Imagine that a few years ago HP announced it was developing a new ultra high resolution printer capable of printing 1500 pages an hour with resolution of 10K dots per inch resolution.
Imagine that the printer has been delayed and plagued by technology development issues, with slow progress being made to the point where customers wonder if it will ever work.
Then one day HP and a major customer announce that they successfully ran 637 sheets of paper through the printer in an hour as proof that it was well on its way to being a working printer.
However HP and the customer conveniently leave out the fact in their announcement that the the paper went through the new printer without anything ever being printed on the paper and the paper came out as blank as it went in. In fact some of the blank paper in the output tray was recycled back to the input tray to be run through the printer again coming out blank again.
No toner was used and nothing showed up on the paper yet HP claimed that the new printer achieved a new "milestone", "watershed" break through rate of 637 pages an hour.
Would you as an investor or analyst view this as an honest and fair representation of progress on the part of HP and its customer or would you find this misleading ?
Well, that is what happened with IBM and ASML.....
At 10 nm EUV doesn't have as easy opportunity as at 100 nm. The required upgrades (new mask, pellicle, high NA, resist) are weighed against multiple immersion exposures. So far not too many required overall. Beyond 10 nm has other uncertainties as well, including multiple EUV exposures.