zlacker

>>fancy_+(OP)
Intel headcount in 2022 was 131,900. Intel’s projected headcount for 2025 is 75,000. Intel fired 43% of its staff over the course of 3 years (when approximating natural retirements at zero and assuming a stop in new employments).

>>lyngui+Je
> Intel headcount in 2022 was 131,900.

Not sure if you intentionally picked the all time high headcount, but you did.

Intel's headcount was relatively stable between 100-110k people between 2014 and 2021 [0]. So, getting down to 75k is definitely still a major reduction, but 2022 was also an outlier. A lot of companies overhired during Covid, and Intel particularly was the beneficiary of WFH pulling in a lot of corporate spending on laptops etc.

[0] https://morethanmoore.substack.com/p/intel-2025-q1-financial...

>>ac29+sm
But the statistic parent poster showed is still correct.

>>sys_64+Rs
Correct statistics is one thing, useful statistics is another.

>>Beetle+eU
This particular statistic is wholly correct and precisely defines the downward trajectory of INTC. It's not like the stat is from 1976.

>>sys_64+pw1
INTC was clearly inflated in 2022 - it rose up with all the COVID hype, so yes, it is misleading. It's like looking at Gamestop stock right when it was artificially boosted by Wallstreetbets, and saying "Look at its decline!"

>>Beetle+xV2
How can it be misleading? It is the factually correct number of employees they had at that time. It is unambiguous.

>>sys_64+JE3
There's a difference between "misleading" and "wrong". One can be factually correct while still misleading. It is the skillset of lawyers and journalists.