Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Why is that?
Jose: Lightwave Logic - keep on rocking. You are already out of this world
Jose: I think Lightwave Logic is already gold ... !!!
So much for us not having a presence tomorrow. Major shift - very exciting.
It is “in writing“. No question.
The devil, as always, is in the details but at 20,000 feet, this is awesome news!
Congrats to you, McFish, on your holdings. Lots to hope for in the coming days, for sure. I already shared a similar tiering as to how share prices would impact my life. My holdings are modest next to yours and Steve. About 117,000 shares here. I can’t really afford more eggs in this basket- but if this is what we believe it to be, those shares will make me quite happy nonetheless. Life changing, truth be told.
Wednesday may be simply more puzzle pieces- but it is exciting to be talked about explicitly on the center stage. I won’t be able to listen - but hope someone will be able to
take good notes.
~yanqui
I don’t even see us listed among the attendees. Curious.
Liu. Autocorrect gets me every time.
Really interesting article on LinkedIn on the future (or lack thereof) for copackaged optics. Article is liked by Karen Lou and lots of spirited debate in the comments including Brad Booth. One thing is clear - there’s no general consensus about this technology. Interested to hear this board’s take after reading the comments.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/microsoftfacebook-never-deploy-co-packaged-optics-mark-lutkowitz
Excellent post.
Again, the video refers to LWLG as one of 4 primary contenders - not the #1 contender. They did not call the race for us or even give us pole position. Calling us #1 was in the context of four contenders - and we were referred to as contender #1. At least that’s how I understood Jose’s comments.
Which is impressive in its own right. Appreciate all you do, proto, but we are all best served by not inflating what was being said.
~yanqui
Agree with this.
This company has been such a disappointment. Still holding, but less optimistic as time goes by.
Thank you, proto.
I don’t understand the technology here as well as some but both Apple and Amazon are now making their own chips. Especially Amazon - is there a reason they aren’t on this list?
What’s with the annoying buzz going off periodically during the yahoo ad? Not the most effective ad I have come across, IMO. Disappointing.
This board is about our common investment. I despise Trump but this is not the place to debate it. Please leave politics out of the room. Thx.
I hope you’re right. What do you base your “bottom” call on?
Maybe someone can help me understand the Rockley connection. Is this the same company that is going public via a SPAC? If so, it appears they are focused on their health monitoring products. What makes you think they will still be a major player in the data center arena?
~yanqui
Mr. Maguire: There is a great future in photonics. Think about it. Will you think about it?
Benjamin Braddock: Yes, I will.
Mr. Maguire: Okay. Enough said. That's a deal.
The Graduate (2021)
Ha! Actually, I see $1000/share as quite possible if all goes exactly to plan. Have even fantasized beyond that in certain scenarios. But...
I’m 67, so I only have so long to wait - lol. And...
Once I have my foundation going, my dreams have been met.
Except, maybe, for that private island in the sun....
~ yanqui
Excellent! I don’t see it yet, but will keep checking.
Thanks, Proto.
Agree with these comments. He can do better on such important issues.
I know you didn’t ask me, or exactly this question, but a fun exercise so forgive me
@ $15 I can retire without stressing
@ $50 I can buy waterfront and travel at will
@ $100 I can guarantee free college to all my grandchildren, offer extravagant weddings to my stepdaughters and buy a vacation house
Above $150, I will start a charitable foundation for major gifting
I will probably sell some shares at each step.
Fun to dream!
Do you know what the POET platform is?
~yanqui
Thanks for doing this, x!
e Innovator's Dilemma
Mar. 17, 2021 11:34 AM ETIntel Corporation (INTC)AMDSSNLFTSM73 Comments12 Likes
EnerTuition profile picture.
EnerTuition
Marketplace
Follow
Summary
Intel's latest desktop CPU, Rocket Lake, has been widely panned by reviewers. The article discusses the reasons.
The article also discusses the mindset at Intel that brought this suboptimal CPU into existence.
Intel needs to snap out of its current IDM mindset or the Company's greatness will slip away over time.
In his famous 1997 book "The innovator's dilemma", author Clayton Christensen showcased how successful, outstanding companies can lose their market leadership - or even fail - as new, unexpected competitors rise and take over the market. Intel's (INTC) Rocket Lake CPU launch on Tuesday ties neatly into the concept and shows how successful companies can go wrong as competitors redefine the market.
Rocket Lake, for readers who may not be aware, is the latest Intel 14nm desktop CPU that launched to unflattering reviews from the enthusiast community. Harsher critics have piled on with scathing narrative about the new Intel entry. The core of the criticism is that Rocket Lake falls short of top-of-the-line chips from Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) even as it consumes considerably more power than AMD alternatives.
The reason for the lower performance and higher power has to do with something the technical world calls "backporting". Backporting, in this case, means that the next generation desktop CPU was originally supposed to be manufactured using Intel's 10nm process but, due to Intel's process challenges, the chip was redesigned in, or ported back to, Intel's older 14nm process. As a matter of chip design, a newer CPU made using 10nm process depends on the goodness of that process - goodness that is not available in the older 14nm process.
Manufacturing a design intended for 10nm process on 14nm process means the design will result in a much bigger die, take more power to run, and may not reach other design goals. That is effectively what we see with Rocket Lake. To make the 10nm design work on 14nm, Intel had to cut back the design to 8-cores and reduce L3 cache to 16MB - compared to 10 cores and 20MB in the previous generation Comet lake. Rocket Lake, as most reviewers note, also consumes considerable amount of power and runs hot. In addition to these functional issues, Rocket Lake, because of backporting, sports a large die size (image below from Tom's Hardware).
As can be seen in the image above, at 276.4 mm2, Rocket Lake chip is larger than any of its recent predecessors. Larger die means Intel can produce fewer of these chips for a single wafer thus reducing the effective unit throughput.
Due to such major disadvantages, backporting, or redesigning a chip into a more primitive process technology, is rarely done in the industry.
So, why is Intel taking such regressive path?
Innovator's Dilemma: Intel Is Stuck On Its Dated IDM Model
When Intel was struggling with its process roadmap, especially the 10nm process, Intel had a choice to make. As much of the semiconductor industry, including rival AMD, is wont to do, Intel could have outsourced its new CPU manufacturing to a foundry like TSMC (TSM) or Samsung (OTC:SSNLF). Or, Intel could stay with its Integrated Device manufacturer, or IDM, model and delay its new products until the 10nm process worked as expected.
Intel chose the latter. This is a classic case of Innovator's dilemma. As discussed previously in Intel And Taiwan Semiconductor: A Tale Of Two Cities and Intel And Taiwan Semiconductor: A Tale Of Two Cities Revisited, the semiconductor industry has fundamentally changed and, Intel's IDM model is now a story of yesterday. Regardless of how hard Intel tries, it is extremely unlikely that Intel can regain its process technology leadership that made the Company an industry giant during the last several decades. The future belongs to the foundry model and TSMC. By sticking to the IDM model and stubbornly trying to regain leadership, Intel is throwing the proverbial good money after bad.
Not surprisingly, the outcome, as predicted in the linked articles, has been dismal. Intel 10nm process suffered from delay after delay and has yet to become a mature node. As Intel stays stuck on yesterday's paradigm, the Company has now incurred long delays in product introductions. Not just on the desktop CPU front with Rocket Lake but also on the server front with Ice Lake and Sapphire Rapids. The delays meant that rival AMD has been gaining product advantage and thus market share in the x86 CPU market.
Over time, Intel had some limited success with the 10nm process and was able to manufacture its laptop CPUs on the new process - including the Tiger Lake CPU released during 2020. However, it appears that Intel is unable to satisfactorily manufacture the high power dissipation desktop chips with the new process. As AMD market share gains became significant and as 10nm delays became untenable, Intel could no longer wait for the 10nm process to work. Given Intel was not outsourcing the CPU fabrication to TSMC or Samsung, it only had one option: to backport its new desktop design to 14nm process. Which is precisely the path that Intel has taken.
Implications
Unfortunately, backporting leads to a sub-optimal CPU like Rocket Lake. While Rocket Lake has been near universally panned, it is something that Intel had to do given the decision to not outsource. Without Rocket Lake, Intel's desktop CPU product line would be weaker, and AMD would go nearly uncontested in some market segments. Competitively, Rocket Lake is a necessity.
The large die of Rocket lake means Intel will yield fewer chips and these CPUs will cost much more to produce than previous generation Comet Lake CPUs. However, this is mitigated somewhat due to the mature nature of 14nm process. This process, which is now over 5 years old, is nearly fully depreciated and the production costs, even for large die CPUs are not exorbitant. Intel can further reduce the capacity and cost impact by limiting Rocket Lake only to the high-end of the market where ASPs are high and the volume needs are low. In other words, despite its limitations, Rocket Lake partly plugs a significant product hole.
However, the problem for Intel here is not Rocket Lake but the mindset at Intel that produced Rocket Lake. Unless Intel escapes the paradigm that brought it its current success, the Company's future is in jeopardy.
We do not view Intel stock as being worthy of a long term investment until the mindset at Intel changes.
A lesson on the cost to Intel of being too stubborn to outsource when innovation is overtaking it in the market: Intel Rocket Lake: The Innovator's Dilemma https://seekingalpha.com/article/4414511-intel-stock-rocket-lake-innovator-s-dilemma
Premarket overall down. We’re up again - significantly. Couldn’t be more bullish. Still think this is early. And wondering - was TwoCents prediction of $2 ... late - or early?
Luckily it doesn’t matter.
~yanqui
If we write an article, it has to do a number of things. First, write it as if you are presenting it to a ceo. If your first 5 minutes haven’t captured him, you’ve lost him. Then make it entertaining. And write it in terms a newbie will understand- since for many it will be the first time they will have heard the term photonics. Lastly, keep it persuasive but succinct. Lots of solid numbers and facts. Finally, don’t say “It’s deal time!” If the article doesn’t already suggest that, you’ve written it wrong. This should not read as a pump but as well investigated guidance. I’d start it out something like this:
“If The Graduate were to be produced today, Benjamin Braddock might have been given this advice - “One word: Photonics”. Don’t take my word for it - take Jim Cramer’s (include CNBC quote here). Why Photonics? $82 billion in investment is projected in the next 4-5 years to meet the ravenous performance needs of data centers alone. But it will also be essential for meeting the needs of 5G networks, AI applications, digital currency mining and self-driving cars. Existing silicon chips can’t meet this need, and even if they could they would bleed money on the energy needs of this rapidly-outdated technology...(blah blah photonics)...Moore’s Law is broken. You need look no further than the recent bidding war for laser manufacturer Coherent to see where the Tier 1’s are headed. They are moving - fast - to photonics.
So how to play this emerging field? Let me suggest a small company that is about to find itself in the center of all this - Lightwave Logic. “
Not only would an SA article reach thousands of new investors, you *could* grab the eyes of influencers such as Paul Scolardi or Ian Cassel. Maybe even a hedge fund manager. If it is done right.
I’d borrow from what’s already been written, but I’d build it anew with eyes towards this audience. Read a few articles before you write it. And update it with Lebby’s recent numbers, mention his “commercialization” presentation, emphasize how the goo can be applied to existing structures while copackaging and even package-less options are coming. The “saving the planet” play. Throw it all in. And make it a 10-15 minute read max.
Anyone else have suggestions?
Exactly! A well-done update could really jumpstart our pps. There’s a great story here - waiting to be understood by a broader community. Seeking Alpha is a great vehicle for that.
“Someday someone will write book about this. “
Or a Seeking Alpha article. Anybody?
We aren’t likely seeing anything from Roth yet. Serious investment will get intrigued by Lebby but will take a few days of due diligence before they start investing real money.
This is just the very beginning.
~yanqui
Train ... meet station
Note that near-term inflation is negligible and our beta is less than 1 (though I expect that to change). If you thus apply a standard dcf analysis and apply any accepted risk analysis metric - we are unbelievably under-valued. Unless they are lying about the goo.
Which they aren’t.
~yanqui