Question Qualcomm, maybe SK Hynix, and others to form consortium to buy ARM?

[DrMrLordX]

NV is out, Qualcomm is in:

https://www.windowscentral.com/hardware/qualcomm-may-purchase-stake-in-arm-as-part-of-consortium

This after SK Hynix was considering forming a consortium back in March:

https://www.pcgamer.com/sk-hynix-considering-consortium-to-buy-arm/

Sounds like another JEDEC in the works to me.

 

[gdansk]

Better than Nvidia ownership. Not sure if it's better than an ARM IPO (though it is probably poor timing).

 

[DrMrLordX]

Better than Nvidia ownership. Not sure if it's better than an ARM IPO (though it is probably poor timing).

I believe the implication is that ARM will IPO and that companies like Qualcomm are ready to buy up major minority stakes.

 

[moinmoin]

Important parts of the two articles:

The CEO (Qualcomm chief executive Cristiano Amon) explained that Arm could work together with multiple chipmakers to purchase Arm. Amon said that multiple companies would need to join together in a purchase of Qualcomm in order to maintain neutrality. "You’d need to have many companies participating so they have a net effect that Arm is independent."

Park Jung-ho, vice chairman and CEO of SK Hynix is quoted as saying: "We are reviewing possibly forming a consortium, together with strategic partners, to jointly acquire it," He followed up by saying "I don't believe Arm is a company that could be bought by one company.”

As long as the consortium is open (as in rand - reasonable and non discriminatory) to any Arm licensee I'm actually fine with this approach.

 

[soresu]

Anyone think it's a bit odd that the 1st year after the nVidia deal fell through ARM broke their half decade long trend of announcing new core IP in late May?

I expected the annual big announcement early last week, then the end of the week, then the start of this week.... and still nada.

Concering to say the least 😑

 

[DrMrLordX]

As long as the consortium is open (as in rand - reasonable and non discriminatory) to any Arm licensee I'm actually fine with this approach.

That's the rub. Will it be a truly open consortium?

 

[Mopetar]

That's the rub. Will it be a truly open consortium?

There is legal framework and implications for such an arrangement. Most of the companies involved already belong to or license patents from consortiums that are only permitted to operate because they offer FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms.

Frankly for something like ARM this is preferable to a single company that's a licensee from owning a majority controlling stake. A collection of adversaries keeps the collective surprisingly honest.

 

[AkulaMD]

Better than Nvidia ownership. Not sure if it's better than an ARM IPO (though it is probably poor timing).

I do share the same sentiment. It is better and fair for a company like ARM to be owned by many rather than by just Nvidia.

 

[Ajay]

There is legal framework and implications for such an arrangement. Most of the companies involved already belong to or license patents from consortiums that are only permitted to operate because they offer FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms.

Frankly for something like ARM this is preferable to a single company that's a licensee from owning a majority controlling stake. A collection of adversaries competitors keeps the collective surprisingly honest.

FIFY, but I agree. If ARM were to go the IPO route, somebody would buy them out soon enough. Turning ARM into a jointly owned company, though challenging, would be mutually beneficial. Not a business major, so I have no idea how something like this is done.