Vishay Mosfet group going under?
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 6 Jun 2010 16:38 On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:29:36 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:46:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> > >[...] > >>> Recently I had designs where, when I handed the client the module spec, >>> schematic and BOM, a part that showed thousands of stock just days >>> before stood at zilch. So nowadays my recommendation is often "Look at >>> the schematic later, first order the BOM stuff, right now, and enough to >>> last at least through the first half year". >> >> When I worked for LM they had prototype quantity issues. I told them that I >> always had a drawer full of any component I was designing in and wouldn't >> start until I did. When I left they were *still* chasing parts and raw >> boards. What a mess. Your tax dollars at work. > > >Currently I am working with an engineer whose attitude in that respect I >like: He only designs stuff in when he has an order confirmation _and_ a >valid FedEx tracking number. Given the issues with order fulfillment mentioned here a couple of weeks ago, this may no longer be good enough. The amazing thing, to me, was their total dismay that engineers would order parts. ...like they were contaminated, or something. I understand that they couldn't go into the final product, but boards are cheap. It's not like the first item is going to be shippable (but that's another story).
From: krw on 6 Jun 2010 16:51 On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:35:55 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:49:09 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 00:10:53 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Joerg wrote: >>>>>> Yzordderrex wrote: >>>>>>> On Jun 5, 10:06 am, Winfield Hill <Winfield_mem...(a)newsguy.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Yzordderrex wrote... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I heard that Vishay is cancelling open orders for fets and shutting >>>>>>>>> lines down. I suspect my intelligence sources though. Has anyone >>>>>>>>> heard anything that might confirm this? >>>>>>>> Can you get more specific information. With part numbers? >>>>>>>> For example, Vishay bought a raft of old MOSFET products >>>>>>>> from IRF a few years ago, parts that IRF was likely ready >>>>>>>> to retire then, and Vishay may finally be retiring now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> - Win >>>>>>> Sorry Win, I don't have much to go on. I was told that they are >>>>>>> canceling open orders. I think this is probably an embellishment of >>>>>>> the truth. I do notice quite a few fets are out of stock at digikey, >>>>>>> so I expect there is a lot of panic buying going on. Not just >>>>>>> Vishay, but other sources as well. A different intel source told me >>>>>>> that they are trying to slow down this environment where purchasing >>>>>>> groups are helter skelter ordering 2x what they need in order to get >>>>>>> what they need. ... >>>>>> That actually _is_ what I recommend to client for some parts. Better to >>>>>> have $3k of extra inventory sitting on the shelf than being hit with a >>>>>> hard 20wk leadtime and next month you have to furlough half the >>>>>> production staff because of a hardcore line stop. I know that >>>>>> accountants and CFOs really don't like this but man's gotta do what >>>>>> man's gotta do. >>>>>> >>>>>> The only explanation I could imagine is that some mfgs must have slammed >>>>>> the brakes end of 2008. >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> >>>>> 20wk lead time sounds like they have to open new mines for raw >>>>> materials, then build plants, then... >>>> One of the Disties was telling me of 214 week lead times. Yes, 2014. >>> >>> Time to re-design for another manufacturer's part, and pronto. That sort >>> of leadtime is almost Maximesque :-) >> >> Ya think! So far we've been OK. I've had to add a bunch of vendors as >> alternatives. Crystals and caps have been a problem. So far our inventory >> control people have been pretty good at keeping inventory. Often far >> exceeding expectations. One crystal that I was going to obsolete had >12K in >> inventory - guess not. I did reduce it from two to one per. > > >Crystals are fairly easy, no need to stock oodles of those. I tend to >avoid oscillators in a can. A regular standalone crystal can, in a >pinch, be custom ordered from lots of places and isn't going to break >the bank. Ok, it's more expensive but for larger qties you could source >it in China. The main thing is to avoid a line stop. Several manufacturers are apparently dumping these lines (CS10?). All but a few crystals (14.7456MHz, and such) are custom ordered. This one happens to be 12.0MHz. In reality it can be anything from 4-40MHz. We also use a 12.5MHz crystal in the product. I could easily use it, but with 12.7K in inventory there isn't any point. >When I did that with an inductor for a client a long time ago we looked >at it and it was "Wow, custom from Taiwan costs less than catalog from >the US". So they are still using that Taiwanese inductor. Yes, these crystals are from China, too.
From: Joerg on 6 Jun 2010 16:58 krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: > On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:29:36 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:46:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >> [...] >> >>>> Recently I had designs where, when I handed the client the module spec, >>>> schematic and BOM, a part that showed thousands of stock just days >>>> before stood at zilch. So nowadays my recommendation is often "Look at >>>> the schematic later, first order the BOM stuff, right now, and enough to >>>> last at least through the first half year". >>> When I worked for LM they had prototype quantity issues. I told them that I >>> always had a drawer full of any component I was designing in and wouldn't >>> start until I did. When I left they were *still* chasing parts and raw >>> boards. What a mess. Your tax dollars at work. >> >> Currently I am working with an engineer whose attitude in that respect I >> like: He only designs stuff in when he has an order confirmation _and_ a >> valid FedEx tracking number. > > Given the issues with order fulfillment mentioned here a couple of weeks ago, > this may no longer be good enough. The amazing thing, to me, was their total > dismay that engineers would order parts. ...like they were contaminated, or > something. I understand that they couldn't go into the final product, but > boards are cheap. It's not like the first item is going to be shippable (but > that's another story). That always surprised me, and still does. In some companies every ever so small purchase must go through a central department. Since those guys are often busy fighting fires in the logistics area I have seen many serious project delays because parts for experiments weren't there in due course. When I took the helm at a company's division this was one of the first things I changed. Engineers were allowed to order, and every group manager received a sizeable purchase authority. A corporate credit card was there to get stuff in a jiffy. If one trusts engineers with design decisions I don't quite understand why one should not also trust them with such minor financial decisions. I mean, if one of them would go overboard too many times the big boss would see that on the regular reports and could have a chat. In my case that was never needed, in years. But I do remember some consternation when the accounting guys of the company that bought us heard about this. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Joerg on 6 Jun 2010 17:02 krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: > On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:35:55 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:49:09 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 00:10:53 -0700, Robert Baer <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Joerg wrote: >>>>>>> Yzordderrex wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jun 5, 10:06 am, Winfield Hill <Winfield_mem...(a)newsguy.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Yzordderrex wrote... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I heard that Vishay is cancelling open orders for fets and shutting >>>>>>>>>> lines down. I suspect my intelligence sources though. Has anyone >>>>>>>>>> heard anything that might confirm this? >>>>>>>>> Can you get more specific information. With part numbers? >>>>>>>>> For example, Vishay bought a raft of old MOSFET products >>>>>>>>> from IRF a few years ago, parts that IRF was likely ready >>>>>>>>> to retire then, and Vishay may finally be retiring now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> - Win >>>>>>>> Sorry Win, I don't have much to go on. I was told that they are >>>>>>>> canceling open orders. I think this is probably an embellishment of >>>>>>>> the truth. I do notice quite a few fets are out of stock at digikey, >>>>>>>> so I expect there is a lot of panic buying going on. Not just >>>>>>>> Vishay, but other sources as well. A different intel source told me >>>>>>>> that they are trying to slow down this environment where purchasing >>>>>>>> groups are helter skelter ordering 2x what they need in order to get >>>>>>>> what they need. ... >>>>>>> That actually _is_ what I recommend to client for some parts. Better to >>>>>>> have $3k of extra inventory sitting on the shelf than being hit with a >>>>>>> hard 20wk leadtime and next month you have to furlough half the >>>>>>> production staff because of a hardcore line stop. I know that >>>>>>> accountants and CFOs really don't like this but man's gotta do what >>>>>>> man's gotta do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The only explanation I could imagine is that some mfgs must have slammed >>>>>>> the brakes end of 2008. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>> 20wk lead time sounds like they have to open new mines for raw >>>>>> materials, then build plants, then... >>>>> One of the Disties was telling me of 214 week lead times. Yes, 2014. >>>> Time to re-design for another manufacturer's part, and pronto. That sort >>>> of leadtime is almost Maximesque :-) >>> Ya think! So far we've been OK. I've had to add a bunch of vendors as >>> alternatives. Crystals and caps have been a problem. So far our inventory >>> control people have been pretty good at keeping inventory. Often far >>> exceeding expectations. One crystal that I was going to obsolete had >12K in >>> inventory - guess not. I did reduce it from two to one per. >> >> Crystals are fairly easy, no need to stock oodles of those. I tend to >> avoid oscillators in a can. A regular standalone crystal can, in a >> pinch, be custom ordered from lots of places and isn't going to break >> the bank. Ok, it's more expensive but for larger qties you could source >> it in China. The main thing is to avoid a line stop. > > Several manufacturers are apparently dumping these lines (CS10?). All but a > few crystals (14.7456MHz, and such) are custom ordered. This one happens to > be 12.0MHz. In reality it can be anything from 4-40MHz. We also use a > 12.5MHz crystal in the product. I could easily use it, but with 12.7K in > inventory there isn't any point. > >> When I did that with an inductor for a client a long time ago we looked >> at it and it was "Wow, custom from Taiwan costs less than catalog from >> the US". So they are still using that Taiwanese inductor. > > Yes, these crystals are from China, too. If a certain type seems to get dropped you might want to ask around. In China there always seems to be someone who keeps making older stuff. For example, through-hole parts and single-sided phenolic are kicking and alive over there. When you ask a board house about phenolic in the US that can result in a blank stare ;-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: krw on 6 Jun 2010 17:11
On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:58:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:29:36 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: >>>> On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 09:46:37 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>> Recently I had designs where, when I handed the client the module spec, >>>>> schematic and BOM, a part that showed thousands of stock just days >>>>> before stood at zilch. So nowadays my recommendation is often "Look at >>>>> the schematic later, first order the BOM stuff, right now, and enough to >>>>> last at least through the first half year". >>>> When I worked for LM they had prototype quantity issues. I told them that I >>>> always had a drawer full of any component I was designing in and wouldn't >>>> start until I did. When I left they were *still* chasing parts and raw >>>> boards. What a mess. Your tax dollars at work. >>> >>> Currently I am working with an engineer whose attitude in that respect I >>> like: He only designs stuff in when he has an order confirmation _and_ a >>> valid FedEx tracking number. >> >> Given the issues with order fulfillment mentioned here a couple of weeks ago, >> this may no longer be good enough. The amazing thing, to me, was their total >> dismay that engineers would order parts. ...like they were contaminated, or >> something. I understand that they couldn't go into the final product, but >> boards are cheap. It's not like the first item is going to be shippable (but >> that's another story). > > >That always surprised me, and still does. In some companies every ever >so small purchase must go through a central department. Since those guys >are often busy fighting fires in the logistics area I have seen many >serious project delays because parts for experiments weren't there in >due course. When I took the helm at a company's division this was one of >the first things I changed. Engineers were allowed to order, and every >group manager received a sizeable purchase authority. A corporate credit >card was there to get stuff in a jiffy. > >If one trusts engineers with design decisions I don't quite understand >why one should not also trust them with such minor financial decisions. Right. With trust goes responsibility. Don't trust me, I take no responsibility for results. >I mean, if one of them would go overboard too many times the big boss >would see that on the regular reports and could have a chat. In my case >that was never needed, in years. But I do remember some consternation >when the accounting guys of the company that bought us heard about this. Overboard, yes, but this stuff is *CHEAP*. What's a few hundred bucks? Ok, when I was using $3800 FPGAs, sure, be careful with them. $.002 resistors? and $.03 gates? |