downloadGroupGroupnoun_press release_995423_000000 copyGroupnoun_Feed_96767_000000Group 19noun_pictures_1817522_000000Member company iconResource item iconStore item iconGroup 19Group 19noun_Photo_2085192_000000 Copynoun_presentation_2096081_000000Group 19Group Copy 7noun_webinar_692730_000000Path
Skip to main content
Default Banner Image

secondary equipment market

As we move through Q2 of 2021, it seems that the world is finally approaching normalcy. But I don’t believe our lives and businesses will ever be the same. Travel is unlikely to return to the same level as pre-COVID-19 for many years. I’m sure many companies will establish tighter travel policies and budgets as virtual conferencing has proven to be beneficial and cost-effective. Patients and doctors who were skeptical of telemedicine are embracing it, and although it’s not perfect, it has filled a needed gap. Online learning essentially happened over a weekend and will now be part of many curriculums and programs. All of these elements have spurred our semiconductor industry into a super cycle. Demand for chips is leading to an increased demand for semiconductor equipment. Semiconductor capital equipment expenditures in 2020 surpassed $63 billion and are forecast to top $70 billion in 2021. The secondary equipment market typically makes up about 5% to 10% of that. Our inquiries have definitely increased this year. With this in mind, I’d like to share some thoughts for the remainder of the year. Storage of Chipmaking Equipment Not New The semiconductor industry has been experiencing an equipment shortage for some time. It is difficult for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to support such a large variety of products and technologies. Some companies use equipment for manufacturing 150mm, 200mm and 300mm wafers. Fabs still run 30-year-old technology on 150mm wafers while the latest technology is manufactured on 300mm wafers. We’ve also seen new technologies like silicon carbide (SiC) being developed on these smaller wafer sizes. Unfortunately, some OEMs stopped making 150mm and 200mm some time ago and have only recently jumped back into the market. These OEMs have had to balance technological advances, pricing, and manufacturing capacity to meet this demand since their primary focus is on 300mm equipment. Third-party refurbished equipment suppliers have also experienced an increase in demand over the last several years. We see it increasing at all technology levels over the next three to five years. This translates to increased equipment pricing for both new and used equipment, as well as increased lead times. Growing Demand for Legacy Tools Many electronic products we use and are familiar with don't require state-of-the-art technology. For instance, cellphones, electric vehicles, wearables, monitors and industrial products still contain many chips manufactured on 200mm wafers using 200mm equipment. There are still approximately 200 200mm fabs worldwide and this makes up about 25% of all wafer capacity regardless of wafer size. These fabs manufacture analog devices, MEMS products, power management ICs, RF devices, discrete devices and sensors. We have also seen an increase in lead times for 200mm equipment. Typical lead times of three to six months have increased in some cases to one year or more. This situation has created a dramatic increase in chip making equipment prices and we do not expect much relief there. Many OEMs transitioned to 300mm equipment prior to 2010. Revenue and profit margins are much higher for them on 300mm equipment. 200mm manufacturing was supported by many third parties for a while. However, in 2016 we saw a resurgence in 200mm equipment, and at that time many OEMs began jump-starting their supply chains. It took some time for them to develop new supply chains, upgrade technology and in some cases hire newly trained engineers to support these new tool sets. All this costs money, which is why we will continue to see an increase in new legacy equipment pricing. Because manufacturers and products may not be able to support these prices, we expect the robust third-party ecosystem to continue. SurplusGLOBAL's Response to this Demand One of the advantages we bring to the secondary equipment market is our ability to recycle technology. We continuously search for opportunities to purchase large packages of tools from companies that are transitioning technology nodes, moving from 200mm to 300mm wafer size or changing product lines. We spend approximately $65 million to $100 million each year on purchasing equipment and in some cases storing it for the right customer. For instance, a memory company may be changing technology nodes and no longer needs its equipment. This use to happen on a predictable schedule. Instead of scrapping that equipment, SurplusGLOBAL purchases and stores it. Sometimes we only need to store it for one month before relocating it. However, in many cases, we store it for one year or more. We may power it on at a later date if it is in good condition. In some cases, we work with an OEM or third party to have it refurbished and ready for a new customer. In response to the need for more secondary market equipment, we have opened up additional offices in Japan and Singapore to stay close to and better support our customers in those regions. Finally, our biggest and most recent endeavor is building our Semiconductor Equipment Cluster, which opens in July 2021. Learn more about the SurplusGLOBAL Semiconductor Equipment Cluster. Emerald Greig is executive vice president Americas at SurplusGLOBAL.
Read More
IntroductionStarting July 4, 2022, PFOA (Perfluorooctanoic acid) levels in semiconductor manufacturing and related equipment (SMRE), including replacement parts, entering the European Union (EU) will be restricted to 25 ppb per component (or any part thereof). Semiconductor equipment components (and the parts thereof) of particular concern include fluid tubing and fittings, pipe/seal tape, wire and cable insulation, filters, valves, tanks, panels, reaction vessels and o-rings; if they are made from fluoropolymers or fluoroelastomers.When PFOA is used as an aid to the manufacture fluoropolymers such as PTFE, PFA, PVDF or fluoroelastomers such as FKM and FFKM (collectively referred to as fluoromaterials), an unintended PFOA residue can be trapped within the fluoromaterial. Buyers of components used in SMRE are usually unaware of the processing method used for any fluoromaterials they may contain, and, as a consequence, the potential for PFOA residue. This lack of information about potential PFOA residues could result in regulatory enforcement actions and restricted market access, particularly in the EU.The impact of restrictions on fluoromaterials used in SMRE has been introduced in previous SEMI articles ‘Fluorinated Compound Restrictions May Trigger Costly Equipment Changes’ and ‘Fluorinated Substance Restrictions Triggers Costly Equipment Changes.’PFOA and its related compounds, such as the ammonium salt APFO (collectively called PFOA in this article), are recognized internationally as hazardous chemicals and are now targeted for regulatory restriction in the U.S., Taiwan, Canada and the EU. The UN Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) is also considering listing PFOA, which could lead to additional international restrictions.The SEMI EHS Division PFOA Compliance Working Group has been working to understand: The likelihood of PFOA residue entering the supply chain of new components The residual level of PFOA in fluoromaterials produced prior to the phase out of PFOA by some manufacturers The impact of PFOA residue on the secondary equipment market This SEMI resource page, ‘Elimination of PFOA from the Equipment Supply Chain,’ and the supporting FAQ contain the Working Group’s key findings and conclusions.PFOA in the Fluoromaterial Supply ChainSignatories to the U.S. EPA Stewardship Program, which include FluoroCouncil members, eliminated PFOA from their manufacturing processes by 2013. However, other fluoromaterial manufactures – particularly in China, Russia and India – might still use PFOA and pose a significant risk to the worldwide supply chain.China, the world’s largest fluoromaterial producer, accounts for 53 percent of global production of PTFE and 38 percent of worldwide production of PVDF, FEP and FKM. An estimated 75 percent to 85 percent of fluoromaterials are manufactured using PFOA in China. Fully 25 percent of these fluoromaterials are exported, primarily to the U.S, Japan, EU and India. What’s more, finished goods made from or containing fluoromaterials that might be used as components in SMRE are exported from China.Documentation that traces fluoromaterials through the supply chain back to the original fluoromaterial manufacturer is key to meeting the PFOA regulatory requirements. This traceability can be straightforward in cases when an SMRE manufacturer directly specifies the use of a fluoromaterial in a custom-fabricated fluoromaterial component. However, for off-the-shelf components (e.g., cable ties, wiring insulation, tubing) or the components assembled from these components (e.g., controllers), the complexity and dynamics of the supply chain makes traceability back to the original fluoromaterial producer almost impossible.Residual PFOA Levels If, or how much, PFOA/APFO residue is contained in a fluoromaterial depends on the manufacturing process. Details of the manufacturing processes are proprietary and vary widely. Post manufacturing thermal treatments, such as sintering, extrusion, and molding, can result in the rapid thermal decomposition of APFO above 250C, but PFOA is significantly more stable. The temperature and time of thermal treatments is also proprietary and varies depending on the type of fluoromaterial and what is being made.This variability makes it impossible to estimate the likely level of trapped PFOA or APFO in a finished component or a part thereof. It is unwise to use data on the level of residue made known for one case to extrapolate the level of residue across the fluoromaterial industry. However, an industry-wide range on the order of 1ppm-10ppm (nearly 1000 times the EU limit) is suspected. Testing for the presence of PFOA/APFO at 25ppb in components is also problematic as there is no standard test method, and results among the custom methods developed in each test lab may vary.Given this uncertainty in test methods, a system of supplier declarations warrants consideration.Impact on Secondary (Used) EquipmentThe EU REACH restrictions apply to SMRE and replacement parts placed on the market at any time (not just initial placement – known as “first placing on the market”). For fluoromaterial components manufactured prior to 2013, there is a higher likelihood of residual PFOA/APFO levels exceeding the 25ppb limit of EU REACH. In principle all the SMRE components containing fluoromaterials should be investigated, and those containing PFOA above 25ppb must be replaced before the SMRE can be legally placed again on the EU market. Companies (e.g., semiconductor manufacturers) in the EU who wish to sell used equipment within the EU will be required to demonstrate the used equipment is in compliance. Selling older used equipment would likely be unprofitable after necessary investigations and component replacements are completed.Next StepsWhile the EU semiconductor manufacturing industry heavily depends on the secondary (used) equipment market, EU regulators may be unaware of the PFOA restriction’s damaging impact to this market. The EHS Division PFOA Working Group, in conjunction with SEMI Europe, is now considering how to bring this concern to the attention of regulators and to collaborate and lobby for effective changes including possible modifications to the EU Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) regulation.
Read More