Intel ex-CEO Gelsinger and current co-CEO slapped with lawsuit over Intel Foundry disclosures — plaintiffs demand Gelsinger surrender salary earned
LR Trust wants Pat Gelsinger and David Zinsner to return their compensation.
LR Trust, an Intel shareholder, has filed a lawsuit related to the performance of Intel Foundry and against former and current executives as well as directors of the company (as discovered by The Register). The lawsuit accuses Pat Gelsinger, the former chief executive of Intel, and David Zinsner, an interim co-CEO and CFO of Intel, of mismanagement, misleading disclosures, and demanding the return of their compensations and other gains to the company. Among the listed demands, the plaintiffs seek the entire sum of Gelsinger's $207 million salary earned during his tenure in 2021, 2022, and 2023, which would then be paid back to Intel.
The lawsuit claims that Pat Gelsinger and David Zinsner failed to communicate the poor performance of the Intel Foundry division, which had struggled to attract significant interest from major fabless designers while bleeding money. The lawsuit accuses Intel of failing to disclose critical risks in its 2024 Proxy Statement, a claim similar to one for which the company the company was sued for earlier this year. The lawsuit further claims that executives and board members allowed misleading statements about Intel Foundry Services' (IFS) growth potential, obscuring substantial operating losses and declining internal revenue.
LR Trust asserts that Intel misrepresented the financial condition and performance of IFS and issued materially false and misleading public statements regarding cost savings, operational efficiencies, and IFS's profitability. Intel's production unit lost $7 billion in 2023 alone, and losses worsened in 2024 as the company increased spending on new fabs.
The lawsuit seeks remedies for alleged harm to the company itself. If successful, the damages would be paid to Intel rather than LR Trust and individual shareholders, which could improve the company's financial health. If LR Trust wins the lawsuit, it benefits primarily through its indirect interest as a long-term shareholder of Intel.
The lawsuit also claims that Pat Gelsinger and David Zinsner allegedly received substantial compensation, including salaries, stock awards, and bonuses, during a period of alleged mismanagement and financial misrepresentation. As a result, the plaintiffs seek restitution and punitive damages, along with court costs.
Page 19, point 70 of the lawsuit states [PDF]
"As later admitted by Intel, and in breach of the individual defendants' fiduciary duties, the true status of Intel's affairs at the time were that: (1) IFS's growth was not indicative of revenue growth reportable under its segment; (2) IFS experienced substantial operating losses in 2023; (3) IFS experienced a decline in product profit driven by lower internal revenue; (4) due to the foregoing, IFS could not be a strong tailwind to Intel’s foundry strategy; and (5) the Company failed to maintain adequate internal controls," the lawsuit states. "As a result of the foregoing, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times."
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.
-
-Fran- Hm... Well, this escalated quickly.Reply
I wonder if this will even move forward, since how can you prove they actually withheld information in the reports? It's not like they would personally verify everything by themselves and only report on what they can gather? Will this force a deeper investigation, turning it into a witch hunt of sorts?
Definitely not what Intel needs right now, for sure. I wonder who will even want to try to steer the ship in this climate.
Regards. -
Elusive Ruse The hits keep coming, I feel worried for Intel but maybe a better Intel rises up once they are done facing the consequences of the missteps of the past years.Reply -
watzupken In my opinion, the state of Intel’s foundry business was probably very bad when Pat took over in 2021. His 3 years tenor can’t do that much damage in my opinion. Intel’s fab was clearly in a very bad shape being stuck on 14nm for half a decade and falling behind TSMC. So if they want to seek the culprits, then every Intel CEO for the past decade likely contributed to this mess.Reply -
phead128
Intel quit the foundry business in 2018. Pat Gelsinger attempted to revitalize the foundry business (again) in 2021, with IDM 2.0 strategy for tech leadership.watzupken said:In my opinion, the state of Intel’s foundry business was probably very bad when Pat took over in 2021.
He was there for 4 years (3 years, 10 months), just in time for his "5 Nodes in 4 Years" timeline to mature.watzupken said:His 3 years tenor can’t do that much damage in my opinion.
I think Pat needs to held to "5 Nodes in 4 Years (5N4Y)" timeline he professed, given he served for 4 years. Cancelling nodes outright (20A) and gaslighting about true health (18A) is why he has partial responsibility.watzupken said:Intel’s fab was clearly in a very bad shape being stuck on 14nm for half a decade and falling behind TSMC. So if they want to seek the culprits, then every Intel CEO for the past decade likely contributed to this mess.
‘You have an unlimited budget, and you are going to deliver five nodes in four years. We are going to get back to unquestioned process leadership.’
If the qualifications to become Intel CEO is just giving "unlimited budgets" to engineers and promising ridiculous 5N4Y timelines, then maybe even I can become Intel CEO one day.
- Pat Gelsinger, Oct 4, 2022 -
Roland Of Gilead That anybody can or should earn 207m over a 3 year period is just gross in of itself. Nobody is worth that. Specially not someone who stood over Intel's run in the last 3 years. Very poor showing from Intel and Pat. But, we can't forget about the board either. The same board that sacked Gelsinger are also complicit in the bad choices of the last few years. I wonder how much they earn?Reply -
Roland Of Gilead
Agree with you there buddy (y)phead128 said:I think Pat needs to held to "5 Nodes in 4 Years (5N4Y)" timeline he professed, given he served for 4 years. Cancelling nodes outright (20A) and gaslighting about true health (18A) is why he has partial responsibility. -
Co BIY How much Intel stock does this group own ?Reply
Even perfect management cannot prevent a shareholder lawsuit in a public company ? Musk was sued despite incredible gains to shareholders.
A claim does not need to be credible to be filed. -
jg.millirem I worked as an engineer at Intel Oregon from 2017 to 2019, in the era of endless 14nm and failed Cannonlake and the horny CEO then the bean counter CEO (but hey we all got a t shirt for the 50th anniversary), and I can report a feeling of constant dismalness. The environment probably got even worse after that.Reply -
why_wolf If this were true shouldn't they be pushing a board motion to immediately remove David Zinsner since he was the CFO (the person actually in charge of creating the financial reports) and is now co-CEO.Reply
Since the lawsuit is alleging they lied, in what world would it be acceptable for him to continue working at Intel in any capacity?
Honestly though this sounds kinda like BS. Everyone knew Intel Foundry was performing badly and was in a Hail-Mary race to get back to competitive position. -
will_i_am Yeah, Patt got pushed out because they lost to much money and this time it was to much and they are angry. It's so obvious. They don't understand these things take time. Makes me angry. "ReVeNuE mUsT aLwAyS gO uP".Reply