Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/government-should-invest-in-tsm-not-intel.14157/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Government should invest in TSM, not Intel

Arthur Hanson

Well-known member
If the government is going to truly "INVEST" a term they use far too loosely, I'd rather see the money go to a proven winner for their Arizona fabs than to a proven also-ran, like Intel. Sadly, the government has proven to many times it likes to invest in losers, uneconomic projects, or other endeavors with little or no return, many times substantial losses. I hope they invest in a winner, either way, if they invest, the government should get a verifiable return and not just hot air.
 
I think one needs to distinguish between regular investments and government investments. Government does not invest to make money (they can print them), government invests in country security and things like that. If it was just about money, the government would make even more money by investing in TSMC's Taiwan FABs.
 
I think one needs to distinguish between regular investments and government investments. Government does not invest to make money (they can print them), government invests in country security and things like that. If it was just about money, the government would make even more money by investing in TSMC's Taiwan FABs.
You make my point, in that basically, you are saying it doesn't make economic sense for even the best companies like TSM should build in Taiwan than the US for a good return. If one shouldn't invest in even TSM in the US, why throw money at a number two who lost their lead through poor management like Intel.
 
You make my point, in that basically, you are saying it doesn't make economic sense for even the best companies like TSM should build in Taiwan than the US for a good return. If one shouldn't invest in even TSM in the US, why throw money at a number two who lost their lead through poor management like Intel.
That's half of my point. It looks like you believe that US do not need semiconductor industry. That's where we disagree. And if US were to save semiconductor industry the government may have little choice but to invest in it even if it means potential losses.
 
That's half of my point. It looks like you believe that US do not need semiconductor industry. That's where we disagree. And if US were to save semiconductor industry the government may have little choice but to invest in it even if it means potential losses.
The US should invest in technology of all types but needs to create an efficient ecosystem to support it starting with a highly efficient, low-cost training system, streamlined permitting, and efficient capital structures.
 
If the government is going to truly "INVEST" a term they use far too loosely, I'd rather see the money go to a proven winner for their Arizona fabs than to a proven also-ran, like Intel. Sadly, the government has proven to many times it likes to invest in losers, uneconomic projects, or other endeavors with little or no return, many times substantial losses. I hope they invest in a winner, either way, if they invest, the government should get a verifiable return and not just hot air.
I don't know, Xi Jingping will likely invade Taiwan within the next ten years. Having the eggs in the TSMC basket if that situation plays out will not be good for USA or the EU, even if their are fabs in AZ. Process & cost wise TSMC would be the one to bet on, though the risk from the CCP is just not worth it.
 
Come on folks, there's a bit of disingenuous comments here. This industry location scenario and government support is NOT merely an economic discussion. Never has been. Of course money is involved, so companies want their "share" - and that's where the waste & inefficiencies come into play. The best lobbyist gets more dollars rather than the best overall research or development program. That is the maddening part, as companies will aim for the low hanging fruit of handout money and ignore the long term threat of their whole existence. But the security aspect is, and has been for 2+ decades, the driving factor in keeping leading edge technology out of China. That is the priority, and main threat to the US (financially & militarily to be sure), but wrapping it into an economics discussion is ignoring the 800# elephant in the room (or dragon if you want). Maybe that is worth two cents, it's what I have today....
 
The current CEO of Intel isn't credible. He's made claims about new fabs in ireland , Arizona, Israel, oregon , Germany ... and some of them won't be happening. With that there is still a core of Intel that's a brilliant company but parts of it are run poorly.
 
The current CEO of Intel isn't credible. He's made claims about new fabs in ireland , Arizona, Israel, oregon , Germany ... and some of them won't be happening. With that there is still a core of Intel that's a brilliant company but parts of it are run poorly.
Fab expansions can be good for Intel due to regional security issues, however Intel is still behind the top semiconductors, maybe even in the future. Hopefully they can turn things around.
 
If the government is going to truly "INVEST" a term they use far too loosely, I'd rather see the money go to a proven winner for their Arizona fabs than to a proven also-ran, like Intel. Sadly, the government has proven to many times it likes to invest in losers, uneconomic projects, or other endeavors with little or no return, many times substantial losses. I hope they invest in a winner, either way, if they invest, the government should get a verifiable return and not just hot air.
That's exactly DoD is doing to "encourage" TSMC to set up an advance fab in Arizona. Some additional federal semiconductor research projects and incentives floating around today are ways to "buy" senators and congressmen's support. Or we can say it's a "compromise".

If you allow us to get a TSMC fab in US, we will help you to fund your pet projects in your state.
 
Hopefully, the TSM fabs in the US will create an entire advanced ecosystem that will benefit not only TSM by diversifying production sites, but also its technology by working with the US universities and research institutions. Hopefully, this could create a win/win ecosystem for all.
 
I really don't think that you can call Intel an "also ran". They were the pioneers.
I do, however, also think that government should not invest in ANY commercial operation, at least not directly. Giving incentives to steer development in a certain direction (say renewable energy) is OK, but these existing companies are large enough to fend for themselves.
 
Back
Top