Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/baird-notes-supply-chain-talk-of-intel-fab-spinoff-with-tsmc-involved.22079/page-3
        )

    [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] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

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

Baird notes supply chain talk of Intel fab spinoff with TSMC involved

kevin01 said:
It feels that this deal rumor was b.s.

I can imagine a tariff by Trump adminstration in some way like this: 1) 25% or even 50% tariff on chips manufactured in TW. 2) however, if the involved fab customer also manufactures in the U.S., or put some sort of prepay into a fab based in the U.S. (it could be IFS, globalfoundries, or TSMC), they can get a deduction of tariffs. It is kind of like carbon taxes and ev credits.
Click to expand...

Carbon Taxes and Offsets , more financial BS to transfer tax payer money to the private sector.

So bringing in something similar for semiconductors should be a popular industry move no?
 
osnium said:
What happens to Intel’s development fabs in Oregon? Will they get shut down or get converted to production only?
Click to expand...
JD Vance mentioned US designed and US manufactured silicon in the recent event. That implies Oregon would remain as it is with or without JV..
 
XYang2023 said:
JD Vance mentioned US designed and US manufactured silicon in the recent event. That implies Oregon would remain as it is with or without JV..
Click to expand...
You can keep Oregon as a manufacturing site but there will be significant layoffs because fewer people are required to run a manufacturing site than a development site.
 
osnium said:
You can keep Oregon as a manufacturing site but there will be significant layoffs because fewer people are required to run a manufacturing site than a development site.
Click to expand...
I think they would keep it as a development site (or hybrid) to meet the "US designed" criteria. It is just my guess from connecting the recent news.
 
XYang2023 said:
I wrote about this approach on this forum after the August earnings call. At that time, I thought this approach was the cheapest for both sides. Probably no one believed it, and most viewed TSMC with a winner-takes-all perspective.

"In addition, Intel’s fab could be spun off into a new entity jointly owned by TSMC and Intel, and run by TSMC, with the new entity receiving U.S. Chip Act funding, the firm adds."

Baird notes supply chain talk of Intel fab spinoff with TSMC involved - TipRanks.com

Baird analyst Tristan Gerra says there are discussions from the Asia semiconductor supply chain that the U.S. government will get involved in potentially TSMC (TSM)...
www.tipranks.com www.tipranks.com
Click to expand...

This is absolutely not true:

Baird analyst Tristan Gerra says there are discussions from the Asia semiconductor supply chain that the U.S. government will get involved in potentially TSMC sending engineers to Intel’s 3nm/2nm fab, applying the company’s know-how to ensure that fab and subsequent manufacturing projects from Intel become viable.

This is highly unlikely:

In addition, Intel’s fab could be spun off into a new entity jointly owned by TSMC and Intel, and run by TSMC, with the new entity receiving U.S. Chip Act funding, the firm adds. Baird says that while there is no confirmation and potential completion of this project could be lengthy, the move would make sense. Intel would benefit from significant cash flow relief, and would focus on design and platform solutions going forward, while a viable fab could finally attract key fabless companies to diversify into a geo-dependable manufacturing model, contends the analyst.

That said, anything could happen in the next four years. :unsure:
 
fatfat said:
Unless the US concede to China in some key aspects such as lifting the embargo of EUV, it's unlikely for China to approve any deal between Intel and tsmc.
and I guess it's not wise for Intel or tsmc to lose China market in the short to mid term.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Remember, China did not approve the Tower Semiconductor acquisition by Intel. There is no way they would approve anything involving Intel and TSMC. As I understand it, in China's mind TSMC belongs to Taiwan and Taiwan belongs to China.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
I agree completely. Remember, China did not approve the Tower Semiconductor acquisition by Intel. There is no way they would approve anything involving Intel and TSMC. As I understand it, in China's mind TSMC belongs to Taiwan and Taiwan belongs to China.
Click to expand...
Taiwanese media are taking this narrative at face value (see timecode 11:35 in the linked video:
).

These suggestions and ideas appear to have originated from Taiwan’s tech circles as part of proposed measures to address tariffs.
 
 
Daniel Nenni said:
I agree completely. Remember, China did not approve the Tower Semiconductor acquisition by Intel. There is no way they would approve anything involving Intel and TSMC. As I understand it, in China's mind TSMC belongs to Taiwan and Taiwan belongs to China.
Click to expand...
I assume Trump could use the tariffs card again if that would be the case.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
China has a much bigger tariff hand to play with a $300B trade surplus over the US.
Click to expand...
I think it's actually the opposite. Since the US imports far more from China than China imports from the US, the US has far more impact on tariffs on Chinese goods than China does on US goods. The US economy is fueled most by domestic consumer demand. The Chinese economy is fueled far more by exports, so the negative impact of tariffs on China is greater.
 
blueone said:
I think it's actually the opposite. Since the US imports far more from China than China imports from the US, the US has far more impact on tariffs on Chinese goods than China does on US goods. The US economy is fueled most by domestic consumer demand. The Chinese economy is fueled far more by exports, so the negative impact of tariffs on China is greater.
Click to expand...
I also believe the opposite is true. Behind China’s export numbers are numerous small businesses employing large workforces. Any further increase in tariffs could seriously harm those workers.
 
siliconbruh999 said:
If we All knew how stocks worked we would have been millionaires.
Click to expand...
There are details on rumors (Some foundry spin off and some acquisition/take private) that analysts are publishing..... All of these lead to a much higher Intel price. I know for a fact, the discussions are real.... does anything come of it, who knows? Stock could be 35 or 19 tomorrow and it would make logical sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top