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 : IDTI - an IC Play on Growth Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SemiBull who wrote (10254)	5/9/1999 11:19:00 PM
From: musea	Respond to of 11555

Semi, This is a good article. If you will note, a key point (perhaps THE key point) is that Intel, through its awesome manufacturing capability, is making life on the edge uncomfortable for all of its competitors. It has become clear, because of IDTI's 0.7% of the market, that IDTI cannot fab the WinChips effectively (effectiveness measured by cost and yield, two sides of the same coin). Otherwise we would have seen the Pacific rim blanketed by low-cost WinChips. Therefore, a partnership at the minimum would be the only strategy for IDTI at this point. I think that the only two candidates in terms of process technology and manufacturing muscle are TXN and IBM. However, I don't think that a partnership would be in the best interests of IDTI shareholders, namely, us. My belief is that the best way to increase the value of our shares is to allow (i.e. fund) Centaur to come through on its design goals as put forth last year. This would create the greatest demand for the Centaur design center (i.e. highest price). If either TXN or IBM buys Centaur, then Intel would face its greatest competitor to date. If someone else does, then AMD would be fighting for its life. -musea

To: SemiBull who wrote (10254)	5/10/1999 2:46:00 PM
From: Rob S.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11555

The uP marketplace is one of narrow "windows of opportunity" during which it is crucial to make your entry and ramp production quickly - near flawless execution is needed to compete with Intel. Intel has several design teams simultaneously working on designing uPs to meet similar goals. One group might be working on an architecture that stresses multiple execution pipes while another group leans more toward incorporating more on-chip memory. These groups compete and the most successful gets chosen for production. If the market shifts, Intel is often only a few steps away from pulling in the efforts on a design that addresses the need. IDT/Centaur have limited resources both in terms of money and in terms of design bandwidth. They have no margin for error and can't support simultaneous designs. Intel has also exceeded expectations for going after the low cost uP market, aggressively turning up the heat with the once crippled Celeron product. Now that they have beefed up the on-chip memory, ramped up the MHz and refined the core, the Celerons are head-to-head competition against the K6 and the PII. And now that Intel has come out with the new low cost mb chip set that incorporates the graphics processor, the cost advantage has swung over to Intel. There is still some premium for the Intel name. Unless IDT finds OEMs who want uPs designed for high volume applications (something they have been trying to do for about two years), they had better act quickly to sell Centaur off. Within a few months it will be worthless, if not already.