Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A look inside TSMC

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: A look inside TSMC

#21

Post by gumby »

sytelus wrote: post #6

One thing I don't understand is why fabs got uprooted from USA. There doesn't seem to be cost savings if you try to offshore a multi-billion dollar fab because labor is not the main cost. So fab in China/Taiwan/USA should cost more or less same money to run.

Typically a process step means a completely new fab. Thus when you Build a new one everything is on the table: cost of land, cost of labor, skill level of labor, distance from HQ... So when intel build new fabs in Penang and later PRC these all went into the decision. The old fabs are still around making older-generation parts.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#22

Post by nordsieck »

redis_mlc wrote: post #17
di4na wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Environment protection laws. They all reject quite a lotbof nasty chemicals. We can filter or recycle them but it cost a lot at scale. This is an open secret in EE schools.

EPA and ROI on capital ... Western companies tend to look at the ROI as a percentage, while Chinese businessmen at the actual profit amount. As one said, "You can't take ROI to the bank. But I can deposit my nickels."

> Western companies tend to look at the ROI as a percentage, while Chinese businessmen at the actual profit amount.

Warren Buffett is actually pretty famous for optimizing for "free cash flow".

Re: A look inside TSMC

#23

Post by barrkel »

siscia wrote: post #18

I really found TSMC inspiring, the level of technology reached is amazing. I only wish an effort from Europe to bring this expertise also in Europe.

Two European companies are mentioned as producing critical hardware for the process.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#24

Post by seanmcdirmid »

gumby wrote: post #21
sytelus wrote: post #6

One thing I don't understand is why fabs got uprooted from USA. There doesn't seem to be cost savings if you try to offshore a multi-billion dollar fab because labor is not the main cost. So fab in China/Taiwan/USA should cost more or less same money to run.

Typically a process step means a completely new fab. Thus when you Build a new one everything is on the table: cost of land, cost of labor, skill level of labor, distance from HQ... So when intel build new fabs in Penang and later PRC these all went into the decision. The old fabs are still around making older-generation parts.

Intel doesn’t have a fab in Penang, it only has a testing assembly site there. It has one fab in the PRC doing flash memory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_...

No non-PRC company is fearless enough to build a new fab in the PRC with anything that aren’t comfortable with being copied by mainland companies.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#25

Post by siscia »

barrkel wrote: post #23
siscia wrote: post #18

I really found TSMC inspiring, the level of technology reached is amazing. I only wish an effort from Europe to bring this expertise also in Europe.

Two European companies are mentioned as producing critical hardware for the process.

And I am quite happy.

But still there is a huge difference between being a provider of technology and actually using that technology.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#26

Post by di4na »

nordsieck wrote: post #22
redis_mlc wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EPA and ROI on capital ... Western companies tend to look at the ROI as a percentage, while Chinese businessmen at the actual profit amount. As one said, "You can't take ROI to the bank. But I can deposit my nickels."

> Western companies tend to look at the ROI as a percentage, while Chinese businessmen at the actual profit amount. Warren Buffett is actually pretty famous for optimizing for "free cash flow".

Any CFO worth its money would tell you to optimise for free cash flow. As my ex CFO used to repeat (and we were working for big co tm).

"Cash is King". She tought ne a lot.

Also RoI is a measure of time. Not money or profit. Time until you get your money back.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#27

Post by vladimirralev »

PhantomGremlin wrote: post #20
dotnetcore wrote: post #4

TSMC = 80% foreign investment. its hardly Taiwanese at this point...

TSMC is a Taiwanese company. The people in the C-suite are Taiwanese. The fabs are in Taiwan. The people who operate the fabs are in Taiwan. The people who do the R&D for all the processes live in Taiwan. The people who create the Intellectual Property live in Taiwan. Analogously, many decades ago Mitsubishi Group, a Japanese company, bought Rockefeller Center. Ha ha. Good luck with that. If things didn't work out it…

Sooner or later TSMC will build next-gen R&D facilities and fabs. Shareholders will be able to vote for the new locations.

Re: A look inside TSMC

#28

Post by newswasboring »

siscia wrote: post #25
barrkel wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two European companies are mentioned as producing critical hardware for the process.

And I am quite happy. But still there is a huge difference between being a provider of technology and actually using that technology.

Disclaimer: I've worked in several semiconductor companies mentioned in this article as hardware guy.

Actually it's quite liberating to be the provider of technology. You control the whole market. Specially true for some of the companies which are virtual monopolies (over 95% of the market is owned by them). In EUV side, which is the future (happening now), some vendors are the only option. Fabs can pressure them, of course, but at the end of the day they are the only vendors available. I find it quite funny, on one hand TSMC is one of those "jump? Where and how high" kind of customer but OTOH there is no one else they can turn to. I find this kind of relationship quite funny and unique. I am not aware of any other industry where the vendor has this much power. All because they are the only supplier. Maybe in defense?

Re: A look inside TSMC

#29

Post by siscia »

newswasboring wrote: post #28
siscia wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I am quite happy. But still there is a huge difference between being a provider of technology and actually using that technology.

Disclaimer: I've worked in several semiconductor companies mentioned in this article as hardware guy. Actually it's quite liberating to be the provider of technology. You control the whole market. Specially true for some of the companies which are virtual monopolies (over 95% of the market is owned by them). In EUV side, which is the future (happening now), some vendors are the only option. Fabs can pressure them, of…

Can you share more?

I would love to know better this kind of dynamics.

Why TSMC or other fabs don't develop the same technology in house? How the technology is protected? Why there are not other competitors?

Moreover, what that means from the company point of view? I guess there is not a big push to innovate, isn't it?

Re: A look inside TSMC

#30

Post by draugadrotten »

vladimirralev wrote: post #27
PhantomGremlin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSMC is a Taiwanese company. The people in the C-suite are Taiwanese. The fabs are in Taiwan. The people who operate the fabs are in Taiwan. The people who do the R&D for all the processes live in Taiwan. The people who create the Intellectual Property live in Taiwan. Analogously, many decades ago Mitsubishi Group, a Japanese company, bought Rockefeller Center. Ha ha. Good luck with that. If things didn't work out it…

Sooner or later TSMC will build next-gen R&D facilities and fabs. Shareholders will be able to vote for the new locations.

Shareholders of such things are sometimes proxies for the true powers hidden behind. Money is not a democracy. There are national interests at stake here, and then I'm not talking about Taiwan's national interest.
Post reply on HN