One reviewer of Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1 griped that Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (Korea: SEC) has too many Galaxy products, all of which will likely be affected by last week's US court ruling that Samsung infringed on Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL)'s patents.
So far, the ruling has not included an injunction preventing Samsung from selling its products in the United States. If that should come to pass, Samsung will either have to call a temporary halt to sales (unlikely) or quickly redesign its products (more likely). The impact on Samsung's suppliers would be negligible unless suppliers are designed out of the newer products.
An IHS teardown of the Galaxy Note 10.1 lists the suppliers to the device and notes that these same suppliers and products show up in other Samsung devices.
Samsung has been able to save costs by leveraging its relationships with suppliers as well as utilizing vertical integration, the researcher says. Starting with the priciest components in the Note, leading suppliers are:
Samsung Mobile Display
If Samsung can maintain its price point on the Note, it will command a higher profit margin that Apple's iPad. Andrew Rassweiler, senior director of teardown services for IHS, said:
Samsung is a behemoth in the electronic industry and its competitive strength lies in its control, via internal sourcing, of a large percentage of the components that go into its final products. This allows Samsung to keep costs down, while delivering competitive differentiation. The company's internal sourcing strategy is certainly in evidence in the Galaxy Note 10.1, where Samsung supplies the memory -- both flash and DRAM -- as well as the core processor, battery and many other components.
I think that it will be better for Samsung to close this chapter as soon as possible because the jury has favored Apple. If i think as a customer then buying an Apple product will give me more satisfaction due to its seemigly original tag. Consumer psychology can hurt Samsung more than just 1B+ loss.
Apple has indeed asked for the injunction as expected. It is in Samsung's best interest that the appeals processes stretches out as long as possible to give Samsung (and others) time to develop new products, as you point out. The other businesses affected, I think, would be the carriers. Go to any Verizon or T-Mobile store and you'll see a lot more Samsung models than Apple models. Anyone know exactly how the carrier-hardware relationship works?
Samsung is likely to ask for expedited hearing of its appeal. Even then, it may take a minimum of six months for the case to finally make its way to the Appeal Court and then several more months before a ruling is issued. Of course, that won't be the end. Whichever party wins would most likely find itself back in court because the losing party would appeal the verdict to the U.S. Supreme Court. It ends there.
By that time, the market would have long moved on. The issues would be blurred and consumers won't be impacted the way people think they might be because the two companies and rivals are taking steps to modify their products already.
Apple has been adamant about protecting its intellectual property and others are adopting its hardnosed strategy. This is only one of many battles ahead.
Patent infringement case was a very interesting one. Especially the argument given by both the parties. Was not surprised that Apple won. I think they had the facts right and their case was stong. I feel good for Apple.
Even if Samsung is barred from selling its products ( related to patent infringement) in US, It has a strong hold over the fast growing asian markets ,the market size of which is in my opinion far bigger than the US market.
Coupled iwth that is the Samsung's ability to redesign products to avoid further patent infringment, will keep the Samsung brand as strong as it is today
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.