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 Mathos on 10/19/2012 2:30:14 PM , Rating: 2
Thats interesting. I grew up while Reagan was in office. I have a very long memory. The Democrats didn't take majority in both houses until late 2007, and didn't have a controlling majority until 2009 shortly after Obama was elected. And lets not forget, currently the Dems are the Minority party in the house. We have deadlock as far as getting anything, done, because the republicans in the house and senate refuse to work with anyone that isn't in their party.

Thats interesting, considering George H. W. Bush was in office before Clinton. Reagans economy was being propped up by the cold war. The fight the commies nationalism, was a major rallying call that kept our economy going. Unfortunately the cold war ended in 1991, half way through HW Bush's admin. Interestingly enough, what else began in 1991? Saddam Hussain invades Kuwait, ah now we have another enemy to rally against. Don't get me wrong, Desert storm was a necessary evil, if he'd been left to take Kuwait he could of devastated the entire region with those resources, and the wealth from that area.

Lets note that after then of the cold war, and subsequently, Desert Storm, the economy started to slow very quickly. We started to see the idea of "trickle down" economics as a hoax, it wasn't working. The economic booms in the early and mid 90s were due to the internet becoming usable by the public, after NSFNet was decommissioned in 1995. This caused the dotcom boom of the mid to late 90s. Not to mention, the major purpose of NAFTA was to remove tariffs on the import of OIL from Canada and Mexico, which is historically where we get most of our oil imports from. Which is what kept gas prices in control during the 90s in the US, the first period when price per barrel went over $90.

Now lets move forward to George W Bush. Shortly after taking office, we get hit by one of the worst terrorist attacks in modern US history. Note that terrorists have been around for a long time, and aren't just a recent development, the technology is just more advanced now. Ah, now we have another perceived enemy to distract us. Except, this one doesn't have a home nation, we can chase these around forever, taking out cell leader after cell leader. Now, lets talk about skyrocketing fuel prices, due to a combination of over extended military needs, back lash from attacking two arab nations, and Bush, encouraging Americans to show their patriotism by buying American made SUV's, light trucks, and heavy trucks, that was with a tax subsidy offered. Which drove up demand for Oil and gas even more. Ironic idea's coming from a Texas oil man. Throw in pushing Ethanol blending into Gas, to cut dependance on foreign oil. This was of course done with a subsidy to big corn growing companies. Worked OK until we're at our current problem. Corn prices skyrocket, inflating the price of Ethanol, animal feed stock, food, and food additives (high fructose CORN syrup). BTW, this whole ethanol boondoggle started before Obama ever took office. Haven't even brought up the housing bubble and collapse either. That one was created by completely unregulated banks, and predatory lending practices.

Everyone likes to romanticize the reagan era, but they don't look and see the truth of things. Much like Texans like to romanticize how Texas was so much better off before they joined the US. But, when you look back at Texas history, you realize the period when Texas was an independent republic, were the worst times in Texas history. And nice rating down my post before actually replying.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

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