GlobalFoundries could proceed with a planned initial public offering. It is owned by Mubadala Investment Co., an investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, but headquartered in the U.S.
Array ( [content] => [params] => Array (  => /forum/index.php?threads/intel-is-in-talks-to-buy-globalfoundries.14433/ ) [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] => 2020671 [XFI] => 1050070 ) [wordpress] => /var/www/html )
Does GF really know how to be a foundry? Outside of Singapore, Malta has two customers: AMD and IBMNot a bad idea if Intel is serious about the foundry business, absolutely. Wait, does this mean Intel is not buying SiFive for $20B? Both for $50B? Exciting times in the semiconductor industry, absolutely.
Maybe Pat will cover this in his next webcast:
TrueIntel is trying to buy a chip production and research organization that AMD, IBM, Globalfundries, and Mubadala for many years can't figure out a way to be competitive and profitable.
If Intel really wants to jumpstart their foundry business quickly, they should buy UMC.
Neither Globalfundries nor UMC are in the game of leading edge. What's Intel looking for from this GF acquisition? Why don't they just buy UMC?Not a bad idea if Intel is serious about the foundry business, absolutely. Wait, does this mean Intel is not buying SiFive for $20B? Both for $50B? Exciting times in the semiconductor industry, absolutely.
Maybe Pat will cover this in his next webcast:
IMHO, the Globalfundries' IPO is just a posture to lure some M&A buyers. Without leading edge manufacturing capability, Globalfundries can't create too many amazing outlook to show those potential IPO investors. No amazing outlook means no amazing dream means no amazing IPO.Interesting, Mubadala wants to sell. But it the current climate which is quicker/ more secure: IPO or Acqusition
I really disagree with this. When GF was pressing 7nm it was losing slightly less than $1bn per year. Now it is profitable. TSMC and UMC both make money from mature nodes. There is more to semi than leading edge: everything has a chip in it not everything has the latest MPU. They are serious about their IPO and have been planning for years..IMHO, the Globalfundries' IPO is just a posture to lure some M&A buyers. Without leading edge manufacturing capability, Globalfundries can't create too many amazing outlook to show those potential IPO investors. No amazing outlook means no amazing dream means no amazing IPO.
While your points are certainly valid, I think that the main point you miss is the goal of additional domestic production. GF fabs in the US have almost the same # wafer starts as Intel fabs in AZ & OR, they simply aren't leading edge. But then MOST foundry business is not leading edge, at least as measured by wafer starts. Any such foundry business would have to be run independently - surely Intel learned that lesson the first time around. Regardless it should be interesting to see how it may unfold. GF's "watch this space" for July 19th holds even more curiosity at the moment.Neither Globalfundries nor UMC are in the game of leading edge. What's Intel looking for from this GF acquisition? Why don't they just buy UMC?
1. In terms of revenue, UMC is bigger than GF.
2. GF has been losing money every year while UMC is making profit every year. GF acquisition potentially will drag down Intel's financial performance but buying UMC will be positive to Intel's book.
3. The integration of GF into Intel's organization and roadmap can take several years. Does Intel really have time and energy to do so?
4. If Intel buys UMC, Intel can immediately tap into the large Taiwan semiconductor talents and resources. But buying GF? Do we know if GF has anything that makes GF so wonderful in the past many years?
3. No matter how, in the long run any Intel's competitors will walk away from the foundry Intel acquired. I really don't see there's any magic solution on this. For example, if AMD and Nvidia are currently the clients of GF and UMC, are they going to stay as Intel's customers once Intel becomes the new owner?
4. We know Asia is a critical part of semiconductor industry. We can see TSMC is making strategical investment and partnership in Taiwan, Mainland China, Japan, US, and Europe. On the other hand, I don't see Intel is doing anything significantly in Asia in recent years. Why is Intel avoiding Asia while TSMC is setting up shops in Intel's front yard and backyard? Does it make sense?
It’s a good point on the ip.GF buyout is actually a smart move. GF is all in on Si on insulator which is strong for IOT, RF, high power semis, etc. and is unique IP. Makes intel a broader play. After GF dumped trying to compete in leading they finally found a winning formula with multi billion design wins for anyone who hasnt been counting… Those talking about UMC, now that makes zero sense…. A legacy fab with zero IP.
Some questions I have:
What about process knowledge?
Would there be anything in cancelled GloFo 7nm project which Intel can use to improve 10nm?
Would there be any IBM Reaserch which GloFo incorporated when IBM Fabs became part of GloFo, which Intel can use?
Also capacity: Is Intel 10nm capacity constrained, and could GloFo fabs fix this?