TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE CXMT IS ALIVE AND KICKING.
Chinese semiconductor industry
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
- Status
I attack his credibility solely because as someone in the industry, it is beneath contempt. It is a "report" written like an Indian forum attack post disguised as analysis.
I don't get paid to educate Indians.
I think you might have just replied to a guy that's fishing for information.
I just don't like it when forums get filled with pages of pointless useless back and forth attacks. It makes reading topics to find interesting information so much harder. A single informative news article takes up just a short post, but a useless argument takes up multiple pages -.-
None of this is secret information. All of these articles have been posted to this forum before. Some simple google searching is enough to find the rest of the information.
You don't seem to understand what unlimited funding means. Does the Chinese nukes need to be commercially viable? They are running the same program now except it's semis. The West is finished.
I hope you didn't mean me as the guy fishing for information (rather than the Indian guy) as I was introduced to this forum from an analysis I wrote on Chinese semi equipment in Seeking Alpha and it was copied here. But to be truthful, I am writing another Seeking Alpha article about SMIC and how the U.S. sanctions (yes I was born in the U.S.) have failed, as it is pushing SMIC to expand in the sweet spot of Nodes (28nm) and how it is pushing Chinese equipment manufacturers to make products to push out foreign equipment suppliers. And the KEY is SMEE and whether SMIC can get these litho systems to push out ASML.
By the way, you can read the article in a few days, as well as all the articles I've written, at
Also by the way, I have a D.Phil from Oxford University and have been an "analyst" for the semiconductor industry since 1985. You can read my bio on the Seeking Alpha website.
I have read and enjoyed your articles Robert. Very informative and objective from my point of view, but from the readers' comments in your articles, I feel your readership is much less objective.
I don't think anyone here is questioning your credentials at all, it's mainly towards the writer of the other article, who is not as knowledgable as you.
Non of what you described are real economies in Chinese eyes, "gaming"or "bitcoin". They are just the same money being moved from one hand to another without adding any value.
For the record, most Chinese do not see the companies like FB, Amzon and Tencent as either technology or industry. They are primarily just merchant using computers instead of abacus and paper except whatever they do in AI which is real tech.
Of course, you don't know this or won't agree with this because you didn't study (or reject) "Das Kapital", nor do you know anything about Chinese history.
Put the modern thought of Karl Max aside, are you aware of the Chinese traditional thought? In pre-industrial time, agricultural work (farming) is the fundamental economy that Chinese really cares. That idea is reflected by the order of social class "士农工商", Intellectual -> Farmer -> Craftsmen -> Merchant. In industrial era (that is today), China cares mostly "实体经济" or Real Materialistic Economy, a recent concept since the 2008 financial crisis. Anything else is just serving the real economy, they are just butter on the bread.
You may think China looses a lot (bitcoin), but Chinese are happy for someone else to pick them up while China pick up what the others looses, namely machinery, IC, battery, HSR, ships, rockets, computers etc. etc.
You do not seem to remember what China was like with unlimited funding for any project they wanted.
People want to go onto to Douyin. They do not want to eat grass.
That China does not exist anymore.
Something will be achieved because the plan says so?
That reminds me of "人有多大胆，地有多大产" from the "Great Leap Forward" days. If you are not Chinese speaker, here is the translation "one can produce as much crop as one dare to imagine".
You also said that "talent is the limit". So how do you translate that "unlimited funding" to the needed talent before they can be put into use to achieve the goal of 2025? The talent is not just a degree from the university, it includes experiences that are acquired through years of hands on working.
"unlimited funding" is nothing but some papers (money), the real deal is the talent and machineries that the funding can buy.
- Status