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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kapkan4u who wrote (159876)	2/23/2002 1:36:39 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

The bulk of .18u capex was spent in 1999 and 2000. On a 5 year depreciation schedule the capacity is not even close to being fully depreciated. Ok but they'll be running for a long time. EP

To: kapkan4u who wrote (159876)	2/23/2002 6:37:00 AM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

kapkan4u: Two things: 1. was it on a ddb - if so not much left after 3 yrs. 2. The reality is that .13 is here and it is so much more efficient that .18 will phased out early or relogated to low end stuff that can be built with what will now be 0 cost equip. Also what must be considered is what portion of that equipment can be recycled into the .13 scheme.JFD

To: kapkan4u who wrote (159876)	2/23/2002 10:12:34 AM
From: Monica Detwiler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

kapkan4u - You wrote The bulk of .18u capex was spent in 1999 and 2000. On a 5 year depreciation schedule the capacity is not even close to being fully depreciated I think Intel only built one wafer fab during that time period - Fab 18 [remember how the analysts berated Intel for not having enough capacity in 2000 ?] . Any other capital expenditures for their 0.18 micron process would have been rather minimal - in photolithography - since Intel - you will recall - maintained their aluminum metallization process. This would result in rather minimal (relatively speaking) capital expenditures for 0.18 micron processing in the first place - would it not? Monica