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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grantcw who wrote (30170)	8/20/2000 8:10:13 PM
From: MarkR37	Respond to of 54805

"Can anyone explain to me why QCOM is classified a Gorilla of CDMA technology while CREE is not classified as a Gorilla of SiC?" I have thought about this a bit and it seems to me that dominating a niche area in the semiconductor field does not give CREE gorilla status all by itself. CREE has been very successful making SIC and has some great growth areas which it is penetrating. However, they don't have an iron clad grip over the intellectual property it takes to make their various products. Getting all of your competitors to pay you licensing fees and having lots of patents like GMST and QCOM is something CREE currently lacks. Don't get me wrong, I own both of these companies and love CREE's business. I just don't think it is a gorilla. Maybe an up and coming king.

To: Grantcw who wrote (30170)	8/20/2000 8:43:04 PM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 54805

Can anyone explain to me why QCOM is classified a Gorilla of CDMA technology while CREE is not classified as a Gorilla of SiC? I'm no smart guy, but I'd say it's because QCOM has proprietary rights to CDMA and gets royalty revenues from others using it, while CREE has no such rights to SiC. I'd say that a better analogy might be Cree:SiC::Qualcomm:CDMAasics. There the expertise, head start, etc. would come into play for both companies, but in a context in which other players could still compete. tekboy/Ares@bwtfdik.pov

To: Grantcw who wrote (30170)	8/21/2000 7:09:03 PM
From: Eric Jacobson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Re: Cree and it's G&K status Chilly, I'd like to offer an answer to differs somewhat from the other two you received. There was some discussion of CREE's G&K status on the CREE thread previously (between posts #2250-2300)that several G&K regulars participated in that you might want to review. One thing to keep in mind with CREE is that it is involved in more than one market. For example, it produces SiC wafers (one market), some of which it sells, but most of which it uses for the production of other products in other markets (blue LEDs, RF amplifiers, etc.). CREE has the potential to become a Gorilla because it is in a mass market involving a discontinuous innovation (production of SiC wafers), CREE controls the IPR of an open proprietary standard, and there are significant barriers to entry. It is not considered a Gorilla because this market has probably not yet crossed the chasm and an extensive value chain has not yet formed. CREE is also involved in royalty markets (production of various products using SiC technology - blue LEDs, RF amplifiers, etc.) where there is no open proprietary standard or significant barriers to entry. Some people believe CREE is likely to become a King in these markets because the inherent characteristics of SiC make the production of these various products more efficient using SiC than other techniques. CREE is furthest along in the LED market. Based on recent revenues and the reported backlog regarding the LED market, CREE is across the chasm, in the bowling alley, and the market has just reached tornado standards. In addition to the royalty plays, it is possible that one of these days, in addition to the Gorilla market for SiC wafers and various royalty markets, CREE will stumble upon a Gorilla market for a product using SiC technology. An example might be the blue laser. This is an example of an increasingly complex product that begins to rely upon the inherent characteristics of SiC. However, this is not yet a whole product or across the chasm. There are questions marks about whether CREE will achieve either G or K status. SiC technology and the related products like LEDs are substitutes for products that are already produced and have established markets. Therefore, the barriers to entry are not extremely large at the moment. For example, someone can use a LED made by CREE, an LED made by someone else, or they can use a light bulb. Such a substitution threat means CREE may never achieve King status in a relatively simple market such as LEDs. Over time, however, it is possible the barriers to entry might become more significant as the applications of CREE's technology become increasingly complex and increasingly reliant on the inherent characteristics of SiC and as the value chain members "design in" CREE's products.