Originally Posted by steve1971
As I look at the bigger picture it wouldn't have mattered if Sony would have gone OLED or not they are in deep trouble and they have been for awhile. I believe the only thing saving them right now is the Playstation consols. .
Sony is a conglomerate. They make good money in the content business and also things like finance and insurance.
Originally Posted by slacker711
Things dont need to change.
Samsung has capacity for 430 million 5" smartphones today. That is without the additional Gen 6 capacity that they have planned. The irony in the Displaysearch report is that it occurs just as Samsung is planning on moving OLED's into the mid-tiers and as various Chinese players begin ordering equipment for their own Gen 5.5 equipment.
So it is at all possible that DisplaySearch is right here or are you just certainly that because Samsung has all this capacity, they will ship more than 1/3 of smartphone screens by 2020?
I don't mean to be flip, but DisplaySearch does this kind of stuff for a living. Sure, they get it wrong sometimes. But they most definitely know exactly how much fab capacity Samsung has -- and everyone else too. They are using predictions of the smartphone market that are on the order of 1.5 billion+ annually (installed base headed for 6 billion, replacement cycles probably stretching out to an average of 3+ years).
I mean it's possible they are flat out wrong and OLED will take the lion's share of mobile phone displays. They say, "No, that won't happen, it'll be 30%." What's your number?
The problem in tablets is that it has been difficult for OLED's to compete with models made using a-si. As the resolutions increase and tablets move to LTPS, the economics will change. As with smartphones, OLED's can compete just fine when manufactured on the same substrate material and size. Whether they actually become dominant in smartphones will depend on whether flexible/unbreakable displays become popular or if they can create a phosphorescent blue with a long lifetime. Those are the types of discontinuous innovation which are needed to actually replace LCD's.
OLED displays are more expensive than LTPS displays on mobile phones.
Granted, there are screen real estate differences here, but IHS has the iPhone 5 at $41 for display + touchscreen, the Galaxy S4 at $75 for the 5" high-res model. Even if we assume that it's a linear difference for real estate, the iPhone screen scaled up would be $10 cheaper. (And Apple usually uses more expensive touchscreens, so it may be a bigger gap.) $10 x 1.5 billion phone is a lot of freaking money
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson
You make good points, but it's just hard for me to acknowledge OLED will be losing ground given the expectation that Samsung will produce half a billion OLED displays in 2014.
See the math above. First of all, little ground is going to be lost in the short run (the market share for OLED only falls later in the decade). Second of all, what Samsung can produce and what people buy are not the same thing. Samsung could supply 100% of the mobile industry -- even at 2 billion units annually by decade's end. But they aren't going to have 100% share for a billion reasons. If the LTPS manufacturers sell for less and offer more (in terms of certain specific, desirable features), they will -- in fact -- win. And the additional benefit of scale economies LCD gets by also dominating tablets and laptops do not apply
Mobile phone screens are already moving to 8G substrates. OLED is far behind that curve.