Brian Faith: I think, firstly, the magnitude of this could be just like the rad-hard programs where we’re talking about potentially tens of millions of dollars upfront for design services if you will and then the back end being probably in the hundreds of millions in terms of device sales potential just because the markets that the chiplets are trying to target. Our approach is that we’re not going to do everything ourselves. So, we know what we’re good at. We’re going to stay in our swim lane of FPGA technology and the user tools associated with that and pulling other IP around that. That’s why you’ve seen that we’ve announced ecosystem relationships with like eTopus. We are getting contacts by other companies now to do something similar.
And it’s interesting because the whole notion of a chiplet is that you can reuse on mask set or one type of chip across many final products, right? It’s the integration play versus the monolithic silicon. And so eFPGA has a pretty good value proposition that’s resonating with those folks because it means that you can change the personality of FPGA in the future as they’re stacking these chips with other chips, and you never know exactly what the use case is going to be. So, I’m pretty excited about the €“ what we can do with chiplets, both in terms of licensing our IP to people doing a chiplet or doing a FPGA-based chiplet ourself with partners. But like I’ve said many times over the last couple of years, we are done with doing free engineering.
We are doing it with customers and with customer funding. And so we have customers in our funnel at the point at which they’re putting funds up to do the development. We’re going to be happy to do that either as an IP or a device with them. And then I think there’s going to be, a few years after that, a pretty big revenue opportunity. Similar to that of the defense contracts, although I’d say in the near term, the next couple of years, it’s definitely a clear line of sight to the defense revenue than chiplets just because we have signed contracts on the defense side.
Richard Shannon: Great. Yes, understood. I think that will do it for me for now. I will jump in the line. Thank you very much guys.
Brian Faith: Thanks, Richard.
Operator: Our next question is from Rick Neaton with Rivershore Investment Research. Please proceed with your question.
Rick Neaton: Hi thank you. Hello, Brian and Elias.
Brian Faith: Hi, Rick.
Rick Neaton: When you €“ just a couple of questions since most of them have already been asked and you’ve answered them. When you spoke about the schedule shift into Q2 out of the fab for this one customer, were these specific fab-related issues? Or are we talking about or a particular unexpected issue that developed in Q4 and into Q1?
Brian Faith: I’ll answer it this way, Rick. I don’t want to get into the sausage making of how chips are manufactured and brought back. But this problem was unrelated to QuickLogic. Let me state it that way.
Rick Neaton: Okay. Now that answers the question. And then one last question I guess the new word of the conference call is bespoke. And I assume you are using that in the generic sense because Samsung has an entire appliance line named Bespoke. So can you give an example or some examples of what these bespoke applications would be that you would be targeting with eFPGA and your IP?
