Eric,
You have done your homework and I don't think anyone will contest
the information you have organized and presented here.
I have a few questions for you.
___________________________________________________________________________
You said...
"A variation of the two transistor cell is also used by manufacturers
for sequential access approaches, e.g., NAND (SNDK)...
and later
...according to SSTI's IR, this allows SSTI to move up the food chain into higher density / data storage flash. Any competitor's sequential access NAND flash is inappropriate for code storage, so in a sense it is a one-way street. SSTI is already beginning to move up, claiming the fastest read/write data transfer rates for their 96 Mbyte CompactFlash Card."
First, SanDisk's claim to fame is its NOR flash cells, not NAND. Are you saying that SNDK's products are unacceptable for code storage?
Second, are you certain that SSTI manufactures all components of their 96MB CF card? During the last c.c. the SSTI CEO stated that the highest density product they will manufacture is 16Mbit. Has this changed? [Perhaps I misunderstood or am in error on this.] If not, it is clear that SSTI buys components for the CF product. Also, it pays card assembly royalties to SanDisk for the controller technology.
I don't see SSTI as a threat to SNDK in the CF business.
___________________________________________________________________________
You stated...
"Most industry observers believe that in the near future, 164K is all that is going to be required for flash code storage. Therefore unless Intel or AMD invent a new disruptive manufacturing process, SSTI will own the low-density (not lower end!) flash market. IMO"
The argument you make suggests that the requirements of electronics manufacturers will remain static in this ultra-low density range. That would seem to be a bit unusual. I am not saying it is not possible, just that as devices become more sophisticated is it not equally likely that the requirements for these small, insular "bits" of code storage could increase or that a larger density chip would assume a central role that eliminates the need for a single dedicated 164K chip (thus simplifying the assembly process)?
___________________________________________________________________________
Do you believe that SSTI can easily enter moderate and high density flash applications using the Superflash technology they are licensing? I still believe that 16Mbit is a far cry for 256 or 512Mbit. SanDisk, Toshiba, Hitachi and Intel are pushing the envelope on the higher end. I don't see SSTI as capable of competing in this race. Further, SSTI could feel pressure from above as established semiconductor manufactures place pressure on the lower density manufactures. As I said before, if margins are fat and there is a profit to be had, competitors will come. Is the converse true? Will SSTI be able to make a play at moderate or high density applications or is this a "one-way street"?
___________________________________________________________________________
I appreciate your fervor and diligence in presenting the SSTI case. Owning both SNDK and SSTI would seem to be a good fit as they don't overlap. I personally remain doubtful that SSTI can be as well diversified as SNDK can be. Concentrating on low density applications and hoping that the technology doesn't migrate away from you seems a bit risky, but if you are assured that this is the case then SSTI should flourish.
I look forward to your responses to my queries.
Best,
Aus |
