Hi

Not a lot of detail out there other than that the deal is expected to close before the
end of December.

Bob

Hi,
It has become a colossus.
And market competition?
Luciano.
www.timeok.it

Da "time-nuts" time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
A "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Cc
Data Fri, 27 Oct 2017 20:14:01 -0400
Oggetto Re: [time-nuts] vectron to be acquired by MicroSemi
Hi

Not a lot of detail out there other than that the deal is expected to close before the
end of December.

Bob

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Hi

In terms of what Vectron actually manufacturers, there isn’t a lot of overlap
with Microsemi. Compared to a a lot of possible matchups this one does not
have to many things to work out. They both do a bit in space and they both
do GPSDO’s. Past that, the other stuff is not in markets or technologies
that overlap.

Indeed Vectron re-sells various things. My guess is that some of those
relationships will change a bit. I’d say it’s unlikely they will continue to resell
Accubeat Rb’s once the deal gets done and the reorganization is complete.

Looked at from the side of “how many vendors on the vendor list”, yes this
takes one off the list. Most companies are working to trim down that list
rather than build it up. The ideal seems to be to have three giant outfits that
can each sell you 100% of your needs. You then have a run-off between the
three each week to decide who gets it all this time based only on price.
(Yes, that may be a slight exaggeration, but not by much).

Certainly having a parent in the timing business will give them more ability
to work with the rest of the company. Their prior parent (Knowles) was more
focused on the audio business. There’s not a lot of common customer base
between Vectron and the main part of Knowles.

Since they are looking to close very quickly, I doubt they expect any real issues
as far as the various government  regulators. I’d bet at least a couple of beers
that they have some very good guidance on that part of it by now.

Bob

On 10/28/17 6:19 AM, Bob kb8tq wrote:

one concern would be if there's a desire to consolidate or move
manufacturing - I'm thinking here of the Symmetricom CSAC vs MicroSemi
CSAC story.

I'm in the space business for the most part, and there's great emphasis
on Heritage - we bought Part XYZ from Company ABC for the Ranger mission
to the moon and it worked in 1967, so lets just keep using it.  While
I'm not a huge fan of the value of heritage (I think it's often a "you
can't go wrong buying IBM" kind of strategy to reduce the number of
questions in design reviews) - when it does exist, it's "XYZ people" not
"released drawing number in XYZ's library" that gives you the desired
product.

The other concern about acquisitions in general (I don't know if that's
an issue here)  is that there tends to be a "cleaning out of old files
and websites" as part of the process - documentation, data sheets, etc.
for "not in the current product line" often disappears.

For those of us who tend to use legacy, older products, perhaps spares
or surplus (time-nuts list members, and flight hardware designers
alike), this can present a problem.  (Because we are also faced with
pressure to dispose of all that old paper and records, either from
cohabitants or managers).  This is particularly the case when we're
building up a breadboard or demonstration - I've built an awful lot of
stuff at JPL using spare parts and components with date codes in the 60s
and 70s - it's not like a 2-4 GHz directional coupler made in 1964 works
any different from one made in 2014.

Of course, the lack of data sheets for semiconductor modules and parts
from the 1980s and 1990s is probably a boon in the long run, although a
pain in the short run.  Amplifiers, mixers, etc. are all a LOT better
today (in general) than they were 20-30 years ago.  (Of course, I do
still have a bunch of WJ parts sitting around for breadboarding)

Hi

To some extent, companies are acquired for their heritage / IP. That can
give a pretty strong push towards hanging on to all the old files and
designs. Certainly that’s been the case with Vectron (and with McCoy,
Piezo, Ovenair, Telequartz, Oscillatek, ….) through multiple passes at this.

Bob

This is exactly my point of view. For example, I feel that Symmetricom
was much "open" in terms to share the tech. documentation and some
software.
Once, I was struggle to get response from Microsemi sending them direct
requests about the product (SYNCPOINT PCIE-1000 card, p/n 089-00376-000
Rev 3). And only fellow time-nuts make it happens that I am getting
right person to talk. There was no public resources available on
Microsemi WEB site. Long story short - I was happy to get the Linux
drivers and software for that card. But I am still struggle for the the
microcode update (I have some "beta" version). Of course the firmware
could be different story and it is not for free. But at least it would
be nice to have that confirmation.

Speaking about Vectron - its also not easy to get tech. docs for the old
versions of OCXO.

--
WBW,

V.P.