SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Dupont Photomasks (DPMI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: LittleMax who wrote (733)11/16/1998 10:02:00 AM
From: Katherine Derbyshire  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 955
 
>> The first issue is my claim that MASK is relatively undervalued next to DPMI and
PLAB and absolutely undervalued in terms of standard valuation measures, e.g.,
P/E. It does not appear to me that any of the other comments on this thread or the
related threads have put a dent in that claim.<<

A claim regarding which I have no opinion, positive or negative.

>>The second issue is your claim that 0.25 is the current standard or, at a minimum,
that it is not far off. (I hope that phrasing is acceptable.) I agree that .25 is the
current technical standard. I'm questioning whether it is the current business
standard. I suspect that a lot of profitable business is being done at larger sizes and
will continue to be done at larger sizes for some time. The transition to .25 in a
business sense (not just a technology sense) is taking place and will continue to take
place over the next year or so. ... If you
know where the sales volumes are published on this point, please share it with us. <<

I do not have specific sales volumes for different mask types. If I were looking for that information, my sources would be Dataquest, ICE, the Intel mask survey, and mask supplier SEC filings, in roughly that order.

Katherine



To: LittleMax who wrote (733)11/22/1998 10:43:00 PM
From: Carl R.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 955
 
You wrote: The only way for MASK to be relatively adversely affected over the next few quarters is for .35 and above to disappear at the same speed the 486 disappeared when the Pentium showed up.

....or the speed at which TFI was replaced by MR in disk heads. <VBG>

While I don't think that is happening either, it is a risk that is worth watching.

Carl