(12 of 13)
Grove has so effectively squashed the competition that his biggest worry isn't the rumblings of AMD but the strategic risk of a slowing PC market. The hottest-selling PCs this year have been dirt-cheap, sub-$1,000 models. Growth there could wreck Intel's business model. Says Drew Peck, an analyst at Cowen & Co.: "You can't sell a $500 processor in a $1,000 PC." And though cheap PCs are a tiny part of the overall market--businesses generally buy pricier PCs--Intel may be heading into a sea change. Intel's buoyant stock is off 30% from its 52-week high (though it is still up nearly 100% in the past 18 months). Some analysts expect to see the stock at $100 a share in 1998, but many investors don't understand Intel's business. To them the $1,000 PC looks like death.
Grove, of course, sees it as an opportunity. He is in the midst of rejiggering Intel's operating model so the firm can make money on sub-$1,000 PCs. That means taking more risks and finding new applications for Intel chips. Intel has also invested hundreds of millions to "seed" demand for PCs. The firm is betting on interactive multimedia (imagine watching the Super Bowl and clicking on a player to see his stats), cable modems that speed Internet delivery and audio software that makes your PC sound like the local THX multiplex. Grove has reviewed dozens of battle plans for the company and finds the same fault with them all: not radical enough.
As Von Clausewitz craved the decisive battle, Grove hungers for the decisive risk, the bet that will guarantee Intel's future. "Are we missing something?" Grove mused one day this spring over a lunch of tofu and ketchup, settling his silverware into a moment of quiet. "Sometimes," he says in a rolling baritone, "the risk of omission is greater than the risk of commission."
There are other worries. The Federal Trade Commission launched a second probe of Intel this fall. Though the firm has escaped with a clean bill of health in the past, its dominant market share may look like a fat bull's-eye to trustbusters. Intel's close relationship with Microsoft--tech insiders refer to a WinTel duopoly--does seem to make competition more difficult. Grove, for one, isn't slowing any plans because of the government. "We're very careful," he says, "and clean."
Though no one talks of retirement (Grove considered it in 1987 but changed his mind), the CEO is building a management legacy. Last spring the company tapped Craig Barrett, a former Stanford materials-science professor and longtime Intel executive, as the new president and Grove's successor. And behind Barrett is a chain of bright, driven engineers all lusting for the top spot. Meet intense contenders like Intel V.P.s Paul Otellini and Sean Maloney, and you'll have little worry about a leadership vacuum. Chairman emeritus Moore sometimes comes to the office, looks around and says he sheepishly thinks, "I'm not sure I could get a job here today."