So this is also the area where you see the demand shifts, but healthy or let’s say relatively healthy was more in the mature space and in — and of course China because we heavily under-shipped these customers, which of course, with their orders in the order book and all — and most of them were to a large extent prepaid, of course, we will ship those tools to them if others don’t want them, and that’s all mature.
Rolf Bulk: Thank you. It’s very clear.
Operator: Thank you. We will now go to our next question, and the next question comes from the line of Didier Scemama, Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Didier Scemama: Yeah. Good afternoon. It’s Didier Scemama from Bank of America. I have a couple of questions. First, I wanted to just probe you a little bit again on 2025 revenue guide. I think you answered pretty well, but I guess what I wanted to ask you is, if we don’t see those bookings coming through in the first half of ’24, is that roughly in July ’24 where you would consider changing that guidance or at least telling us that you would be towards the low end of that range or even below that? And I’ve got a follow-up. Thank you.
Peter Wennink: Well, you by now know us, Didier, because we know each other for a long time. We just tell you how it is, how we see the world at the moment that we have this call. This is how we see the world. So if we see the world by Q1 of 2024 different, we will tell you, if we see it different by Q2 of 2024, we will tell you. So this is what we currently see, what we currently believe. If the world turns out to be completely different, better or worse by the middle of 2024, we will tell you. So I cannot say — I cannot answer that question other than, we’ll just tell you how it is.
Didier Scemama: No, makes sense. Second part on China restrictions. Is there anything you can share with us with regards to the sort of tools that might not be allowed to be shipped to those fabs? I mean, should we consider the 1980 to be part of the banned tools for those particular fabs, but that you could ship it to other China customers? Or is it too early to say at this stage?
Peter Wennink: No, no. I think that’s probably not too early. It is — it is as you indicate. So the way we read the rules now, and of course you can imagine that, that part of the regulation, we’ve read pretty carefully, that the principle is that in — that in principle, also the 1980s would fall under the export control restrictions, but only when those immersion tools are used for advanced semiconductor manufacturing. And those advanced semiconductor manufacturing, we’ve been informed, only applies to a handful of fabs. Yeah. So that means that the 1980, for that — for those handful of fabs, is off limits, but not for the vast majority of our Chinese customers, for which we don’t need an export control license either. We can just ship. Yeah. And those are for the mature and lower mid-critical chips that are needed for all the transition that I just mentioned. So, yeah.
Didier Scemama: Okay.
Peter Wennink: Yeah.
Didier Scemama: All right. So that means the majority of your immersion revenues next year in China will be — at least some of the 1980, but probably move to 1950, 1930 sort of things for those customers.
Peter Wennink: No, no, because the 1980 is a low-end immersion tool. So the only export controls will be on the 1980s that go to a handful of fabs. Yeah.
Didier Scemama: So you’ll ship the 1980? Yeah.
Peter Wennink: Yeah. And for all the other customers, which are using those chips for non-advanced semiconductor manufacturing that is actually used for mid-critical, lower mid-critical, mature applications where there are no security concerns. Yeah. We can just ship those. And that’s —
Didier Scemama: Brilliant. Thanks very much.
Peter Wennink: And that’s the vast majority of our business.
Didier Scemama: Perfect. Thank you, Peter.
Operator: Thank you. We will now go to our next question and the next question comes from the line of Mehdi Hosseini from Susquehanna. Please go ahead.
Mehdi Hosseini: Thank you. A couple of questions. Peter, I am a little bit confused, and I’m just going to focus on lithography, not going to ask you about WFE or we are in the semiconductor cycle. When I look at the leading edge, we’ve had a couple of years of a slow start to three nanometer. As a matter of fact, the leading edge has been trending in a half pitch, and I was hoping that by next year, there will be a bigger demand for leading edge among Foundry and your Logic customer, but what I get from you is probably EUV unit shipment is going to decline. What I want to ask you or get a clarification, is this a kind of a pause as we insert a gate-all-around? Is this something that happened when we went from planar to FinFET and we’re going to see the repeat of that next year and then that would impact your EUV shipment? Any thought around gate-all-around would be appreciated. And I have a follow-up.
Peter Wennink: You know, I think gate-all-around and the nodes associated with that are 2025, 2026 high-volume ramps, yeah. That will happen. Yeah. So that — so the pause of, let’s say, the pause or a lower unit shipment of EUV next year is simply the cost of what we discussed earlier. I mean, we’re in a cyclical downturn and there are end markets that don’t need that full capacity. So this is the reason. The R&D roadmaps are very much intact. Yeah. And as a matter of fact, our leading customers keep telling us this. Yeah. So I would not expect, I would even say, if you would see the HVM volume ramp, yeah, on the gate-all-around architecture, it’s just a reason — one of the reasons why I think 2025, 2026 is going to be a good year.
It’s a very strong year. Yeah. But everything that we see today, it’s got nothing to do with that. It’s got nothing to do with the roadmap. It’s got — just got to do with the fact that we are in a downcycle and we’re climbing out of the downcycle whereby the capacity utilization also at the leading edge is, of course, not at 100%. Yeah. You just have to grow into it and it’s got to happen because it’s just the cycle.
