SEMI has *nothing* to do with chip sales. It is only about Semiconductor Capital Equipment sales.

Besides which, a book to bill ratio is completely meaningless: the *only* thing that matters about SEMI's book to bill is the bookings trend. Because a book to bill is a ratio, a ratio > 1 just means the number on top is bigger than the number on the bottom. So, if shipments (billings) are collapsing at a slightly faster pace than orders (bookings), then book to bill is > 1.

As it happens, demand for Semiconductor Capital Equipment *is* collapsing, and thats all that matters.

The editors should pull this piece and replace it with a comment written by somebody who at least knows something about these data. This is an embarassment.

Like a sawtooth. XP released, sales crater. Slow growth happens anyway. Vista released, two years flat. Economy craters, well, it's 2001 X 10.

...if ever jump into comments threads, but in this case I believe it makes sense to do so.

Mingy, don't you believe that book-to-bill of "front-end (wafer processing/mask/reticle/wafer manufacturing/fab facilities) equipment and final manufacturing (assembly/packaging/test) equipment" -- as defined by SEMI -- has anything to do with semiconductor final-product sales? Of course it does.

You are, of course, correct, in that my breeziness didn't make that clear, but the book-to-bill ratio of manufacturing equipment is directly related to chip sales. If anything, it's a better indicator of market volatility than pure monthly chip-sale reports due to that fact that fabs are, in many ways, turn-them-on, turn-them off materials-pipes, while the book-to-bill investment in equipment that supports fabs indicates market confidence.

Again, you're correct that I didn't make that clear -- but my original argument that book-to-bill is a good indicator of the overall health of worldwide chip sales still stands.