Tech Forum 2005 Kickoff

1
Tech Forum 2005 Kick-off

• Pamela Rosen
• February 2, 2005

2
Agenda

• Brief Overview of 2004
• What worked, what didnt
• Survey Results

• Looking Forward to 2005
• Hot Topics for Presentations
• Hot Topics for Panel Discussions
• Potential Keynote Speakers

• Discussion Suggested Themes and Messaging
• Based on content--Text
• Based on creative--Imagery

3
Agenda, continued

• Discussion Outstanding Issues for 2005
• To CD or not to CD?
• Official Tech Forum Video
• Smaller versus Higher Quality?
• Address Market Segments?
• How to re-allocate Costs and Improve Quality

4
Interviewees between Nov. 2004-Jan. 2005

• The following Chartered employees took part in an
  in-depth
  interview session, usually lasting
  anywhere from 30-60 minutes,
  to give
  feedback on Tech Forum 2004 and make the
  suggestions that
  are presented here
• Arthur Kuo
• Derrick Carson
• Libby Aston
• Cheam Tong Liang
• John Martin
• Abhijit Gupta
• Joe Pascale
• Carlo Ariani
• Others were asked but were not able to participate

5
Tech Forum 2004

• What worked?
• What didnt?

6
What worked?

• In order to remain objective, the identities of
  actual speakers remain, for this document,
  annonymous.
• Partner Pavilionexcellent placement of partners,
  making sure the right ones were near each other.
• Involvement from IBM was outstanding.
• Press event schedule was just right, and Maggie
  did an excellent job making sure the topic stayed
  on the messaging.
• We had more technical depth than our competitors.
• 90nm panel discussions were great, speakers were
  wonderful
• Successful RFCMOS session
• Getting decision makers to attend better than
  accepting all registrants

7
What didnt work?

• Wrong audience for RFCMOS presentation.
• Need to present more application information, not
  just processes.
• Side discussions during 90nm presentation were
  not compelling
• IBM had too big a presence and outshone Chartered
• Not able to capture exactly who attended each
  session
• Catering sometimes looking like it was running
  out of food
• Missing press event/hosted dinner was a real
  loss.
• Individuals felt they were given jobs to do at
  the event that prevented them from real customer
  interaction
• Start of event was delayedthis needs to be fixed

8
Survey Results

• Tabulated results of surveys collected at Tech
  Forum 2004

9
Survey Results 1
General ViewsOverwhelmingly very good

• These two charts represent what respondents
  said about the Tech Forum in general. The chart
  on the left represents the summation of all the
  questions, the chart on the right illustrates the
  responses to the direct question regarding the
  overall quality of Tech Forum 2004. As you can
  see, there is a slight discrepency, but the
  variance is not large.
• Note also we had no poor votes!

10
Survey Results, 2
These results show the general feeling that came
across all of the individual sessions and
speakers. According to our respondents, we do a
very good to excellent job.
11
Survey results, 3

• Outside speakers rated higher than Chartered
  speakersbut not significantly higher
• Audience most enthusiastic about John Kelly
• Certain frustration with proceedings and missing
  slides, lack of color proceedings as our
  competitors provide
• No one mentioned anything regarding venue,
  parking, food, convenience

12
Survey Results 4

• Some comments
• More technology design issues, failures
• More technology related More technical detail
• Too many slides missing from handout. Include CD
  ROM with presentations./ Handouts should match
  slides/Handouts should be in color
• Would like to see more detail in presentations
• Want to see something on SOC Mixed
  Signal/Demos/eFlash/IP
• Keep it at this size!

Complete survey with results from individual
sessions and speakers is available from Marketing
Communications Milpitas.
13
Looking forward to 2005

• Interview Results
• Discussion

14
Hot Topics for 2005 presentations

• Across the board, everyone agreedits Fab 7s
  year! Potential topics include
• Advanced Technologies from Fab 7
• .13 and below
• 90 nmActual performance
• 65 nm development/implementationbring in Samsung
  and Infineon if possible
• DFM at 65nm
• Customer testimonial
• All technologies will be in various stages of
  implementation, so some will be an update, some
  will be new information
• Challenges involving the process design/Success
  stories
• Joint presentation between Chartered and AMD on
  the implementation of APM and the benefits Fab 7
  is seeing
• Mask costs relative to 65/90

15
Hot Topics for 2005 presentations

• Other Hot Topics
• Special session on EDA/IP
• DFMFocus on yield improvement with partner and
  design side
• 80nm with Samsung (if public)
• Chartered/Samsung joint development
• What is Chartered Doing about Reliability?
• Design Services Expansion
• Reducing Risk
• DISCUSSION????

16
Hot Topics for Panel Discussion 1

• DFM at 65 and 90nm Chartered, Magma, Synopsys,
  Cadence, PDF Solutions, IBMHow to manage design
  flow so it all works when the finished DFM is in.
• IP Panel ARM Synopsys, ChipIdea, MoSys, Virage
• IP standards adherence
• IP challenges at 65 and 90nm
• Support for Emerging Standards
• New Applications for 90 and 65nm
• Application focused
• Bring in speaker from FSA
• Whats available now? In 2-5 years?

17
Hot Topics for Panel Discussion 2

• Scaling versus Design and Technology Innovation
• Outlook for 65nm or 45nm
• Design Integration/Spice Modeling Challenges,
  S-RAM
• Challenges to Robust Design
• Suggestion panel sessions for each market
  segment (a different approach?)
• Wireless
• PC
• Consumer

18
Hot Topics for Panel Discussions 3

• Process and Package Interaction (ASE,
  StatsChipPac, Amkor, Chartered, Mentor)
• How does packaging work with new technology?
• Almost all respondents indicated they would like
  two panel discussions, one in the morning, one in
  the afternoon.
• 
  DISCUSSION??

19
Themes and Messaging

• Suggestions from Respondents
• Discussion

20
Potential messaging/themes

• Defining our collaborations
• Defining relationships
• Importance of 65nm and Fab 7
• 65nm is real, emerging, and the choice of
  Chartered is backed by IBM, Samsung and Infineon
• Customers have many more options
• We are leading edge, we have open partnerships,
  and were READY
• We are further ahead than people think we are

21
Potential messaging/themes

• Focus on leadership in process and design IP,
  manufacturing and value to the customer
• Reliability
• Pathways to Partnership, changing the world
• Success with partnerships
• IBM/Chartered joint platform success
• We have what you need and we can execute
  Connecting Chartered to the Market
• Its all about Fab 7
• RESULTS of new perspective, new performance, new
  choice
• What makes us stand out from the crowd?
• DISCUSSION??
• What imagery do these bring to your mind?
• What key words fit these messages together?

22
Additional input

• We should do a special session on EDA/IP
• We should get a customer to give a presentation
• We need to show more success stories
• We should do an executive event like a very VIP
  dinner
• We should have presentations from outside
  companies other than IBM
• Our own speakers must be as good as outside
  speakers
• Would like to see a lunch speaker
• Would like to see some tutorial sessions

23
Potential Keynote Speakers

• Suggestions
• Discussion

24
Potential Keynote Speakers

• Someone from AMD
• Someone from Motorola, Infineon, Samsung, Semico
• Jim NorlingMotorola
• Jim Feldon from Semico
• An external analyst or VLSI
• Doug Gross, IBM
• George Gilder-Forbes Magazine
• Customer keynote?
• Academic LeadersStanford professors,
  Technologists, stars

25
Outstanding Issues for 2005

• CDs
• Video
• Target Audience affecting attendance size
• Addressing Market Segments
• How to Re-allocate costs
• How to Improve Quality

26
CDs

• There have been many requests to put our full
  proceedings on CD. We have not done this in the
  past due to non-disclosure issues.
• It has been proposed that we provide CDs after
  the event to those customers who request them and
  sign an NDA.
• It has also been proposed that we provide a CD
  version of the proceedings as is.
• What is the best way to handle these many
  requests while keeping our confidential
  information out of the wrong hands?

27
Tech Forum Video

• We have always videotaped our general sessions
  and created a DVD for internal use. Do we want
  to create a DVD documenting the event as a whole?
• This involves
• Additional videography of breakout sessions
• Videography of event as a whole
• Videography of Partner Pavilion, including
  interviews
• Post production resulting in a professionally-done
  DVD suitable for outside use (under NDA)
• Additional cost (depending on scope of video
  desired, if any)

28
Smaller audience versus Higher Quality?

• All respondents were in agreement that the move
  to targeting decision makers was the right
  direction.
• What influencers to the decision makers should we
  include?
• Will focusing on decision makers lower our
  overall attendance numbers, and if so, is that
  acceptable?
• If we wish to open it further, at what point do
  we do that?
• To Whom should the Tech Forum be open? Closed?

29
Addressing Market Segments?

• There has been some management statements
  regarding the desire to migrate sales groups into
  market segments. Following this directive,
  should we have sessions, panels, etc. that are
  aimed to the following specific market segments
  identified below?
• Wireless
• PC
• Consumer
• Is it possible to do panel discussions or
  sessions addressing these particular market
  segments?

30
How to Re-Allocate Costs/Improve Quality?

• Everyone appears to be happy with the size,
  content, style and
  format of Tech Forum. All the kinks have been
  worked out logistically, but our
  respondents have still
  indicated room for improvement.
• Luckily, our respondents also gave us a roadmap
  for improvement. Quality. Quality of handouts,
  quality of sessions.
• So how do we do it? Some suggestions
• Color proceedings. Provided by competitors but
  possibly cost prohibitive for us.
• More technical content in sessions
• Executive event/press dinner
• Pay speakers?

But it all costs money! Where can we re-allocate?
31
Possible re-allocation
Saving money in other areas allows us to allocate
it into new or improved programs. Here are some
minor suggestionsDISCUSSION of others?

• Chartereds booth in Partner Pavilionuse
  existing booth or use booth designed for another
  show (possibly FSA) so no costs associated with
  Chartereds booth
• Install in house database and bulk mailing
  program
• Order locally made giveaway items to save
  substantial (1000s) shipping costs
• Order larger quantities overseas and use all year
  worldwide
• Smaller attendance means lower overall costs-but
  do we want to do that?

32
Conclusions

• Are we ready to Kick Off Tech Forum 2005?

33
Conclusions

• RecapWhat are the Hot Topics for presentations?
• RecapWhat are the Hot Topics for Panel
  Discussions?
• RecapWho are the best candidates for Keynote
  Speakers
• RecapIdeas for Themes and Messaging
• Who Will Take Ownership for Proceedings content?
• Marching Orders What direction has this meeting
  led us?