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: Dale Knipschield who wrote (49302)	7/17/2001 1:51:56 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 70976

Intel Green--The tension builds!

To: Dale Knipschield who wrote (49302)	7/17/2001 2:58:32 PM
From: mitch-c	Respond to of 70976

Yep. I usually use a limit order to let me "lead" the price in the direction I think it's headed (habit from a life of target shooting). I remain concerned that the marginal increase in chip production from geometry (300mm and line shrinks) will actually offset demand growth, so the unit volume of semi equipment sales will have a hard time increasing. Effectively, a fab will be able to buy one (larger, more complex, more efficient) semi tool to make the same chip volume as several prior generation tools, so the tool demand will likely become lumpier (fewer but higher revenue orders). Morgan's "all at once" comment captures this; I think he's exactly right. Whether the pricing model (for the tools) allows the same profitability as before ... well, he's the guy running the business <g>. Another problem with an "all at once" order scenario is one we've seen before - ramp-up from famine to feast. The more a company downsizes now, the faster the ramp-up meter will peg out at max, and the less opportunity it will have to feed at the (coming) feast. So, I'm beginning to see current overhead cost-efficiency as a limiter to future profitability in these companies. They really ought to carry some fat now, to help build muscle later. We've just had the negative shock; expectations are low. With the Fed and the IRS pumping liquidity, the next "surprises" are likely to be positive. (at least, that's where I'm leaning ... <g>) - Mitch