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.

Technology Stocks : Semi Equipment-Sell when they're singing in the streets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pink Minion who wrote (68)	4/29/2000 7:39:00 PM
From: Pink Minion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 276

This is what I'm waiting for. Semi is part of the Internut craze dailynews.yahoo.com `Driven by the Internet, we expect a golden age of the semiconductor industry over the next 10 years,'' Chairman Wilfred Corrigan, MH

To: Pink Minion who wrote (68)	4/29/2000 9:11:00 PM
From: Ritz	Respond to of 276

Re:"Are their any full blown 300mm fabs out there or are they still just pilot lines?" Just pilot lines so far. I believe that TI is the only U.S. maker that plans to have a 300mm fab actually in production next year, and that Intel is currently slated to start 300mm production in 2002. -Ritz

To: Pink Minion who wrote (68)	5/2/2000 11:05:00 AM
From: TI2, TechInvestorToo	Respond to of 276

Dresden was first big fab 300mm fab (Siemens JV). Its been up a couple of years-my perspective that it came up easier then IBM at 200mm (they started in early 80's-were running in late 80's at 500-1000nm ground rules). Intel gave us 6 inch. TI2

To: Pink Minion who wrote (68)	5/2/2000 5:24:00 PM
From: Dr. Mitchell R. White	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 276

Yo ex-, sorry for the delay responding, I was reading up on stuff related to ion implant and oxidation/diffusion (classes to teach this week). Intel was mostly responsible for the 125 mm to 150 mm step, in the mid '80s, I believe. The jump to 200 mm was carried mostly by IBM, although Sematech had a supporting role. Still, IBM once published that they'd spent over $8 billion of their own $ to get the industry over that hurdle, and they thought they'd let some other sucker, er, industry partner suffer through the next wafer size expansion. Which is slated to cost $18 billion to work the kinks out of, according to some industry analysts. That's more than a small pile of change! I don't know of any full-scale, 300 mm fabs actually running. Siemens/Motorola in Dresden (Siemec, is that the name?) was slated for that, but I believe they populated with 200 mm tools when all the equipment makers pushed their 300 mm release dates out. Intel has a 300 mm pilot line in Oregon, and I understand it's making Pentium III chips; enough they call that fab "production" but it's really still a beta-test facility. <grin> There was one other small facility up, but I misremember where. Best information on this is available from SEMI, by simply purchasing their "Fabs on Disk" which comes out regularly (quarterly, I believe). All you need is about $800 or so in loose coins from the sofa. (My wife took all my loose sofa change and installed some tile flooring, hence I don't have a recent copy of Fabs on Disk. <sigh> ) Matching the top with "when the next generation wafer sizes start kicking in" is much more problematical; I tried, really I did. Here's the rub: I can't find solid data on MSI (millions of square inch) Si devoted to each size wafer over time, preferably reported monthly, since about 1985 or so. That would make it possible to "correlate" growth in MSI devoted to each tool size over time, and where that falls on the rise/fall cycle chart for our industry. Anybody got raw data of that type? MSI Si consumed each month, by wafer diameter, over the last 15 years or so? Then I might could give a guess about whether or not it correlates to the financial cycle. At a guess, the correlation is probably not very good, as the economic cycle may not match the implementation cycle. We've had more tops (and bottoms) in the financial end (5? 6? since 1985) than we have wafer size changeovers (not yet 3 complete), and that's a Real Problem to sort out.... Mitch