Print 35 comment(s) - last by wislam.. on Oct 23 at 7:09 PM

15% of its global workforce will be let go

AMD has officially announced its financial results for Q3 2012. The company didn't do well with revenue of $1.27 billion, which is a 10% sequential decrease and a 25% decrease year-over-year. AMD reported a net loss of $157 million including a loss of $.21 per share. The operating loss for the quarter amounted to $131 million.

AMD is set to begin a restructuring plan designed to reduce its operating expenses and position the company to be more competitive in the future. AMD says that a "significant portion" of its restructuring plan will be implemented in Q4 of 2012 and will include a workforce reduction along with site consolidations.

The chipmaker expects the restructuring to providing operational savings of approximately $20 million in Q4 and approximately $190 million in 2013. AMD plans to reduce its global workforce by approximately 15% and is largely going to be completed in Q4. Previous reports have estimated that AMD would lay off, as much as 30% of its global workforce.

“Our restructuring efforts are decisive actions that position AMD to compete more effectively and improve our financial results,” said AMD CEO Rory Read.  “Reducing our workforce is a difficult, but necessary, step to take advantage of the eventual market recovery and capitalize on growth opportunities for our products outside of the traditional PC market.”

AMD reports that its computer solutions segment revenue decreased 11% sequentially and 28% year-over-year. AMD believes that the sequential decrease was driven by weak consumer demand for computers and other devices. AMD also saw difficulty with its graphics processor unit with revenue decreasing 14% sequentially due to low unit shipments to OEMs. Operating income for that division was only $18 million compared with $31 million in Q2 of 2012.

“The PC industry is going through a period of very significant change that is impacting both the ecosystem and AMD,” said Read.  “It is clear that the trends we knew would re-shape the industry are happening at a much faster pace than we anticipated. Our restructuring efforts are designed to simplify our product development cycles, reduce our breakeven point and enable us to fund differentiated product roadmaps and strategic breakaway opportunities.”

Source: AMD

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Yeah, right
By bug77 on 10/19/2012 10:52:22 AM , Rating: 3
It's not about the 1%. It's just that the western world has regulated itself out of competitiveness.

RE: Yeah, right
By Jeffk464 on 10/19/2012 11:28:57 AM , Rating: 3
Right we should allow workers to be exposed to hazardous work conditions and get paid $10 a day.

RE: Yeah, right
By Kurz on 10/19/2012 11:49:35 AM , Rating: 3
We aren't talking about Work Compensation and Work safety regulations... (Though some safety regulations are obsene, watched recently how a regulator shut down gold mining for a few months. Looking at the infractions it didn't look unsafe at all.)

RE: Yeah, right
By menting on 10/19/2012 11:29:45 AM , Rating: 3
if there were no regulation, AMD would have been killed off by Intel already.

RE: Yeah, right
By Ammohunt on 10/19/2012 11:44:25 AM , Rating: 2
So you are saying that AMD was never competitive in the free market and depends solely on government regulation? I see you don't have a good grasp of free market economics.

RE: Yeah, right
By zixin on 10/19/2012 2:27:07 PM , Rating: 4
No, he is saying if there weren't government regulation and anti trust rules Intel would have bought AMD a long time ago and we would have a monopoly, which is exactly what non-regulated capitalistic economy gravitates to.

RE: Yeah, right
By Ammohunt on 10/19/2012 2:57:42 PM , Rating: 2
Where exists the mythical beast of a non-regulated "capitalist" economy? If companies cannot compete on a level playing field in a free market economy its not governments role to prop-up or otherwise subsidize their business. If a company ends up being the last one standing by no fault of their own that is not a monopoly.

RE: Yeah, right
By Taft12 on 10/19/2012 3:38:41 PM , Rating: 3
Government has no part in propping up or subsidizing, it's simply to forbid monopolism through M&A.

See recently the FTC blocking the purchase of T-Mobile by AT&T for a recent fine example.

RE: Yeah, right
By Jeffk464 on 10/19/2012 3:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
Its basically the goal of every company to be a monopoly, companies don't like competition. Its the job of the government to make sure companies can't use unfair business practices to bump off their competition. For example Intel was nailed with a huge settlement to AMD for illegal business practices. The damage was probably already done though and intel probably benefited from the illegal business practices despite the settlement.

RE: Yeah, right
By Jeffk464 on 10/19/2012 11:42:45 AM , Rating: 3
Intel has actually been pretty good for US jobs. Despite being SOB's with their policies towards competitors They have at least kept high tech manufacturing in the US.

"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki