Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Donald B. Fuller who wrote (34509)	3/7/2000 1:27:00 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Re: MEMC Cheap for a reason though. They were bleeding money so bad there was talk of a buyout by parent VEBA of Germany not too long ago. I would much rather own an equipment co. with a vast IP library than a commodity play. Just MHO, Brian

To: Donald B. Fuller who wrote (34509)	3/7/2000 1:50:00 PM
From: FLSTF97	Respond to of 70976

Actually that article didn't really give the whole story. What Dr. Mozer really said is that even now the 200mm wafer price is a money losing proposition for all the players. Even with extremely high capacity utilization, they don't have the money, nor does the price justify capital expenditures for even new 200mm pullers much less 300mm. In private discussion the question was posed as to why doesn't somebody buy MEMC to whittle the suppliers down to 4? The answer was two fold: No money and even if there was money nobody would offer a price likely to be acceptable. The latter thought being that buying them and continuing to operate the facilities is tantamount to paying for more losses. Buying them and shutting them down would leave the other competitors healthier. Bottom line was that if prices don't increase its a matter of poker to see who goes belly up first. I doubt there is an equipment play here nor a reasonably safe play in the commodity vendors until that first player dies. FATBOY