“More Wall Street analysts are confident that TSMC will gain 100% of Apple’s chipset business in 2016,” Mihai Matei reports for G For Games. “Even more intriguing is that this exclusivity deal might spell trouble for Samsung on multiple fronts.”
“The A10 SoC will reportedly be manufactured using TSMC’s InFO technology that is not reliant on IC substrates. More and more chipset makers could adopt TSMC’s InFO packaging technology for future products, and this might lead to Samsung Electro-Mechanics (SEMCO) losing its IC substrate business,” Matei reports. “It could also force Samsung LSI to rely on TSMC for creating its own Exynos chipsets.”
Shuli Ren reports for Barron’s Asia, “[UBS] analyst Bonil Koo wrote: ‘We think the negative will come from the mobile application processors substrate business starting in H216. We believe TSMC could have close to a 100% market share in Apple’s new A processor (A10) foundry service in 2016 and use its Integrated Fan-Out (InFO) technology for packaging. With the InFO technology, we expect Apple would benefit from better performance with smaller form factors. If so, we think SEMCO would lose the IC substrates business for which it has been one of the suppliers, as InFO would not need IC substrates. We expect Fan-Out (FO) technology to be adopted over time by other application processors/system on chip (SoC) vendors, which could include Samsung LSI.'”
Shackled to Android, Samsung has no point of differentiation. Apple will continue to take unit and the rest of the profit share from Samsung in the market segment in which they compete, and the bottom feeders will continue to take unit share as well. Tizen was Samsung’s only real hope, but they couldn’t manage to pull off such a large undertaking or, really, much of anything beyond mass producing inferior iPhone knockoffs. The world now sees: iPhone is the dream. If they have to settle for an Android phone until they can achieve iPhone, they can get the same thing Samsung offers at much lower prices from myriad Chinese Android handset assemblers (who are also knocking off Apple iPhones’ trade dress left and right).
Sooner or later, even Samsung will figure out there’s no profit to be had in Android handsets.
If Apple were to give all of its A-series chip orders to TSMC, and if as the article says, Samsung loses its IC substrate business, then wouldn’t that mean TSMC would have significant leverage over future chip orders from Apple?
Wouldn’t it be far better to give the majority of orders to TSMC, and string Samsung along so that it stayed in the business, but made little money. That way you have two mfrs competing for Apple’s A-series chip business, neither able to profit too much, but neither going out of business.
I suspect that these stories are being deliberately spread and possibly exaggerated to weaken Samsung’s negotiation position, but to still keep them hopeful of making an attractive proposal to retain the Apple contract.
If Samsung can be coerced into making an unprofitable deal, that would obviously work well for Apple, but also for TSMC because Samsung would be further weakened.
Not who can make in the volume Apple needs though, and this is why the break with Samsung has taken so long. Say what you will about their methods of business, etc., but Samsung is unique in the world.
“If Apple were to give all of its A-series chip orders to TSMC, and if as the article says, Samsung loses its IC substrate business, then wouldn’t that mean TSMC would have significant leverage over future chip orders from Apple?”
TSMC is where it is today precisely because Samsung screwed Apple and Apple decided to build up an alternative supplier where no realistic alternative existed.
If TSMC tried to mess with Apple, they know exactly what will happen to them. On the other hand, if they prove to be trustworthy partner, then the rewards can be considerable.
What makes anyone think Samsung won’t pilfer TSMC’s manufacturing designs, copy them and use them against TSMC? This is precisely what Samsung does to try and stay competitive in business.
Yea, what he said!
I hope someone understands the jargon in this article!
Well, I understand the F.O. technology bit… I think Steve would have loved it!
If Apple were to give all of its A-series chip orders to TSMC, and if as the article says, Samsung loses its IC substrate business, then wouldn’t that mean TSMC would have significant leverage over future chip orders from Apple?
Wouldn’t it be far better to give the majority of orders to TSMC, and string Samsung along so that it stayed in the business, but made little money. That way you have two mfrs competing for Apple’s A-series chip business, neither able to profit too much, but neither going out of business.
I suspect that these stories are being deliberately spread and possibly exaggerated to weaken Samsung’s negotiation position, but to still keep them hopeful of making an attractive proposal to retain the Apple contract.
If Samsung can be coerced into making an unprofitable deal, that would obviously work well for Apple, but also for TSMC because Samsung would be further weakened.
There are plenty more fish in the sea- besides TSMC & SEMC.
Not who can make in the volume Apple needs though, and this is why the break with Samsung has taken so long. Say what you will about their methods of business, etc., but Samsung is unique in the world.
fool me twice shame on me….
“If Apple were to give all of its A-series chip orders to TSMC, and if as the article says, Samsung loses its IC substrate business, then wouldn’t that mean TSMC would have significant leverage over future chip orders from Apple?”
TSMC is where it is today precisely because Samsung screwed Apple and Apple decided to build up an alternative supplier where no realistic alternative existed.
If TSMC tried to mess with Apple, they know exactly what will happen to them. On the other hand, if they prove to be trustworthy partner, then the rewards can be considerable.
What makes anyone think Samsung won’t pilfer TSMC’s manufacturing designs, copy them and use them against TSMC? This is precisely what Samsung does to try and stay competitive in business.
Now that’s a stock to short. hehe
Need to have a AntiMatter BOMB posted soon! haha suck you Samstupid.
So many conspiracy theories… so little time.
This would have negligible impact on the Samsung semi-conductor business.
Also, why would Apple choose to cut the diversity in its supply chain. That is simply bad management.
RUMOR Rumor rumor *yawn*
But damaging Samsung is always a GOOD TIME!