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 : Stock Swap -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tonyt who wrote (11172)	2/3/1998 11:01:00 AM
From: Andrew Vance	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 17305

AV -- I haven't heard anything yet but they are a compelling story for a takeout. Low price makes it affordable to almost anyone with cash reserves or a less beaten up stock. Why take out GGNS??? Real easy. 1. There are maybe 3 ion implanter vendors worthy of note in the Industry. 2. IMO, Eaton Corp has the hands on headlock in the market. 3. GGNS was early to market with its high energy MeV implanter while Eaton's foray was less enthusiastic. 4. The GGNS BILLI process, when implemented correctly, with good equipment uptime, etal. has demonstrated that it can shave numerous costly processing steps from the overall manufacturing process. this lowers wafer cost, increases yields (more steps, more chances of defects), reduces cycle (which might also translate to improved fab starts capability which reduces costs again), and may eliminate the need for using more costly epi wafers for certain devices. 5. Everything in #4 is a major competitive advantage for the hard pressed DRAM business and anyone needing to improve the bottom line. It might also be said that advanced processes may actually require the use of MeV implanters. GGNS is not strong enough, IMO, to go it alone and is in dire need of partnering with someone before they lose their appeal. They need enhanced technical, applications and field service support that may only be available from the likes of Eaton or AMAT. (actually a 4th company comes to mind, Varian.) Either way, GGNS has what I believe to be an enabling technology that, in the right hands with the correct amount of infrastructure, could be extremely successful in the long term. Its recent move and spike in volume may only be recognition of an extremely oversold situation. If I were to guess, they might have a double edged sword relative to the Asian situation. I would expect them to have a great deal of exposure there since the Asian Foundries and DRAM producers have the highest probability of implementing this technology on a broader scale there to improve competitiveness and cost efficiencies, and above all, to meet customer requirements for foundry services. As the crisis unfolds, I would expect this exposure to hurt GGNS. However, the other side of the blade is that it is a very cost effective means to improving you lot in life relative to this crisis. For all the reasons mentioned in #4 above, you would beg, borrow, steal, etal to implement an enabling technology such as this to remain competitive or to be more competitive in the global marketplace. My guess is that any of the other major ion implanter providers would make suitable parent companies for GGNS. Please also keep in mind that GGNS has had a spotty history. There are those of us still smarting from the early thin films deposition systems purchased from them more than a decade ago. It's sometimes hard to shake your past. As usual, this is just one man's opinion. this and 25 cents may not even get you a cup of coffee these days.<GGG> Andrew