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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shane forbes who wrote (14746)	9/3/1998 4:32:00 PM
From: shane forbes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25814

Addi: Here's the ARTI release: biz.yahoo.com And balance this long term angst with the fact that LSI is still generating a large number of design wins. Didn't they say twice as many design wins as the first quarter or something like that in the c.call? Design wins are the best way to evaluate a high tech company's future prospects. Nevertheless LSI (pre Symbios) was caught in the middle - between the 0 vertically integrated foundry/IP setups and the fully integrated IBMs/LUs of the world. Now LSI (post Symbios) is a lot closer to the fully BIG vertically integrated companies. So that is good. The guys in the middle really do not have a long term future (that was the basis of my original comment about a 3-4 investment horizon in LSI). It is the big SQUEEZE factor so to speak. This is a capital intensive industry and BIGGER is BETTER. Yet another reason why Symbios is good <g> Worst case scenario is that someone will eventually buy LSI out! Don't laugh if things don't pan out that could really happen! Not this year but maybe around 2000. At what price who knows. But eventually all capital intensive industries coalesce into 5-10 behemoths. Maybe by taking over Symbios LSI is staking a claim to be one of those behemoths. I'm not so certain they can pull it off longer term but again we shall see.... Holding until bankrupt...

To: shane forbes who wrote (14746)	9/3/1998 4:41:00 PM
From: patrick tang	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

I do not see to much problem in excess foundry capacity at the next upturn - there will be a lot of 0.35/0.30um capacity, probably balanced 0.25um capacity, but most likely a scarcity of sub-0.25um foundry capacity. This overcapacity now has caused a lot of the current bunch of investors in Far East to lose confidence in semi-investments. For the first time Taiwan lost money in semi - Vanguard, Kuotech (lost it big!), Mosel-Vitelic etc. There might be some money to convert a few these 0.35um fabs to deep UV, but I just can't see the money freeing up int he near future to build brand new sub-0.25um fabs, let alone 300mm lines. On top of that, both the Koreans and Japanese have vastly scaled backt their investments. I see the next upturn right around the corner - at sub-0.25um. If I am right, that means within one year. As an example of what 0.35um vs 0.25um can mean - I just built a computer using the Matrox G200. The 0.35um graphic chip should really be called a heater. All this heat will be gone at 0.25um. And that's only for a VGA chip. A lot of these system-on-a-chip stuff just won't be feasible at 0.25um. Demonstrated, yes. Fully consumer ready price wise and ease of use, need sub-0.25um. Thanks for the angle on the number of designers. To me, system on a chip won't really take off under one gets to sub-0.25um. At that point, it will be quite a task to build the design teams to turn out enough building blocks for the chips. Notice how much trouble NSM is having getting out their Cyrix/GX stuff. I bet you the trouble comes from both a lack of processing as well as a lack of enough designers. In this view, LSI will be nicely positioned. I still like this company, the only thing that worries me is the stock market will tank and take the whole economy with it. IMHO, I think we have hit bottom for international economic crisis. But if US tanks because of the stock market, all bets are off. I hope the Feds will take this stock market drop seriously. patrick

To: shane forbes who wrote (14746)	9/3/1998 6:11:00 PM
From: Jock Hutchinson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 25814

Shane: Another problem facing LSI is that LSI is dependent upon Cadence and others for providing the software for the design tools that LSI needs for its future deep sub-micron products. Without the software, a lot of potential products cannot be developed. As of yet, Cadence hasn't developed much of the needed "next generation" software. In essence, this means that LSI could eventually become a commodity player in a different sort of chip market--i.e. a "better" class of commodity chip, but still commodity nevertheless. Why? Because the ability to go to the next level of sub-micron will become meaningless without the needed design tools. The other scenario is if Cadence does develop the needed software. Then the entire "fabless" chip industry is able to compete with LSI. Certainly, the control of one's own software is what has allowed companies such as ALTR and XLNX to flourish (at least relative to LSI). Thus, it would seem that the future looks even bleaker for LSI. However, much of this will be mitigated by the next upturn in the semi cycle. Long-term, vertical integration is imperative--particularly with the ongoing disinvestment in chip making equipment. Whatever short-term pain is being felt by Gresham will be a wash and then some with the ongoing lack of capital investment. Gresham is not limited by the lack of design tools. Thus, LSI promises to become an outright cash cow during the next upcycle. LSI's Symbios purchase at the peak of the next cycle could easily present a company with a book value of $20.00 a share with the portion of its intellectual capital significantly undervalued. What does LSI need to do? It needs to seek out a partner such as Cadence to achieve true intellectual property status. That's the sort of intellectual property cachet that will give it significant intellectual property status and stamina. Indeed, over time, it may make sense for Cadence to purchase LSI given LSI's lead as an independent maker of standard cells. Your thoughts?

To: shane forbes who wrote (14746)	9/3/1998 10:42:00 PM
From: Grand Poobah	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Regarding coming changes in the chip design process, here's my opinion. What's needed to produce a good design: 1. marketing/product strategy 2. design methodologies 3. designers 4. EDA tools 5. fab processing 6. testing 7. packaging What is scarcest/most expensive/hardest to come by: 1. design methodologies 2. designers 3. marketing/product strategy 4. EDA tools 5. testing 6. fab processing 7. packaging The Cadence/IP combination can come up with 4-7 on each list fairly easily, perhaps more easily and cheaply than today's ASIC vendors. But they have no advantage or even a disadvantage in obtaining items 1-3, which are what set apart the good companies from the mediocre. JMHO, G.P.

To: shane forbes who wrote (14746)	9/4/1998 12:58:00 AM
From: uu	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 25814

I read the Alex Brown report over and over and over. Buttom line they are basically saying LSI is "finished". So anyone who has a stake in this company better sell now and go home. I really dont know what to make of it. It is a one sided negative view of the company. There are valid points. But surely it can not all be that negative to the point of basically writing the company off. I dont believe even Tom Kurlak can be so negative on LSI. I would like to ask anyone who happens to have reports made by other analysts covering the company to please post them here. It would be very interesting to read for example Gruntel's report on LSI and why they continue to rate the company as a Strong Buy with a 12 month target price of $36-$40/shr (at least that was their target price till 3 weeks ago). Many thanks in advance to anyone having access to other reports by other analysts covering LSI. Rgards, Addi Jamshidi