India, the $5 billion raise is a bet that it can maintain its position in the top tier as fund sizes inflate and competition for the best deals intensifies. Its portfolio of 1,199 companies, 107 unicorns, and 46 IPOs provides a track record. But in a market where Anthropic alone could generate returns that justify an entire fund, the temptation to concentrate bets on a handful of AI winners is strong, and the consequences of getting those bets wrong are correspondingly severe.

The broader picture is that AI venture capital has entered a phase where the funds themselves are becoming as large as the companies they once backed. Accel’s $5 billion raise would have made it one of the most valuable startups in Europe just a few years ago. Now it is table stakes for a firm that wants to participate meaningfully in the rounds that matter. Whether this represents rational capital allocation or the peak of a cycle that will eventually correct is the question that every LP writing a cheque today is, implicitly or explicitly, answering in the affirmative.



Source link