You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
I don't quite understand what you are trying to say because I am aware of what you have said and my post was not in contradiction to what you just said.
What I have said was "withholding selling top equipment is a common practice". You may see this saying as conspiracy theory, but I have seen this with my own eyes because I was once involved in works of such banning to sell to countries under CoCom. It was civilian product. Wassenaar may be less restrictive to CoCom, but it is the successor no doubt. When needed it will be used by anyone. Doesn't Intel has a large share in ASML? And Intel will be subjected to US jurisdiction?
Photo Lith equipment manufacturing is a very cyclical business, Intel invested in ASML because it's a cyclical business and the cash injection irons out the peaks and troughs, Intel owns approximately 15% of ASML. In public companies it's the management not the shareholders that runs the company.
China is currently the fastest growing market for the equipment, ASML has > 60% of the world market, for ASML not to supply the Chinese market on an up turn in a cyclical business would not be sound, it's a listed company not some government agency. ASML is a large Dutch company, if the US government wants to interfere in ASML's business then how does it intend to make good on the lost sales, buy out ASML production? As a minority share holder Intel isn't in a position to dictate what a Dutch company does US government or No US government.
The US government could blacklist ASML, but on what grounds? with over 50% of its business in Asia and the market leader in its field that just makes it an easy target for a Chinese buyout, the US could try a buyout but that will just end up in a bidding war with China assuming the Dutch government doesn't block it. When the US government tried to screw with Bombardier they just formed a JV with Airbus.
With respect to the Wassenaar Arrangement, it's not CoCom, Russia is a signatory!
China isn't currently competitive in semi-conductor manufacturing not because of any foreign plot or restrictions it's simply the Koreans and Taiwanese have invested vast amounts over a long period of time to be market leaders, unlike "the west" they also play a long game, If any one has a motive to slow down the Chinese its the Koreans and Taiwanese!
antiterror13
Brigadier
The MLU100 is slated to use TSMC's 7nm process
Looking at the specs of the Matrix-2000 probably 28nm, HLMC has a 28nm foundry.
wowww, MLU100 with 7nm process node would be one of the first chips manufactured with that node.
Exactly my point .. what would happen if "Taiwan govt" would order TSMC to stop receiving order from China ?
Wondering why Matrix-2000 wouldn't be manufactured with 7nm process node by TSMC?
antiterror13
Brigadier
This is a link that has lots of information. There are names in it. Just be careful, not every posts can be trusted.
Thats is a great article and opinions .... thanks
wowww, MLU100 with 7nm process node would be one of the first chips manufactured with that node.
Exactly my point .. what would happen if "Taiwan govt" would order TSMC to stop receiving order from China ?
Wondering why Matrix-2000 wouldn't be manufactured with 7nm process node by TSMC?
The Matrix-2000 is a specialised limited run device where as the MLU100 is a mass market device. The Matrix-2000 needs a proven process supercomputers aren't mobile phones, you don't just get a new one if it breaks, you really don't want down time on a supercomputer to replace faulty boards every few weeks!
The Matrix-2000 is part of a revamped super computer which is being built presently so the chips would have been done some time ago the MLU100 will be going into production.
TSMC has a subsidiary in China, TSMC China with fabs in the mainland. China is the largest consumer of integrated circuits if TSMC doesn't take any Chinese business it's going to have idle production capacity that it will have to mothball and burn through lots of cash, the banks that lent it the cash will have to decide whether to call in the loans, at this point what is the Taiwanese government suppose to do pay off the loans or default on them?
People in this forum have some very strange ideas about business, economics and contracts.
antiterror13
Brigadier
The Matrix-2000 is a specialised limited run device where as the MLU100 is a mass market device. The Matrix-2000 needs a proven process supercomputers aren't mobile phones, you don't just get a new one if it breaks, you really don't want down time on a supercomputer to replace faulty boards every few weeks!
The Matrix-2000 is part of a revamped super computer which is being built presently so the chips would have been done some time ago the MLU100 will be going into production.
TSMC has a subsidiary in China, TSMC China with fabs in the mainland. China is the largest consumer of integrated circuits if TSMC doesn't take any Chinese business it's going to have idle production capacity that it will have to mothball and burn through lots of cash, the banks that lent it the cash will have to decide whether to call in the loans, at this point what is the Taiwanese government suppose to do pay off the loans or default on them?
People in this forum have some very strange ideas about business, economics and contracts.
well, you are absolutely right during a peace time ... but if the tension rises between China and Taiwan (and USA) .. politic and national security reasons would be first priority than economic reason
@hkbc .... you are new here .. you don't need to "lecture" or "accuse" long time members in this forum ... please be respectful. I respect you even you are new here
Many things you said here are valid, no doubt about that. But many things that is happening or has happened suggest the opposite without doubt too. Let me give some hints.Photo Lith equipment manufacturing is a very cyclical business, Intel invested in ASML because it's a cyclical business and the cash injection irons out the peaks and troughs, Intel owns approximately 15% of ASML. In public companies it's the management not the shareholders that runs the company.
China is currently the fastest growing market for the equipment, ASML has > 60% of the world market, for ASML not to supply the Chinese market on an up turn in a cyclical business would not be sound, it's a listed company not some government agency. ASML is a large Dutch company, if the US government wants to interfere in ASML's business then how does it intend to make good on the lost sales, buy out ASML production? As a minority share holder Intel isn't in a position to dictate what a Dutch company does US government or No US government.
The US government could blacklist ASML, but on what grounds? with over 50% of its business in Asia and the market leader in its field that just makes it an easy target for a Chinese buyout, the US could try a buyout but that will just end up in a bidding war with China assuming the Dutch government doesn't block it. When the US government tried to screw with Bombardier they just formed a JV with Airbus.
With respect to the Wassenaar Arrangement, it's not CoCom, Russia is a signatory!
China isn't currently competitive in semi-conductor manufacturing not because of any foreign plot or restrictions it's simply the Koreans and Taiwanese have invested vast amounts over a long period of time to be market leaders, unlike "the west" they also play a long game, If any one has a motive to slow down the Chinese its the Koreans and Taiwanese!
US made sanctions on Iran, punishing any companies doing business with Iran. These sanctions were out of the scope of UN sanctions, but EU did follow US demand in fear of blow back. These EU business are bigger than ASML, oil companies and more. Does UA sanction includes civilian aircraft? DidThat is true, right?
Trump recently threatened sanctions on Russia. EU has protested that those sanctions should not hurt EU's interest, right? The north stream natural gas project connecting Russia and Germany is put at a halt due to Danish "hesitation"/blockage. It happened just a month ago, isn't it?
Neither EU as a whole nor Denmark as a country dared to defy the demands. Why would Netherland be in a stronger position to defend ASML? There are numerous NGOs, political opposition factions there to speak for US and effectively act on behalf of US in Europe. EU could not stop the Syria adventure that created the refugee crisis for Europe. What do you expect then?
As of SK and Taiwan, have you heard that the government in Taiwan just "refreshed" (or tightening) their approval procedure regarding TSMC's business with mainland China, particularly ZTE? What an coincidence? Or a conspiracy theory?
Why did Japan backed out from the trilateral FTA among China, SK and Japan when they were in deep negotiation, and then joined the TPP out of nowhere? Why did the Diaoyu islands dispute came up right before the FTA and TPP struggle? Coincidence again? Conspiracy theory again?
I do wish EU and Netherland in this case particularly can stand up and defend their own interests by holding up their business with China. But seeing all these happenings listed above, I won't bet on that, and I do expect some dirty tricks in whatever names otherwise to happen.
As of the WA and CoCom, that is poteito, potato. Same shit with different colors. Russia is a signatory, so was Russia a member of the now defunct G-8. And Russia being a member has nothing to China not being cut off of her supply chain. China is not a member of international space station but Russia is. So long as China is not a member of WA, WA can and will be used against China. There is a reason why China was not a member of it. You get the picture?
Last edited:
w
@hkbc .... you are new here .. you don't need to "lecture" or "accuse" long time members in this forum ... please be respectful. I respect you even you are new here
Been here since 2007, is that considered "new"?
Just don't post a whole lot since I have a life, and most of the time here is spent reading and digesting.
You asked questions I gave you some answers, examples and opinions.
If you consider the mobile phone example a lecture then you should have read the preceding posts more carefully and took note of the time lines at which point it would be self evident why they could not possibly have used the 7mm process which is only just about to become available for a computer with 17,000+ interconnected processors that's about to go live and I wouldn't have to use a dumb down everyman explanation. There I go lecturing and accusing again.....
antiterror13
Brigadier
Been here since 2007, is that considered "new"?
Just don't post a whole lot since I have a life, and most of the time here is spent reading and digesting.
You asked questions I gave you some answers, examples and opinions.
If you consider the mobile phone example a lecture then you should have read the preceding posts more carefully and took note of the time lines at which point it would be self evident why they could not possibly have used the 7mm process which is only just about to become available for a computer with 17,000+ interconnected processors that's about to go live and I wouldn't have to use a dumb down everyman explanation. There I go lecturing and accusing again.....
nope, not about that.
You said "People in this forum have some very strange ideas about business, economics and contracts" in the last sentence of
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ne...ogical-development.t4270/page-427#post-506914
Many things you said here are valid, no doubt about that. But many things that is happening or has happened suggest the opposite without doubt too. Let me give some hints.
US made sanctions on Iran, punishing any companies doing business with Iran. These sanctions were out of the scope of UN sanctions, but EU did follow US demand in fear of blow back. These EU business are bigger than ASML, oil companies and more. Does UA sanction includes civilian aircraft? DidThat is true, right?
Trump recently threatened sanctions on Russia. EU has protested that those sanctions should not hurt EU's interest, right? The north stream natural gas project connecting Russia and Germany is put at a halt due to Danish "hesitation"/blockage. It happened just a month ago, isn't it?
Neither EU as a whole nor Denmark as a country dared to defy the demands. Why would Netherland be in a stronger position to defend ASML? There are numerous NGOs, political opposition factions there to speak for US and effectively act on behalf of US in Europe. EU could not stop the Syria adventure that created the refugee crisis for Europe. What do you expect then?
As of SK and Taiwan, have you heard that the government in Taiwan just "refreshed" (or tightening) their approval procedure regarding TSMC's business with mainland China, particularly ZTE? What an coincidence? Or a conspiracy theory?
Why did Japan backed out from the trilateral FTA among China, SK and Japan when they were in deep negotiation, and then joined the TPP out of nowhere? Why did the Diaoyu islands dispute came up right before the FTA and TPP struggle? Coincidence again? Conspiracy theory again?
I do wish EU and Netherland in this case particularly can stand up and defend their own interests by holding up their business with China. But seeing all these happenings listed above, I won't bet on that, and I do expect some dirty tricks in whatever names otherwise to happen.
As of the WA and CoCom, that is poteito, potato. Same shit with different colors. Russia is a signatory, so was Russia a member of the now defunct G-8. And Russia being a member has nothing to China not being cut off of her supply chain. China is not a member of international space station but Russia is. So long as China is not a member of WA, WA can and will be used against China. There is a reason why China was not a member of it. You get the picture?
nope, not about that.
You said "People in this forum have some very strange ideas about business, economics and contracts" in the last sentence of
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/ne...ogical-development.t4270/page-427#post-506914
That's an opinion not an accusation or a lecture, get to have those from time to time, right?