​The rumor mill is abuzz with talk that Apple (AAPL) has decided to to move the MacBook Pro display from the Mini-LED LCD display it is using now to an Oxide OLED which is expected to be solely supplied by Samsung Display starting in 2026.  While unconfirmed (and likely to stay so for some time) there is logic behind the idea as SDC’s early and continuing investment in IT OLED might be the lynchpin needed for Apple to both make the decision and to enlist Samsung Display as its sole supplier for the project.  As we have noted numerous times in the past, Samsung Display is building out a Gen 8.6 OLED line for IT fab at its Asan, Korea campus.  China’s BOE (200725.CH) is doing the same but has had issues with Apple in the past which has portrayed them as a less reliable supplier.  SDC has already bee sampling product from this line although it is not officially in mass production.  LG Display, while able to produce similar product for IT, does not have a Gen 8.6 line and must rely on a lower volume Gen 6 line.
If this deal pans out, it has significant implications for SDC.  Based on ~5.4 Macs sold on average and ~50% of those MacBook Pros, we estimate that at 100% yield and utilization SDC could produce1.125m MacBook Pros per month and fill Apple’s requirements in 2 months, which is a very conservative demand estimate, as some expect almost twice that demand from Apple.  Of course, those are theoretical numbers, and yield will likely be considerably lower, extending that time period to at least 3 months of production.  Still, for a new fab that has a specific purpose (10+” displays), having a high quality customer take a quarter’s worth of production is a very good start for a new fab, and we expect SDC has other customers lined up, particularly in the notebook space where OLED has been gaining traction.  BOE will be a competitor for those other customers, and likely a very aggressive one, but if the rumor is correct SDC has a lock on the MacBook business next year.

Given the lack of holidays or special events over the last 45 days, we have not checked Samsung Electronics (005930,KS) TV set pricing until today.  It seems that Samsung has made some structural changes to their premium TV set availability and pricing during that period, essentially eliminating all 2024 8K Mini-LED/QD sets from their on-line roster and almost all (3 hi-end sets still available) Mini-LED/QD 4K sets for which they raised prices substantially.  This is rather unusual as the previous year’s sets are typically available for at least the entire following year as an alternative for those looking to save money by purchasing last year’s models, but in this case Samsung pushes potential 2024 model purchasers to outside sources or to 2025 models.  We note also that in 2024 Samsung made available 8K and 4K  Mini-LED/QD sets along with a line of QD only sets, however this year they have eliminated the QD only line, meaning all LCD display premium TVs are Mini-LED/QD, with no alternative without the Mini-LED option.
In terms of OLED, Samsung seems to be taking the same track on last year’s models, eliminating all of the hi-end and low-end models, leaving only the mid-tier. Essentially pushing potential buyers to 2025 models.  We note that 2024 low-end models saw a large price increase in May (from $2,000 to $3,400) but we are suspect about that change as that model has now been discontinued.  Without that change the 2024 OLED low-end tier would be down 41.2% (lifetime), rather than down 18.1% and flat YTD (yellow highlight).
Over the last 49 days here is how Samsung’s on-line premium TV set pricing has evolved:

​All in, it seems that Samsung is taking an unusual turn with the premium TV set line this year, pushing buyers to 2025 models directly, rather than giving them the option of last year’s models and doing a little less anticipatory discounting in front of the Labor Day holiday.  The exception seems to be the low-end of this year’s OLED line, where prices dropped over 15% during the period and remain far below the mid and upper tier OLED sets.  There is the possibility that Samsung is able to capture any cost savings on the QD/OLED panels it uses for most of the low-end S85F models, but that is unconfirmed.  We expect some additional discounting before the holiday itself.

OLED displays typically garner a premium as their display characteristics tend to be superior to more common LCD displays.  However, because OLED displays do not need a backlight, as they are self-emitting (LCDs require a backlight), OLEDs can be produced on flexible substrates, allowing for bendable, foldable, and rollable applications.  OLED display producers have been promoting this flexibility characteristic since the early days of OLED display production and it has been a major selling point for OLEDs, particularly foldable OLED displays which have become their own product category for smartphones and laptops.  That said, because of the stress at the fold point, foldable displays have had a checkered past, with fold lines and similar issues forming  in the early days.  Improvements have ben made and stress has been minimized with more sophisticated hinges and updated panel structures, but for devices larger than smartphones (laptops) one alternative to a foldable structure is a rollable one.
Rollable OLED devices take the flexibility of an OLED display and either roll the display around an internal spindle or fold it inside of the device.  When needed, a mechanism pulls the hidden part of the display from the device or roller in an external frame.  Spindle rollable devices move the stress from a single point (the fold) to across the entire display, which, in theory, should eliminate visible creases, although the tightness of the wind around the spindle is a trade-off between overall stress on the display and the thickness of the rolled spindle/display combination inside the device.  Those devices that fold the display inside of the device have the same potential crease issue and require a thicker case.
Until recently, foldable display laptops have been physically similar to foldable smartphones, allowing for an extended screen size by opening a folded display to increase visual real estate.  For example the ASUS (2357.TT) Zenbook 17 Fold shown below can be used as a in a number of configurations including with an attached keyboard or with a virtual keyboard that takes up a portion of the lower screen.  The laptop has a 12.5” (diagonal) display when in single screen mode and a 17” display when fully opened.  This represents an 84.96% increase in screen real estate.

To be fair, there are also a number of ‘foldable’ laptops that are not true foldables.  They are essentially dual screen laptops that can be opened for additional real estate but have a border and fold mechanism between the screens, while true foldables, when opened, have a single continuous display.  All of that said, there is a new foldable laptop configuration that is now available, a rollable laptop.  The Lenovo (992.HK) ThinkBook Plus is the first consumer oriented rollable laptop, although it has been shown in various forms by the company since 2022 as a concept or demo.

At the push of a button, the screen extends from 14” (diagonal) to 16.7”, an increase in screen real estate of 44.8% in a rigid frame (5:4 aspect ratio when closed, 8:9 when open).  The laptop is a bit heavier and thicker than typical Lenovo ThinkBooks but has all the physical bells and whistles that are usual on Lenovo laptops of this class.  As did early foldable, the part of the screen that is rolled is not perfectly smooth when extended, something that we expect Lenovo will address with a smoother rolling mechanism and spindle, but other than that the unit seems well put together, although the addition of a motor and extension mechanism in the laptop adds a bit to the potential for problems over time.
The biggest issue with this first of its kind rollable laptop is the price, which is $3,299.  In order to put that in perspective, we lined up a few close equivalents (single screen) to compare prices.  Based on  list pricing the  Lenovo rollable is ~77% more expensive than the average of the similars, 32% more expensive than the most expensive comparable and 136% more expensive than the least expensive comparable model.  None of this  is surprising given the unique nature of this device, but most of the rollable’s other specs are more comparable than one might have expected.  The ThinkBook Plus is certainly not the heaviest, is smaller (closed) than all the others, and compares in all other aspects other than price, at least for now, but it will take some die-hard fans to  generate sales with this kind of premium, and unless Lenovo is convinced that  rollable laptops are the wave of the future, ahead of foldables and dual-screen devices,  the rollable laptop category is  not going to set the world on fire right away.
We do expect others, for no reason other than one-upmanship, to follow suit, but if the bugs can be ironed out in a generation or so, it would seem to be a viable category if the premium were less onerous.  We have no doubt that as the rollable ecosystem develops further, the price will come down, but there are lots of alternatives for those who are still able to live with a small bezel between two windows.

Trendforce, in our view, one of the more aggressive estimators we watch, has lowered their 2025 TV unit shipment forecast to 195.71m units, down 1.1% y/y.  They cite the following reasons:

• High panel costs have (and will) hinder promotional discounting
• US shipment pull-ins have (~2% to 3%) will lower 2H shipment growth
• 60% of China’s consumer subsidy capital has been used to date, limiting subsidies for the holiday season

We note that Trendforce has lowered their full year 2025 TV shipment forecast a number of times since last year.  Here are the forecasts:

• November 2024          200.72m units             up 1.7% y/y
• December 2024          199.16 m units             up 0.9% y/y
• February 2025             197.80m units             down 0.2% y/y
• August 2025                 195.70m units             down 1.1% y/y

Trendforce estimates the following for the top 5 TV set brands for the first half of the year for both unit volume and share.  The substantial share increases at TCL () and Hisense () are the result of Chinese subsidies that have been in place since (officially) September of last year.  It was originally slated to end by the end of 1Q this year but has been extended.  Who says you can’t buy market share?:

​Chinastar (pvt), who has announced intentions to develop a Gen 8 ink-jet printed OLED line as far back as 2020, has said they will announce their investment plans for such a line as early as this month, a bit later than their recent expectations for a July announcement.  It is thought that the company is in discussions with the local government over the investment’s scale and we expect funding for the project.  The company currently has a Gen 5.5 IJP pilot line (20k/m) at its T5 fab in Wuhan where it has been producing 21.5” medical displays since late last year, but the economics of large panel production for IJP requires a large (Gen 8) substrate to become profitable.
While ink-jet printing is done under a low-level vacuum, as opposed to the full vacuum environment used in FMM (Fine metal mask) deposition (the current standard for OLED display production), the OLED materials must be mixed with a solvent in order for them to flow through ink-jet heads.  Not all of the OLED stack materials are able to make this transition, and new materials have been developed to facilitate IJP, but this also means that the emitter materials, the ones that actually produce light, don’t have the same characteristics as current OLED materials, and that means some of the major features could change or have to be adapted, particularly material lifetimes.  The offset is that inkjet printing allows for higher aperture between the sub-pixels, meaning more light is emitted per pixel, making the device brighter or more energy efficient.
We assume Chinastar’s pending announcement will be for at least one 15k/month line with plans for more, along with associated TFT and a local ecosystem to provide the necessary production materials.  This is a big risk for Chinastar in that it will be the only IJP large panel producer, with others taking a more conservative Gen 8.6 FMM approach (Samsung Display (pvt), BOE (200725.CH), and potentially Visionox (002387.CH).  If the technology does not pan out, they will be years behind others in the IT OLED space.

Its tariff announcement day, and it seems not every country was ready to kiss the ring or make the required genuflections, and negotiations continue.  Without comment, here’s the list with key CE countries highlighted.  The EU has a special category as it works on a product by product basis.  If the product tariff is less than 15%, it is brought up to 15%.  If the tariff is 15% or higher on particular goods, it stays at that level:

Universal Display (OLED) reported 2Q results of $171.8m in sales, ahead of consensus of $162m, with EPS of $1.40 against consensus of $1.18.  Sales were up 3.3% q/q and up 8.4% y/y, while net income was up 4.4% q/q and up 21.9% y/y, with operating margins of 39.9%.  The company now expects operating margins to come in toward the high end of guidance (35% to 40%) as opex are declining.  Material sales grew 2.9% q/q but declined 7.1% y/y while royalty & license revenue also increased by 2.9% q/q and increased by 27.1% y/y.  The company raised the low end of its guidance range from $640m to $650m and left the high end at $700m. 
From a more granular perspective, UDC management indicated that they had seen some tariff-related pull-ins from Chinese customers in April, although they believe that most were intra-quarter, leaving 3Q mostly intact.  In that regard, China represented 44% of sales in 2Q, the highest thus far, with the exception of a slightly higher share in 1Q 2021 when Chinese OLED producers were building material inventory as they began to move to OLED mass production.  We expect the pull-ins might have had a 1% or 2% increment to China’s share in the quarter, but on a general basis China will likely grow material share more rapidly than Korea over the next few years.