Large panel shipments and sales were, to say the least, quite poor in January, with large panel shipments of 48.7m units, down 23.4% m/m and down 35.4% y/y.  To put that in perspective, typically January large panel shipments are down 5.8% m/m (5 yr. avg.), with Jan. ’23 being the lowest January shipment level since 2016.  Sales of large panels in January were $3.72b, down 23.2% m/m and down 43.0% y/y.  Again to put that into perspective, January large panel sales are typically down 5.8% m/m, with January 2023 being the lowest large panel monthly sales since February 2020, the first month of the CVID -19 pandemic.
When broken down by category, notebooks saw the largest m/m shipment decline while monitors saw the least, down 18.4%, as shown below, with some categories getting near or below February 2020 lows (pandemic month one), and others, like TV shipments going back to 2012 below a lower number was seen, and monitors going back even further.

On a regional basis in January, China held the largest share of the large panel LCD market from a sales perspective, with a 53.7% share, above the average of 48.7% the region held for 2022.  South Korea saw its share decline from an average of 23.8% of large panel LCD sales (2022 average) to 18.4% in January ’23, as Samsung Display (pvt), ended all large panel LCD production and LG Display (LPL) continued to limit production of same.  Taiwan and Japan both remained relatively consistent with 2022 averages in January, at 22.5% (Taiwan) and 5.4% (Japan) respectively.
While South Korean panel producers continue to lower or end their exposure to large panel LCD production as they formulate plans to expand OLED capacity, from a sales standpoint, China’s revenue share continues to rise, despite the drop in overall large panel LCD revenue.  Chinese large panel LCD suppliers saw the smallest revenue growth decline in January (↓12.4%) of all regions and similarly, on a y/y basis saw among the lowest y/y decline in sales (↓39.3%), with only Japan  marginally better at ↓35.0%.
All in it was a bad month for large panel LCD producers, al unexpected.  We expect February to remain weak, with March the best month of what will be an overall weak quarter for panel producers.  As we have previously noted, panel producers are hoping to raise some panel prices in March as inventory levels for some products have been lowered, but we expect the price increases will be met with resistance from CE producers who have yet to see any substantial signs of consumer demand returning.  We do expect that panel producers will be able to get some price increase to stick, particularly in TV panels where new model releases  require some inventory build, but the 2nd quarter is far from clear as to consumer demand, so we expect better results from the panel space, but no clear-cut return to the profitability levels seen in late 2021 or early 2022. 

Foldable are not new anymore.  Having been technically available since 10/31/2018[1] and in real production in September 2019[2], there have been at least 30 foldable smartphone models and a number of other ‘foldable’ display devices.  That said, there have been a vast number of prototypes, demos, and ‘concept’ foldables shown at a never ending parade of conferences and expositions, only a few of which have ever seen retail shelves.  That said, consumers have become used to the idea of foldable displays, and with the improvements that have been made in both the displays themselves and the hinge and other mechanisms needed to make them operate correctly, that fear of spending all that money on a device that is going to fall apart quickly seems to have dissipated.
As smartphone component manufacturers became more adept at creating those intricate mechanisms that help foldables to open an close without scoring a line across the screen, they began to understand that as flexible OLED screen technology continued to develop, they could think about rolling a display on a spool inside a device and unrolling it when a larger screen was desired.  Many smartphone brands have shown demos of such devices, including smartphones, tablets, and laptops, and with the start of Mobile World Congress this week, there have been a few more that have made the tech press rounds.
Lenovo (992.HK) showed a particularly interesting device, a 12” laptop (diagonal) that could be expanded to 15.3”, and while that might not seem a big change in size, it is a ~65% increase in display surface area.   As seen below, the device looks a bit strange when expanded as the screen expands vertically, but Lenovo said the idea comes from users as the expanded screen can fit two 9:16 aspect ration images, the format for most videos.  The screen expands mechanically through a motor as the user presses a button and the system adjusts the screen resolution as the size changes. 
There is no timetable for the commercialization of such a device from Lenovo and earlier prototypes have been around for a while, but one has to give credit for Lenovo coming up with an idea that has practical value in the real world, as opposed to the many demos we have seen that are essential there to prove that engineers can prove a point.  The most successful CE products are those that make life easier for consumers, and we can see how such a device, especially in a cramped location such as a plane, might be useful.  Perhaps we won’t buy the first iteration, letting the mechanics settle in for a generation, but it certainly is a thoughtful use of rollable technology.


[1] Royole (pvt) Flexpai developers model

[2] Samsung Galaxy Fold

​Last October we noted that Apple (AAPL) had included the ability to make emergency call (text message) in areas that were not covered by cell service, through the iPhone 14 and 14 Pro..  The service, available for free for two years in the US, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland and the UK, if you have iOS 16.1 or later, and while the service is available for travelers to those countries in an emergency, if the phone was purchased in China, Hong Kong or Macao, those phones do not include the service.  Apple is spending ~$450m, primarily with Globalstar (GSAT) to ensure access to the company’s 24 LEO satellites for emergency-only texts, as long as the user is in view of the open sky and the horizon.
While sat-phones have been around for many years, particularly those based on high-earth orbit satellite systems (~22,000 miles), which can handle higher data volumes but require the user’s phone to ‘find’ a HEO satellite.  LEO satellites are ~900 miles up and smaller, but there are at least two or three available to phone users at all times, and do not have to be ‘found’ by the user’s phone.  HEO based phones are therefore more expensive but are more capable.   Military applications are obvious, but those working in remote locations, such as off-shore platforms, disaster recovery workers, or forestry workers, all have difficulty connecting using typical cellular services, while able to connect, especially in an emergency, via satellite.  We note that Google (GOOG) search results for the phrase ‘satellite phone’ originate primarily (US only) from Alaska, Montana, Kansas, Idaho, and Oregon, none of which are surprising.
Of course, Apple’s service is an emergency convenience, but has already started a trend, with Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) announcing that while it will not be including such services in the Galaxy S23 series, it is building a 5G NTN (Non-terrestrial network) modem into its Exynos chipset, that will give it similar capabilities to the Apple service but will also allow the user to send photos and videos, stepping up the competition and pushing it past ‘emergency services.  Qualcomm (QCOM) has also announced that they are working with Iridium (IRDM) to build emergency satellite services into its Snapdragon Mobile Platform by mid-2025.
Right now the idea of building satellite communication into smartphones is one that has rarified use, but will likely garner the inevitable, “My iPhone 14 saved my life when I was lost on a mountain top…”headlines and push other smartphone brands to add the service to high-end models, but satellite service can be challenging and expensive, so unless the average smartphone user is a global traveler who remains off the beaten path, it seems to be a service with a limited (but helpful) usage profile.  A e-Sims become accepted by smartphone brands and carriers, the ability to sign up to a cell service in a foreign country for a relatively short time becomes a simple process, which obviates one reason for owning or renting a sat-phone, but Apple can create considerable buzz and seems to have set the tone for a new round of competition among major smartphone brands, so we expect to hear more about such plans over the next few months.  

​Display panel producers tend to be an optimistic lot, likely a function of the fact that they have billions of dollars’ worth of equipment sitting on the factory floor that needs to be running at near full capacity to generate profitable results that garner praise and bonuses.  Chinese LCD panel producers are among the most confident, and while some of that optimism is a function of the need to stimulate government agencies to provide capacity expansion and operating subsidies, there is also considerable national pride, much of it well-deserved, in that China was able to achieve dominance in the LCD panel production space against some formidable competitors in South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.  Behind that conviction however, and this is certainly not limited to Chinese panel producers, is a bit of blind hope, fear of failure on the world stage, and a healthy dose of self-promotion, that sometimes leaves out some necessary details.   
BOE (200725.CH), China’s largest display producer, is, as a listed company, required to disclose meetings that it has with investors and analysts, and the content discussed.  Earlier this month the company disclosed a summary of the last meeting of this type it had on February 2 of this year, essentially a visit to the company’s production fab in Mianyang with 12 local and global sell-side firms, and a Q&A session.  While there was considerable discussion as to the company’s performance in 2022, to us, the most relevant conversation concerned the prospects for 2023, but we summarize BOE’s most relevant comments on 2022/2023 below, using the company’s own words when possible, along with some clarifying points (red):

• According to 3rd party consultation and institutional data, all five major display categories saw declining sales in 2022. (Monitor, Notebook, TV, Tablet, Mobile), while automotive, AR/VR, smartwatch and special displays remained stable. 
• Utilization rates, which sank to about 60%, saw a slight increase starting at the end of 2Q 2022, in order to meet end of the year promotions, but remained at relatively low levels, reducing the annual production of large-size LCDs. Notebook, Monitor & Tablet panel production declined in 2022, but TV panel production was up 0.4%.  Relative to pre-pandemic levels, 2022 shipments for many CE categories were up.
• The overseas promotion season performed well in the 4th quarter, and some brands were conservative as to purchasing strategies to control inventory.  The inventory of TV brands continued to decline in the 4th quarter and the overall inventory is approaching a healthy water level. We question the characterization of 4Q performance as while global 2022 holiday sales were up 6.7%, and 5.3% in the US, electronics and appliance sales (US) were down 5.7% (US), and while global sales were up, volumes were down, with inflation providing the sales boost.
• In terms of inventory, according to data from 3rd party consulting agencies, the low utilization rate of panel producers continues to be lower than the shipment area, and the inventory level drops significantly.
• Looking forward to 2023, according to the forecast of consulting agencies, the demand for large-sized LCD products will return to growth, especially the large size TV market.  Still too early to tell, but TV unit volumes are expected to be flat to down, so growth will be inflation related or limited to specialized TV segments.
• In terms of prices, under the influence of supply-side capacity control, in the 2nd half of 2022, the supply/demand ration of large-size LCD panels has fallen sharply in the 1st quarter of 2023.  The prices of mainstream-sized products remained relatively stable.  Correct so far.
• Semiconductors show that the industry will return to normal low-peak seasonal fluctuations, and thanks to current low inventory, in the 2nd quarter of 2023, as the industry turns from weak to prosperous, LCD products will have opportunities to usher in a rise in both volume and price.  TV panel producers are pushing for higher panel prices in March, but demand remains weak.  Still a toss-up as to whether TV set makers will buy into the potential panel price increase.
• Faced with greater depreciation pressure, the performance of OLED and other businesses continued to be under pressure. In terms of LCD, we will focus on high-value fields such as automotive, e-sports, and AR/VR, and enhance the overall profitability; significantly increase product shipments in terms of OLED and increase high-end production. The proportion of product shipments has achieved breakthroughs in the mass production of innovative products such as vehicles and foldable notebook computers.  The cost of building small panel OLED capacity, particularly for participation in Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone supply chain, will continue to pressure overall OLED profitability for BOE and thus far success has been relatively limited (see our recent notes), so volumes will have to increase considerably, without major price degradation for a quick OLED profitability turnaround, a difficult task for this year.
• In terms of market share, according to data from 3rd party consulting agencies, it is estimated that the company has the largest market share of the traditional five mainstream LCD products, while flexible OLED shipments continue to grow, with the company having the number one share in China and the world (in LCD).  We will continue to increase shipments of high-end in-vehicle products, where the company’s share in 3Q ’22 was 16%, the highest in the world.
• Entering the 1st quarter of 2023, in the traditional off-season, the industry is expected to maintain a low utilization rate.

Q&A
Question 1: What is the development trend of the flexible AMOLED industry in 2022?
In 2022, the overall flexible AMOLED industry shipments-maintained growth.  The penetration rate in the field of smart phones cand notebook computers continues to increase.  New application fields such as vehicles have emerged, but affected by weak terminal consumption, shipment growth rate was lower than expected; at the same time, some customers shipped entry-level products.  With the obvious low-price competition, the price of entry-level flexible AMOLED products has sharply declined.  Penetration is broadening but is still small relative to smartphones.
Question 2: How is the company's flexible AMOLED business progressing?
In the face of many adverse effects of the market, the company basically completed the annual shipment target, maintaining more than 30% compared with last year, especially the increase in the proportion of high-end products, in vehicles, notebook computers, etc.  However, due to the pressure of depreciation and the production of Android customers, the profitability of the products has dropped sharply, and the performance of the company's flexible AMOLED business still suffers pressure.
In 2023, with the continuous growth of the company's flexible AMOLED business, and the continuous increase in client share, it is expected that the company's flexible AMOLED products will maintain substantial growth; at the same time, the company will continue to increase shipments of high-end products, improve product portfolio profitability, promote LTPO, folding, automotive, IT, etc, striving for the leading position in the flexible AMOELD business.
All in, BOE’s dance over some of the more relevant points, such as capacity additions in both LCD and OLED, and the company’s (not 3rd party) expectations for demand growth in 2023, left us wanting, although we expect such a public forum was not the place to be asking difficult questions, if one wanted to be invited back, as these, and those asked at other recent meetings with analysts were all soft-ball questions. But the lack of specifics as to what the puts and takes will be for BOE this year, and a heavy reliance on 3rd party data, seemed to indicate that BOE was either not disclosing its actual forecasts or that it does not have them.  Even the company’s platitudinous comment from its last analyst meeting gave little toward what gives the company confidence to use the terms ‘rationality’ or ‘reasonable range’.  Here’s the previous quote:
“As the influence of uncertain factors is gradually digested, the industrial development pattern will gradually return to rationality.  The price of products will fluctuate within a reasonable range mainly due to the influence of low and peak seasons.”

The EU can be a tough market for CE companies, with all sorts of regulations, such as those that have forced Apple to change its charging connector, or the power consumption regulations that are plaguing the 8K TV market, but the EU is getting ready to make another proposal that will potentially affect a slew of technology companies that network providers say have been riding for free on their networks.  Over the last few years, particularly during the COVD-19 pandemic, network traffic has grown considerably, and while mobile network traffic growth gets much of the press, the growth of all network traffic continues to grow at a rate over 20%/year[1], and while a number of applications that drive network traffic saw peak levels in 2021, at the height of the pandemic, there are more high traffic applications driving current network growth.
The EU has instituted a program that sets connectivity targets that must be reached by carriers by 20230, but EU telco’s, such as Orange (ORAN), Telefonica (TEF), and Deutsche Telekom (DTE.XE) have been writing letters and speaking to officials concerning the cost of building out network capacity to meet those goals.  It is not that they believe such goals are unrealistic, but more about the cost, which they believe should be shared by those that generate internet traffic.  This sounds like a typical cost shift from corporations to consumers, but that is not what the telcos want, they want the companies whose applications are generating the traffic, not consumers, to share the cost of the expansion.
As the data shows, in 2021, almost 57% of internet traffic was generated by applications relating to six very large technology/CE companies (Google (GOOG), Netflix (NFLX), Meta (FB), Microsoft (MSFT), Apple, Amazon (AMZN)) and while that declined to ~48% last year, most of that decline came from Google and Facebook, while all others, particularly Netflix, saw increases.  The EU telecoms are asking that these companies, who pay nothing to ‘piggyback’ their services across carrier hardware, pay a fee to help finance the mandated coverage expansion that the EU has mandated, under the theory that at least a portion of the traffic expansion that will be seen over the next few years, is a result of applications that benefit these companies, while they pay nothing for the use of the network, with carriers and consumers (price increases) baring the cost of the expansion.
We expect that the beginnings of such a proposal will be presented at Mobile World Congress, which begins on February 27th, with a ‘consultation’ between the EU, the US, and the UK, and the collection of opinions from stakeholders that will help to form the legal wording of the proposal, a process that takes about 3 months.  Once the bill is formalized, it is reviewed by all EU members and the EU parliament, with the hope that it can be finalized by the end of this year.  The bill is expected to offer a potential alternative to the original telecom proposal of passing the full cost of 5G and additional broadband coverage equipment on to those who benefit directly or indirectly.  With CE company contingent relying on the concept of net neutrality to quash the bill, the proposal will also have to gather support from those outside of the EU, as global support is essential for the proposal to work, a difficult task at best, but one that will allow carriers to expand broadband coverage, financed by those who benefit, without the public having to bear the cost.  


[1] Based on average monthly usage

While we note that gauging the success of Samsung’s (005930.KS) just announced Galaxy S23 flagship smartphone series in South Korea is a datapoint that might not translate globally, it does give some color as to the potential success of the series going forward, at least on a relative basis.  Samsung announced the new series on February 1, with three models, the Galaxy S23 Ultra, the Galaxy S23+, and the Galaxy S23 in order of price and feature set, with the three South Korean carriers able to take pre-orders for delivery beginning on the 17th, with Samsung announcing this morning that as of the 14th, pre-orders amounted to 1.09m units, above last year’s record of 1.01m units. 
Of the three models, the S23 Ultra garnered ~60% of the pre-orders, the more generic S23 ~23% and the S23+ ~17%, with the fact that the Ultra has a 200 MP main camera (plus 4 others) and a 6.8” display, while the plus has a 6.6” display and a 50 MP camera (plus 3 others), while the S23 has a 6.1” display and also a 50 MP camera (plus 3 others).  With a difference of $200 between the Ultra and the plus, it seems most early buyers are willing to fork up the extra cash for the high-resolution camera, although there are many discounts and promotions being offered that can lower the price, particularly with trade-ins, new carrier accounts or when using carrier credit cards for purchase.
In recent years Samsung has had difficulty maintaining robust flagship smartphone sales, and the elimination of the Galaxy Note series in lieu of folding models was an indication that the company recognized a need to refresh the premium side of its smartphone offerings.  Breathing life into smartphones that have changed relatively little over the last few years was not an easy task, and the economic weakness being experienced on a global scale in 2022 did little to help, but Samsung continues to dominate the foldable smartphone market, and maintains a significant manufacturing lead over other OLED panel producers. 
That said, it will take time for Samsung’s foldable smartphone line to gain enough end user acceptance to generate consumer momentum toward the smartphone market, along with the potential for Apple (AAPL) to join the foldable market in a year or so, but Samsung does have he ability to stretch in terms of form factors, as we have noted in the past, and we expect a third foldable model to appear this year or b next, although it might be considered more of a tablet than a smartphone.  Either way, if it is practical and generates consumer excitement, it will help to offset the mid and low-tier competition Samsung faces from Chinese brands, where Samsung has less of an advantage.
 

​Samsung Electronics has made a number of investments in local South Korean companies over the last 10 years, many of which are investments in developing technology that Samsung uses or has the potential to use in one of its many businesses.  While investment timing is certainly a consideration, making such investments is as much a business decision as it is a financial one, and investment performance  does not take into consideration the positive aspects of products developed and sold as a result of such investments.  That said, it is also nice to have positive returns, so after attention was drawn to Samsung’s long-term investments in Korean companies when they announced an investment in Rainbow Robotics (277810.KS) late last month, we went back to check on how the company’s other investments have done over the years.
All in, Samsung has had mixed results over the mid-term as to investments made since 2020, but earlier investments have proved extremely favorable, with the entire portfolio up 166.7% since 2013, or an 11.5% CAGR.  Samsung has invested ~$409.3m in local South Korean companies, taking a roughly 6.4% stake since 2013.  The average investment is ~$37.3m US).  While Rainbow has soared since the announcement was made, increasing the value of that investment from $46.4m to $145.7m, we expect there will be many bumps in the road for that asset over the next few years.

​A Taiwanese technology daily, known for its somewhat misleading headlines and extreme forecasts (our opinion), has published the headline “Tablet shipments to slip below 30 million units in 1Q 23”, an ominous prediction that looks to strike fear into the hearts of those that participate in the CE space and set a negative tone for the 2023 year.  We find this a bit headline a bit misleading in that it gives little or no perspective as to what such a prediction actually means.
If we look at quarterly tablet shipments over the last six years, the trend is a bit difficult to see as tablet shipments tend to be volatile, and not always seasonal, but when viewed on a yearly basis, it seems more obvious that tablet shipments had flattened during the two years before the COVID-19 pandemic.  During the two years before the pandemic (2017 – 2018) the quarterly rate of tablet shipments was 35.4m units, while during the pandemic (2Q ’20 – 2Q ’22) the quarterly average was 41.1m units, 18.9% higher.  As the pandemic winds down, we would expect tablet shipments to return to pre-pandemic levels, which would imply a rate close to that 35.4m units/quarter that we mentioned above.  That said, it can be seen in Figure 1 that there have been a number of quarters when tablet shipments fell below 30m units, both before and during the pandemic, so while a prediction of ‘less than 30m units’ for 1Q is a bit troubling, it is not out of line with past history and is likely reflective of both the winding down of COVID, and the global inflationary macro environment.
Our bigger concern however is less about the level of tablet shipments in 1Q and more about whether tablet brands have reduced expectations with suppliers, particularly panel producers, and whether panel producers will maintain the low panel production levels needed to balance supply and demand.  After a poor 2022, panel producers will have a strong desire to push prices or production to generate some momentum early in the year.  Figure 3 points to the fact that in pre-pandemic years, tablet panel production was, for the most part, behind tablet shipments, which should drive panel prices higher, however this was not the case as tablet panel prices declined (Figure 4), more in keeping with the slow deterioration of demand through the end of 2019.
In 2020 tablet panel producers stepped up production, matching demand closely and tablet panel prices increased rapidly.  That said, we believe this was more of a function of strong demand, rather than a closer balance between tablet demand and tablet panel supply, and as the tablet demand peaked at the end of 2020, panel producers continued to oversupply, causing tablet panel prices to decline in 2Q ’21, along with other IT product prices.  During 2022, tablet panel production was closely matched to demand, yet panel prices still declined, more likely picking up the long-term declining trend that had been interrupted by the pandemic.  If panel producers take time to respond to the lower tablet shipment levels expected for 1Q (Figure 5 & Figure 6), tablet panel prices will decline further, rather than level off as they seem to be doing in recent months.

​The Bureau of Industry & Security, a Division of the US Department of Commerce, added 6 Chinese companies to the ‘entities list’ based on their alleged participation in the recent “Wandering Balloon” issue that dominated the news in recent days.  According to the BIS, these companies have been added for their support of China’s military modernization efforts, specifically the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) aerospace program, including airships and balloons, specifically using high-altitude balloons for intelligence and reconnaissance.  While any US entity wanting to do business with these companies can submit a request for a trade license, under the column “License Review Policy” in the BIS statement, each was categorized as “Presumption of Denial”.
China’s Foreign Ministry stated that the country has always opposed the US unilateral sanctions on Chinese institutions, enterprises, and individuals, and that the “Chinese civilian unmanned airship that strayed into US airspace was completely accidental incident caused by force majeure”, and has explained such to the US government, and the Chinese press says the US is using the incident to ‘blackmail’ the 6 Chinese companies…
Beijing Nanjiang Aerospace Technology
China Electronics Technology Group
Dongguan Lingkong Remote Sensing Technology
Eagles Med Aviation Science & Technology Group
Guangzhou Tian-Hai-Xiang Aviation Technology
Shanxi Eagles Med Aviation Science & Technology Group
 

According to sources in South Korea, which does tilt the story a bit, China’s largest panel producer, BOE (200725.CH) will only be supplying OLED displays for one model of the iPhone 15 to be released later this year.  While both Samsung Display (pvt) and LG Display (LPL) will be producing LTPO displays for the iPhone 15 Pro Max and iPhone 15 Pro, BOE is expected to be supplying displays only for the iPhone 15 model, rather than both the iPhone 15 and the iPhone 15+.  Samsung will be taking up the slack with the iPhone 15+.
BOE has had an up and down relationship with Apple (AAPL) concerning OLED displays, with a number of failed attempts to get on Apple’s OLED display provider list, which has been the exclusive territory of Samsung Display and LG Display.  BOE did supply Apple with replacement OLED displays, sort of a test run for inclusion and was able to convince Apple that it had the technical and volume capabilities to supply LTPS OLED displays for the iPhone 13, released in September 2021, and the iPhone 14, released in September of last year, a point that has been emphasized by the Chinese press innumerable times.  That said, BOE made a catastrophic mistake by changing the design of a TFT backplane in order to improve yield, without getting the change approved by Apple.  We assume that the change was made in order to bring yields to levels necessary to satisfy Apple’s demand requirements.  This caused BOE to be put in the penalty box for the iPhone 14, limited to only producing OLED displays for the iPhone 14 6.1” model and that seems to still be the case with the iPhone 15.
It had not been expected that BOE would be supplying OLED displays for the high-end iPhone 15 models (Pro Max & Pro), as they require LTPO backplanes, a process for which Samsung Display has the most expertise and capacity, along with LG Display, who also has LTPO capacity, but it was expected that BOE would expand its OLED display supply to both LTPS models (iPhone 15 and iPhone 15+), which, at least at this time, does not seem to be the case.   
While there is still time for things to change, as production for this year’s iPhone release does not usually start until July/August, there is also the fact that Samsung has warned BOE that it has been infringing on certain of its OLED patents, and while Apple would therefore be involved in an infringement case, if SDC were to bring the dispute to the courts, there is the possibility that Apple has limited BOE’s participation in the iPhone 15 for both reasons..  While we expect the Chinese press will spin the less than expected participation in the iPhone 15 in a more positive light, and BOE could stack the deck a bit by lowering its quote on the iPhone 15+ displays, but Apple has always been a stickler for suppliers meeting their stringent specifications, both technical and volume related, so it might be a bit more difficult for BOE to change the situation that with other customers, but we note that BOE is about as determined to challenge SDC’s and LGD’s OLED leadership as anyone could be and seems to have a massive amount of energy and will toward making its relationship with Apple continue to grow.  Essentially, they don’t seem to take no for an answer and rejection only seems to spark the company to work harder toward achieving that goal.

​Key = Light Blue – LTPO -  Gray – LTPS