> Not a system that necessarily works all that well if one player has a short-term ability to vastly outspending all the rest.

Well yeah, people were identifying that back when Apple bought out the entirety of the 5nm node for iPhones and e-tchotchkes. It was sorta implicitly assumed that any business that builds better hardware than Apple would boot them out overnight.

▲

swiftcoder 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> It was sorta implicitly assumed that any business that builds better hardware than Apple would boot them out overnight

It's not "build better hardware" though, it's "continue to ship said hardware for X number of years". If someone buys out the entire fab capacity and then goes under next year, TSMC is left holding the bag

	▲	bigyabai 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not that, either. Low-margin, high-volume contracts are the worst business you can take. It devalues TSMC's work and creates an unnatural downward force on the price of cutting-edge silicon. By ignoring Apple's demands they're creating natural competition that raises the value of their entire portfolio. It really is about making better hardware. Apple would be out-bidding Nvidia right now, but only if the iPhone had equivalent value-add to Nvidia hardware. Alas, iPhones are overpriced and underpowered, most people will agree.