Note that Micron is giving up on 3D XPoint entirely, and TI is only buying the fab and most or all of the current tooling inside it, but not the IP. So TI can't pick up this torch. If 3D XPoint has any significant future, it's solely with Intel and their Optane branded products.
It's interesting that TI would want all of that tooling: part of 3DXPoint's problem is that it has some very nonstandard fab steps to build the central structure. (This makes it expensive, and attempts at cost reduction seem from the outside to have failed.) So why would TI want that tooling (if indeed they are getting and keeping it all)?
It makes one wonder about TI's FRAM product line, which if I'm remembering correctly involves similar materials as 3DXPoint. But since they do not get the IP, they're not going to manufacture 3DXPoint. And FRAM is sufficiently different that it is very unlikely to replace NAND. In particular, FRAM reads are destructive and wear down the cell! That may work out with a large, lower-density cell being accessed relatively infrequently by a lower-end embedded part, but will certainly fail for small, high-density cells accessed heavily. FRAM is weird stuff!
I don't know much about the exact tools needed for 3DXPoint, but the value of semiconductor manufacturing capacity generally in the U.S. has dramatically increased in the past year. This is now seen as a strategic resource and the government is willing to subsidize it. The value of 3DXPoint production though is not really strategic to the U.S. since hardly anything uses it that couldn't also use regular flash memory.
If a fab can show that they have the ability to at least partially fill the role of a TSMC in case of a disruption, there are large profits to be had. This may be the context and motivation for the sale.
