or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung to invest $4 billion in Texas iPhone, iPad chip plant
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung to invest $4 billion in Texas iPhone, iPad chip plant

post #1 of 49
Thread Starter 
Samsung announced on Tuesday that it plans to spend about $4 billion to renovate its existing chip plant in Austin, Tex., where the company builds Apple's custom processors for the iPhone and iPad.

In addition to renovating the current facilities, the investment is intended to boost production of ARM-based chips used in smartphones and tablets, according to Reuters. Samsung is believed to be the sole supplier of Apple's custom processors found in the iPhone, iPad, iPod touch and Apple TV.

The South Korean electronics maker already announced in June that it plans to build a new logic chip plant in its home country to better serve customers like Apple. That project is projected to cost 2.25 trillion won, or $1.98 billion.

Samsung's U.S.-based ARM chip production was highlighted just last month within an AppleInsider-authored report -- Made in America: Apple's supply chain increasing US production -- that offered a closer look at how the iPhone maker's component suppliers have been increasing American production of electronic parts. IHS iSuppli estimates that Samsung Semiconductor's ARM processors account for 12.4 percent of the bill of materials for Apple's iPhone 4S.

Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook also highlighted Samsung's Austin plant at the D10 conference in May, when he was asked about the possibility of Apple building its products in America. The CEO said although many parts for Apple's products are built in the U.S., there is an "intense focus" on final assembly, and that he'd like for that assembly to take place in America if it were feasible.

A5 1


Though Apple relies heavily on Samsung for custom processors and other parts in its popular devices, there have been persistent rumors that the iPhone maker hopes to move away from its dependence on Samsung. In particular, last year Apple was said to have signed a foundry agreement with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company to produce ARM chips for devices like the iPhone and iPad.

While some reports suggested that TSMC could begin building custom ARM chips for Apple as soon as this year, so far there has been no indication that anyone other than Samsung has received orders for the A5 chip found in the iPhone 4S or the A5X processor that powers the new third-generation iPad.
post #2 of 49
I hope much of that will be sourced else where by Apple sooner than later. That or Sammy really changes its ways and becomes a friend of Apple's again.
Edited by digitalclips - 8/21/12 at 6:54am
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #3 of 49
While I am happy that this plant and production is based in the US, I would still rather that Apple use another company for this work. Perhaps Apple could help by prepaying for chips so that another US company could build another US plant to compete with/diversify from this one. Preferably a US based chip company such as an Intel or TI who does not compete with Apple in smartphones and tablets.
post #4 of 49

Hmm, $4billion? Perhaps not a wise investment beyond the short-term.

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #5 of 49

And there is the settlement for the Apple vs. Samsung case.

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #6 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

Hmm, $4billion? Perhaps not a wise investment beyond the short-term.

Doesn't apple account for ~8% of samsungs chips produced? While the largest- and a big number- it's by no means crippling.

Samsung willl be fine without Apple buying anything from them- And still extremely profitable. Notice I said without apple buying from them.... Not designing for them- they still need apple for that. :-)

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #7 of 49

This investment is not just for Apple, Texas has been really good with attracting new start ups and I think this investment by Samsung is to ensure that the production source is actually closer to where the demand lies. 

 

Many of these start up/big companies would require many chip runs until they get it right as well. So all and all it is good. 

post #8 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Doesn't apple account for ~8% of samsungs chips produced? While the largest- and a big number- it's by no means crippling.
Samsung willl be fine without Apple buying anything from them- And still extremely profitable. Notice I said without apple buying from them.... Not designing for them- they still need apple for that. :-)

Samsung had something like $10 B in profits last year. Apple buys something like $8 B from Samsung. If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits (and a much larger percentage of the profits for the divisions Apple is buying from).

Losing > 30% of your total profits and a larger percentage of profits of key divisions is not 'fine'.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #9 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Samsung had something like $10 B in profits last year. Apple buys something like $8 B from Samsung. If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits (and a much larger percentage of the profits for the divisions Apple is buying from).
Losing > 30% of your total profits and a larger percentage of profits of key divisions is not 'fine'.

 

I doubt Samsung makes 40% gross margin on Apple products... Apple has been known to 'squeeze' its suppliers.

post #10 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


Doesn't apple account for ~8% of samsungs chips produced? While the largest- and a big number- it's by no means crippling.
Samsung willl be fine without Apple buying anything from them- And still extremely profitable. Notice I said without apple buying from them.... Not designing for them- they still need apple for that. :-)

 



You're right, Samsung desperately needs Apple's chip design expertise, otherwise they never could have brought the Hummingbird to market, or their line of Exynos SOC's like the quad core one in the Galaxy S III, or their new ARM A15 cored Exynos 5 SOC or ..... er, er...

post #11 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

Hmm, $4billion? Perhaps not a wise investment beyond the short-term.

Okay genius-stein, shower us with your enlightened knowledge.
post #12 of 49

Samsung manages to come from No Where to 4th place in the Fab business as an IDM. And looking to displace UMC as the third. And Apple has been a large part of that.

 

I just wish Apple could team up with Global Foundry or TSMC. There is a recent talk that TSMC is considering making a delicated Fabs for specific customers with a large enough investment. Sounds like a perfect deal for Apple.

post #13 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Samsung had something like $10 B in profits last year. Apple buys something like $8 B from Samsung. If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits (and a much larger percentage of the profits for the divisions Apple is buying from).
Losing > 30% of your total profits and a larger percentage of profits of key divisions is not 'fine'.

Those numbers are such crap you literally pulled them out of your rear. Apple's contract to Samsung is worth around 6% -8% of total Samsung revenue. So no, it would be much less than 30% of profits. Why do people seem to have this distortion Apple is propping up Samsung financially?

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #14 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Samsung manages to come from No Where to 4th place in the Fab business as an IDM. And looking to displace UMC as the third. And Apple has been a large part of that.

 

I just wish Apple could team up with Global Foundry or TSMC. There is a recent talk that TSMC is considering making a delicated Fabs for specific customers with a large enough investment. Sounds like a perfect deal for Apple.

There are serious rumors that Apple wants to give the A chip business to TSMC, but that won't be able to happen until 2014+.

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #15 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

There are serious rumors that Apple wants to give the A chip business to TSMC, but that won't be able to happen until 2014+.

 

All stories which make the headlines about TSMC are always associated with delays (NVidia has had a lot of trouble because of TSMC). I highly doubt it they will have their production fixed in 2014+ as these delays have been haunting them for years. It would not be wise for Apple to move to any other supplier. Only Samsung can deliver the quality and numbers to them right now. For SoC's as well as memory and for that matter iPad Retina screens. Apple could simply not have had the business its having now without Samsung. There is not other supplier able to take their place, not previously and not in the near future.

post #16 of 49

The will surely be SVP's at Samesung who are looking very darkly upon certain other SVP's (or what ever they are called).

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #17 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Samsung had something like $10 B in profits last year. Apple buys something like $8 B from Samsung. If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits (and a much larger percentage of the profits for the divisions Apple is buying from).
Losing > 30% of your total profits and a larger percentage of profits of key divisions is not 'fine'.

 

Talk about making up numbers.

 

That is COMPLETELY FALSE.

 

 

 

In other news, this Austin plant produces more than just logic chips and logic chips for Apple.

 

It also produces NAND flash memory and DRAM chips.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #18 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

I think this investment by Samsung is to ensure that the production source is actually closer to where the demand lies. 

 

 

 

Problem with that theory is that most of the products into which Samsung chips are inserted are assembled in China or elsewhere in Asia. So putting a fab in TX means shipping the chips to China, putting them in a product, and then shipping the product back to the US. It would be likely easier to just build the chips in Korea. 

 

It seems to me that the main advantage of being in Austin is that's where Apple's CPU people are. I guess a secondary advantage might be the Austin labor market. But I bet that Samsung made these plans to build in Austin because of Apple, before relations got so frosty. I bet if they had it to do over again, they would have made this investment in Korea. 

post #19 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


 If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits ...

 

 

was this average of "40% gross margin" ever published and verified someplace?

 

incidentally: in 2011, Samsung Electronics (not Samsung Group) revenue was 165 trillion KWR (or $143.7 billion Canadian in revenue and $14.2 billion in operating profit).

 

http://www.samsung.com/us/aboutsamsung/ir/financialinformation/annualreport/downloads/2011/SECAR2011_Eng_Final.pdf

 

as such, the Apple deal accounts for about six (6) percent of Samsung Electronics revenue or less than four (4) percent revenue for Samsung Group.

post #20 of 49

Perhaps Samsung knows Apple WILL cut a deal and settle eventually, and this new factory will become the peace offering.

 

Cook is not Jobs, Samsung believe that. My opinion that is.

post #21 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Samsung had something like $10 B in profits last year. Apple buys something like $8 B from Samsung. If Samsung averages 40% gross margin on Apple products, that means that Apple accounts for 30% of the company's profits (and a much larger percentage of the profits for the divisions Apple is buying from).
Losing > 30% of your total profits and a larger percentage of profits of key divisions is not 'fine'.

And Galaxy phone/tablet line is there to make sure Samsung Mobile and Semiconductor will not die should it loses Apple. Hurt, yes, but alive.

post #22 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Problem with that theory is that most of the products into which Samsung chips are inserted are assembled in China or elsewhere in Asia. So putting a fab in TX means shipping the chips to China, putting them in a product, and then shipping the product back to the US. It would be likely easier to just build the chips in Korea. 

It seems to me that the main advantage of being in Austin is that's where Apple's CPU people are. I guess a secondary advantage might be the Austin labor market. But I bet that Samsung made these plans to build in Austin because of Apple, before relations got so frosty. I bet if they had it to do over again, they would have made this investment in Korea. 

Not quite. Shipping is still shipping. If you notice, South Korea is isolated from the mainland, just like Japan and Taiwan are. So anything produced or assembled in Japan, Taiwan or South Korea has to be shipped by sea. In the Asia area, this is something of a 8hour to 3 day type of trip. But To ship from Asia to the US and back to Asia, is a 16 week round trip. That is if they're shipped by sea.

Now if they're shipped by air, then all bets are off. I'm sure one plane load of chips every week is more cost effective than waiting 8 weeks for them to arrive with the possibility of the ship losing the freight due to weather. But when you start shipping things, this is where your part leaks come from, as they're examined by customs/shipping people. So if you want to retain a highly secret production process, you have to make absolutely everything in the same building. That doesn't really work with complex devices, even automobiles are not all assembled in the same building.

Apple has enough money that they could produce everything in the US if they wanted to, but they'd have to do it with robots, not people.
post #23 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I hope much of that will be sourced else where by Apple sooner than later. That or Sammy really changes its ways and becomes a friend of Apple's again.

Personally, I think it is Samsung's mobile division that's the problem.  But if the component division gives their Mobile division info about an upcoming iPhone model, that's not good business practices.  The other problem is Samsung NEEDS to retain as much business as they can with Apple, and until Apple can divert component sourcing elsewhere, they rely on Samsung just as much.  The potential problems is can or will Samsung keep up with Apple's demand and there is a risk associated with relying on Samsung to deliver quality components in a timely manner if the company can't be trusted.

 

If Apple were to own and operate their own foundry to produce certain components, then they would probably cut costs and rely on themselves for delivery.  It's a tough situation for most computer mfg.  IBM, for instance, has their own chip mfg plants for much of their own costly chips.    A long time ago IBM made most of their own chips that ended up in their mainframes, they were actually the largest chip maker for a while, but nowadays, they only make certain chips, like processors and other chips designs, but still has to rely on outside vendors.

 

Apple may need to change from outsourcing to doing it themselves, but since the mfg constantly changes it is difficult to always have the latest and greatest plants to keep up.  Which is a large reason why the smaller chip designers have to use the outsourcing model.  It isn't so much the labor costs as it is the equipment costs and constantly upgrading plants to the latest mfg equipment. Most chip mfg plants are automated to the point where there are only a small number of people operating the equipment.

post #24 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

All stories which make the headlines about TSMC are always associated with delays...
Perhaps one reason is because on time deliveries are not headline material - in many cases in the news, usually the events that are reported are only when things go bad.

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply

We've always been at war with Eastasia...

Reply
post #25 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I hope much of that will be sourced else where by Apple sooner than later. That or Sammy really changes its ways and becomes a friend of Apple's again.

 

It should go to GlobalFoundries Malta plant which is fully certified for ARM chips and they are jointly working with TSMC to get down to 20nm chipsizes with FinFET that scales down to 10nm in present implementation.

 

http://hexus.net/tech/items/cpu/43661-arm-globalfoundries-collaborate-enable-next-generation-devices-20nm-finfet-process-technologies/

 

Lots of solid info on how the ARM spacing manufacturing is moving forward:

 

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=476&mn=244814&pt=msg&mid=12025351

post #26 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post


was this average of "40% gross margin" ever published and verified someplace?

I'm being conservative. Intel's gross margin is over 60%. AMD has typically averaged 40-50%. Others in the semiconductor industry are over 90%.
http://www.fnno.com/story/331-ceva-has-highest-gross-margin-semiconductors-industry-ceva-rmbs-ezch-auto-generated

The average gross margin for the industry is over 60%:
http://beta.fool.com/saintgermain/2012/08/20/semiconductor-industry-cycle-about-turn/10109/

Gross margin in semiconductor products is quite high - so my 40% estimate is almost certainly too low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post

incidentally: in 2011, Samsung Electronics (not Samsung Group) revenue was 165 trillion KWR (or $143.7 billion Canadian in revenue and $14.2 billion in operating profit).

http://www.samsung.com/us/aboutsamsung/ir/financialinformation/annualreport/downloads/2011/SECAR2011_Eng_Final.pdf

as such, the Apple deal accounts for about six (6) percent of Samsung Electronics revenue or less than four (4) percent revenue for Samsung Group.

Apple is projected to buy $11 B in components from Samsung this year:
http://www.mobot.net/apple-buy-11bn-worth-components-sworn-enemy-samsung-2012-39197

I don't have Samsung's sales projections for 2012, but since they weren't growing all that fast, Apple's $11 B is still a big percentage. And if you use the industry average of 65% gross margins, losing Apple would cost them $7 B in profits.

NO ONE walks away from $7 B in profits lightly. Considering it to be insignificant is just plain foolish.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #27 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by diplication View Post


Perhaps one reason is because on time deliveries are not headline material - in many cases in the news, usually the events that are reported are only when things go bad.

 

Quite right, but I have not heard of any apple products being delayed because of manufacturing problems with Samsung, the A4/A5/A5X are all deliverd in great numbers and meeting the quality demands Apple has. The new old ipad 2 is also getting the smaller lithography A5 SoC produced by Samsung without big problems. I have heard of numerous NVidia cards which were delayed because of TSMC problems. Also have heard of quality issues with LG/Sharp regarding iPad retina displays etc.

post #28 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

 

All stories which make the headlines about TSMC are always associated with delays (NVidia has had a lot of trouble because of TSMC). I highly doubt it they will have their production fixed in 2014+ as these delays have been haunting them for years. It would not be wise for Apple to move to any other supplier. Only Samsung can deliver the quality and numbers to them right now. For SoC's as well as memory and for that matter iPad Retina screens. Apple could simply not have had the business its having now without Samsung. There is not other supplier able to take their place, not previously and not in the near future.

 

TSMC actually have great Tech, the problem is they are always being too STUPIDLY conservative. They fired half of their work force during Lehman Brothers crisis and only to rehire them back after two months or so. They are slow to upgrade and built new Fabs, and happen to mispredict demand by HUGE margin. 28nm for example, even those who read the tech news would have some idea how hot these things will be. And yet TSMC are so unprepared and slow to react. 

 

However when serious shxt happens, like Qualcomm decide to sign a deal with GF and Samsung, Nvidia threatens to move to GF etc, they reacted and prove they are more then capable in moving quickly, the latest news is their 28nm are up to 80% yield rate. That is a huge achievement in such a short time.

 

So basically TSMC got great potential however their management lack visions. 

 

And Oh, may be someday Intel will finally decide to Fab Apple's SoC...

post #29 of 49

Samsung and Apple both have strong interests in continued collaboration on chips and to the success of Apple products. Samsung is the only firm capable of meeting Apple's increasing chip needs, and it makes a profit on every device Apple sells. But within Samsung's conglomerate style organization, the handset division is too powerful, and contributes too much to the bottom line, to be reigned in. It needs to make $, and the only way to do that right now is to follow Apple's design lead.

 

Accordingly, Samsung has told Apple that if Apple head-smacks the handset division in court, that's fine (some Samsung "told you so's" might actually be pleased), but whatever happens in consumer products litigation, its not going to effect their lasting collaboration in chips.   

post #30 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


I don't have Samsung's sales projections for 2012, but since they weren't growing all that fast, Apple's $11 B is still a big percentage. And if you use the industry average of 65% gross margins, losing Apple would cost them $7 B in profits.  NO ONE walks away from $7 B in profits lightly. Considering it to be insignificant is just plain foolish.

 

Samsung Electronics' gross margins are less than 35% according to http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/Tearsheets/Financials?s=A005930:KSC

post #31 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

 

TSMC actually have great Tech, the problem is they are always being too STUPIDLY conservative. They fired half of their work force during Lehman Brothers crisis and only to rehire them back after two months or so. They are slow to upgrade and built new Fabs, and happen to mispredict demand by HUGE margin. 28nm for example, even those who read the tech news would have some idea how hot these things will be. And yet TSMC are so unprepared and slow to react. 

 

However when serious shxt happens, like Qualcomm decide to sign a deal with GF and Samsung, Nvidia threatens to move to GF etc, they reacted and prove they are more then capable in moving quickly, the latest news is their 28nm are up to 80% yield rate. That is a huge achievement in such a short time.

 

So basically TSMC got great potential however their management lack visions. 

 

And Oh, may be someday Intel will finally decide to Fab Apple's SoC...

GF has had its own issues with AMD. forgot the technical details but apparently there are several different ways to make CPU's as to the order in which you burn the transistors onto the die. what's interesting is that you have to design the CPU according to the method you're going to use to manufacture it. AMD and GF were using incompatible methods and it caused problems and delays.

 

other than the fact that Apple doesn't have their own CPU. they take Samsung's design and modify it. they can't just send their tapes to TSMC and order 100 million CPU's. there are lots of technical challenges to get around first

post #32 of 49

Once Apple's bitch, always Apple's bitch - as long as Apple deems it convenient. Samsung needs to make money from orders. 

 

Samsung's component division is doing their job. 

post #33 of 49

What is all this talk of this CPU and THAT CPU?

 

ALLLLLLL ARM chip makers license their design from ARM. Well, then again there is intel but whatever. A5, exynos, tegra3.....its all ARM Cortex A9. The only diff are in slight energy saving mods and of course the GPU. Samsung uses a stock ARM GPU in the exynos, so there was def no copying there. 

 

As long as all CPU's are ARM designs, A9, A15, A7 whatever, there will always be hardly ANY diff between them once its the same generation. 

 

OT, lets not forget that Samsung currently does not sell its exynos chips to customers other than a small chinese firm that sells about 5 phones a year. they have already said they plan to start selling it to other manufacturers in the future and with ARM chips showing up everywhere from phones to cameras, to media players, to tablets, to toasters, there can be a LOT of demand for chips and with your own foundry you have a huge advantage. 

 

Nvidia, Qualcomm...they have to design their SoC THEN pay someone to make it. Samsung does it all in house and therefore can charge customers much less than the others. This seems more of a move to eventually squeeze out other companies from the SoC business. 

 

Add to that Samsung is top memory manufacturer IN THE WORLD, and you have a pretty formidable business. How much longer before almost every chip on the market, be it a tegra, a snapdragon, an exynos, an a5x....has a "Made by Samsung" stamp on it?

 

Sure Apple sells a lot of phones. But even IF they drop Samsung, Samsung would be a position where they would be fabbing chips for other phones anyway. Apple has what? 20% of the global market? And again, we are just talking phones. With Android in everything from TV's to cameras to picture frames (the instacube looks cool as hell) to anything under the sun, there are a LOT of chips to sell. Good going Samsung to see that opportunity. 

 

And that's just android. We didn't even mention windows RT. 


Edited by sleepy3 - 8/21/12 at 10:56am
post #34 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

Hmm, $4billion? Perhaps not a wise investment beyond the short-term.

 

The chip fab division has gotta keep the green (or what ever color their money is) rolling in.  If you don't have a plant, you can't build the chip.   Apple is the big player, and wants capacity.   You don't say no to your best customer, even if the other part of your company is doing everything they can to beat Apple in the mobile game.

 

I've said it in the past.   The Samsung SVP of chip production probably is stabbing his thigh in  strategy meetings when the CEO and the VP of mobile present the logical argument:   'Do we build 10M phones and make $200 a device, and risk Apple's wrath, or make  50M chips for Apple and make $5 per chip?  Logically if we can make them for $2 less, we can undercut all other Fabs,and Apple will still have to do business with us, even if we go to war on the phone/pad side.... Can you cut your profits by 40% to keep Apple happy?"

post #35 of 49

I hope Apple will reduce her dependence on Samsung after all that has happened.

Samsung is not a grateful partner. It's Sad.

post #36 of 49
More chip plants being built helps apple in the long run. The point of the lawsuit is to get Samsung to think twice (at least once more) when copying designs. Apple can't stop them from making smartphones and probably doesn't want to. I think and hope Apple is still running on a change the world attitude. They don't need to destroy the competition, just the copy. Being better than the competition is the key and in the past Apple always felt they could be better. It was/is kinda the point. they didn't destroy Microsoft, but they have bested them in the long run. Any company can try to copy them not just Samsung. Not to say that there isn't some lost trust there I'm sure and that could mean some loss of business.
post #37 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post

Samsung Electronics' gross margins are less than 35% according to http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/Tearsheets/Financials?s=A005930:KSC

Well, yes. If you include refrigerators, washers, driers, and other home appliances, their margins are low. But Apple isn't buying those products. Apple is buying semiconductor products from Samsung. Look at the middle of the page for information on gross margins on the type of products Samsung sells to Apple (Samsung is even mentioned by name).

http://beta.fool.com/saintgermain/2012/08/20/semiconductor-industry-cycle-about-turn/10109/

Of course, even if you were correct and the gross margin were only 35%, Apple would STILL contribute $4 B in margin this year - which is far too much for anyone to simply throw away without good reason. Samsung is not going to walk away from Apple's business and if Apple pulls the business away, it WILL hurt. (not that I expect either of those things to happen).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #38 of 49
Apple was Samsung's second-largest customer in 2010 with close to $5.7 billion in orders. 
 
Apple in 2011 was Samsung’s largest customer, and spent over $7.8 Billion on parts.
 
Today, Apple is Samsung's biggest customer, according to Bloomberg, accounting for 8.8% of Samsung’s revenue.
 
Samsung needs to lose Apple like they need another hole in the head. 
 
Samsung is a proven supplier. FOR NOW. 
 
They have competition, because others want a piece of that sweet Apple pie:
 
 
 

Edited by Quadra 610 - 8/21/12 at 12:55pm
post #39 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post




You're right, Samsung desperately needs Apple's chip design expertise, otherwise they never could have brought the Hummingbird to market, or their line of Exynos SOC's like the quad core one in the Galaxy S III, or their new ARM A15 cored Exynos 5 SOC or ..... er, er...

Actually Samsung success with those processors is directly related to technology Apple owns through the purchase of Intrinsity a couple of years ago. Apple and Samsung worked hand in hand to develop those technologies into the ARM processors Samsung now manufacturs.

As to the Samsung plant in Texas it is rumored that the plant was partially funded by a partnership and that it is possible that Apple was the partner or one of them. This is more rumor compare to the fact that Samsung used Intrinsity developed tech in their ARM processors.
post #40 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

Quite right, but I have not heard of any apple products being delayed because of manufacturing problems with Samsung, the A4/A5/A5X are all deliverd in great numbers and meeting the quality demands Apple has. The new old ipad 2 is also getting the smaller lithography A5 SoC produced by Samsung without big problems. I have heard of numerous NVidia cards which were delayed because of TSMC problems. Also have heard of quality issues with LG/Sharp regarding iPad retina displays etc.

This really isn't true, every manufacture except for Intel has had problems reaching the sub 32 nm nodes. This is why we still have the high power demand SoC in Apples products. It should be telling that the new iPad2, a limited production machine compared to iPhone and the new iPad, is the only products getting process shrunk A5's.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung to invest $4 billion in Texas iPhone, iPad chip plant