$100-$150M for IP, tell em their dreamin.....
First, consider fab construction. The cost of building and equipping a facility with 5 nm production lines now runs about $5.4 billion—more than three times the $1.7 billion required for a fab with 10 nm production lines (Exhibit 3). Most of the increase is related to the greater precision required to manufacture small structures. For instance, lithography now uses extreme ultraviolet light, increasing costs for tools.
Now consider R&D. As chips get smaller, R&D becomes more challenging as researchers deal with quantum effects, minor structural variations, and other factors that can complicate development. Designing a 5 nm chip costs about $540 million for everything from validation to IP qualification. That is well above the $175 million required to design a 10 nm chip and the $300 million required for a 7 nm chip. We expect that R&D costs will continue to escalate, especially for leading-edge products.
"The quest for Storage Class Memory with DRAM-like latencySince it is increasingly difficult to further improve the properties of DRAM while the cost per bit of NANDFLASH keeps dropping, the “holy grail” of Storage Class Memory has become the design of memory withproperties much closer to DRAM than to NAND FLASH.4DS has been on this quest to get closer to DRAM too and has been tuning the properties of its patentedInterface Switching ReRAM to get the latency of its technology comparable to DRAM.A key asset of Interface Switching ReRAM is that – unlike Filamentary ReRAM technologies – its cellcurrents scale with geometry: smaller cells yield lower cell currents, and lower currents can flow reliablythrough narrow on-chip wires. Small cells and narrow on-chip wires are required to achieve high densitymemories. However, lower cell currents also translate into longer latency. In order to achieve DRAM latencyin high density Storage Class Memory, the cell currents of small cell sizes need to match the requiredlatency.Through extensive measurements and analysis of its patented Interface Switching ReRAM cells fabricatedin different cell sizes, the Company concluded that cell currents needed to be boosted by an order ofmagnitude to reach DRAM latency at the cell size targeted by the industry for Storage Class Memory.4DS Memory Limited | ABN 43 145 590 110Level 2, 50 Kings Park Road, West Perth WA 6005PO Box 271, West Perth WA 6872+61 8 6377 8043 | [email protected] |www.4dsmemory.com4DS is pleased to report that the architectural changes the Company made to its Interface SwitchingReRAM – for which additional patents are pending – improve the inherent memory latency (read accesstime) so dramatically that it is now comparable to DRAM."
Imec’s Plan For Continued ScalingThe path forward for EUV and the new transistor types needed to reach 1nm.JANUARY 14TH, 2021 - BY: PAUL MCLELLAN
At IEDM in December, the opening keynote (technically “Plenary 1”) was by Sri Samevadam of Imec. His presentation was titled “Towards Atomic Channels and Deconstructed Chips.” He presented Imec’s view of the future of semiconductors going forward, both Moore’s Law (scaling) and More than More (advanced packaging and multiple die). It is always interesting to hear Imec’s view of the world since it is a sort of Switzerland of the industry. All major semiconductor companies are engaged with Imec in pre-competitive research. There are over 500 “guest” engineers from these companies who work onsite at Imec.
Sri started with an overview of scaling in the past. It’s a story I’m sure you know: the end of Denard scaling when the voltage could no longer be lowered due to short-channel effects, copper interconnect, strained silicon, HKMG, FinFET, and in the near future, GAA nanosheets.
Fig. 1: Roadmap for transistors (top image) and interconnect technologies (bottom image). Source: Imec
If they sell for $150M then they are giving it away.... State of the Art is 3nm as we know which is somewhere North of $540M for any otehr Semiconductor Company to produce through R&D costs alone..
Yes the Ann was crap...... But since then over 310M shares have traded hands across both the ASX & CHI'x..... Or roughly 25% of the register..
So who is buying this bag of supposed miss etched knackers? You? Me? or someone else.... ??
Two key pieces of the upcoming resolutions to be voted on by those still holding are key for me... 6.2 Summary of material proposed changesFee for registration of off market transfers (clause 8.4(c))
On 24 January 2011, ASX amended Listing Rule 8.14 with the effect that the
Company may now charge a “reasonable fee” for registering paper-based
transfers, sometimes referred to “off-market transfers”.
Clause 8.4 of the Proposed Constitution is being made to enable the Company
to charge a reasonable fee when it is required to register off-market transfers from
Shareholders. The fee is intended to represent the cost incurred by the Company
in upgrading its fraud detection practices specific to off-market transfers.
Before charging any fee, the Company is required to notify ASX of the fee to be
charged and provide sufficient information to enable ASX to assess the
reasonableness of the proposed amount
Partial (proportional) takeover provisions (new clause 37)
A proportional takeover bid is a takeover bid where the offer made to each
shareholder is only for a proportion of that shareholder’s shares.
Pursuant to section 648G of the Corporations Act, the Company has included in
the Proposed Constitution a provision whereby a proportional takeover bid for
Shares may only proceed after the bid has been approved by a meeting of
Shareholders held in accordance with the terms set out in the Corporations Act.
This clause of the Proposed Constitution will cease to have effect on the third
anniversary of the date of the adoption of last renewal of the clause.
Information required by section 648G of the Corporations Act
Effect of proposed proportional takeover provisions
Where offers have been made under a proportional off-market bid in respect of
a class of securities in a company, the registration of a transfer giving effect to a
contract resulting from the acceptance of an offer made under such a
proportional off-market bid is prohibited unless and until a Resolution to approve
the proportional off-market bid is passed.
Reasons for proportional takeover provisions
A proportional takeover bid may result in control of the Company changing
without Shareholders having the opportunity to dispose of all their Shares. By
making a partial bid, a bidder can obtain practical control of the Company by acquiring less than a majority interest. Shareholders are exposed to the risk of
being left as a minority in the Company and the risk of the bidder being able to
acquire control of the Company without payment of an adequate control
premium. These amended provisions allow Shareholders to decide whether a
proportional takeover bid is acceptable in principle, and assist in ensuring that
any partial bid is appropriately priced.
Knowledge of any acquisition proposals
As at the date of this Notice of Meeting, no Director is aware of any proposal by
any person to acquire, or to increase the extent of, a substantial interest in the
Company.
Potential advantages and disadvantages of proportional takeover provisions
The Directors consider that the proportional takeover provisions have no potential
advantages or disadvantages for them and that they remain free to make a
recommendation on whether an offer under a proportional takeover bid should
be accepted.
The potential advantages of the proportional takeover provisions for Shareholders
include:
(a) the right to decide by majority vote whether an offer under a proportional
takeover bid should proceed;
(2) assisting in preventing Shareholders from being locked in as a minority;
(d) increasing the bargaining power of Shareholders which may assist in
ensuring that any proportional takeover bid is adequately priced; and
(e) each individual Shareholder may better assess the likely outcome of the
proportional takeover bid by knowing the view of the majority of
Shareholders which may assist in deciding whether to accept or reject an
offer under the takeover bid.
The potential disadvantages of the proportional takeover provisions for
Shareholders include:
(a) proportional takeover bids may be discouraged;
(b) lost opportunity to sell a portion of their Shares at a premium; and
(c) the likelihood of a proportional takeover bid succeeding may be
reduced.
Recommendation of the Board
The Directors do not believe the potential disadvantages outweigh the potential advantages of adopting the proportional takeover provisions and as a result consider that the proportional takeover provision in the Proposed Constitution is in
the interest of Shareholders and unanimously recommend that Shareholders vote in favour of Resolution 5
Average turnover normally i sin the vicinity of 4 million shares a day.... In the last 3 days it has been in excess of 100 million...
Now I don't know where they went but it may be that some conglomerate just saved themselves the cost of paying even your 15c Unc and picked the lot up for circa 7c...
Now ol 8tey sure is a dreamer and he hopes that is the case cause with all the money that might have been saved he may well get a few $ more for ones he refused to let go..... ;-) hehehe 
