With the first update for Apple’s mid-range price tiered iPhone SE in two years and Samsung’s announcement of its 2022 Galaxy A23 LTE the battle for mid-tier smartphone buyers has heated up quickly.  While the iPhone SE is out and the A23 is due this month, the faceoff between these two phones will be intense in coming months as they both offer a lower priced option to the flagship models from both brands.  Apple certainly has bragging rights as to the iPhone SE’s CPU, as it uses the same A15  (5nm)  chipset used in the iPhone 13 series, against Samsung’s use of Qualcomm’s (QCOM) Snapdragon 680 (6 nm), but it is still a bit early for processor benchmarking and more importantly actual use tests.  We note also that the iPhone SE is 5G ready (sub6 only), while the A23 LTE is not, while the A23 display is considerably larger and has more cameras, giving consumers a number of important tradeoffs to consider, along with the price.
Not all of the characteristic for the A23 have been revealed so the table below might change slightly, but we show the key features of both for comparison below:

Samsung Large Panel LCD Phase Out
​

Samsung Display (pvt) has been working toward ending its production of large panel LCD displays for a number of years and is now likely to close its last remaining large panel LCD production fab this year, likely by the end of 2Q.  Samsung Display’s decision to shut down large panel LCD pricing began a number of years ago as a result of the competition from Chinese LCD panel producers, who were both extremely aggressive in building out large panel capacity and had the backing of the Chinese government, who saw the necessity to change the balance of power in the display business from South Korea and Taiwan, who had long dominated the large panel LCD display business.  At the same time Samsung Display found itself the dominant player in the small panel OLED display business, with its parent Samsung Electronics a very strong supporter of OLED technology for small panel devices, and from the standpoint of profitability, SDC could make a higher return on small panel displays on a m2 basis than it could on large panel LCD displays.
In 2016 SDC began converting some of its older Gen 7 LCD capacity to OLED and in 2017 shut down additional older fabs in South Korea, sold equipment to Chinese panel producers, and leased the facilities to affiliates.  As SDC added small panel OLED capacity it found interest continued to build for small panel OLED displays with Apple (AAPL) releasing its first OLED iPhone, the iPhone X in late 2018.  Firmly convinced that Chinese large panel LCD producers would continue to build capacity regardless of short or mid-term demand, SDC continued to push forward with its large panel reduction plans, culminating in 2020 when it sold its remaining large panel LCD plant in Suzhou, China to Chinastar (pvt) for over $1b US.
SDC has been converting its larger (Gen 8.5) LCD fabs in South Korea to OLED over the last two to three years to small panel OLED and one for its new QD/OLED large panel production line, and has additional idle capacity for QD/OLED expansion should the technology become in demand.  What remains is SDC’s last large panel line in Asan, South Korea, and that was kept open at the request of parent Samsung Electronics when large panel prices increased as the COVID-19 pandemic began to spread.  While the operation of the fab was likely profitable for Samsung Display during the large panel price increases that began in July 2020, those prices peaked a year later and have fallen quickly to pre-pandemic levels.
This puts SDC back in the same position it was in in 2020, that of competing against the Chinese in the large panel market, and likely making only a small profit or no profit while doing so.  As the aggregate price of TV panels is only 7.5% above the lowest point during the last 5 years, SDC sees little need to continue to compete in that business and will likely end that last production fab this year.  Samsung Electronics buys all (other than what it still gets from SDC) of its TV panels from other suppliers and while faced a difficult times during the pandemic related price increases, is now taking advantage of the price declines, without the burden of the losses at SDC that such declines caused in the past. 
While there will always be large panel LCD price cycles, Samsung Electronics can use its buying power to exert price pressure on outside panel producers, who clamor for Samsung’s business to fill their capacity, while SDC operates in the OLED world that has completely different demand characteristics.  While it has been a bumpy road over the last year for both Samsung and Samsung Display, the logic behind SDC’s original decision to exit the large panel LCD space seems to be proving out, leaving them little need to remain in the large panel business.
 

LG Electronics (066570.KS) has announced prices for its 2022 OLED TV line, or at least some of it.  What they have released is the pricing for the “C” series and the “G” series OLED TVs, which are the top two price tiers,  and the “B” series, which are mid-range models,  leaving the “A” series, which is the low-end of the OLED line undefined.  In the table below we compare current (2022) TV set initial prices with last year’s initial prices and where they are currently to give some idea as to how they might decline over the coming year.  We note that the "B" series was not expected to be released in the US last year but eventually made it way to the states as a special offer on the LG website only, which is why that data is omitted.
The “B” series 2022 pricing is 4.6% higher than the 2021 “B” series, while the “C” series is 5.1% lower and the “G” series is also 5.1% lower.  A smaller size (42”) was added to the “C” series this year as was a 97” model to the “G” series, although the 97” model has yet to be priced.  When comparing 2021 initial pricing against where the sets are selling today, the “B” series is down 32.6% from initial pricing, the “C” series is down 29.9% from initial pricing, and the “G” series is down 25.8% from initial pricing.  We note at the bottom of the table is the pricing for Samsung’s (033570.KS) QD/OLED TVs for comparison and are 9.1% (55”) and 16.7% (65”) more expensive than LG’s most expensive “G” series 2022 OLED TVs, less than we had anticipated given the relatively early stages of QD/OLED panel production.

The Nike (NIKE) Air Force 1 was the most popular shoe in 2021 according to eBay and data shows that while much of the US population remained indoors for much of 2020 athletic footwear grew more than 35% y/y in the first six months of last year.  Sneakers and running shoes are so popular among the buying public that certain Air Jordan models can sell for over $6,000 (new) and Michael Jordan’s actual used sneakers have fetched almost $200,000 at auction.  Having been around commercially since the 1920’s sneakers became de rigueur when vulcanization, the process used to strengthen natural or synthetic rubber, made it possible to fuse cloth to rubber, and as the legend goes, two brothers started a sports shoe business in a small German town.  As their wives did not get along the two brothers eventually going their own ways, with one creating Puma (pvt) and the other Adidas (ADS.GR).
While the folklore is interesting, sneakers are utilitarian, comfortable, and can certainly be a status symbol, but what does this have to do with consumer electronics and technology?  Yesterday Xtep (1368.HK), a leading sneaker manufacturer in China with over 6,300 stores across the country (Jeremy Lin is its spokesperson) released a new and special sneaker collection that sold out in 70 minutes and the special limited edition gift box set sold out in 10 seconds, all of which were part of the company’s 160X 3.0 collection, but at the same time the company also released the 160X-Metaverse NFT collection , the first ‘professional virtual running shoe’ collection that were priced at $252.53 a pair, and sold out in the abovementioned 70 minutes, and as they were sold using NFTs, they will remain one-of-a-kind forever. 
So to make this clear, the 321 pairs of these shoes so not exist in the real world but are likely to make your virtual feet feel very comfortable when you are doing your virtual run in the around your virtual plot of real estate in the Metaverse.  While the company touts the non-virtual sneaker line’s rolling carbon-fiber plates that add 5% to propulsion power and 20% to stability, they don’t say if the virtual items have the same improvements, so we would be careful before building too much into such a purchase as we expect that any day another sneaker company could come out with a better virtual sneaker could give you 10% more propulsion during your virtual runs.
Of course, the idea here is that such virtual items will have a growing intrinsic value in the virtual world that collectors will be willing to pay more than $253.53 (no applicable sales tax, but likely a number of fees) for as the Metaverse becomes where we live.  While the company earned $81,383.13 on the sale, we suspect that given the manufacturing cost of almost zero, the shoes were quite profitable and would encourage Xtep to release more such items in the future.  Taking it a bit further, perhaps we could expect the company to reduce its physical production capabilities, where it has to pay workers, purchase machinery, pay for utilities and the like, and become a ‘virtual’ shoe company with a few computers for design and a fancy Metaverse site.  Makes business sense, right?
Not these…

Or these...

Or these...

But these...

The 5G ecosystem continued its growth in February in many categories, although 5G smartphone growth was modest at 1.6%, the lowest since January 2020.  While seasonality data for 5G is relatively new and is therefore more sensitive to shorter-term variations, we believe the shower growth in the 5G smartphone space is a function of two factors in China.  First, the Chinese New Year holiday, which occurred on February 1 and lasted the entire week during which much business activity is limited, and second, the COVID-19 breakouts and resulting lockdowns in a number of major cities on the Mainland which curtailed both business activity and consumer shopping.
Over the last three months, while primary indicators are still well above trend line, as they have been since July of last year, they have begun to level off a bit.  Again as the seasonal data is still relatively small, it is difficult to tell whether this is a global trend, a Chinese trend, or just a more typical seasonal trend as 5G matures, however while global seasonality should pick up in 2Q, Chinese 5G seasonality should see a more significant bounce in March and April data if the seasonal data is an indication, so we should be able to get a better picture for 5G trends over the next 60 days.
As 5G continues to expand its global footprint, we look at a number of factors that give some understanding as to how prevalent the technology has become around the globe.  In Figure 5 we show the countries where 5G is commonly available and a combination of both the amount of time 5G is available (Figure 6) and the download speed (Figure 7), which is called the ‘5G experience’.  South Korea, while they are almost exclusively sub6 (low and mid 5G bands) has the highest download speeds by quite a bit, and makes 5G available to a large part of the population on mobile networks, meaning as you roam, the 5G signal remains rather than dropping back to 4G.  We do note that while the US ranks 4th in 5G availability, we do not know how the statistics from Open Signal take into consideration the area of the country, so we are cautious about using that particular data set as a basis for understanding deployment across the globe.  That said, given that China has considerably more 5G base stations than any other country but does not show in Figure 5, we assume that area or population is considered in some way.
Download speed however is not conditional on area or population but on the spectrum used and equipment and in most cases is focused only on 5G low and mid band spectrum (sub-6 – in red).  While the table below does not show 5G connection speed, the rule of thumb is that the potential connection speed increases with the frequency range but the transmission distance decreases as frequency increases, so for those carriers interested in coverage, the tendency is for using the lower 5G bands, allowing for less base station, while those looking for speed would emphasize the higher bands, although the number of base stations would increase.  Each carrier in the US and other countries took an initial stance as to what kind of customer they were initially interested in attracting in the early days of 5G but most have migrated toward mid-range frequencies as the provide a mix of higher speeds and extended coverage.  This makes some of the country speed statistics a bit less valid as a carrier using a lower 5G band would be able to gain coverage albeit at a slower speed, however as even the low band 5G speeds tend to be higher than 4G, and the incremental cost to consumers is low in most instances, carriers only need to meet customer expectations, which in the residential/mobile world are relatively low.

​Longli Technology (300752.CH) has issued a prospectus to raise ~$157.3m in capital to invest in adding to the company’s Mini-LED production capabilities.   The company raised ~$28.3m back in 2020 to build out 6 Mini-LED production lines for displays, 10 lines for automotive displays, and one for wearables, so the additional capital will expand production exponentially.  While we are not sure where the estimates are coming from, the company expects to produce profits of -.46m yuan $-7.3m US) in 2021 (reported?), 2.47m yuan ($388k US) this year, and 390m yuan ($61.4m US) in 2023.  Obviously someone (likely the broker doing the deal) has set a valuation of 45x the 2022 estimate, which would yield a market value of 11b yuan or $1.73b US).  If only it were that easy…

​Only days after the actual release, the Apple Mac Studio is being torn down.  The device, which sells for between $2,000 and $4,000, is certainly not made to be upgraded by users, although from the early teardown, it might give Apple a reason to invalidate the warranty, as Apple notes, “Mac Studio is not user accessible.  If you think you might need more storage capacity in the future, consider configuring to a higher capacity”, meaning buy the higher storage unit at the onset.  In reality we would expect that there will be an upgrade package developed for the Mac Studio, but again it will not be user installable, which keeps the Apple repair program folks happy.  What we will say to Apple’s benefit is that the structure of the Apple Mac Studio and the ancillary components are of unusual quality, par above most of the typical Windows-based computers we have seen or used.  Aside from the M1 Ultra chip, which is a SoC of the highest order (another note), while you might not be able to upgrade or fix it yourself, the Mac Studio is among the highest quality we have seen.

Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) has announced pricing for its Quantum Dot/OLED TV models, which are in pre-order mode.  While not all of Samsung’s 2022 TV line pricing has been revealed, the two sets are to be priced at $2,400 for the 55” model and $3,500 for the 65” model, which puts them at the top of Samsung’s 4K TV line in those sizes.  As both are 4K models, they would compare to Samsun’s Mini-LED/QD 90B series (2022) which sell for $2,600 and $1,900 respectively, putting the QD/OLED sets 34.6% and 26.3% more expensive than their closest sets in Samsung’s 2022 YV line.  When compared to LG Electronics’ 4K OLED TV lines (2021 models), using their most expensive models, the Samsung QD/OLED sets are 52.2% and 50.0% more expensive than the OLED sets.  While these are prices set by Samsung on its website, Amazon (AMZN) is offering the 55” model (no delivery date) for $2,197 to Prime™ members with an April 11 release date and delivery between April 15 and April 18.
The table compares Samsung’s QD/OLED TV pricing against similar Samsung Mini-LED/QD TVs, Samsung QD only TVs, and the most and least expensive LG OLED TVs.  We note that LG OLED TV pricing is based on 2021 models.  We note also that there has been some question as to the actual pricing for Samsung’s S95B models as some Samsung representative s are quoting a ‘corrected’ price of $2,200 for the 55” and $3,000 for the 65”.  While this might ultimately prove correct given the Amazon price mentioned above, the official prices on Samsung’s webstore are used below.