I find it difficult to disagree with your comments since they are indeed supported by AMAT's most recent acquisitions. You are right on target with your comments concerning AMAT getting closer to their customers and expanding their product offering. However, I do not agree that they will eventually manufcture ICs for their customers. AMAT will most likely partner with a Design/Construction company to provide a turn key manufacturing solution for customers like Intel.
AMAT and mega product offering companies like them do not provide the REAL technical capabilities for their systems. These companies have their "cookbook" processes that "work" in "everyone's" process but invariably the savvy process engineers who are the end users, research, develop, implement, and improve processes on the equipment as well as point out and demand equipment improvement programs for the tools they use. This is actually part of the charter at SEMATECH in Austin; to work with the equipment suppliers in order to develop more process worthy equipment (capability, uptime, and throughput).
Companies like AMAT do not have the sense of urgency required to be successful and competitive in the manufacturing arena and are very reluctant to change and work in a dynamic mode. Besides, these companies love to make "process upgrade kits" available at considerable mark up which are more times than not, the brainchild of a frustrated process engineer who is living with an equipment issue. A great deal of innovation resides within the ranks of the end user's engineering staff which then works closely with technical support of factory staff to provide real solutions. I do not mean to put down any equipment suppliers but just because you can produce a Ferrari, it most certainly does not qualify you as an INDY 500 superstar driver.
Very few of the Ferrari designers, field service, or mechanics could ever compete in a race as a driver.
But back to your original comments. While your point is well taken, TNCR recently announced the acquisition of Uniphase (part of Unipoint or vice versa) which seems to support my observations. I did not start nor do I want to start the AEIS takeover rumor but when you consider the huge mark up made by the equipment suppliers in the form of spare parts and/or replacement parts for down equipment, there is good reason to acquire certain strategic component suppliers purely on the revenues they can generate for field service. This is especially the case when you consider the non semiconductor applications for AEIS products in the near future.
As a shareholder of AEIS (therefore, I am admitting a certain degree of bias), a user of their components, and being intimately aware that their subsystems are replacing other components when the need arises (downtime) or when upgrades to existing equipment is considered, I beleive that it is not totally out of the question for them to be gobbled up by a larger fish. We have seen scenarios like this in the past and we have seen what you observe.
In closing, and in support of your comments, it was rumored on a different thread that AMAT was looking to acquire ASYT, a minienvironment SMIF supplier. I commented as to how I thought this was not a good fit and how I believed it was without merit. Everyman's opinion is just that. But what is most fortunate is that month's from now we can genuflect and see whose comments were closer to the target.
I do not want to give the impression that AMAT is going to takeover AEIS but rather that AEIS looks too good to be left on its own. It will be a better feather in a bigger hat.
Regards and thanks for your insight. |
