Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

Trouble in Your Tank: A Series of Questions on Price Increases

Editor’s note: This special installment of Michael Carano’s long-running column is excerpted from a Q and A session held by the I-Connect007 staff.

Q: Happy Holden points out that direct metalization (DM) is more efficient, and more cost-effective than electroless. Is this the time to migrate? 

Carano: DM has been around for 25 years. It is more efficient, easy to provide in a continuous horizontal fashion, and is environmentally friendly. Asia is way ahead of North America. We are starting to convince companies that DM is ideal for flex and HDI fabrication. Asia already understands this. 

Q: What are the challenges right now? 

Carano: There are several—supply chain disruptions, price increases, low yields from the fabricator’s standpoint, and an inadequately trained workforce, as well as aging or inadequate equipment needed to build high yield/higher technology product. The money will be made in higher yields and more complex circuit boards.

Q: What’s new about those challenges? 

Carano: Mainly, the environment post-COVID is more challenging due to lack of ability to onboard workers; many line workers, so to speak, are poorly trained, and offered $12-$13 per hour. Really? My neighborhood McDonald’s is offering $15-$16 per hour plus other enticements. Amazon is offering $22-$25 per hour plus benefits. No wonder the PWB fabricators can’t find reliable employees. There’s also a lack of government support for the PWB industry. They only see semiconductors as sexy, not recognizing that without a reliable board, the chips have nowhere to go.

Q: What do you anticipate for the next two years? 

Carano: Without an awakening of our elected officials, the PWB footprint in North America will erode. The bigger firms (TTM, FTG, Summit Interconnect, Advanced Circuits) will find distressed fabs and acquire them as they have been doing.

Q: What are your thoughts on recent comments from Dan Feinberg that price increases for the seller are cost increases for the buyer? Is this a good time to optimize processes to minimize your price increases? 

Carano: I am a firm believer in process optimization, enhanced troubleshooting skills, use of statistical tools, training, and engineering. One should not wait to “optimize” processes. Optimization requires focus, commitment, and investment. Things as simple as automating the analytical procedures for the processes, training and certifications through IPC Training Programs (much of the training modules can be taken online and on demand through the IPC Edge portal). Yes, most of the fabricators and assembly firms are not taking advantage of these offerings. Why? So much can be learned. Knowledge is power. 

Q: How do folks down the chain from you mitigate the risk? 

Carano: If possible, strike deals for material/chemistry supply with contracts. Also, lock in technical service from the supplier; however, that means paying a premium. The fabricators, instead of trying to beat down your price, should select the chemical material supplier on several other criteria:

• Innovation track record
• On-site tech support
• Being a partner with the supplier—to ensure steady flow of new ideas, best practices, analytical services

Q: Is this situation driving new product? Or is this situation causing a scaling back of product development?

Carano: We don’t scale back product development; most of our competitors don’t either. We continue to invest. That is the only way to help fabricators jump the technology curve. However, the fabricators need to change their way of thinking. We need to push the envelope a bit and invest in new technology and training/certifications. Process control, in many instances, is lacking or sub-standard. 

This column originally appeared in the July 2021 issues of PCB007 Magazine.