Intel’s Galaxy Tab Loss Stings, But It’s Not a Deal Killer

With the loss of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10.1, Intel's tablet presence gets more difficult.

Jan 14, 2014 at 11:00AM

Samsung's (NASDAQOTH:SSNLF) next generation of Galaxy Tab products, sold under the "Galaxy Tab Pro" brand, look quite impressive compared to their "non-Pro" predecessors. Each model – from the 8.4-inch to the 12.2-inch variant – a sports a super-fast Qualcomm (NASDAQ:QCOM) Snapdragon 800 for the cellular-enabled models and an in-house Exynos processor for the Wi-Fi-only versions. Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) didn't win a single one of these sockets, much to the chagrin of Intel-bulls everywhere.

The very real loss
This obviously stings. Samsung is one of the fastest growing tablet vendors, and thanks to its excellent cost structures and enormous brand equity it continues its meteoric rise in the vast majority of the tablet/smartphone market. With Intel's Galaxy Tab 3 10.1-inch win, many Intel bulls (including yours truly) believed that Intel had finally gained a foothold at the world's most important tablet vendors.

Unfortunately, Intel lost this socket and hasn't won any further (publicly announced) sockets over at Samsung. This loss is due both to timing issues of Intel's tablet chip released as well as the company's competitive position. To be quite blunt, there was absolutely no reason for Samsung to go ahead and use an Intel chip in any of its tablets because the latest Exynos/Snapdragon chips are simply "better" when viewed from a full-solution standpoint.

Things look difficult, but not impossible
What's interesting is that at Intel's investor meeting, management made the very bold claim that it is aiming to ship more than 40 million tablet chips next year – representing anywhere from 15%-20% of the expected tablet market next year. This is an extremely aggressive target and – given the extraordinary level of "contra revenue" that Intel is providing to get OEMs to use its Bay Trail product (which unfortunately has a bloated bill-of-materials that needs to be compensated for) – one that seems plausible.

However, if Intel is to actually achieve this target, it's going to have to do the following:

  • Very aggressively pursue business at every major OEM such as ASUS, Lenovo, LG, and Acer
  • Price Bay Trail aggressively (as well as continue to provide generous "contra-revenue) and convince the OEMs that future Intel chips will be worth buying (and that this year's Bay Trail problems won't recur)
  • Offer extensive marketing support, particularly to promote its own brand (as well as its partners' brands) in order to gain business. Samsung and Apple are incredibly formidable, so even if Intel wins sockets at these other players, it may not be relevant if Samsung keeps eating their collective lunch
  • Aggressively get new and better chips out. With Samsung, Apple, and Qualcomm moving very quickly on their chips, OEMs using Intel don't want to be at a capability/performance disadvantage. With Bay Trail, CPU performance is excellent, but its graphics performance is likely to be lacking – this issue needs to be addressed quickly in both the upcoming "Merrifield" and "Moorefield" phone/tablet processors for Android

Time is running out
It has been nearly four years since the introduction of the iPad and nearly seven years since the launch of the iPhone – both products having "revolutionized" the smartphone and computing markets. Intel needs to get into these markets in a very big way and it needs to do so very quickly. While the Apple business is forever lost (outside of a foundry deal), Samsung business could still be on the table longer-term if Intel can develop world-class chips.

Beyond that, however, Intel needs to enable these many smaller partners in a big way if it hopes to have meaningful market segment share. If Intel has the best chips, then Samsung would look pretty silly selling devices that underperform products from smaller vendors and could even be compelled to use Intel chips. However, to avoid a customer concentration issue, Intel really needs to help its partners become big players that can take share. Intel's brand can help with that.

Foolish bottom line
Do not misread this – Intel is a world-class company with world-class assets. However, the raw ingredients aren't enough to "win" the market segment share race. Intel needs to move faster – much faster – and it needs to really hit the target by using its assets to build the world's best computing chips. Intel's not quite there in tablets and is certainly a far-cry from this in smartphones, but if the song remains the same by the end of the year 2015, the odds that Intel will ever be successful here will be quite low.

More compelling ideas from The Motley Fool
They said it couldn't be done. But David Gardner has proved them wrong time, and time, and time again with stock returns like 926%, 2,239%, and 4,371%. In fact, just recently one of his favorite stocks became a 100-bagger. And he's ready to do it again. You can uncover his scientific approach to crushing the market and his carefully chosen 6 picks for ultimate growth instantly, because he's making this premium report free for you today. Click here now for access.

Ashraf Eassa owns shares of Intel. The Motley Fool recommends Intel. The Motley Fool owns shares of Intel and Qualcomm. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information