>>Are you the same person who doesn't like CYMI because it only has a
single product?
No! I'm long CYMI now and have done well with it over the past year. I even had the good luck to sell at 97, although I gave a little back by rebuying some before it bottomed. But I'm ahead again on the current round. I generally like single-product companies, since if you analyze (guess?) correctly, they really fly. Also did quite well with ASMLF, Iomega and Intuit.
Please don't sound so defensive. I'm not attacking the stock and was long until a couple of weeks ago (looks like I sold at a good time, although Friday nailed me with a couple of others). I don't perceive the masking operation, i-line operation and P-GILD to be complementary, that's my concern. If this was Lucent and they were developing masks to support an e-beam stepper they were also developing, it would make more sense. But they are developing masks that don't seem to enhance their current stepper line.
My criticism of P-GILD is more complicated, and has to do with the likelihood of it ever being adopted widely enough to show a decent profit. The industry is pouring money into what appears to me to be incompatible technology with P-GILD. I would love to hear that it has a niche in a world dominated by DUV, EUV, XRL, e-beam, and ion beam, but I see it as being such a small player it could be shunted to the side even if it has some real merit. If Sematech gave it a nomination in November, it would be a different story. But right now, with so many powerful entrants in the next two+ generations of photolith pursuing so many incompatible system paradigms, a little guy like P-GILD seems like a long shot.
So although you could say that UTEK is focussed on the closely related areas of current steppers, future stepper technology, and masking technology, I don't see them fitting together. I am very willing to listen and be persuaded, however. |
