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 : Applied Materials No-Politics Thread (AMAT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (12146)	11/19/2004 10:40:12 AM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25522

<They said they spent $500M on buybacks. Does this mean that employees exercised $350M?> We would have to go much deeper into the actual 10K or 10Q to find out exactly. In theory yes.

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (12146)	11/19/2004 11:15:44 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25522

"Isn't it true that employee options exercises increase paid in capital, while share buybacks decrease it? They said they spent $500M on buybacks. Does this mean that employees exercised $350M?" Not being an accountant, I can't tell you what "Paid in capital" means, but I know the the single event of an employee exercising an option is a POSITIVE CASH FLOW event. If they have options at $12 from the 2002 and 2003 lows and exercised 1,000 of them when AMAT was $24, then this is my understanding of what happened. #1 AMAT got 1,000 x ($24-$12) = $12,000 in cash for its treasury #2 The Employee has $24,000 in AMAT stock that she can sell immediately to anyone willing to buy. Most of us (me at HPQ) did just this as we were taxed on that gain on the day of exercise so selling provided cash to pay the taxes. Some only sell enough to pay the tax... But bottom line is the employee sees $12,000 in income. #3 Shareholders suffer dilution by 1,000 shares. They got some benefit from the extra cash which shows on "Stockholder equity" but the number of shares went up by 1,000 so the book value per share went down unless AMAT was selling at a P/B below 1.0 in which case it could go up.

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (12146)	11/19/2004 12:47:01 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 25522

Litho roadblocks threaten sub-40-nm chip production Mark LaPedus 11/19/2004 12:14 PM EST SAN JOSE, Calif. — New roadblocks are surfacing in next-generation lithography (NGL) that could threaten the IC industry's shift towards sub-40-nm chip manufacturing, warned an official from fab-equipment provider Canon Inc. Current 193-nm optical tools could hit the wall after the 65-nm node, prompting the need for new solutions at 65-nm and beyond. Immersion lithography remains the most promising technology after current and "dry" 193-nm tools, but the jury is still out on whether or not the technology can process wafers -- in volumes. Electron projection lithography (EPL) lacks a customer base, while extreme ultraviolet (EUV) technology has apparently hit a new and unforeseen roadblock -- viable photoresists. EUV is supposed to move into production for the 32-nm node by 2009. The industry must resolve several issues before EUV goes into volume production in fabs, most notably the power source. At a recent EUV event in Japan, lithographers disclosed a new problem. EUV "images below 40-nm with chemically amplified resists are unacceptable," said Phil Ware, a fellow with Canon (Tokyo), a supplier of lithography equipment, during a presentation at International Sematech's Global Economic Symposium on Thursday (Nov. 18). In the past, EUV proponents claimed that current resists were suitable for production. However, Ware indicated that EUV will require "more sensitive resists" in order for EUV tools to process wafers below 40-nm. "It's one of the issues the industry must overcome," Ware said. "EUV looks iffy," he said. "All of the same issues with EUV are still on the list despite all of the money spent in the industry. If EUV doesn't come at the 32-nm node, it will be a challenge at 22-nm." This is not to say that other NGL candidates are a slam dunk, including EPL. "EPL has a different issue: no customers," Ware said. There are even some questions about immersion lithography, which is supposed to emerge in the 2006 and 2007 time frame. While the industry is bullish on immersion, the technology has yet to produce a wafer in a production fab. "What we're waiting for is proof of life," he said. Immersion also appears to have some theoretical limits. Some believe that immersion could scale to the 22-nm node. Ware indicated that an advanced 193-nm immersion tool, coupled with a "flavored water" at a refractive index at 1.6, could only process wafers down to 40-nm. "You still need (a solution) at 30-nm," he said. Immersion with 157-nm tools could go beyond 40-nm, but that technology still suffers from a lack of suitable 157-nm lens materials. And there is no viable liquid for 157-nm immersion, he said.