47 ms·

I suspect having close partnerships with the likes of Carl Zeiss AG who do the optics for the EUV machines will be part of it.

amelius 3y ago
Why wouldn't Zeiss want to profit from more clients?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- arethuza 3y ago
  I would suspect that they have exclusivity deals with ASML? Edit: It looks like the Carl Zeiss subsidiary that does the semiconductor manufacturing tech is part owned by ASML: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_SMT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_SMT Edit2: Looks like ASML invested a billion Euros into Carl Zeiss SMT: https://www.asml.com/en/news/press-releases/2016/zeiss-and-asml-strengthen-partnership-for-next-generation-of-euv-lithography https://www.asml.com/en/news/press-releases/2016/zeiss-and-a...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - kergonath 3y ago
    It’s like Apple and TSMC. At this scale, both benefit if a large customer helps funding its critical supplier’s technology and infrastructure developments. It’s a symbiotic relationship, both suffer if one has serious issues. On one hand it’s anti-competitive because it makes it more difficult for the customer’s competitors to use leading edge technologies; on the other those leading edge technologies would be much harder and take longer to develop without the customer’s contribution.
    - amelius 3y ago
      How much did Apple invest in TSMC? And how is it symbiotic if Zeiss can't take other customers?
      - sjsdaiuasgdia 3y ago
        > And how is it symbiotic if Zeiss can't take other customers? Guaranteed revenue that doesn't need sales/marketing to keep going.
      - verall 3y ago
        > How much did Apple invest in TSMC? A bunch, like more than a million dollars
      - kergonath 3y ago
        It’s a specific part of Zeiss, it’s not like they bet the whole group on it. It’s symbiotic because they help ASML get better machines, which helps ASML get more money, a part of which is funnelled back to its suppliers. In the end it’s a risk assessment: what is the expected value if we get closer to a single partner, compared to trying for a broader market. Also, bear in mind that both sides have to keep the other working: the customer without suppliers is just as dead as the supplier without customers. So: they depend on each other, and they get more business and make more money by getting closer and have incentives to help the other improve (so it is not an adversarial relationship). Hence, symbiosis.
        janc_ 3y ago
        This part of Zeiss probably wouldn't exist without ASML, and maybe one day when next-gen tech is out tbe exclusivity might be lifted...
      - whaleofatw2022 3y ago
        The symbiosis is often in legal but specific deals. And in the imaging and litho world surprising in the level of trust. For example, Sony actually makes a number of sensors for Nikon and other camera makers, despite having often competing products.

amelius 3y ago

Why wouldn't Zeiss want to profit from more clients?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
arethuza 3y ago
I would suspect that they have exclusivity deals with ASML? Edit: It looks like the Carl Zeiss subsidiary that does the semiconductor manufacturing tech is part owned by ASML: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_SMT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_SMT Edit2: Looks like ASML invested a billion Euros into Carl Zeiss SMT: https://www.asml.com/en/news/press-releases/2016/zeiss-and-asml-strengthen-partnership-for-next-generation-of-euv-lithography https://www.asml.com/en/news/press-releases/2016/zeiss-and-a...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- kergonath 3y ago
  It’s like Apple and TSMC. At this scale, both benefit if a large customer helps funding its critical supplier’s technology and infrastructure developments. It’s a symbiotic relationship, both suffer if one has serious issues. On one hand it’s anti-competitive because it makes it more difficult for the customer’s competitors to use leading edge technologies; on the other those leading edge technologies would be much harder and take longer to develop without the customer’s contribution.
  - amelius 3y ago
    How much did Apple invest in TSMC? And how is it symbiotic if Zeiss can't take other customers?
    - sjsdaiuasgdia 3y ago
      > And how is it symbiotic if Zeiss can't take other customers? Guaranteed revenue that doesn't need sales/marketing to keep going.
    - verall 3y ago
      > How much did Apple invest in TSMC? A bunch, like more than a million dollars
    - kergonath 3y ago
      It’s a specific part of Zeiss, it’s not like they bet the whole group on it. It’s symbiotic because they help ASML get better machines, which helps ASML get more money, a part of which is funnelled back to its suppliers. In the end it’s a risk assessment: what is the expected value if we get closer to a single partner, compared to trying for a broader market. Also, bear in mind that both sides have to keep the other working: the customer without suppliers is just as dead as the supplier without customers. So: they depend on each other, and they get more business and make more money by getting closer and have incentives to help the other improve (so it is not an adversarial relationship). Hence, symbiosis.
      - janc_ 3y ago
        This part of Zeiss probably wouldn't exist without ASML, and maybe one day when next-gen tech is out tbe exclusivity might be lifted...
    - whaleofatw2022 3y ago
      The symbiosis is often in legal but specific deals. And in the imaging and litho world surprising in the level of trust. For example, Sony actually makes a number of sensors for Nikon and other camera makers, despite having often competing products.