Originally Posted by walford
Several years ago I saw on a post drawings of the several different multisize patterns to be used on one of the vendors new FABs each of drawings utiilized the entire motherglass so there was not any waste after the cutting which was the first part of the process.
I also believe that with each new FAB generation that the unit manufacturing costs of same size panels goes down due to improved production equipment such as use of newer lower energy lazers being used in the cutting process.
So I reiterate, if that's currently the case, it further invalidates almost every point made by Irkuck, all of which rely on the following precepts:The only way to gain economies of scale in LCD is through making an entire motherglass of same-size panels. Once you can make 6 per sheet, your cost of manufacture is 1/5 that of someone who can only make 2 per sheet, even if the 2 are made with no waste.
There are significant valid points in Irkuck's arguments surrounding these precepts, even though there are serious issues with the first one (in particular, the fact that the bottlenecks in LCD manufacture occur after the glass is cut into individual panels) and the second one is patently ridiculous.
(Although I'm going to fully admit I have no actual evidence that Samsung could process 80" panels in their 8G fab given that they have no actual way of cutting large numbers of 65" *or* 75" panels anywhere and therefore are doing something unusual to make those happen, I'm going to point out they could easily have chosen to do 2-up 80" displays at the 8G fab if they actually viewed the market as valuable. And we can certainly easily prove what the bill of materials is for those by taking each of them to be as difficult to produce as 4, 40" displays and assuming that at this point yield on 40" displays is nearly perfect, which it almost certainly is.
It's also worth noting that since Panasonic currently seems at best headed for 75" displays and Sharp is locked in at 70" and LG seems committed to 72", Samsung would then have a size no one could match and would cannibalizing some portion of 40" production, where it's unlikely they are making any money at all anyway. But I digress, let's keep pretending that the 65" can be sold for $5000, while the 75" somehow has to be sold at $13000. Or even $10,000, which is equally ridiculous.
And before I get another lecture about how these companies are so good at seizing market opportunities and are so this or that, I will cite a few examples of how stupid companies are, to remind readers that no company is infallible. And most, in fact, routinely act in ways that are against their self interest:
1) When the mortgage crisis in the U.S. was already exploding, Bank of America bought Countrywide, the worst mortgage lender in U.S. history, essentially doubling down on stupid loans.
2) When Intel was finally moving to Pentium successfully, IBM doubled down on its licenses to produce 486 chips and basically passed on Moore's Law and the future.
3) When memory was finally getting cheap, Bill Gates said publicly he doubted anyone would ever need more than 640K of RAM. (1024K = 1MB, 1024MB = 1GB, just for those of you who don't know what a K even if).
4) When AT&T was breaking itself up, it decided the entire U.S. market for cell phones was 500,000 subscribers, so it gave the cellular licenses to regional Bells in exchange for some other concessions from government, including exciting things like being able to keep making Touch Tone phones.
5) For you east coast folks, when a young hamburger impresario named Ray Kroc approached Tom Carvel about putting his ice cream into every McDonald's restaurant, an annoyed Carvel told him he'd never get anyway with his burger joints and walked away.
6) Upon seeing the success of the 10" iPad, Samsung decided that what the world really wanted was... a tablet that was just as heavy, but had a screen 1/2 the size. The 7" Galaxy Tab continues to be outsold by the iPad by approximately 10:1 (outsold, current data, please don't cite quarter or two old shipment data, since Samsung sell through on those remains terrible).
But clearly, it's impossible Samsung missed the fact that Sharp might create a 70" market at an affordable price because they are perfect and infallible. No company ever misinterprets market conditions and misprices something. Ever.)