Can someone share what's the potential ramification of this?

Do you need displays in your life? If so, how do you feel about the prospect of not being able to purchase them in case of prolonged conflict over IC factories in Taiwan?

▲

alephnerd 2 days ago | parent [-]

A Taiwan conflict wouldn't have an impact on the Display fab industry.

Display Fabs have primarily been located in Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore for decades.

The economics of display fabs are even worse than those of IC Fabs, because of how displays have been viewed as commodified for decades, and because they are not viewed as a "critical" or "dual use" technology, so the same level of industrial policy for this never existed.

Both India and Vietnam recently tried to subsidize Display Fab investments, but the PLI never got significant takers because aside from OLED, the rest of the display fab market is heavily commodified, and Samsung+LG largely finished capacity investments 2-5 years ago, and commodified vendors like Sharp can't justify the capex given that Displays are not treated as a critical technology.

▲

ikawe 2 days ago | parent [-]

This article is entirely about where displays are produced, so no need for “from the gut” stats.

According to TFA, about 95% are made in China and Taiwan.

	▲	alephnerd 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		The majority of non-Chinese fabricated displays are fabricated by basically 3 companies: 1. Samsung Displays - which primarily invests in SK and ASEAN 2. LG Displays - which primarily invests in SK and ASEAN 3. Japan Displays Inc - they are JV of Sony/Hitachi/Toshiba, and primarily Japan and ASEAN The China related data does make sense given BOE and HKC's execution, but the Taiwanese data feels like an extrapolation of AUO and Innolux's market share. If they are including Innolux's production (which includes Pioneer in Japan), then it might be overindexing Taiwanese production.

▲

dr-detroit 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]