The question of whether the government should rescue manufacturers of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) chips is generating mixed responses.
The issue attracted attention last week when lawmakers across party lines urged the government to create an immediate bailout package, adding that without action, the DRAM industry would collapse and consequently damage the nation’s economy.
Figures show that the nation’s top four DRAM makers posted combined losses of NT$36.6 billion (US$1.1 billion) in the third quarter and NT$90.83 billion for the first nine months of the year, making the sector the biggest loser among local industries.
With the industry still in a trough and market demand weak, experts expect the four companies — Powerchip Semiconductor Corp (力晶半導體), Nanya Technology Corp (南亞科技), Inotera Memories Inc (華亞科技) and ProMOS Technologies Inc (茂德科技) — to incur combined losses of NT$112.5 billion this year.
Making matters worse is the fact that these companies have borrowed an aggregate NT$420 billion (US$12.7 billion) from local banks over recent years, according to Ministry of Economic Affairs statistics, in addition to a significant roster of overseas convertible bond payments that are due next year.
The combination of global credit crunch and economic slowdown has discouraged banks from lending to avoid bad loans, and this has made it impossible for chipmakers to borrow more money to ease capital shortages and honor bond payments. Under these circumstances, some may bow out of the industry before the market recovers — possibly in the second half of next year, as many in the industry expect.
Some say the government should save the DRAM industry because a sector collapse would not only create a financial crisis for local banks but also trigger a chain reaction in the tech industry, with flat-panel displays very likely to be the next victim.
The economic repercussions of bankruptcies in the DRAM industry, even if just one chipmaker were allowed to fail, would also be far-reaching and hard to predict, as would the socioeconomic impact of a spike in job losses.
However, others say that saving the DRAM industry would pose a greater threat to banks because no one knows how much cash would be needed to see DRAM makers through this difficult time.
There is also an argument that the government should let the weaker players go to the wall. Though painful in the short term, this would allow the survivors to grow stronger, with bigger economies of scale and more cost-efficiency, which would raise the industry’s long-term competitiveness.
Given the complexity and massive risks associated with a collapse of the DRAM industry and its implications for the economy overall, however, the government is expected to come to the rescue.
So far, the government is considering an adjustment of payment terms and emergency loans. It is also looking into injecting public funds into DRAM companies and securing stakes in the companies, eventually facilitating mergers or other consolidation within the industry. But the task will not be easy in view of the different production technologies and various partnerships involved.
Whether or not a bailout is on the way, the government must make its position clear, and soon. This would enable DRAM makers to seek funding from other investors or negotiate mergers while there is time left.
In the meantime, the companies must make deep cuts in production capacity and change corporate strategies given the unfavorable and inevitable market obstacles that lie ahead.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
RSS