Intel’s reported move to acquire SambaNova raises serious concerns and appears to be a poorly conceived strategic decision. While the interest in SambaNova isn’t entirely new—SemiAccurate learned about it nearly a year ago, alongside Intel’s potential acquisition of Rivos—it remains deeply troubling for several reasons. The initial signals came shortly after Lip-Bu Tan was named Intel’s CEO. Rather than Intel expressing interest in SambaNova, sources close to Tan revealed that it was his personal initiative to sell both SambaNova and Rivos to Intel. As a former investor and venture capitalist in these companies, Tan stood to benefit financially from such a deal. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with a CEO pursuing a transaction that could be mutually beneficial, the circumstances surrounding this one raise red flags. The timing is particularly suspicious. The information we received suggested that Intel’s board may have been aware of these potential deals well before Tan’s appointment—or even as a condition of his hiring. If true, that would indicate a lack of transparency and proper governance. Intel’s board has a history of being highly involved in major decisions, but its track record on accountability—especially during past crises like the Snow Ridge and 10nm delays—has been inconsistent. The company’s efforts to cover up or downplay those failures, including undisclosed payments to Nokia, Ericsson, and ZTE, have not been made public, further eroding trust. Even if the board was aware and due diligence was conducted, the core question remains: does SambaNova’s technology align with Intel’s long-term strategy? SambaNova is known for its custom AI hardware and software stack, but Intel already has a strong presence in the AI accelerator market with its Gaudi series. Acquiring SambaNova would not only be a massive financial commitment but also bring integration challenges, cultural misalignment, and potential redundancies. What makes this even more concerning is the insight from two highly technical sources with deep knowledge of the companies involved. These conversations, which predated any public reports on the deal, were not about product fit or market potential, but about fundamental issues with SambaNova’s engineering approach and execution track record. While we cannot disclose specifics to protect our sources, their expertise and timing lend credibility to the skepticism. Given Intel’s recent struggles with leadership, execution, and transparency, acquiring a company with questionable technical and operational credibility is not a path to recovery. Instead, it risks further straining resources, diluting focus, and deepening the company’s existing challenges. A more strategic move would be to invest in internal innovation, partner with emerging players, or acquire companies with proven, complementary technologies—not those with a history of overpromising and underdelivering. For now, the acquisition appears less like a visionary step and more like a high-stakes gamble driven by personal interests and a flawed decision-making process. If Intel proceeds, it will be a clear sign that governance and long-term strategy are being sacrificed for short-term optics.