Why the British got out of fabs
Peter Clarke
In response to a request from a participant in the forum discussion below When the smart money got into/out of manufacturing I have tried to answer the questions: "Why the British had to get out of fabs and end up just with design/IP a la ARM ?" and "Why fabs still surv ive (if not exactly thrive) in the UK's traditional rival France?"
The detailed reasons are complex, generalizations are usually faulty but I will have a go at putting down my perspective as an observer of the electronics industry from the U.K. since 1984.
A primary reason that fabs failed to thrive in the U.K. is that while the Second World War helped create the U.S. as a global economic superpower it more or less bankrupted the U. K. with implications that were heavy in the 1950s and early 1960s and that continue to this day. A second reason is a long-established arts and humanities versus science division in U.K. society.
I think it is still the case that science and technology are not sufficiently well represented a mongst the political and wealthy establishment in the U.K. But maybe that is just the scienc e graduate in me talking.
In the distant past the owners and managers of UK companies usually had a non-scientific background. The likes of ARM, Wolfson, CSR, Vodafone and several others are now gloriou s but relatively recent exceptions.
Back in 1960s U.K. technology-based company management treated engineers as willing ser fs who did not need and should not be given too much money. It was a "make do and me nd" mentality left over from the Second World War, and many electronics companies continu ed to be closely aligned to military interests and defense was the early application for electr onics.
These companies often could not comprehend or cope with:
1) international competition
2) the continuous exponential increase in the cost of participation in electronics
Parsimonious and parochial
When faced in the 1960s and 1970s with the choice between spending millions of pounds t o compete in thin-film monolithic integrated circuits and thousands of pounds to make thick-f ilm hybrids and PCBs, managements up and down the U.K. chose to do the latter not perc eiving any difference but cost.
The difference between the wealth, ambition and entrepreneurial spirit abroad in the United States, and the high salaries paid there, and the meager existence in the United Kingdom a t this time, gave rise to a notorious exodus of talent, known as the "brain drain." Included i
