SAN FRANCISCO—Intel Corp. confirmed Tuesday (Feb. 28) it is no longer a member of the World Semiconductor Trade Statistics (WSTS) organization, a non-profit organization which publishes monthly reports about global chip sales.
Intel's decision, first reported by the Wall Street Journal Tuesday, follows the exit from WSTS of rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) late last year.
The WSTS's monthly sales report is a widely used metric for chip sales. Groups such as the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) and market research firms use the WSTS data to gauge the health of the chip industry. Without the sales data supplied by Intel and AMD, the WSTS will presumably need to estimate the firm's sales to provide data on the microprocessor market and the total semiconductor market.
"From time to time we evaluate organizations where we have membership and make decisions about our needs and the benefits of that membership," said an Intel spokesman in an email exchange Tuesday. "We decided the WSTS was no longer a fit for us."
On its website, WSTS claims 62 member companies that represent more than 75 percent of the global semiconductor market. The withdrawal of Intel, the world's biggest chip maker, would presumably alter these figures. The website also claims that the world's top 20 chip makers are all members, a group that would include both Intel and AMD.
The Wall Street Journal reported that some analysts believe Intel concluded the WSTS data was no longer valuable to the company after the withdrawal of AMD, it's only meaningful competitor in the PC microprocessor space. Intel accounts for more than 80 percent of global microprocessor sales.
A spokesman for AMD confirmed via email that the company left the WSTS late last year. "We are always evaluating our membership in industry associations and trade groups and made the decision last year to not renew our members with WSTS," the spokesman said.
It is unclear how the withdrawal of Intel and AMD from the WSTS will impact the reports that the organization generates. The Wall Street Journal reported that the group's administrator, Bernd Schniggenfittig, said the organization uses a variety of techniques to estimate sales for companies that do not report data.
Bill McClean, president of market research firm IC Insights Inc., said in an email exchange with EE Times that the withdrawal of Intel and AMD would leave an enormous hole in microprocessor data published by the WSTS, though he added it would have minimal impact on the rest of the data published by the organization. "Intel and AMD represent about 90 percent of the MPU market and, without them, it will be pure guessing," McClean said.
"My feeling is that this could result in the demise of the WSTS as a viable source of monthly industry sales data," said veteran IC market analyst Mike Cowan. "Time will tell."
Cowan said it should be interesting to see what January's global chip sales look like without Intel's participation. The WSTS is currently scheduled to report January sales numbers on March 7.
Schniggenfittig could not immediately be reached by EE Times for comment. An SIA spokeswoman said she could not comment until she had conferred with the WSTS.
WSTS members pay for membership on a sliding scale, based on revenue. AMD, with 2011 revenue of $6.57 billion, would pay $1,700 for an annual membership, according to data on the WSTS site. The site does not list the cost of membership for companies with sales of more than $10 billion, which would apply to Intel.
Interesting but incomplete news report. I am sure AMD did not leave the Consortium in order to save $1700 per year. Diddo for Intel, even if their annual dues were a bit more. They must have been ticked off by some action of WSTS, or they see added value in not publisizing the stats. In either case, an in-depth interview with an Intel spokesman is in order here.
I just posted an opinion piece on this topic.
"Why it's wrong for Intel and AMD to abandon WSTS"
You can read it here:
While this will make data collecting somewhat more difficult on a monthly basis, earnings reports and guidance will still likely be provided by Intel and AMD on a regular basis, so much of the data will still be there (although probably not in the format that the WSTS would like).
We have been trying to gather comments from the industry on this issue.
While industry officials try to downplay the significance of the news, this is an incredibly short-sighted move on the part of Intel.
The industry, when its stops collecting data of its own market, will start losing its power.
It starts losing its own voice -- against whatever unforeseeable battles/issues the industry would need to fight collectively.
Tell us your thoughts.
The WSTS data is useful for Market Share information provided you are comparing apples to apples AND you know the real sales numbers per category and companies participating. Some companies, even public ones, are not comfortable sharing much detail on their sales let alone a breakout of those sales by product category.
I prefer to know my market share by looking at how my design wins are increasing against my peer competition, and how that translates into increasing revenues. Do I know the exact number? NO... but I do know it is increasing.
The responsibilities of the company organization is to continue that trend as long as possible by providing true value to customers with their product offerings and solutions and support.
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.