In order to account for unusual or outlying estimates, we average smartphone data from a number of sources to arrive at quarterly and yearly totals.  Our aggregated smartphone shipment total for 2024 is 1.223 billion units, up 5.1%  y/y.  Based on our data Apple (AAPL) edged out Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) by 0.6% in terms of unit volume share (224.8m units for Apple and 223.5m units for Samsung), although Samsung had a higher share in every quarter except the 4th, which is when Apple releases the new iPhone.  They were followed by Xiaomi (1810.HK) with 169m units, Oppo (pvt) with 106.1m, and Transsion (688036.CH), rounding out the top 5 with 102.4m units.  Falling out of the top five last year were Vivo (pvt) and Honor (pvt), with Vivo only 1.4m units less than Transsion.
While our final unit volume number might be a bit different from others, we note that back in late 2023, when predictions are first made for the following year, they ranged from up 3% to up 6.2%, with most in the 3% to 4% range, so even with our 5.1% average increase, the year was a bit better than expected, above the trendline, and a welcome relief after two down years.  Expectations for this year center around 2.1% to 2.4% unit volume growth.  That said, our data indicates that 1Q unit volume was up 1%, and we believe there was some pre-tariff buying in that number.  We are a bit less optimistic than the estimates, but the US/China trade situation puts everything in flux.

In 2024 China shipped 314.6m mobile phones, up 8.7% y/y, marking the 2nd consecutive year that shipments have increased y/y.  86.4% of phones shipped were 5G models, the highest for any year (2023 was 82.2%), and 85.6% of shipments were domestic (Chinese) brands.  As can be seen in Figure 1 and Figure 2, after a dismal 2022 and 2023, China’s smartphone market has recovered, albeit modestly.
So far this year (Jan/Feb data only) January smartphone shipments were down 14.2% y/y, but February shipments were up 37.9% y/y and above the 5-year average by over 25%.  On January 20, the Chinese government added smartphones to its “New for Old” consumer product subsidy program, which we expect accounted for the strong February results.  While we expect continued strength in smartphone shipments in the domestic Chinese market, we expect consumers took advantage of the subsidy at the onset, and front-loaded February shipments.  March is  typically a strong shipment month, so we can see how much front-loading was done in February through the March shipments when they are released.
While the domestic situation for Chinese smartphone brands improves, the current trade war with the US, despite recent smartphone exceptions, still requires that Chinese smartphone brands entering the US pay an import tariff of between 20% and 25%, which, unless absorbed by the brand, will make them less attractive against other non-Chinese brands.  The most common Chinese brands entering the US are:

• One Plus (pvt) – Offered through all three major US carriers, although estimates for US sales are between 5% and 10% of company totals.
• TCL (000100.CH) – Typically sold unlocked.  Estimates are for between 10% and 15% of total sales to the US.
• Motorola – Owned by China’s Lenovo (992.HK) and sold through all US carriers and retailers.  Roughly 20% to 30% of total sales (estimated) are in the US.
• ZTE (000063.CH) – While most consumers believe ZTE smartphones are banned in the US (They were in 2018, but they paid a $1.4b fine and the ban was lifted), pre-paid phones from Metro (TMUS) are made by ZTE, but the numbers are small.

While other Chinese smartphone brand phones are sold in the US, the numbers are small and most have no official presence in the US.  However, even though  the recent exemptions  from additional tariffs have given the Chines smartphone brands shown above a bit of breathing room, the administration has promised to ‘investigate’ the matter further, essentially threatening new phone tariffs.  Chinese brands already work for very tight margins, so should any new smartphone tariffs be levied on Chinese brands, they will likely have to pass most of the incremental cost on to consumers.
That said, they have one thing in their favor, Apple (AAPL) who has been able to lobby the President to postpone another massive Chinese tariff increase.  While Apple is still a competitor, it has considerable production in China, and therefore works toward the same goals as Chinese brands in this instance.  As Apple continues to shift iPhone production away from China that will dissipate, leaving Chinese brands to fend for themselves, an unenviable position at best, at least for the next 3.5 years.

Yesterday Samsung (005930.KS) announced that the new Galaxy S25 flagship line would be based on the new Qualcomm (QCOM) Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset, the first mobile device to use this processor.  This chipset competes directly with Mediatek’s (2454.TT) Dimensity 9400 chipset, which is already the basis for 3 smartphone models from Vivo (pvt) and 3 from Oppo (pvt) that were released in October of last year.  The characteristics of each of those chipsets are listed below, along with a number of benchmarks that compare performance and details on what those benchmarks capture.  However while there are benchmarks that score the AI related performance of smartphones, there does not seem to be a recognized benchmark that rates the performance of the chipsets themselves in terms of AI performance. 
We believe this is due to the integration of the AI into each phone’s hardware and software, which can influence AI performance, along with the fact that the Snapdragon 8 Elite is quite new.  Using just the AI benchmarks for the few models that are based on the Dimensity 9400 (average) and comparing that to the previous Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 chipset, it shows that the Dimensity has just under twice the AI performance of the older Snapdragon, so we have to assume that the 8 Elite Ai benchmark will at least match that once the Galaxy S25 line is benchmarked.  In the interim, the chipset comparisons are the only benchmarks to compare the performance of the processors.

Test Bench Criteria

• GeekBench 6 – Real-world tasks
  • Image Processing – Applying filters, resizing images, etc.
  • Machine Learning – Training & running ML models.
  • Augmented Reality – Processing & rendering AR.
• AnTuTu 10 – Combined Workloads
  • Image Processing – Rendering 3D scenes
  • Video Editing – Processing & encoding video files
  • Multitasking – Switching between apps & performing multiple tasks
• Wild Life Extreme (GPU)
  • Frame Rate – Higher frame rate implies smoother graphics
  • Graphics Quality – Details, texture, lighting, effects
• AI-Benchmark
  • Object Recognition – Object, facial and scene recognition
  • OCR – Character recognition
  • Effects – Deblur, Denoise, Bokeh

While the structure of these two chipsets are different, there performance on the test bench is very close, and that seems to indicate that Mediatek is getting close to closing the gap in terms of phone performance.  However, as AI functions are added to these devices, the need for larger die size, higher densities, and more memory affect the cost and yield as the NPU becomes a larger part of the chipset.  Ideally the NPU should have a dedicated core with an instruction set specifically designed for the NPU but the complexity of the design and production of such a chipset is not economically feasible yet.  For now chipset NPUs share the cores with device processes, but the current drive toward on-device Ai processing intensifies the impact on overall device performance.  This leads to eventual chipset designs with a dedicated NPU core or a hybrid approach with a dedicated NPU core and main core sharing the load.  With each of these improvements comes more manufacturing complexity and cost, but if AI is going to drive a mobile device replacement cycle, these improvements will have to continue with each chipset iteration.
Each of the chipsets below contained an NPU, and while NPU ‘size’ is a function of a number of factors, the NPU affects cost.  We expect it will continue to be an increasingly large component of the overall cost of subsequent chipsets, and, if the Samsung Galaxy line is any indication, smartphone brands have yet to try to recoup the incremental cost.  We expect that, at the smartphone level, consumers will assume that the added functionality that AI adds is already built into the cost of the device.  They have learned over the years that the incremental changes in each smartphone generation (50MP camera to a 100MP camera, or 6.7” display to a 6.8” display) do not seem to add to the device cost, so why should they think that AI is different, especially as AI looks to the user as software, not a visible physical change…  Another slice out of smartphone brand margins.

Samsung (005930.KS) announced its flagship smartphone line for 2025, the Galaxy S25 series today.  While the event detailed a number of hardware improvements, the real focus was on (not surprisingly) AI.  It seems that while Samsung continues to upgrade hardware to maintain a competitive stance against Chinese smartphone brands, we believe they understand that the incremental hardware improvements made each year are not enough to stimulate consumer to upgrade unless their phone begins to age out.  Foldables represent a new mobile category but due to their high price, volumes are relatively low, so it is essential that major brands maintain a flagship line to offset mid-range, lower margin lines.
There are times when hardware improvements can be a driver for consumers, as were OLED displays when they were new to the mobile world, and multiple cameras back a few years ago. But at this juncture, even OLED displays cannot be much larger and there is no new display technology on the near-term horizon that is appreciably different from what is available today.  Higher resolution cameras will always be possible as semiconductor technology improves, as will chipsets, CPUs, and GPUs, but other than foldables, mobile phone hardware will improve slowly and slowly does not excite consumers.
Smartphone software is in a similar position.  Smartphone applications have changed little over the past few years and do almost nothing to convince consumers to upgrade their mobile devices, but Ai for mobile devices is developing quickly and represents a platform where smartphone brands can compete and attract attention.  Ai does need processing power but Qualcomm (QCOM), Mediatek (2454.TT), Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG), and Samsung continue to adapt their chipsets to the needs of AI, and while in the true sense, AI is a hardware-based system, on a mobile device it appears to consumers as software and requires relatively little hardware or mechanical changes or design restrictions.  However AI represents change and change in the CE market is something every marketing department looks toward to sell more devices.
Samsung seems to understand the fact that there are two AI’s.  One, answers your questions and interacts directly with users, while the other works silently in the background.  But they also seem to understand that the two should be working together and if there was anything to be taken away from the Samsung S25 event, it was that Samsung is interested in merging those two AI processes.  This not only improves the user’s experience with the phone but lessens the need for breakthrough hardware or software application improvement to attract consumers.  By leveraging Ai to allow applications on the phone to work together, the applications seem to be improved, even if they are not, and the ability of the AI to control or direct applications without the user having to open an application for each task is an improvement worth buying a new phone for.
Samsung’s multi-modal Ai allows the user to speak to the Ai directly (voice or even audio) and gives the AI the ability to create ‘agents’ that perform tasks that the user would typically have to do by pausing what they are doing to open a separate application.  Here’s an example.  The user is listening to a conference call which happens to be in Korean.  The Ai translates the call in real time but also compiles a transcript of the call.  When the call is finished the user tells the AI to summarize the call and reviews the AI summary.  The user tells the AI to change the 3rd paragraph to be more concise and reviews the change.  The user then tells the Ai to write a cover letter describing the circumstances of the call and to send the cover letter and the transcript summary to those in the ‘Level 2 Client’ list. 
Rather than having to open a number of applications to complete each part of the full task, the user either read or listened to the AI during each step and opened no applications.  The AI interfaced with the necessary applications and completed each task.  The system also gives the option to allow the Ai to collect information from other applications and devices in the Samsung ecosystem that can help it build a detailed profile of the user in order to make better or more personalized suggestions.
This can only happen when the AI is integrated into applications and Samsung has the advantage of having a recognizable enough brand that users are willing to use Samsung applications on its phones, along with a variety of externally developed applications.  Samsung offers external developers a number of tools to give them access to Samsung’s One UI 7, the user interface that sits on top of Android and provides the hooks to the AI, but there is nothing better than having that interface and the applications themselves developed in-house.  Only Samsung, Apple, and Google have the ability to tie their hardware and AI to such large application bases, with both Apple and Samsung concentrating on processing AI on device whenever possible.
As noted Samsung said all the right things about its AI at the Galaxy S25 event but everyday use can be much different from well produced event videos.  The Galaxy S25 family is now on pre-order and will be available in stores on February 7, at which point we should be able to get a better idea as to whether the phones live up to their marketing pitch.  The good news is that if they do, there is no premium being charged for the AI capabilities as the phones are priced the same as last year’s models, a plus for consumers.  Below we show only the differences between the hardware in the Galaxy S25 and last year’s Galaxy S24.

⁎ The 4th main camera (ultrawide) in the S25 Ultra is 50 MP f/1.9 while the 4th mani camera in the S24 is 12MP f/2.2.  The other three cameras are the same.
​

​IDC is out with early predictions for the semiconductor market for 2025, expecting a 16% increase in value this year to $779.8b.  Inside of that number are expectations for 24% growth in the memory market, with DRAM expected to be up 30.2% to $118b, with HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) for AI the driver.  As a contrast, they predict that the smartphone market will grow only 3.3% this year, primarily in 2H as inventory levels are worked down, but the datacenter market will see 23.9% growth, with that jumping to 33.6% if you include the cloud and enterprise markets.
As we have noted previously, Samsung, the leader in the memory market, has been unable to capitalize on that leadership and has been losing ground to competitors, SK Hynix (000660.KS) and Micron (MU) in this very competitive market.  Samsung has had problems with heat and power consumption in its HBM3e 8 and 12-layer products that caused yield issues and qualification delays at Nvidia (NVDA), contributing to the recent weakness, and among the pressures that have lead to Samsung’s recent executive level parings.  The head of Samsung’s memory group made a public apology for the shortfall in 4Q’24, leading one to believe that even more intense pressure continues for Samsung to right the problems in the semiconductor division, and it seems they are taking additional steps toward other issues that might be contributing to the problems with the company’s semiconductor production.
Samsung has been developing a more advanced memory product (D1b) that is based on a 10nm node.  They have been producing D1b memory, which is used in its DDR5 memory products, on a 12nm node since late 2024, which itself was delayed by almost a year.  This node change has raised expectations  about the 10nm product, based on higher density and even higher speeds than the D1b 12nm product.  However it seems that as it continued the development of the 10nm product, Samsung has taken the very unusual step of changing the design of the D1b 12nm product, which has been in production for nearly a year, to improve yield.  This typically means that the production process is also changed, an expensive procedure, with equipment having been ordered in 4Q ’24 (unconfirmed) and production of the D1b memory with the new design scheduled for 2Q or 3Q this year.
This was not a light decision on Samsung’s part, likely based on the need to push ahead of SK Hynix and Micron, both of whom use D1b memory in their HBM product, while Samsung is still using D1a memory in its HBM.  If Samsung is able to meet it goal of producing the new design of D1b memory quickly, without yield issues, they will remain competitive until the D1b 10nm development is completed.  If they face problems with the new design and process, they could lose more ground to their competitors and the idea of a design change mid-stream will be viewed as a mistake.  It’s a big bet, but also indicates the urgency being placed on fixing Samsung’s memory issues and allowing them to capitalize on the strength of the memory business this year, an absolute necessity if they are to remain the leader in the memory space.

When foldables first appeared some in the smartphone world were concerned that foldables were making smartphones inconvenient for users because they were too bulky to comfortably fit in one’s pocket when folded.  Over time those concerns seem to have dissipated as 2024 progressed, it seems that substantial progress was being made on that front.  In the early part of last year foldables were running 15.3mm to 15.8mm when closed and 7.1mm to 7.5mm when open.  Just for reference 25.4mm = 1 inch, so 15.8mm = 0.62”.  Later in the year, it seems that foldable brands took that criticism to heart with the Samsung (005930.KS) Z Fold 6 only 12.1mm when closed and 5.6mm when open.  But the competition did not stop there, with the Huawei (pvt) Mate XT Ultimate coming in at 12.8mm when folded and only 4.8mm when open.  Not to be outdone, Samsung countered with the Z Fold 6 Special at 10.6mm when folded and 4.9mm when open, and we note that the iPhone 16, which is not a foldable, is 7.8mm thick, so the Z Fold 6 Special is only 2.8mm thicker than the iPhone 16 when it is folded.
One would think the concept of thinner foldables would have run its course when a folded phone has come so close to the thickness of a regular phone, but that is not the case.  Chinese brands Oppo (pvt) is said to be about to release (February) the Find N5[1] foldable which is shown to be only 4.0mm thick when open, even though it has a large 5,700mAh battery.  While we don’t have a thickness when closed for the Find N5 yet, given that other foldables are typically 0.8 to 0.9mm thicker closed than open, we can estimate that the Find N5 will be between 9.0mm and 9.3mm thick when closed, just a millimeter and a fraction thicker than an iPhone 16.  Oppo says they were limited in how thin they could make the Find N5 only by the thickness of the Type-C connector used to charge the phone.  Type-C connectors are typically less than 1mm thick but need additional vertical space to be reinforced into the frame of the phone, so unless someone is able to modify the connector, the competition for thinnest foldable might be coming to an end this year, perhaps followed by a focus on multiple fold devices, where only one segment would need a connector, leaving others to be even thinner, or maybe skip the connector altogether in favor of wireless charging, removing the last restriction to thinness.


[1] Will be available in the US as the OnePlus Open 2.

Smartphones are incredible feats of technology, squeezing innumerable parts into a rectangle typically under 20 in2 and ~ 1/3 of an inch thick.  Most smartphone owners rarely see what is on the inside of their phones, making purchase decisions (hopefully) on matching specifications to their use profile.  But inside those rectangles, packed in like sardines, are literally hundreds of ICs and other components, along with a battery, display, and assorted cameras. 
There are those that relish the thought of purchasing smartphones and then taking them apart, piece by piece, in order to quantify structure and cost.  Such a group is TechInsights, who are known for their detailed teardowns of various CE devices.  They have been kind enough to afford us a detailed look at one of their smartphone teardowns, which we summarize below.
The phone being disassembled here is the Sony (SNE) Xperia 1V, a device released in July of 2023.   Sony is not a major smartphone brand but is known for the high quality of their phones, so the example below should be a guide as to what to look for in a high-end smartphone.  We note that when the Xperia 1V was released, it sold for $1,399.  The phone weighs 188 grams, runs on Android, and has a 6.48” OLED display, along with four cameras, and runs on a Qualcomm (QCOM) Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 processor.
While the greatest share of the BOM is the broad category of integrated circuits (45.7%), the camera subsystem captures 23.7%, due to the fact that it covers 4 cameras and associated electronics, lenses, etc.  The display subsystem, which is a single 6.48” OLED display and a touchscreen, along with a polarizer and cover glass (total of 70 components), is next at 7.5%, followed by non-electronic parts (frame, etc.) at 7.2%.  More relevant to the investment community would be the breakdown of the total component types and the IC category on a branded basis.  As can be seen in the table below, the IC category carries the largest cost share by a large margin, putting significant weight on the brand share shown in the table that follows.  

With only three of the 11 months of Chinese mobile phone shipments in 2024 being above the monthly 5-year averages, one might think that the Chinese mobile phone market continued the long-term decline it has been in since 2017.  While 2024 Chinese mobile phone shipments will not wind up anywhere near the heady levels seen eight or ten years ago, we expect 2024 to be the second year of improvement after hitting a low in 2022 (see Figure 1).  Based on our expectation for mobile phone shipments in China for December, we estimate that 2024 will see shipments increase by 6.9% y/y.  This is a bit better than shipment growth in 2023, which was 6.5%, but comes after the extremely weak 2022, which saw y/y Chinese mobile phone shipments down 22.6% y/y.  

In isolation (see Figure 2), the last three years of Chinese mobile phone shipments present a picture of growth, however the shipment level for 2024, the better of the three years shown in Figure 2, are only slightly above the level of shipments in 2020 and are still below all other years, other than the previous two.  Given the strength of 4Q of 2023, much of the y/y growth in 2024 came in late 2Q and 3Q.  That said, while we would expect 2025 to again see some y/y growth in Chinese mobile phone shipments, we would expect overall y/y growth to be lower than in the two previous years as the comparisons become more difficult throughout the year.  However there are two factors that could influence shipments in 2025.
First, AI.  The Chinese market has had a number of AI enabled models available to consumers, with the Vivo (pvt) X100, released in November of 2023, the first we can find that had advanced generative AI features, and also the first to use the Mediatek (2454.TT) Dimensity 9300 Ai chipset.  By 3rd quarter of 2024 ~22% of all Chinese smartphone shipments were AI capable and Chinese brands held a roughly 92% share of the 28m Ai capable smartphones that were shipped in that quarter in China (Samsung (005930.KS)) had a 4% share along with ‘others’, also at 4%).  This data points to Chinese smartphone brands looking to use AI in 2025 as a way to push the upgrade cycle on the mainland, in what has been a relatively weak retail environment. 
While the success of this strategy is far from certain, Chinese consumer seem to be more enthusiastic about AI, we believe, in part, because China itself has been quite aggressive in AI development, and started from a point similar to others, rather than having to play catch-up.  While trade restrictions on semiconductor development could slow that growth a bit, we expect a continued push from Chinese smartphone brands to offer AI features as a selling point this year.
Second, the Chinese government has recently included smartphones in its ‘New for Old’ consumer subsidy program, which helped to spur sales for a number of CE products in 4Q ’24.  Details of the smartphone subsidies are not yet available, but other products covered under the program typically garner a subsidy between 10% and 20% of the retail price, which we believe is substantial enough to move the needle, at least at the onset.
With these two potential factors as influencers early in the year, and an early Chinese New Year (1/29), we expect 1Q ’25 could see continued y/y growth, but we expect that it will lessen as the year progresses, as comparisons get more difficult and the enthusiasm behind the subsidies wears thin.  All in we expect Chinese smartphone shipments to stay in the low 300-million-unit range for the year, with much of the y/y growth in the 1st half, and, barring any unforeseen trade issues, we see similar results for 2026 at this time. 
As Chinese smartphone brands have a small share of the US market, potentially onerous trade restrictions on Chinese phones would have little effect on US consumers, with Xiaomi (1810.HK) having the largest share, albeit a small one (~1.2%).  However the implications for non-Chinese brands, particularly US smartphone brands in China could face a bit of additional nationalistic pride from Chinese consumers, who tend to opt for Chinese brands during periods of trade tension with the US.  2025 presents a fair number of variables that can have an influence on the Chinese mobile phone market, but we believe the longer-term picture is one where it become similar to other more mature markets, finding a shipment level that remains fairly constant over the years.

With only three of the 11 months of Chinese mobile phone shipments in 2024 being above the monthly 5-year averages, one might think that the Chinese mobile phone market continued the long-term decline it has been in since 2017.  While 2024 Chinese mobile phone shipments will not wind up anywhere near the heady levels seen eight or ten years ago, we expect 2024 to be the second year of improvement after hitting a low in 2022 (see Figure 1).  Based on our expectation for mobile phone shipments in China for December, we estimate that 2024 will see shipments increase by 6.9% y/y.  This is a bit better than shipment growth in 2023, which was 6.5%, but comes after the extremely weak 2022, which saw y/y Chinese mobile phone shipments down 22.6% y/y.  

In isolation (see Figure 2), the last three years of Chinese mobile phone shipments present a picture of growth, however the shipment level for 2024, the better of the three years shown in Figure 2, are only slightly above the level of shipments in 2020 and are still below all other years, other than the previous two.  Given the strength of 4Q of 2023, much of the y/y growth in 2024 came in late 2Q and 3Q.  That said, while we would expect 2025 to again see some y/y growth in Chinese mobile phone shipments, we would expect overall y/y growth to be lower than in the two previous years as the comparisons become more difficult throughout the year.  However there are two factors that could influence shipments in 2025.
First, AI.  The Chinese market has had a number of AI enabled models available to consumers, with the Vivo (pvt) X100, released in November of 2023, the first we can find that had advanced generative AI features, and also the first to use the Mediatek (2454.TT) Dimensity 9300 Ai chipset.  By 3rd quarter of 2024 ~22% of all Chinese smartphone shipments were AI capable and Chinese brands held a roughly 92% share of the 28m Ai capable smartphones that were shipped in that quarter in China (Samsung (005930.KS)) had a 4% share along with ‘others’, also at 4%).  This data points to Chinese smartphone brands looking to use AI in 2025 as a way to push the upgrade cycle on the mainland, in what has been a relatively weak retail environment. 
While the success of this strategy is far from certain, Chinese consumer seem to be more enthusiastic about AI, we believe, in part, because China itself has been quite aggressive in AI development, and started from a point similar to others, rather than having to play catch-up.  While trade restrictions on semiconductor development could slow that growth a bit, we expect a continued push from Chinese smartphone brands to offer AI features as a selling point this year.
Second, the Chinese government has recently included smartphones in its ‘New for Old’ consumer subsidy program, which helped to spur sales for a number of CE products in 4Q ’24.  Details of the smartphone subsidies are not yet available, but other products covered under the program typically garner a subsidy between 10% and 20% of the retail price, which we believe is substantial enough to move the needle, at least at the onset.
With these two potential factors as influencers early in the year, and an early Chinese New Year (1/29), we expect 1Q ’25 could see continued y/y growth, but we expect that it will lessen as the year progresses, as comparisons get more difficult and the enthusiasm behind the subsidies wears thin.  All in we expect Chinese smartphone shipments to stay in the low 300-million-unit range for the year, with much of the y/y growth in the 1st half, and, barring any unforeseen trade issues, we see similar results for 2026 at this time. 
As Chinese smartphone brands have a small share of the US market, potentially onerous trade restrictions on Chinese phones would have little effect on US consumers, with Xiaomi (1810.HK) having the largest share, albeit a small one (~1.2%).  However the implications for non-Chinese brands, particularly US smartphone brands in China could face a bit of additional nationalistic pride from Chinese consumers, who tend to opt for Chinese brands during periods of trade tension with the US.  2025 presents a fair number of variables that can have an influence on the Chinese mobile phone market, but we believe the longer-term picture is one where it become similar to other more mature markets, finding a shipment level that remains fairly constant over the years.