4 ms·

Absolutely nobody stops you from forming a competing company and charging less for equally good or better results

by dmitrygr 1y ago

iwontberude 1y ago
Except for me. I am single handedly holding off all of these people from building a fab.
Eisenstein 1y ago
Great idea. Can you lend me $10 billion?
- bluGill 1y ago
  I think that is a on the cheap side. Unless you are content with 1990s node sizes
- jgeada 1y ago
  Piddling sum in this domain, that amount won't even buy you enough for 1 production line, let alone where to put in, staff it and get all the necessary collateral to allow people to design to it. And no amount of money will get you one of ASML EUV machines any time soon as the entire production line for the next handful of years has already been spoken for.
lillecarl 1y ago
Absolutely everything in the modern economy stops him from forming a competing company, this naive stupid market is the solution idea needs to stop being regurgitated, it's toxic to society.
- nomel 1y ago
  I think most everything shows that it's just really hard (see Intel) and they're really good at it, so have a moat that they can take advantage of.
marcodiego 1y ago
Entering a multi billion risky market is no easy task even if you have investira and teams with deep knowledge. That's the reason monopolise should be avoided.
- lotsofpulp 1y ago
  This monopoly is unavoidable due to the limited number of people in the world with the know-how to make these products, with the second constraint being that you need to risk $10B+ and 10+ years with a risk that you fail. Edit: per link below, seems like you need $100B+ and 10+ years
  - jgeada 1y ago
    For reference, TSMC's yearly capital investment budget is about $50B/year (https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2025/03/07/2003833000 https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2025/03/07/200...) This business is expensive, making and running fabs is way way more expensive than most anybody thinks. There are very few companies able to do it profitably.
  - andrepd 1y ago
    > due to the limited number of people in the world with the know-how to make these products Absolutely nothing to do with this lol, and everything to do with it being ridiculously capital-intensive.
- School-Cotton 1y ago
  TSMC isn’t a monopoly, they are just better than all their competitors. Nothing forces you to buy TSMC; you can buy Intel, Samsung, SMIC, GlobalFoundries and various others.
  - jdiff 1y ago
    This is getting faded out, but this is absolutely right. For very few use cases do you truly need the bleeding edge. So many things do not have such strict requirements, and will meet all necessary requirements on an older node. An ATTiny85 is still an incredibly useful microcontroller even today.
denkmoon 1y ago
Yeah I'll get a loan off Dad for my first EUV machine and we'll snowball from there
UpsideDownRide 1y ago
Chip making has very has barrier of entry. Between fab cost and access to talent you are really not looking at an enticing business opportunity. Free market is not as free as the name would imply.
- lotsofpulp 1y ago
  High barriers to entry have nothing to do with free markets. >In economics, a free market is an economic system in which the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand expressed by sellers and buyers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market As long as a buyer and seller can negotiate whatever number they want, or walk away, it is a free market.
  - MostlyStable 1y ago
    From just a bit further down in your link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market#Low_barriers_to_entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market#Low_barriers_to_en...
    - lotsofpulp 1y ago
      I am not seeing the discrepancy: > A free market does not directly require the existence of competition; however, it does require a framework that freely allows new market entrants. Hence, competition in a free market is a consequence of the conditions of a free market, including that market participants not be obstructed from following their profit motive. The barriers to entry being referred to in the Wikipedia article are presumably government related. No government is stopping Intel or Samsung or any of the other chip makers from selling what TSMC sells, hence the “framework that freely allows new market entrants” is there. And the subsequent paragraph seems to be exactly what is happening in the market of high end chips: > Hence, competition in a free market is a consequence of the conditions of a free market, including that market participants not be obstructed from following their profit motive.
      - 1y ago
tailrecursion 1y ago
Judging by the response to the parent come back, evidently TSMC deserves the high prices it will be charging. Why? It's unrealistic to expect just anyone to start up a new fab. But if not one person among billions will start up a new fab it points to intrinsic difficulty or unpleasantness or lack of prestige in the task. A correctively high price has all kinds of advantages for the society. I haven't seen any argument that difficult tasks shouldn't be priced high. Only name calling.
- PaulKeeble 1y ago
  In this case its more its a 100+ billion investment to possibly produce a competing fab and its encumbered with many thousands if not more patents the likes of which will produce a minefield for any entrant. So far the silicon product market has just shrunk over the years with more and more failing to keep up with the latest process technology as the price of entrance and the patent warheads has risen.
wmf 1y ago
I'm rooting for Rapidus. A lot of people will look foolish if they succeed.
ux266478 1y ago
EUV manufacturing is a loadbearing piece of geopolitical leverage at the highest echelons of power. The assertion that you can trivialize one of the most important bargaining chips in the world and no one will stop you might just be the most naive thing I've read all year.

Absolutely nobody stops you from forming a competing company and charging less for equally good or better results

iwontberude 1y ago

Except for me. I am single handedly holding off all of these people from building a fab.

Eisenstein 1y ago

Great idea. Can you lend me $10 billion?

bluGill 1y ago
I think that is a on the cheap side. Unless you are content with 1990s node sizes
jgeada 1y ago
Piddling sum in this domain, that amount won't even buy you enough for 1 production line, let alone where to put in, staff it and get all the necessary collateral to allow people to design to it. And no amount of money will get you one of ASML EUV machines any time soon as the entire production line for the next handful of years has already been spoken for.

lillecarl 1y ago

Absolutely everything in the modern economy stops him from forming a competing company, this naive stupid market is the solution idea needs to stop being regurgitated, it's toxic to society.

nomel 1y ago
I think most everything shows that it's just really hard (see Intel) and they're really good at it, so have a moat that they can take advantage of.

marcodiego 1y ago

Entering a multi billion risky market is no easy task even if you have investira and teams with deep knowledge. That's the reason monopolise should be avoided.

lotsofpulp 1y ago
This monopoly is unavoidable due to the limited number of people in the world with the know-how to make these products, with the second constraint being that you need to risk $10B+ and 10+ years with a risk that you fail. Edit: per link below, seems like you need $100B+ and 10+ years
- jgeada 1y ago
  For reference, TSMC's yearly capital investment budget is about $50B/year (https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2025/03/07/2003833000 https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2025/03/07/200...) This business is expensive, making and running fabs is way way more expensive than most anybody thinks. There are very few companies able to do it profitably.
- andrepd 1y ago
  > due to the limited number of people in the world with the know-how to make these products Absolutely nothing to do with this lol, and everything to do with it being ridiculously capital-intensive.
School-Cotton 1y ago
TSMC isn’t a monopoly, they are just better than all their competitors. Nothing forces you to buy TSMC; you can buy Intel, Samsung, SMIC, GlobalFoundries and various others.
- jdiff 1y ago
  This is getting faded out, but this is absolutely right. For very few use cases do you truly need the bleeding edge. So many things do not have such strict requirements, and will meet all necessary requirements on an older node. An ATTiny85 is still an incredibly useful microcontroller even today.

denkmoon 1y ago

Yeah I'll get a loan off Dad for my first EUV machine and we'll snowball from there

UpsideDownRide 1y ago

Chip making has very has barrier of entry. Between fab cost and access to talent you are really not looking at an enticing business opportunity. Free market is not as free as the name would imply.

lotsofpulp 1y ago
High barriers to entry have nothing to do with free markets. >In economics, a free market is an economic system in which the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand expressed by sellers and buyers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market As long as a buyer and seller can negotiate whatever number they want, or walk away, it is a free market.
- MostlyStable 1y ago
  From just a bit further down in your link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market#Low_barriers_to_entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market#Low_barriers_to_en...
  - lotsofpulp 1y ago
    I am not seeing the discrepancy: > A free market does not directly require the existence of competition; however, it does require a framework that freely allows new market entrants. Hence, competition in a free market is a consequence of the conditions of a free market, including that market participants not be obstructed from following their profit motive. The barriers to entry being referred to in the Wikipedia article are presumably government related. No government is stopping Intel or Samsung or any of the other chip makers from selling what TSMC sells, hence the “framework that freely allows new market entrants” is there. And the subsequent paragraph seems to be exactly what is happening in the market of high end chips: > Hence, competition in a free market is a consequence of the conditions of a free market, including that market participants not be obstructed from following their profit motive.
    - 1y ago

tailrecursion 1y ago

Judging by the response to the parent come back, evidently TSMC deserves the high prices it will be charging. Why? It's unrealistic to expect just anyone to start up a new fab. But if not one person among billions will start up a new fab it points to intrinsic difficulty or unpleasantness or lack of prestige in the task. A correctively high price has all kinds of advantages for the society. I haven't seen any argument that difficult tasks shouldn't be priced high. Only name calling.

PaulKeeble 1y ago
In this case its more its a 100+ billion investment to possibly produce a competing fab and its encumbered with many thousands if not more patents the likes of which will produce a minefield for any entrant. So far the silicon product market has just shrunk over the years with more and more failing to keep up with the latest process technology as the price of entrance and the patent warheads has risen.

wmf 1y ago

I'm rooting for Rapidus. A lot of people will look foolish if they succeed.

ux266478 1y ago

EUV manufacturing is a loadbearing piece of geopolitical leverage at the highest echelons of power. The assertion that you can trivialize one of the most important bargaining chips in the world and no one will stop you might just be the most naive thing I've read all year.