Russ Fischer's  Instablog

Russ Fischer
Send Message
I have retired from a 35 years career in the semiconductor industry. I now have the time to do the deep research nessesary for successful investng. I freely provide investment information for friends and family. I am a member of MENSA, which means precisely nothing except I wake up in the... More
  • Intel: Debunking A Myth 5 comments
    Sep 28, 2012 2:34 PM | about stocks: AAPL, NVDA, QCOM, TSM, TXN, INTC

    The Myth: Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) can't compete in the low margin mobile SoC business.

    We will use data from Yahoo Finance and some forth grade arithmetic to demonstrate how silly this is.

    While we can't know the exact gross margins a any particular device, a company's overall gross margin will serve as a close approximation for the individual device margins.

    Let's use a mobile chip that sells for $10 to make the arithmetic easy. for the first supplier we will use Qualcomm (NASDAQ:QCOM). QCOM has corporate gross margins of 67%. since a good size chunk of QCOM's business is cost-free revenue from patent royalties, we will reduce this 67% to 60%. Fair? Ok, QCOM will pay their wafer supplier, TSMC (NYSE:TSM) 40% of the $10 or $4 for that chip. TSMC, in turn, has corporate gross margins of 45%, so that chip that they charge QCOM $4 for has a manufacturing cost of $2.20. That $10 chip has a total gross margin from manufacturing to the end user circuit board of 78%!

    Let's compare that to the same size device supplied by Intel. Since Intel is thought to be a higher cost manufacturer (I don't think this is true, but we'll throw the Myth Believers a bone), we will use an Intel manufacturing cost of $3. Intel likes to get 65% gross margins, so if we divide by .35 we will get the Intel full margin price to the end customer of $3/.35 = $8.57.

    Now, let's assume that Intel is not the high cost producer and that their cost is also $2.20. In this case a full 65% margin final price from Intel for that $10 part would be $6.28!

    Of course, the best technology available to QCOM would be the TSMC 28/32nm node.

    Let's assume that the Intel version of our fictitious chip is built on their 22nm process. That would make the chip 40% smaller that the 28nm chip. It would also be 40% cheaper, so that would give us an Intel cost of $1.32. Plugging the 65% gross margin onto this cost would give an end customer a price of 3.77.

    Just to bore you further, consider this chip built on Intel's 14nm process. The cost drops to $.55, the end price drops to $1.57.

    This is how we get to a $100 smartphone cost and a $200 retail price to you and me.

    So, the myth is not only false, but the cost and competitive advantage that Intel has over the competition is so overwhelming and smothering that for suppliers like Qualcomm and Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA), even selling at cost doesn't do any good! Oh, and the mobile SoC in not a low margin business.

    Does this give us an idea why Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) has decided to design their own SoC and deal directly with the semiconductor manufacturer?

    Texas Instruments (NYSE:TXN) has figured all this out early and decided to exit the mobile SoC business.

    Disclosure: I am long INTC. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Back To Russ Fischer's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (1)
Track new comments
  • Michael Blair
    , contributor
    Comments (5100) | Send Message
    Thanks. Love the analysis. Clear and well written, and hard to refute.
    13 Apr 2013, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • philohipis
    , contributor
    Comments (1249) | Send Message
    I also love MU for the same reasons. However, are you preaching to traders or to investors-or both? As a 'newly-minted' trader, I'm OUT for now !! I've made lots of $$ this year trading MU and now's the time to retreat for a while perhaps a Q or 2. MU is an excellent ship that is unfortunately sailing in a very uncertain Sea. The Hedge-fund gurus and the Short-Specialists seem to have a monopoly on economic wisdom for some reason. They are too sophisticated for me and they play with enough chips to alter the share price too much, too fast. I'm up 48% YTD, and I intend to stay there. I'll re capture MU when it finds $10.75 again. I don't see good Macros in the moderate term-sorry!
    30 Jul 2013, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • Russ Fischer
    , contributor
    Comments (3018) | Send Message
    Author’s reply » It is, after all, about making and KEEPING money.
    I just posted a new article that you should read.
    30 Jul 2013, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • rauer
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
    Russ, it looks to me that no one has any idea how the numbers will shake out on Tuesday. We have two totally different views being expressed on where MU is headed. An acquistion of this size can not be intergrated overnight . I agree that this stock could open substainally higher, but because of shorts and amount of profit that has been made last year, it could tank. My bet is they were sand bagging the last quarters. numbers. Any thoughts?
    3 Jan 2014, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • rauer
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
    I have been in the middle market corporate finance business for over 30 years and provided valuation services to many of the Fortune 500 on booking acquistions for tax and accounting purposes. Worked at KPMG and Merrill Lynch. Thanks Bob Auer
    3 Jan 2014, 05:29 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers


More »

Latest Comments

Most Commented
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.