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.

Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: robert b furman who wrote (23324)	2/16/2025 10:43:49 AM
From: Kirk ©	1 Recommendation Recommended By CrashDavis Respond to of 26443

Thanks for your thoughts on this Bob I worry about a loss of competition but perhaps it is like airliners, and it will boil down to Mainland China vs US based companies with TSMC the volleyball... or hockey puck. IF China develops commercial nuclear fusion first, then it is game, set and match. I think we should be putting government money into getting that done first rather than more trips to the Moon or landing on Mars. A joint venture would eliminate the fear of failure for Intel investors so they might be more willing to spend to increase USA capacity quicker. I think our real estate shortage and cost problems are in large part due to government costs and taxes too. We've had so much massive inflation in California that most of us at an age to downsize are remodeling our larger than needed homes for the long term rather than sell since the taxes owed are so high we can't afford to buy smaller homes in the same city with the money left over after taxes. If I was running Intel, I'd want 51% of the foundry so if they become profitable enough, they could buy out the others if the others wanted to sell. Under 51% and the currently cash rich companies might buy them out with a hostile takeover. TSMC might also want 51% so the US based companies don't hostile take over their share after they give up the needed IP to become competitive. Kirk

To: robert b furman who wrote (23324)	2/19/2025 9:44:01 AM
From: Kirk ©	1 Recommendation Recommended By Return to Sender Respond to of 26443

Interesting observations. Is Trump pushing for this and will an Intel/TSMC venture put Japan and Korea in a situation similar to what Intel faced being too far behind? TSMC takes over Intel foundry? Samsung and Rapidus face steep headwinds Monica Chen, Hsinchu; Jingyue Hsiao, DIGITIMES Asia Wednesday 19 February 2025 The global market is watching how TSMC, pressured by the US, might assist Intel's foundry operations, while Samsung Electronics and Rapidus, also facing challenges, may similarly require TSMC's support. Since Trump assumed office, there has been speculation that Trump targets TSMC to help restore US dominance in semiconductor manufacturing. Efforts include plans to speed up advanced manufacturing expansions in the US and move advanced packaging capacity stateside, with hopes that TSMC can support Intel through various strategies. If TSMC teams up with Intel on the sub-4nm process node in any form, it could significantly affect Japanese and Korean counterparts, potentially hindering their ability to secure major chip clients. This scenario might lead to financial losses similar to Intel's and increase their deficits while they await government support. TSMC under Trump's pressure: will it be forced to rescue Intel? Under pressure from Trump, who accuses Taiwan's TSMC of taking away American chip business, there are threats to alter the CHIPS Act subsidies. Rumors indicate TSMC may have to assist Intel, but this could put TSMC at a disadvantage, forcing it to seek the least harmful option. TSMC's acquisition of an Intel wafer fab could alleviate Intel's losses by simplifying its factory operations. However, this process could take two to three years to become fully operational and is complicated by both companies being publicly traded. However, industry insiders argue that Intel's primary challenge is its foundry operations, not its design business, adding that only US government intervention might persuade a company to tackle it due to the high acquisition costs of fabs and patents. Even if TSMC were to acquire Intel's foundry business, the acquisition's high cost, coupled with valuing fabs and patents, poses significant challenges. Even post-takeover, restructuring would take at least three years. Ongoing quarterly losses add to the difficulties, while TSMC must also factor in US government interests. Rescuing Intel seems nearly impossible. However, while involvement in Intel's foundry business poses a substantial risk, TSMC would likely comply if the US government insists. Risks other than Intel Amid the Trump 2.0, several countries are struggling, with TSMC potentially being the semiconductor industry's biggest casualty. Industry insiders reveal an air of uncertainty surrounding the future of Samsung and Rapidus. In the competitive market for advanced processes below 7nm, Intel has faced significant challenges, witnessing years of financial losses. While Samsung aspires to surpass its rivals, it remains considerably behind TSMC, struggling to secure external clients or substantial orders for its sub-5nm processes. If TSMC acquires Intel's foundry business, it could maintain dominance over major US firms' orders with government backing, potentially raising foundry prices for profitability. This would further challenge Samsung's position. Samsung might expand its collaboration with TSMC, similar to Intel's approach, to maintain its competitiveness in the chip industry beyond memory products. On the other hand, Rapidus plans to start trial production of 2nm technology by April 2025 but faces uncertainties with yield and clients. With Samsung and Intel dealing with financial challenges, Rapidus, dependent on government and private investments such as those from Sony, might find it difficult to sustain itself. TSMC may eventually be asked to intervene again. digitimes.com