_______________________________________________

-  THE FRIDAY LETTER  -

(emailed weekly, from Gilder Publishing,
for friends and subscribers)

_______________________________________________


 | http://www.gilder.com/ | Issue 349.0/July 25, 2008

SIGN-UP A FRIEND FOR FREE!
 

 

HEADLINES:

-  The Week / George Gilder: Ceradyne’s SemEquip Purchase
-  Friday Feature / Ken Fisher: Don’t Fret About the Fed
-  Friday Blogger Bonus / Tom Evslin: How to Lose Your Company
-  Readings /


 

The Week / Ceradyne’s SemEquip Purchase

Ceradyne to buy privately held SemEquip for $25 million
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/546ca59a966c917a2440999df39494e6.htm

George Gilder, Gilder Telecosm Forum: If Ceradyne (CRDN) is near a reasonable valuation for its existing business, I would regard it as a compelling buy after it purchases SemEquip, which has a critical path technology for the entire next generation of semiconductors. According to tests at NTT labs, SemEquip's ion implant breakthrough not only increases throughput nine-fold but also enhances the performance of transistors by 30% to 40% while reducing leakage current by as much as a hundredfold. It has a compelling business model, which adds monthly proprietary chemical supplies to the sale of some of the most complex and expensive and vital equipment in the industry. Ion implanters are what make silicon semiconductors.

Carver Mead and other experts at Gilder/Forbes Telecosm 2008 (May 27 – 29 in Lake George, NY) regarded SemEquip's invention as the most exciting new technology presented at the conference. (Selden Labs and Jules Urbach’s Lightstage were last year's stars.) SemEquip's problem was an incredible imbroglio among feuding venture capitalists who bought shares at varying values in expectation of an AMAT buyout and wanted to sell in order to cashout their fund on schedule. Applied Materials (AMAT) decided instead to exit the ion implant business entirely and concentrate on solar.


Telecosm Forum Member:
Ceradyne is a $1 billion market cap with $760 mil of sales in 2007. They are paying $25 mil for SemEquip with a 15 year earnout. Given that purchase price I would guess that SemEquip is still long on promise but not yet sales rich; so I'm not sure how much SemEquip exposure an investor today will get in Ceradyne... I think body armor and the other lines of business are going to be more impactful on the stock price than the semiconductor technology business.

Read more posts by George Gilder and the Gilder Telecosm Forum members, logon with you subscriber password at www.Gildertech.com today.

 

The Gilder Telecosm Forum

The next logical step in the evolution of the Gilder Technology Report (published by Gilder Publishing, LLC in association with Forbes Inc., 1996-2007), the Gilder Telecosm Forum is the web’s premier technology investment discussion forum.

 

To learn how to join this powerful network of talented, tech-savvy investors and thinkers online daily to debate, discuss, and decode new and emerging technologies and share valuable and actionable investment advice, visit www.Gildertech.com today.  


Friday Feature / Don’t Fret About the Fed

Ken Fisher, Forbes.com “Portfolio Strategy” (7/21/08): Curious fact: U.S. stocks do better than foreign ones in the months before a U.S. election.

 

There is a spreading fear in the U.S. that a period of tightening by the Federal Reserve Board is imminent. It has gotten to be obsessive. On a recent round of New York media interviews, I encountered two almost unanimous views: that the Fed would hike rates later this year, and that Barack Obama would be elected President. Both events are viewed as all but certain, and as all but certain to do great damage to the stock market.

 

The fears can be put aside. The market will recover.

 

It is presumed that increases in the Fed's target rate for overnight loans are bad for stocks because high interest rates make the future earnings from corporations less valuable today. But the connection is not so neat.

 

Since 1970 there have been eight stretches in which the Fed was tightening and eight in which it was loosening. These periods ranged from 6 months to 56 months long. Recently I made two tables, one showing stock returns (as measured by the MSCI World Index) over various periods beginning at the starting points of the tightening periods, the other showing returns beginning at the starting points of the loosening periods. The periods covered 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. I've asked both large audiences and individuals to tell me which set of returns was for the tightening times and which for the loosening. They've been stumped. There's no pattern. They look almost identical.

 

For example, 24 months after tightenings started, returns averaged a cumulative 16.9%; 24 months after loosenings they averaged 19.7%. But look at medians instead of averages and the results flip-flop to 18.1% for tight money and 12.4% for loose money. You can't find any pattern over shorter holding times, either. Despite what your gut tells you, central bank action holds no useful information about where stocks are going.

 

In my May 19 column I detailed why U.S. investors needn't worry about an Obama presidency. Another observation: U.S. stocks do better than foreign ones (in dollar terms) in the last five months before a presidential election. Since 1928 this has happened three-fourths of the time; the advantage to domestic stocks, averaged over all 20 elections beginning with Herbert Hoover's, is 9.1 percentage points. And when it hasn't happened, the other quarter of the time, U.S. stocks haven't lagged by much. When they've led it has been by more than 13%. Simple explanation: Markets dislike uncertainty, and uncertainty declines as Election Day nears.

 

No guarantee the pattern will hold in 2008, but that's the way to bet.

Learn which
U.S. stocks Ken Fisher likes right now:
http://www.forbes.com/business/global/2008/0721/113.html
__________________________________________

 

Friday Blogger Bonus / How to Lose Your Company

Tom Evslin, “Fractals of Change” blog (7/21/08):
From an article on "net-top" computers in today's New York Times: "'We're sitting on the sidelines not because we're lazy. We're sitting on the sidelines because even if this category takes off, and we get our piece of the pie, it doesn't add up,' said Paul Moore, senior director of mobile product management for Fujitsu. 'It's a product that essentially has no margin.'"

 

No one can blame Fujitsu for wanting to stick with higher-margined traditional laptops. But you don't always get what you want. If this category of thin, light, cheap, energy-light computers built primarily to surf the Internet and use online applications takes off and begins to cut into sales of today's full-featured laptops, Fujitsu will lose its current laptop business and have nothing to replace it with.

 

You can't make displacement products disappear by sticking your head in the sand. You can't always maintain the margins you were used to. In fact, if you're in a line of business where you have "comfortably" high margins, you're in a line of business which is particularly susceptible to disruptive attack.

 

It Fujitsu really believes there is no market for this product, it is good business to avoid making it. But, if Fujitsu believes there is a market, then they need to figure out how to make their existing product more competitive or how to compete in this market and add enough value to earn a margin or how to disrupt the disruptors with innovation of their own (or get a law passed against their competitors but that's unlikely in this case).

 

Further down in the story the Times says: "Intel is projecting that by 2011, the market for the netbooks will be 40 million units a year, which is why Intel is jumping in with low-powered chips that would be used in the netbooks and the net-tops… Intel executives think the market for low-cost PCs is too big to pass up, though it does raise a potential threat to more powerful and more profitable computing lines."

 

Microsoft, according to the story, is also a participant in this market:

"Microsoft has been a reluctant participant too. Even though it is no longer selling its Windows XP operating system software, it made an exception for makers of these low-cost laptops and desktops. Microsoft said it was responding to a groundswell of consumer interest in the low-cost machines, but some makers of those machines say Microsoft did so reluctantly because it did not want to lose market share to Linux."

 

Reluctance is OK; sitting on the sideline sulking is not.

 

Years ago I tried to interest my then-employer AT&T in VoIP. To their credit, some people in the company believed AT&T should be a leader in this new category of voice service. But the argument that kept AT&T out of VoIP was "why should we participate in cratering the margins of a profitable business." It was somewhat a holdover from the monopoly days when AT&T's lack of participation in a technology might have slowed the spread of that technology. When my counter-argument "because it's going to happen anyway and we'll be better off leading rather than following" wasn't persuasive, I left to cofound a VoIP company secure in the belief that I wouldn't have to worry about competition from AT&T.

 

I have no idea whether net-top computers will succeed. But I do know that companies have to face disruptive competition squarely in order to survive.


Check out Tom’s Fractals of Change blog:
http://blog.tomevslin.com/

__________________________________________


Readings /

Qualcomm, Nokia End Patent Fight
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121690745641080963.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

Steve Jobs’ Diet Secrets
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2008/07/24/steve-jobs-diet-tech-personal-cx_bc_0724jobs.html

Sprint to Sell Cell Towers
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121687266713780423.html?mod=2_1571_leftbox

Microsoft Engineers Invent Energy Efficient LCD Competitor
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/jul08/6466

__________________________________________
 

Friday Letter Editor: Mary Collins George / mcollins@gilder.com
 

ADVERTISING INFORMATION

The Friday Letter is mailed each week to more than 40,000-plus subscribers and friends of Gilder Publishing, including industry leaders, financial professionals and individual investors. For information about advertising, contact Lauren Klopacs at lklopacs@forbes.com.

PLEASE NOTE: The appearance of an advertisement in the Friday Letter does not indicate an endorsement for the product and/or service by George Gilder, Gilder Publishing LLC, or the Friday Letter staff.

 

FEEDBACK AND PROBLEMS

For technical problems, or to send letters to the editor, please e-mail info@gilder.com.

 

MAILING ADDRESS

Gilder Publishing, LLC

ATTN: Friday Letter

291A Main Street

Great Barrington, MA 01230

_______________________________________________

The Friday Letter is published weekly for subscribers and friends of Gilder Publishing. If someone you know would enjoy it, please feel free to forward a copy.

 

Gilder Publishing makes the Friday Letter available for free. To help defray some of the costs of producing this information on a weekly basis, we will from time to time be sending you offers from companies we think you'll be interested in. These offers will not come more than once a week. If you do not wish to receive this related information, please opt out of this process at the link below and we will not share your name with companies outside of Gilder Publishing.

 

To SUBSCRIBE please visit http://www.gilder.com/

To UNSUBSCRIBE please go to http://www.gilder.com/fridayletter/unsubscribe.php

 

Trouble subscribing or unsubscribing?

Email info@gilder.com

 

http://www.gilder.com/unsubscribe/specialproducts.php

 

To SUBSCRIBE please visit http://www.gilder.com/

To UNSUBSCRIBE please go to http://www.gilder.com/fridayletter/unsubscribe.php

 

Trouble subscribing or unsubscribing?

Email info@gilder.com

_______________________________________________

Copyright 2008 Gilder Publishing LLC