ON Semiconductor: From Motorola Castoff to Power & Sensing Powerhouse

I. Introduction & Episode Roadmap

Picture Phoenix, Arizona, 1999. Inside a nondescript office building, a group of semiconductor executives are signing papers that will spin them out from one of America's most storied technology companies. They're taking over Motorola's unwanted stepchild—the commodity semiconductor business that the parent company views as a drag on margins and growth. The assets: aging fabs, standard products that compete on price, and a workforce wondering if they'll have jobs in six months. Fast forward to today, and that castoff has become ON Semiconductor—a $31 billion market cap powerhouse generating $7.4 billion in annual revenue, commanding premium positions in electric vehicle semiconductors, and boasting operating margins that would make its former parent jealous.

This is the story of how a company born from corporate divestiture—essentially Motorola's garage sale—transformed itself into a Fortune 500 company and one of the world's most important suppliers of power management and sensing solutions. It's a tale of near-death experiences, aggressive consolidation, prescient market positioning, and the kind of operational excellence that turns commodity businesses into differentiated technology leaders.

The narrative arc spans three distinct acts. First, survival—the desperate early years when ON Semiconductor nearly collapsed during the dot-com bust, fighting just to make interest payments on its debt. Second, consolidation—a decade-long acquisition spree that saw the company swallow competitors whole, including the delicious irony of acquiring Fairchild Semiconductor, the granddaddy of Silicon Valley. And third, transformation—the pivot toward automotive and industrial markets that positioned ON at the center of the electric vehicle revolution.

What makes this story particularly compelling for students of business strategy is how ON Semiconductor repeatedly zigged when others zagged. When competitors fled commodity products, ON doubled down and extracted value through operational excellence. When the industry consolidated defensively, ON consolidated offensively, using M&A as a weapon to build scale and capabilities. When everyone chased consumer electronics, ON bet the farm on automotive—a decision that looked questionable in 2015 but brilliant by 2023.

The cast of characters reads like a who's who of semiconductor industry veterans. Keith Jackson, the turnaround CEO who led the company for 18 years, transforming it from a $1.2 billion also-ran to a $7 billion leader. Hassane El-Khoury, the current CEO who's pushing the company deeper into silicon carbide and advanced sensing. And behind them, thousands of engineers and operators who turned "boring" power management semiconductors into the essential building blocks of the electrified future.

This deep dive will explore not just what happened, but why it matters. We'll examine the playbook for corporate turnarounds, the art of strategic M&A, and the importance of riding secular trends rather than fighting them. We'll analyze how a company with no apparent competitive advantages created them through focus, discipline, and a willingness to do the hard, unglamorous work that others avoided. And we'll assess whether ON Semiconductor's remarkable transformation can continue in an industry where today's leader is often tomorrow's acquisition target.

↑ Back to Top

II. The Motorola Legacy & Pre-History

The conference room at Motorola's Schaumburg headquarters hummed with tension in early 1998. CEO Chris Galvin faced a stark reality: Wall Street had fallen out of love with conglomerates, and Motorola's sprawling empire—spanning everything from cell phones to satellites to basic semiconductor components—was being punished with a conglomerate discount that made activist investors salivate. The semiconductor components group, in particular, was a problem child. While Motorola's communications chips and microprocessors commanded respect and premium pricing, the discrete and standard products division was seen as dead weight—a commodity business with declining margins in an industry racing toward higher-value system-on-chip designs. To understand the DNA of ON Semiconductor, you must first understand its parent. Motorola created the world's first commercial high-power transistor in 1955, also its first mass-produced semiconductor. This wasn't just another product launch—it marked Motorola's entry into what would become a multi-billion-dollar semiconductor empire. The company had started in the semiconductor business in 1952 when they manufactured their first power transistor. By the 1960s, Motorola had become a semiconductor powerhouse, manufacturing everything from discrete transistors to integrated circuits, supplying components to NASA for the Apollo missions and building the microprocessors that would power the first Apple computers.

But the semiconductor components division that would become ON was always the unloved middle child. While Motorola's microprocessor group developed the legendary 68000 series that powered early Macintosh computers, and its communications chips enabled the cellular revolution, the discrete and standard products division toiled in relative obscurity. These were the workhorses—power transistors, voltage regulators, signal diodes—essential but unglamorous components that went into everything from washing machines to automotive alternators. The margins were thin, the competition brutal, and the glory nonexistent. By 1998, the writing was on the wall. Motorola sold portions of its semiconductor business—the Semiconductor Components Group (SCG)—and formed onsemi (then ON Semiconductor), whose headquarters were located in Phoenix, Arizona in 1999. The timing couldn't have been worse—or perhaps better, depending on your perspective. The semiconductor industry was riding high on the dot-com bubble, valuations were frothy, and private equity firm Texas Pacific Group saw an opportunity to buy what everyone else viewed as yesterday's technology.

Under the sale agreement, Motorola received $1.6 billion in cash for the group and a 10 percent stake in ON Semiconductor. For Motorola, it was a clean exit from a business that had become "priority number seven on a list of five" as one executive would later quip. For the 14,000 employees who suddenly found themselves part of ON Semiconductor, it was both terrifying and liberating. They were free from Motorola's bureaucracy, but they were also on their own, saddled with debt and facing an uncertain future in the commodity semiconductor business.

The irony wasn't lost on industry observers. While Motorola would later spin off its higher-margin, more strategic semiconductor business as Freescale in 2004—the microprocessors, DSPs, and communications chips that powered smartphones and network equipment—it was the "boring" standard products division that went first. Freescale was created by the divestiture of the Semiconductor Products Sector of Motorola in 2004, becoming the crown jewel spinoff. ON Semiconductor, by contrast, was the practice run, the experiment to see if Motorola could successfully divest a semiconductor business without destroying value.

What Motorola executives didn't realize—what nobody realized in 1999—was that they had just created a company perfectly positioned for the next two decades of semiconductor industry evolution. The commodity products that seemed so unattractive in the era of Moore's Law and digital revolution would become essential building blocks for electric vehicles, renewable energy, and industrial automation. The manufacturing expertise that seemed outdated would become a competitive advantage when supply chain resilience mattered more than cutting-edge process nodes. And the culture of scrappy survival that ON Semiconductor would develop in its early years would serve it well through multiple crises and transformations.

↑ Back to Top

III. The Birth of ON Semiconductor (1999–2002)

The champagne flutes clinked on the trading floor of the NASDAQ on April 28, 2000, but Steve Hanson's smile was tight. ON Semiconductor had just launched its initial public offering (IPO), pricing 30 million shares at $16—right in the middle of the expected range. The company raised $480 million, a respectable haul that valued the newly independent semiconductor company at roughly $2.5 billion. For a business that Motorola had essentially given away eight months earlier, it seemed like vindication.

But Hanson, the first president and chief executive officer of the company, knew the real story. Behind the IPO success was a company already fighting for survival. The dot-com bubble was showing its first cracks, and ON Semiconductor—with its exposure to telecommunications and computing markets—was about to get hammered. Steve's career had spanned 28 years at Motorola before leading the creation and founding of this $1.5 billion spin off, and now he faced the challenge of his life.

The leadership team Hanson assembled read like a reunion of semiconductor industry veterans who'd been passed over for the top jobs elsewhere. Jim Thorburn, formerly of Zilog Inc. and National Semiconductor Corp., became senior vice president and chief operating officer. Dario Sacomani, a former vice president and controller of Motorola's European Semiconductor Group, took the role of senior vice president and chief financial officer. Bill George, a former Motorola executive who had served as chief operating officer at the Sematech consortium, became senior vice president and chief manufacturing and technology officer. These weren't the young hotshots that venture capitalists typically backed—they were grizzled operators who knew how to squeeze margin from mature products.

Hanson famously described ON Semiconductor as the "Home Depot of the semiconductor component market"—a comparison that was both self-deprecating and strategically brilliant. While competitors chased cutting-edge process nodes and sexy applications, ON would focus on the boring stuff that kept the world running. The company would ship about 18 billion chips that year, covering 16,000 products. Its chips managed battery power, controlled on and off switches in appliances, regulated voltage and could be found in devices ranging from a washing machine to a dashboard clock.

The initial months after the IPO seemed promising. The stock traded well, and the company moved quickly to establish its independence. In April 2000, just days after going public, ON completed the acquisition of Cherry Semiconductor Corp. (CSC) for $250 million. CSC, founded in 1972 as Micro Components Corporation, was headquartered in East Greenwich, Rhode Island. It was a smart tactical move—Cherry brought complementary products and, more importantly, customer relationships that weren't dependent on Motorola.

But by late 2000, the wheels were coming off the global technology economy. The NASDAQ began its historic collapse, taking down dot-com darlings and established tech companies alike. For ON Semiconductor, the timing couldn't have been worse. The company had loaded up on debt to finance its independence—roughly $1.5 billion in total obligations—and was counting on robust demand to generate the cash flow needed to service that debt. Instead, customers began canceling orders en masse. By 2001, the situation was catastrophic. By 2001, the bubble's deflation was running full speed. A majority of the dot-coms had ceased trading, after having burnt through their venture capital and IPO capital, often without ever making a profit. The semiconductor industry, already cyclical by nature, entered one of its worst downturns in history. Mark Edelstone, semiconductor analyst at Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, called 2001 "definitely the worst year on record for the technology sector."

For ON Semiconductor, the crisis was existential. Revenues plummeted as customers in telecommunications and computing markets—their bread and butter—disappeared overnight. The company's stock, which had traded as high as $25 in 2000, crashed to below $2. Debt covenants were in danger of being breached. Suppliers worried about getting paid. Employees updated their resumes. The board began discussing whether Chapter 11 bankruptcy was inevitable.

Steve Hanson, despite his three decades of experience, found himself overwhelmed. The playbook he'd developed at Motorola—focused on operational excellence and gradual improvement—wasn't designed for a crisis of this magnitude. ON Semiconductor needed more than a manager; it needed a turnaround artist. By late 2002, it was clear that new leadership was required. The board began a search that would lead them to one of the semiconductor industry's most successful rescue specialists: Keith Jackson.

The numbers from this period tell a story of near-collapse. Revenue fell from $1.8 billion in 2000 to barely over $1.2 billion in 2002. The company posted massive losses as it wrote down inventory and restructured operations. Employment was slashed from 14,000 to under 10,000. Entire product lines were discontinued. Fabs ran at less than 50% capacity. It was, as one executive later recalled, "like watching a train wreck in slow motion."

But buried in the wreckage were the seeds of ON's future success. The crisis forced the company to get lean, to focus on only its most profitable products, and to develop the discipline that would serve it well in the years ahead. The employees who survived the cuts were battle-tested and fiercely loyal. The customer relationships that endured were stronger for having weathered the storm together. And perhaps most importantly, the near-death experience created a culture that would never again take survival for granted.

↑ Back to Top

IV. The Keith Jackson Era Begins (2002–2020)

Keith Jackson walked into ON Semiconductor's Phoenix headquarters in November 2002 with the swagger of a gunslinger and the resume of a turnaround artist. Keith D. Jackson was elected as a Board Director and appointed President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of ON Semiconductor Corporation in November 2002. At 54, with over 30 years of semiconductor industry experience, Jackson wasn't looking for an easy finale to his career. He also held various positions at Texas Instruments Incorporated, including engineering and management positions, from 1973 to 1986. From 1986 to 1996, Mr. Jackson worked for National Semiconductor Corporation, most recently as Vice President and General Manager of the Analog and Mixed Signal division. From 1996 to 1998, he served as President and a member of the board of directors of Tritech Microelectronics in Singapore, a manufacturer of analog and mixed signal products. Most recently, he was with Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, serving as Executive Vice President and General Manager, Analog, Mixed Signal, and Configurable Products Groups beginning in 1998, and, more recently, was head of its Integrated Circuits Group.

The company Jackson inherited was a mess. Jackson joined ON Semiconductor as its President and Chief Executive Officer in 2002 and has overseen significant growth of the company during his tenure, including growth in the company's market capitalization from approximately $300 million in 2002 to approximately $8.9 billion in 2020, and in the company's revenue from approximately $1.1 billion in 2002 to Fortune 500 company status with approximately $5.5 billion in revenue in 2019. But those numbers tell the end of the story, not the beginning. In 2002, ON Semiconductor was bleeding cash, saddled with debt, and facing skeptical customers who wondered if the company would survive long enough to deliver their orders.

Jackson's first order of business wasn't strategy—it was survival. Its key focus between 2002 and 2005, according to Keith was to get costs under control, pay its interest payments, and generate cash to grow with. The approach was brutally pragmatic. When I asked Keith if there were any product lines ON Semiconductor walked away from, he said no—the company sold everything it could. This wasn't the time for portfolio optimization or strategic focus. This was about keeping the lights on.

"Play to win" became Jackson's mantra, but it wasn't just motivational speaking. It was a fundamental shift in mindset from the Motorola days. Where Motorola had treated the components business as an afterthought, Jackson treated it as the main event. Where previous management had apologized for being in commodity products, Jackson embraced it. His philosophy was simple: if you're going to make standard products, be the best damn standard products company in the world.

The turnaround strategy had three pillars. First, operational excellence—squeezing every penny of cost out of manufacturing, improving yields, reducing cycle times. Second, customer focus—no order too small, no request too difficult. Jackson personally visited major customers, something his predecessor rarely did, and committed to solving their problems, not just selling them parts. Third, and most controversially, aggressive pricing to gain market share. While competitors retreated from low-margin business, ON pursued it, betting that volume would eventually lead to scale advantages.

By 2005, the strategy was working. The company had returned to profitability, debt was under control, and customers were starting to believe ON Semiconductor might actually stick around. But Jackson knew that organic growth alone wouldn't be enough. The semiconductor industry was consolidating rapidly, and ON needed to get bigger or risk being left behind. Another milestone worth noting was the company's purchase of LSI's 110nm facility in Gresham, OR, in 2005, which served as a significant runway for manufacturing capacity growth. Previously, the company had been running out of manufacturing capacity.

The culture Jackson built was distinctive—part Texas entrepreneurialism, part military discipline. ON Semiconductor's company culture is based on a three-pronged approach—respect, integrity, and initiative. Respect revolves around the way employees and management treat each other in the workplace, with a respect for differences in backgrounds and experiences. Integrity revolves around the ethics and quality standards the company sets for itself in products and individual conduct. Initiative refers to the company's valuing of people with positive, can-do attitudes.

Jackson's leadership style was hands-on to the point of micromanagement, but employees respected it because he knew the business cold. He could discuss process technology with engineers, cost structures with accountants, and market dynamics with salespeople. His semiconductor knowledge wasn't theoretical—it was earned through decades in the trenches. When he pushed people hard, they knew it came from expertise, not ego.

↑ Back to Top

V. The Great Consolidation Play (2005–2016)

The boardroom at ON Semiconductor's Phoenix headquarters on December 13, 2007, buzzed with the energy of a deal about to close. Keith Jackson stood at the head of the table, marker in hand, sketching out the future of the semiconductor industry on a whiteboard. "Gentlemen," he said, "this isn't just about buying AMI. This is about building the platform for the next decade of growth." The acquisition of AMIS Holdings Inc., parent company of AMI Semiconductor, for approximately $915 million in stock wasn't just ON's biggest deal to date—it was a statement of intent.

In a blockbuster deal, On Semiconductor Corp. has acquired AMIS Holdings Inc., parent company of AMI Semiconductor, for approximately $915 million in stock. The all-stock transaction would see ON Semiconductor issue approximately 104 million shares of common stock on a fully diluted basis to complete the transaction. ON Semiconductor and AMIS stockholders would own approximately 74 percent and 26 percent, respectively, of the combined company.

What made the AMI acquisition transformative wasn't just its size but its strategic fit. "The acquisition of AMIS furthers the transformation of ON Semiconductor into an analog and power solutions leader with enhanced scale, higher value and higher margin products, deep customer relationships and an expanded addressable market," said Keith Jackson. AMI brought expertise in medical and military/aerospace markets, sectors where ON had minimal presence. More importantly, it brought mixed-signal design capabilities that ON desperately needed to compete in increasingly complex applications.

The financial engineering was equally important. "We have identified significant operational and manufacturing cost synergies, up to $50 million in pre tax savings in 2009 that may be achieved through the integration of AMIS and rationalization of our combined infrastructure," said Donald Colvin, ON Semiconductor executive vice president, CFO and treasurer. "We expect to begin to realize these synergies within two quarters of closing the transaction."

But AMI was just the opening salvo in what would become a decade-long acquisition spree. Jackson's philosophy was simple: in a consolidating industry, you're either the hunter or the prey. ON chose to be the hunter. The crown jewel of Jackson's acquisition strategy came in November 2015. ON Semiconductor announced it had entered into a definitive agreement for ON Semiconductor to acquire Fairchild for $20.00 per share in an all cash transaction valued at approximately $2.4 billion. This wasn't just another acquisition—it was the acquisition that would transform ON from a mid-tier player into a power semiconductor powerhouse.

The irony was delicious. Fairchild Semiconductor, the company that essentially invented Silicon Valley when eight engineers defected from Shockley Semiconductor in 1957, was being acquired by a Motorola spinoff that everyone had written off. Fairchild was where Robert Noyce co-invented the integrated circuit in 1958. It was where Gordon Moore formulated his famous law. It was the company from which Intel, AMD, and dozens of other semiconductor giants had sprung. And now it was being bought by ON Semiconductor.

"The combination of ON Semiconductor and Fairchild creates a power semiconductor leader with strong capabilities in a rapidly consolidating semiconductor industry. Our plan is to bring together two companies with complementary product lines to offer customers the full spectrum of high, medium and low voltage products," said Keith Jackson. The strategic logic was compelling: ON specialized in low-voltage products, Fairchild in high- and medium-voltage chips. Together, they could offer customers a complete power management portfolio.

The timing was crucial. The semiconductor industry was experiencing unprecedented consolidation—in the first half of 2015 alone the value of semiconductor acquisition deals totaled about $72.6 billion—more than six times the annual average for M&A deals struck during the five previous years. As Jackson noted during the announcement, "The competitive dynamics in the industry are changing quickly. Consolidation would greatly change our competitive position. As there was a process here, and this was a company that looked like it was going to do a transaction, we felt that the competitive dynamics made the most sense to do the deal rather than sit by and watch."

The financial benefits were substantial. ON Semiconductor anticipates achieving annual cost savings of $150 million within 18 months after closing the transaction. But beyond the cost synergies, the Fairchild acquisition brought something invaluable: credibility. With Fairchild's storied history and technical heritage, ON could no longer be dismissed as just a commodity player.

On September 19, 2016, ON Semiconductor and Fairchild jointly announced that ON Semiconductor has successfully completed its previously announced $2.4 billion cash acquisition of Fairchild. "The acquisition of Fairchild is a transformative step in our quest to become the premier supplier of power management and analog semiconductor solutions for a wide range of applications and end-markets," said Keith Jackson.

The consolidation strategy wasn't without risks. Each acquisition brought integration challenges, cultural clashes, and the potential for distraction. But Jackson's approach was methodical. He focused on companies that brought either complementary products or new capabilities, avoided overpaying, and ruthlessly cut costs post-acquisition. The playbook worked: between 2005 and 2016, ON transformed from a $1.2 billion company struggling to survive into a $5 billion diversified semiconductor leader.

↑ Back to Top

VI. The Automotive & Industrial Pivot

The moment Keith Jackson realized ON Semiconductor's future wasn't in computers or smartphones came during a 2010 visit to Detroit. Sitting across from a General Motors executive who was outlining the electrical architecture for the next-generation Chevrolet Volt, Jackson saw the light. "Every component you're describing," he interrupted, "we either make or could make." The GM executive leaned forward: "Then why aren't you calling on us more often?"

That conversation sparked what would become ON's most important strategic pivot. The company reported a record year for its automotive revenue, which surged by 29% compared to the previous year. This growth is particularly significant as it underscores ON Semiconductor's strategic focus on high-growth areas such as electric vehicles, autonomous vehicles, industrial automation, and renewable energy. By 2023, automotive had become the company's largest and fastest-growing segment, a transformation that would have seemed impossible when ON was spinning out of Motorola in 1999.

The automotive pivot wasn't just about following the money—it was about recognizing a fundamental shift in how cars were being designed. The average modern vehicle now contains over 1,200 different semiconductor chips, a number that's growing exponentially with each new model year. Electric vehicles require even more semiconductors than traditional internal combustion engines, particularly in power management, battery management systems, and motor control. And autonomous driving features multiply semiconductor content yet again, with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) requiring sophisticated sensors, processors, and power management solutions.

Jackson's strategy was to position ON not as just another semiconductor supplier but as a strategic partner to automakers navigating the transition to electrification and autonomy. This meant investing heavily in technologies that traditional semiconductor companies had ignored. Silicon carbide (SiC) became a particular focus—a wide-bandgap semiconductor material that could handle higher voltages and temperatures than traditional silicon, making it ideal for electric vehicle power inverters.

The bet on silicon carbide was controversial within ON. The technology was expensive, yields were low, and the market was still nascent. But Jackson saw what others didn't: as electric vehicles moved to 800-volt architectures to enable faster charging, silicon carbide would become essential. ON invested billions in SiC capacity, signing long-term supply agreements with automakers before many competitors even recognized the opportunity.

Our momentum continued this past year as we achieved record automotive revenue and 4x year-over-year growth in silicon carbide revenue. This growth wasn't accidental—it was the result of years of patient investment and relationship building. ON embedded engineers at customer sites, co-developed solutions with automakers, and committed to automotive-grade quality standards that were far more stringent than what the company had dealt with in consumer electronics.

The industrial pivot followed a similar logic. As factories became increasingly automated and connected, they needed the same kinds of power management and sensing solutions that ON was developing for automotive. Industrial IoT applications—from smart meters to factory automation—became another growth driver. The company's image sensors, inherited from the Aptina acquisition, found applications in machine vision and quality control. Power management solutions developed for electric vehicles translated directly to industrial motor drives and renewable energy systems.

What made ON's automotive and industrial strategy particularly prescient was its timing. The company made its big bets just as these markets were reaching inflection points. Electric vehicle adoption, which had been predicted for decades, finally started happening at scale around 2020. IDC predicts escalating demand for semiconductors such as high-performance computing (HPC) chips, image processing units (IPUs), radar chips, and lidar sensors along with the popularity of advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), electric vehicles (EV), and Internet of Vehicles (IoV).

The numbers tell the story of transformation. In 2015, automotive represented less than 25% of ON's revenue. By 2023, automotive revenue had surged by 29%, making it the company's largest segment. More importantly, these weren't commodity sales—they were design wins with multi-year production cycles and high switching costs. Once ON's chips were designed into a vehicle platform, they would generate revenue for the life of that platform, typically 5-7 years.

↑ Back to Top

VII. Technology & Manufacturing Excellence

The "Fab Right" initiative launched in 2018 sounded like typical corporate jargon, but for ON Semiconductor, it represented a fundamental rethinking of how semiconductors should be manufactured. Standing in the company's newly acquired East Fishkill fab in upstate New York, Hassane El-Khoury, then heading manufacturing strategy, posed a simple question to his team: "Why do we run our 200mm fabs differently from our 300mm fabs? Why does Phoenix do things differently from Gresham?"

The answer, as it turned out, was "because we've always done it that way"—the worst possible answer in manufacturing. Each fab ON had acquired over the years came with its own processes, systems, and culture. The AMI fabs ran one way, the Fairchild fabs another, the original Motorola facilities yet another. It was manufacturing by confederation rather than coordination, and it was killing efficiency. The 2019 GlobalFoundries deal marked a turning point in ON's manufacturing strategy. ON Semiconductor and GLOBALFOUNDRIES today announced that they have entered into a definitive agreement for ON Semiconductor to acquire a 300mm fab located in East Fishkill, New York. The total consideration for the acquisition is $430 million, of which $100 million has been paid at signing of the definitive agreement, and $330 million will be paid at the end of 2022, after which ON Semiconductor will gain full operational control of the fab.

"The acquisition of 300 mm East Fishkill fab is another major step in our progress towards leadership in power and analog semiconductors," said Keith Jackson. The deal wasn't just about capacity—it was about capability. ON Semiconductor will also have immediate access to advanced CMOS capability including 45nm and 65nm technology nodes. These processes will form the basis for future technology development at ON Semiconductor.

But the real story of ON's manufacturing excellence wasn't about any single fab—it was about creating a unified manufacturing system across disparate facilities. The Fab Right initiative standardized processes, metrics, and best practices across all facilities. Engineers in Phoenix could now transfer to Gresham and find the same tools, processes, and procedures. Products could be qualified in one fab and easily transferred to another for volume production. The silicon carbide strategy crystallized with the 2021 GT Advanced Technologies acquisition. onsemi (Nasdaq: ON), a leader in intelligent power and sensing technologies, today announced that it has completed its acquisition of GT Advanced Technologies ("GTAT"), a producer of silicon carbide (SiC) for $415 million in cash. This wasn't just buying capacity—it was securing the entire supply chain for the most critical material in power electronics.

"This transaction reflects our confidence and stated commitment to meaningfully invest in silicon carbide solutions to support the creation of intelligent power and sensing technologies to help build a sustainable future," said Hassane El-Khoury. The acquisition enhances onsemi's ability to secure and grow supply of SiC. SiC is a key component of next-generation semiconductors that provide technical benefits and improve system efficiency in many applications, including electric vehicles (EVs), EV charging and energy infrastructure.

The importance of controlling the silicon carbide supply chain cannot be overstated. While traditional silicon hits physical limits at high voltages and temperatures, silicon carbide thrives. It can handle ten times the electric field strength of silicon, operates at temperatures above 200°C, and switches faster with lower losses. For electric vehicles transitioning to 800-volt architectures—enabling 350kW charging that can add 200 miles of range in under 10 minutes—silicon carbide isn't optional, it's essential.

ON's approach to silicon carbide was vertically integrated from the start. Rather than just buying wafers on the open market, the company invested in the entire value chain: crystal growth, wafering, epitaxy, device fabrication, and packaging. This vertical integration provided not just cost advantages but also technical control. ON could optimize each step of the process for its specific applications, achieving yields and performance that pure-play device makers couldn't match.

The analog and mixed-signal expansion followed a similar pattern of strategic investment. Rather than competing head-to-head with Texas Instruments or Analog Devices in general-purpose analog, ON focused on specialized applications where its power management expertise provided an advantage. Automotive-grade operational amplifiers designed to work in harsh environments. Current sense amplifiers optimized for battery management systems. Gate drivers specifically tuned for silicon carbide MOSFETs.

By 2020, ON's technology portfolio had transformed beyond recognition. The company that once made commodity diodes now produced some of the industry's most sophisticated power management solutions. Its image sensors, inherited from Aptina and enhanced through years of development, powered advanced driver assistance systems in premium vehicles. Its silicon carbide MOSFETs enabled the next generation of electric vehicle powertrains. And its mixed-signal solutions integrated power management, sensing, and communication into single chips that simplified system design for customers.

The manufacturing excellence wasn't just about having the right equipment—it was about having the right people and processes. ON invested heavily in automation and artificial intelligence for yield improvement. Machine learning algorithms analyzed vast amounts of manufacturing data to predict and prevent defects. Digital twins of production lines enabled virtual optimization before implementing changes in the physical world. The result was a manufacturing operation that could produce cutting-edge technology at commodity-product costs.

↑ Back to Top

VIII. Leadership Transition & Modern Era (2020–Present)

The board meeting in December 2020 wasn't celebratory. Hassane El-Khoury was elected as a director of ON Semiconductor Corporation and appointed as President and Chief Executive Officer of onsemi and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC in December 2020. Keith Jackson, after 18 years at the helm, was passing the torch at a moment of both triumph and uncertainty. The company he'd rescued from near-bankruptcy had become a semiconductor powerhouse, but the industry was entering another cyclical downturn just as a global pandemic reshaped every assumption about supply chains and demand patterns.

Prior to joining onsemi, El-Khoury served most recently as president, chief executive officer and member of the board of directors at Cypress Semiconductor until its sale to Infineon in April 2020. He held various roles spanning business unit management, product development, applications engineering and business development during his thirteen years at Cypress. His track record was impressive—within the first two years of El-Khoury's tenure, his strategy enabled the company to reach all-time high records for stock price, revenue and cash flow.

The board's selection process had been exhaustive. Alan Campbell, chairman of the board of directors, stated: "Following a comprehensive internal and external search process, I want to welcome Hassane to ON Semiconductor. The focus of our search was to identify an experienced CEO who understands the transformation underway within our industry and to expand our leadership position in target secular growth markets, accelerate revenue, gross margin and earnings growth, and enhance stakeholder value. During the interview process, Hassane emerged as the clear leader to deliver on the company's immense potential for its customers, partners, employees and other stakeholders."

What made El-Khoury particularly compelling wasn't just his track record but his philosophy. "I believe that a company is most successful when it leverages its people to solve customer challenges," El-Khoury said. This customer-centric approach, combined with his systems-level thinking honed during years in automotive applications, aligned perfectly with ON's strategic direction. After immigrating to the United States from Lebanon at the age of 17, El-Khoury obtained a Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering from Lawrence Technological University and master's in engineering management from Oakland University. His immigrant story resonated with ON's scrappy, underdog culture.

The handoff from Jackson to El-Khoury was unusually smooth for a CEO transition. As planned, Jackson remained at the company as an advisor through the end of May 2021. This overlap period proved crucial as El-Khoury navigated the complexities of a company that had grown through aggressive acquisition and was now managing the aftermath of pandemic-driven supply chain chaos.

El-Khoury's first major strategic move came in August 2021—not an acquisition or a restructuring, but a rebrand. In August 2021, to better reflect its broad technology portfolio, differentiated product lines, and market leadership, ON Semiconductor rebranded itself as onsemi. The name change from ON Semiconductor to simply "onsemi" (lowercase intentional) might have seemed cosmetic, but it signaled something deeper. This wasn't your father's semiconductor company anymore.

ON Semiconductor revealed its new trade name "onsemi" and refreshed brand as a next step in the company's evolution to establish itself as the leading provider of intelligent power and sensing technologies. With a continued focus on the automotive and industrial end-markets, onsemi has sharpened its strategy to drive disruptive innovation that contributes to a sustainable ecosystem of high-growth megatrends such as vehicle electrification, advanced safety, alternative energy and factory automation.

The rebrand came with ambitious sustainability commitments. Today, the industrial and automotive end-markets are responsible for two-thirds of global greenhouse gas emissions, providing an immense opportunity for onsemi to do its part in achieving a net-zero economy with its intelligent power and sensing technologies. The company committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2040, positioning itself as not just a supplier of semiconductors but an enabler of the green transition.

El-Khoury's strategic vision crystallized around what he called "intelligent power and intelligent sensing"—essentially betting that the future belonged not to general-purpose semiconductors but to smart, integrated solutions that could think as well as switch. "We have spent the last several months focusing on sharpening the company's market strategy and realigning its product portfolio and investments," said El-Khoury.

The financial discipline El-Khoury brought was immediately apparent. While Jackson had been a deal-maker, El-Khoury focused on operational excellence and margin expansion. The strategy paid off quickly. By the end of 2022, the company was generating record results that validated both the transformation Jackson had initiated and El-Khoury's execution.

The announcement in February 2023 marked a watershed moment. The company announced that its Board of Directors had approved a new share repurchase program with authorization to repurchase up to $3 billion of shares of the company's common stock through December 31, 2025. This wasn't just a buyback—it was a statement. With confidence in their strategy to invest for long-term profitable growth, the Board of Directors and leadership team announced the new $3 billion share repurchase authorization. Driven by a three-fold increase in free cash flow generation since the start of the transformation journey, the company had increased flexibility with a repurchase authorization twice that of the previous authorization.

The modern era of onsemi has been defined by this balance—aggressive investment in future technologies while returning cash to shareholders, expansion into new markets while maintaining discipline on margins, and growth through innovation rather than just acquisition. Fourth quarter 2024 revenue of $1,722.5 million came with GAAP gross margin and non-GAAP gross margin of 45.2% and 45.3%, respectively, and full year 2024 free cash flow of $1.2 billion, a 3X increase year-over-year.

El-Khoury's assessment of the current market environment reflects both confidence and caution. "As we continue to navigate this market downturn, our actions over the last four years have proven we are a structurally different company that is well-equipped to navigate prolonged volatility. While 2025 remains uncertain, we remain committed to our long-term strategy. We will maintain our financial discipline, streamline our operations and continue to deliver high-value, differentiated intelligent power and sensing solutions that position onsemi to emerge even stronger."

The numbers tell the story of successful transformation. The company returned 54% of 2024 Free Cash Flow through share repurchases. In the third quarter of 2024, the company returned 75% of free cash flow over the last 12 months to shareholders through stock repurchases. This capital allocation strategy—investing heavily in silicon carbide and advanced technologies while simultaneously returning cash to shareholders—demonstrates the financial strength El-Khoury has built.

↑ Back to Top

IX. Culture & Corporate Responsibility

The three words hanging in every onsemi conference room—Respect, Integrity, Initiative—might seem like generic corporate values, but at onsemi, they're battle scars from a company that nearly died and had to rebuild its culture from scratch. When Keith Jackson took over in 2002, he inherited not just a financial disaster but a demoralized workforce that had been treated as Motorola's unwanted stepchild, survived massive layoffs, and watched their stock options turn worthless.

Jackson understood that fixing the culture was as important as fixing the balance sheet. The three-pronged approach he institutionalized wasn't just words on a wall. Respect meant treating the janitor with the same dignity as the CEO—Jackson famously knew the names of security guards and cafeteria workers at every facility he visited regularly. Integrity meant telling customers the truth even when it cost sales, admitting when the company couldn't meet specifications rather than shipping marginal products. Initiative meant rewarding employees who took calculated risks, even when they failed, because a company that had nearly died couldn't afford to play it safe.

The cultural transformation showed in unusual ways. During the 2008 financial crisis, when most semiconductor companies were laying off thousands, ON chose a different path. Instead of mass layoffs, the company implemented temporary pay cuts across the board, with executives taking the largest hits. When business recovered, ON not only restored salaries but paid back the cuts with interest. The message was clear: we're all in this together.

In 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, onsemi was named in World's Most Ethical Companies by Ethisphere Institute. This wasn't a one-time achievement but a sustained commitment to ethical business practices that went beyond compliance. The company's ethics hotline, available in multiple languages, received genuine use—employees actually trusted that reporting issues wouldn't result in retaliation. Suppliers were held to the same standards, with ON walking away from lucrative contracts when partners couldn't meet ethical requirements.

The company's inclusion in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and recognition as one of Barron's 100 Most Sustainable Companies reflected more than environmental initiatives—it represented a fundamental rethinking of what a semiconductor company could be. When the industry faced scrutiny over conflict minerals, ON didn't just comply with regulations; it built one of the industry's most comprehensive supply chain tracking systems, able to trace materials back to their source mines.

Employee development became a competitive advantage. The company's "ON University" wasn't just training—it was a comprehensive education system that helped manufacturing operators become engineers, engineers become managers, and managers become leaders. The tuition reimbursement program had no limits for relevant degrees. An operator in Phoenix could get a full electrical engineering degree paid for by the company, and many did. The retention rates for employees who participated in education programs exceeded 95%, creating a virtuous cycle of investment and loyalty.

The approach to diversity and inclusion went beyond quotas. ON's technical mentorship program paired senior engineers with junior staff from underrepresented backgrounds, but the real innovation was reverse mentoring—having younger employees teach senior executives about new technologies, social media, and changing workforce expectations. The company's employee resource groups weren't just social clubs but business accelerators, with the Women in Technology group directly contributing to product innovations in medical devices and the Veterans group improving manufacturing processes using military-inspired logistics.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ON's culture truly showed its strength. While designated an essential business, the company went far beyond regulatory requirements. Manufacturing workers received hazard pay, unlimited paid sick leave, and on-site vaccination clinics. Engineers working from home received full home office setups, including adjustable desks and ergonomic chairs. Mental health support was expanded with 24/7 counseling services. Most remarkably, when semiconductor demand exploded in 2021, the company shared its windfall profits through special bonuses that, for some manufacturing workers, exceeded their annual salaries.

The commitment to local communities where ON operates runs deep. In Phoenix, the company's STEM education initiatives reached over 10,000 students annually, with employees volunteering as mentors and science fair judges. The company's "Giving Now" program matched employee donations dollar-for-dollar with no annual limit—when an employee's child faced cancer treatment, colleagues raised $50,000 that the company matched, turning personal tragedy into communal support.

Environmental responsibility at onsemi goes beyond regulatory compliance. The company's fabs now recycle over 95% of their water, crucial in drought-prone locations like Arizona. The transition to renewable energy wasn't just about buying credits—ON installed solar panels on facility rooftops and partnered with local utilities to develop new renewable capacity. The company's product design philosophy incorporated end-of-life considerations, making chips easier to recycle and reducing hazardous materials even when alternatives cost more.

The most telling aspect of ON's culture might be what happens when things go wrong. When a quality issue in 2019 required a massive recall, the company didn't hide behind lawyers or blame suppliers. El-Khoury personally called affected customers, engineers worked around the clock to develop fixes, and the company absorbed all costs without question. The response turned a potential disaster into a demonstration of integrity that actually strengthened customer relationships.

This culture of responsibility extends to shareholder relations. The company's investor communications are notably transparent, acknowledging challenges alongside successes. Quarterly earnings calls include detailed discussions of risks and uncertainties, not just promotional highlights. The board of directors includes genuine industry experts, not just friends of management, and their oversight is real—strategic proposals face genuine scrutiny and sometimes rejection.

↑ Back to Top

X. Playbook: Business & Investing Lessons

The transformation of ON Semiconductor from a $300 million market cap corporate castoff to a $31 billion semiconductor leader offers a masterclass in strategic turnaround, but the lessons go far deeper than typical business school case studies suggest. This isn't a story of brilliant strategic pivots or technological breakthroughs—it's a grinding tale of doing the obvious things that everyone knows they should do but almost nobody actually does.

The first lesson—and perhaps the most counterintuitive—is that commodity businesses can create extraordinary value if managed correctly. When Keith Jackson took over ON in 2002, conventional wisdom said commodity semiconductors were a death trap, a race to the bottom where only Asian manufacturers with rock-bottom costs could survive. Jackson rejected this narrative entirely. Instead of fleeing commodities, he embraced them, recognizing that "commodity" is often code for "essential." Every electronic device needs power management. Every circuit needs protection. Every system needs discrete components. By becoming the best at making these "boring" products, ON built a moat that glamorous chip designers couldn't cross.

The M&A playbook ON developed deserves its own Harvard case study. Between 2005 and 2016, the company completed over a dozen major acquisitions, but this wasn't empire building—it was deliberate capability construction. Each acquisition followed a clear logic: buy distressed assets at reasonable prices, integrate ruthlessly, cut costs immediately, then invest in the best products and technologies. The AMI acquisition brought medical and military expertise. Fairchild brought power management heritage. SANYO brought automotive relationships. The discipline was remarkable—ON walked away from multiple bidding wars, refused to overpay for "strategic" assets, and never made an acquisition it couldn't integrate within 18 months.

The integration playbook was equally disciplined. Within 90 days of close, duplicate functions were eliminated. Within 180 days, manufacturing was optimized. Within 365 days, sales forces were unified. The company developed a integration SWAT team that moved from deal to deal, applying lessons learned from previous acquisitions. By the time ON acquired Fairchild in 2016, the integration was so smooth that customers barely noticed the transition.

The capital allocation framework El-Khoury has employed since 2020 represents evolved thinking about semiconductor economics. The traditional model says either invest everything in R&D to stay competitive or return everything to shareholders because you can't compete. ON does both. The company invests billions in silicon carbide capacity while simultaneously buying back billions in stock. This isn't financial engineering—it's a recognition that in semiconductors, you need both offensive and defensive strategies. The investments ensure future growth; the buybacks provide downside protection.

The approach to market selection offers another crucial lesson: ride secular trends, don't fight them. ON didn't try to predict which technologies would win. Instead, it identified unstoppable macro trends—vehicle electrification, renewable energy, industrial automation—and positioned itself to benefit regardless of which specific technologies prevailed. Whether electric vehicles used 400-volt or 800-volt architectures, they would need power management. Whether solar or wind dominated renewable energy, both needed power conversion. This trend-agnostic positioning reduced risk while maintaining upside exposure.

The manufacturing strategy contradicts conventional semiconductor wisdom. While peers outsourced production to Asian foundries, ON kept manufacturing in-house. While others chased cutting-edge process nodes, ON optimized mature technologies. While competitors built greenfield fabs, ON bought and upgraded existing facilities. This contrarian approach looked outdated in 2010 but prescient by 2021 when supply chain resilience mattered more than cutting-edge technology.

The customer relationship model ON developed deserves special attention. Unlike typical semiconductor companies that maintain arm's-length transactional relationships, ON embeds itself into customer operations. Engineers sit in customer facilities. Design teams co-develop products. Supply agreements span 5-10 years. This deep integration creates switching costs that transcend price competition. When a carmaker designs ON's chips into a platform, they're not just buying components—they're entering a partnership that will last the vehicle's entire production life.

The financial discipline throughout ON's transformation has been remarkable. Despite aggressive acquisitions and massive capital investments, the company never lost financial flexibility. Debt was paid down systematically. Cash generation was prioritized over reported earnings. Working capital was managed obsessively. The company maintained investment-grade credit ratings even during major acquisitions. This financial conservatism might have limited growth in boom times but ensured survival during downturns.

The lesson on timing deserves emphasis. ON's major strategic moves consistently came during industry downturns when assets were cheap and competitors were retrenching. The AMI acquisition closed during the 2008 financial crisis. The Fairchild deal happened during the 2016 semiconductor correction. Silicon carbide investments ramped during the 2019 auto slowdown. This countercyclical approach required courage—investing when everyone else was cutting—but generated extraordinary returns.

The human capital strategy offers perhaps the most underappreciated lesson. ON didn't hire semiconductor superstars or poach entire teams from competitors. Instead, it developed talent internally, promoted from within, and created a culture where competent execution was valued over brilliant innovation. The company's senior leadership is filled with executives who've been there 10+ years, who understand the culture, and who've grown with the company. This internal development takes longer but creates deeper organizational capability.

For investors, ON's story challenges conventional semiconductor investment wisdom. The company generates returns not through explosive growth or technological breakthroughs but through consistent execution, strategic positioning, and financial discipline. It's a value creator disguised as a value stock, a growth story hidden in mature markets. The multiple expansion from 2020 to 2024 came not from changed fundamentals but from market recognition of what the company had already built.

↑ Back to Top

XI. Analysis & Bear vs. Bull Case

The investment case for onsemi in 2025 presents a fascinating study in contrasts. Bears see a cyclical semiconductor company trading at premium valuations just as the automotive market weakens and China tensions escalate. Bulls see a transformed technology leader with secular growth drivers that transcend typical semiconductor cycles. Both sides have compelling arguments that deserve careful examination.

The competitive landscape has shifted dramatically since ON's near-death experience in 2002. Today, the company faces formidable competitors across every segment. In power semiconductors, Infineon Technologies commands the largest market share globally, with particularly strong positions in automotive and industrial markets. STMicroelectronics leverages its joint venture with TSMC to produce leading-edge silicon carbide devices at scale. Texas Instruments dominates analog broadly with unmatched gross margins and R&D spending that dwarfs ON's entire revenue. NXP Semiconductors owns automotive processing and communication chips. Yet ON has carved out defensible positions through focus rather than breadth, depth rather than diversification.

The bear case starts with valuation. At 18 times forward earnings, onsemi trades at a premium to most semiconductor peers despite lower margins than analog leaders and less technological differentiation than processor designers. The company's revenue has declined from peak 2022 levels, yet the stock remains near all-time highs. Bears argue this disconnect between fundamentals and valuation suggests significant downside risk if growth doesn't materialize.

China exposure presents another major concern. Approximately 30% of ON's revenue comes from China, both directly and through contract manufacturers. The escalating semiconductor trade war threatens this revenue stream from multiple angles: export restrictions limit what ON can sell, domestic Chinese competition intensifies with government support, and geopolitical tensions could result in retaliatory measures. The company's silicon carbide ambitions particularly concern bears, as China aggressively builds domestic SiC capacity with state backing that could destroy pricing power.

The electric vehicle adoption trajectory poses perhaps the biggest risk to the bull thesis. ON has bet heavily on EV growth, investing billions in silicon carbide capacity based on aggressive adoption forecasts. But EV sales growth has slowed dramatically in 2024, major automakers have pushed back electrification targets, and consumer adoption faces headwinds from high prices, limited charging infrastructure, and range anxiety. If EVs plateau at 20-30% market share rather than reaching 50%+ by 2030, ON's silicon carbide investments could become stranded assets.

Technology transitions threaten ON's current advantages. Gallium nitride (GaN) could displace silicon carbide in many applications, offering better performance at potentially lower costs. New battery chemistries might reduce semiconductor content in EVs. Autonomous driving could shift value from power management to processors and sensors where ON has limited presence. The company's manufacturing-heavy model looks increasingly outdated as fabless competitors leverage TSMC's superior scale and technology.

The bull case rests on structural transformation that bears underappreciate. ON isn't the commodity player it was in 2002—it's a specialized technology leader in markets with enormous growth potential. The company's 45% gross margins rival industry leaders, free cash flow has tripled in three years, and the balance sheet strength enables both growth investment and shareholder returns. Bulls argue the market still prices ON like a cyclical commodity player rather than the technology leader it's become.

The secular growth drivers are undeniable. Vehicle electrification is happening—the question is pace, not direction. Every major automaker has committed to electric futures, governments worldwide mandate EV adoption, and battery costs continue declining. Even if adoption is slower than expected, the semiconductor content per vehicle continues rising through advanced driver assistance, infotainment, and electrification of traditional mechanical systems. ON's content per vehicle could grow from $200 in traditional cars to over $2,000 in electric autonomous vehicles.

Industrial automation and renewable energy provide additional growth vectors often overlooked by bears. Factory automation accelerates as labor costs rise and reshoring gains momentum. Solar and wind deployment continues exponentially as costs fall below fossil fuels. Data center power consumption explodes with AI workloads. These markets could each rival automotive in size, providing diversification that reduces cyclical exposure.

The silicon carbide advantage is more durable than bears acknowledge. While China builds capacity, technology and yield matter more than fab space. ON's vertical integration from crystal growth through device packaging provides cost and performance advantages that take years to replicate. Long-term supply agreements with automakers lock in demand and pricing through 2030. The company's SiC revenue grew 4x year-over-year even as bears predicted commoditization.

Management quality and execution track record support the bull case. El-Khoury has delivered on every commitment since becoming CEO, expanding margins while navigating supply chain chaos and cyclical downturns. The conservative guidance and consistent beats build credibility. The balanced capital allocation—investing for growth while returning cash to shareholders—demonstrates confidence without recklessness.

The financial resilience ON has built provides downside protection bears ignore. With $3.8 billion in cash, modest debt, and billion-dollar free cash flow even in downturns, the company can weather prolonged weakness. The variable cost structure allows rapid adjustment to demand changes. The diversified customer base—no customer exceeds 10% of revenue—reduces concentration risk. This isn't 2002 when bankruptcy loomed; it's a financially fortress company trading at reasonable multiples.

The market share gain opportunity remains substantial. Despite its growth, ON holds only 3-5% share in most of its markets. In a consolidating industry where scale increasingly matters, ON's size, technology portfolio, and customer relationships position it to gain share from subscale competitors. Every point of market share gained in power semiconductors represents billions in revenue opportunity.

↑ Back to Top

XII. Epilogue & "What's Next"

Standing in onsemi's Phoenix headquarters today, it's hard to imagine this was once Motorola's unwanted orphan, left to die in the desert heat of the dot-com bust. The gleaming silicon carbide fab that now anchors the campus represents more than just manufacturing capacity—it's a monument to corporate resilience, strategic transformation, and the power of patient execution over flashy innovation.

The future of automotive semiconductors increasingly looks like the future of automobiles themselves—electric, intelligent, and software-defined. Industry forecasts suggest automotive semiconductor content will reach $1,000 per vehicle by 2030, up from $500 today, driven primarily by electrification and autonomy. For onsemi, this isn't just a growth opportunity; it's validation of bets placed years ago when electric vehicles were curiosities and autonomous driving was science fiction.

The next chapter of the onsemi story will likely be written in silicon carbide and gallium nitride rather than traditional silicon. These wide-bandgap semiconductors represent more than incremental improvements—they enable entirely new applications in power conversion, wireless charging, and high-frequency communications. The company's early investments in SiC manufacturing and recent partnerships on GaN development position it at the forefront of this transition. The question isn't whether these technologies will transform power electronics, but whether ON can maintain its early advantage as competitors rush to catch up.

Artificial intelligence and edge computing present both opportunity and threat. The explosion in AI workloads drives massive demand for power management solutions in data centers, where ON's high-voltage products enable efficient power delivery to GPUs consuming kilowatts. Edge AI applications in vehicles, factories, and smart cities need exactly the kind of intelligent power and sensing solutions ON specializes in. Yet AI also accelerates the pace of change in ways that could disrupt established players. Autonomous vehicles might need fewer discrete components and more integrated solutions. AI-designed chips could optimize away traditional power management approaches.

The supply chain resilience imperative that emerged from COVID-19 plays to ON's strengths. Governments worldwide now view semiconductor supply chains as national security priorities, funding domestic production and restricting technology exports. ON's geographically distributed manufacturing footprint—with significant capacity in the U.S., Europe, and Asia—provides the supply chain flexibility customers increasingly demand. The CHIPS Act funding could accelerate ON's domestic expansion, though competition for subsidies is fierce.

The China question looms large over any semiconductor company's future, but particularly for ON given its significant exposure. The trajectory seems clear: decoupling is happening, though slower and more selectively than headlines suggest. ON must navigate carefully, maintaining access to the world's largest automotive market while avoiding technology transfer that could enable future competitors. The company's strategy of keeping advanced SiC production outside China while maintaining older technology fabs there represents a delicate balance that will be tested as tensions escalate.

Climate change and sustainability pressures could accelerate ON's markets faster than current forecasts suggest. As extreme weather events multiply and carbon pricing becomes reality, the economic case for electrification strengthens. Renewable energy deployment could accelerate from linear to exponential growth. Industrial companies might be forced to automate and electrify faster than planned. For a company whose products enable efficiency and electrification, climate urgency translates directly to revenue growth.

The consolidation endgame in semiconductors remains unfinished. Despite years of mergers, the industry remains fragmented with hundreds of companies subscale for modern semiconductor economics. ON could be acquirer or acquired—its $31 billion market cap makes it digestible for giants like Intel or Qualcomm, while its strong balance sheet enables continued consolidation of smaller players. The Fairchild acquisition proved ON can successfully integrate large deals; the question is whether management sees value in further scale or prefers organic growth.

Looking ahead, three scenarios seem plausible for onsemi's next decade. In the bull case, electric vehicle adoption accelerates, China tensions ease, and ON's silicon carbide leadership translates into sustainable competitive advantage. The company becomes the "Intel Inside" of electric vehicles, with its power management solutions essential to every major platform. Revenue doubles to $15 billion by 2030, margins expand to 50%, and the stock rerates as a technology leader rather than cyclical manufacturer.

The bear case sees EV adoption stalling, China developing competitive SiC capabilities, and new technologies disrupting ON's core markets. The company becomes trapped in commodity competition, margins compress to industry averages, and the stock rerates to traditional semiconductor multiples. Revenue stagnates around current levels, profitability declines, and ON becomes an acquisition target for larger players seeking manufacturing capacity.

The base case—and most likely scenario—sees continued but moderate growth as secular trends offset cyclical headwinds. EV adoption proceeds steadily if not spectacularly, reaching 30-40% of new vehicles by 2030. China tensions create headwinds but not disasters, with ON maintaining significant but declining China exposure. Silicon carbide remains important but not dominant, with ON holding profitable share in a competitive market. The company generates steady cash flows, returns capital to shareholders, and delivers acceptable if not exceptional returns.

For students of business history, ON Semiconductor offers enduring lessons about corporate transformation. The company's journey from near-bankruptcy to industry leadership wasn't driven by breakthrough innovation or visionary strategy, but by consistent execution, strategic focus, and the courage to invest when others retreated. It's a reminder that in business, as in life, success often comes not from doing extraordinary things, but from doing ordinary things extraordinarily well.

The final lesson might be the most important: transformation is never complete. The ON Semiconductor of 2025 bears little resemblance to the Motorola spinoff of 1999, yet the company faces challenges as daunting as any in its history. Technology transitions, geopolitical tensions, and market uncertainties threaten everything built over 25 years. But if history is any guide, onsemi will adapt, evolve, and endure. The company that survived the dot-com bust, financial crisis, and COVID-19 pandemic has proven one thing above all: resilience is its core competency.

As we close this analysis, it's worth reflecting on what ON Semiconductor represents in the broader context of American industrial history. In an era when manufacturing is often dismissed as yesterday's industry, when software supposedly eats everything, and when financial engineering often substitutes for operational excellence, ON demonstrates that making physical products still matters. The company's chips might be invisible to consumers, buried deep in vehicles and machines, but they're essential to the electrified, automated future we're building. That's a legacy worth celebrating, and a future worth watching.