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 : Speedfam [SFAM] Lovers Unite ! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SemiBull who wrote (3111)	7/13/1998 2:08:00 AM
From: Greger	Respond to of 3736

Worth Magazine had a buy rating on SFAM. All to do with CMP. I don't remember the analyst's name, but it was a mutual fund Mgr.

To: SemiBull who wrote (3111)	7/13/1998 8:42:00 AM
From: Q.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3736

Semibull, re. your invective dismissal of "AMAT BS being published on this thread" and your claim that "AMAT hasn't gobbled up SFAM's CMP marketshare" ... Let's talk numbers. AMAT's CMP sales, which are reported by Carl Johnson Message 4539423 are now simply far, far higher than SFAM's meager $7.4 M quarterly CMP sales. Moreover, SFAM's CMP sales have eroded sharply, simultaneously with AMAT's sales increasing. You can see all the numbers in this table, which I find striking: Message 5092206 So those are the numbers. Now regarding your invective... I'm curious how you dispute these numbers as being "BS". I can't vouch for Carl's AMAT numbers, but I'm sure I got the SFAM numbers right, as you can verify yourself from the SFAM newsreleases each quarter. Anyway, I'm curious what you mean exactly by "the marketshare they [AMAT] have gotten has come at a price (giving machines away for free or dirt cheap as a package deal which they can do b/c of the SEC's materiality standard without Wall Street knowing", and even if this is true, why does it matter ... if the lights are going out at SFAM's CMP business, what difference does it make what kind of gross margin the successful competitor has chosen ... the lights are still going out, and that's all a shareholder needs to know. John G, former SFAM shareholder.

To: SemiBull who wrote (3111)	7/13/1998 12:39:00 PM
From: Donald B. Fuller	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3736

Interesting snippet about the state of CMP development from a larger article about the 200--->300mm transition crisis (from Semiconductor Business News 7/15/98) ... "What will galvanize [the 300-mm movement] is when we say we're going ahead; [but] that unfortunately is not going to happen tomorrow," lamented the Intel executive. "I'm the one pulling the data together and I'm not sure it will be good enough [to make a decision] but I know I'll have the information in the fourth quarter." What Seligson worries about most is the industry talking itself into a "self-fulfilling prophecy of doom." His advice now to tool makers is to continue developing 300-mm systems if they are still in alpha and not quite ready for a pilot line. "We are willing to buy tools that are fundamentally reliable but [that] may still need incremental improvements over an 18- to 24-month period [to be production worthy]," he explained. He believes that Intel has a good handle on the progress of most fab tool sets, but there are some problem areas--especially in chemical mechanical polishing (CMP). "The CMP delays are just embarrassing," he added ... So, in spite of the current SFAM gloom, it sounds as though the CMP field is still WIDE OPEN. That's how I read this. Don