Domestic TV manufacturers are fighting among themselves one after another. Be careful not to become victims of the competition among giants.

Looking at the development of China's television terminal industry, there has never been a lack of technological battles, including the battle between LCD TVs and plasma TVs, the battle between ultra-thin and non-ultra-thin LCD TV technology, the battle between ultra-thin TVs and curved TVs, and the battle between OLED and ULED display technology that is currently forming a confrontation.

After PCs, mobile phones, tablets and other electronic products have completed a round of revolution, the development of the TV industry is obviously much slower. In this situation, both the whole machine manufacturers and upstream hardware manufacturers are eager to seek revolutionary and cross-generational technologies, and hope that their products can become the leaders of new technologies.

The discussion and competition among different technical schools are supposed to be the driving force for the development of the industry, but companies' complaints about competitors and exposure of technical shortcomings have not only hindered technological innovation, but also pushed the Chinese television industry astray.

Climax of intramural fighting

In today's TV industry, it is not only Internet manufacturers such as Xiaomi and LeTV that are keen on dragging friendly competitors into "fighting". The relationships between traditional manufacturers are also often undercurrents. It is not uncommon for TV manufacturer representatives to slam the table and curse at each other at major conferences. "Teasing friendly competitors" is also a must-have program at each company's new product launches.

In the TV technology schools that traditional manufacturers are keen to discuss, the most intense battle is the confrontation between the OLED camp represented by Skyworth and the ULED camp represented by Hisense over TV display technology.

In the past month, Skyworth and Hisense have spoken out to defend the reputation of OLED and ULED. On August 24, Hisense first stated that "OLED TVs still have technical defects and are not suitable for promotion." The next day, Liu Tang, president of Skyworth Group's color TV division, responded at the press conference, "This year and next year will be the first year for the release and promotion of OLED," and pointed out that ULED, QLED, GLED and other technologies are essentially LCD technologies and cannot be compared with "OLED, which truly represents advanced display technology."

To this day, the war of words continues...

The main doubts about the promotion of OLED are whether it can improve the yield rate and achieve large-scale mass production. Cao Jianwei, head of Hisense TV technology research and development, once told the media, "OLED has certain advantages in plasticity and dark field display, but the biggest problem is yield rate and reliability, especially for large-size panel applications. In addition, afterimage, short lifespan, and image sintering are also technical problems at this stage."

We interviewed a well-known industry expert, who believed that OLED is already recognized as the next generation mainstream display technology in the industry and is now in the stage of mass production. However, some companies may not have enough reserves in this regard and may release some negative information.

This has led to domestic TV manufacturers falling into a state of "making trouble without reason" - "just say what you have at home." So later we also saw that before the dispute between OLED and ULED came to a conclusion, TCL also intervened and said that its independently developed QLED was better than OLED, and so on.

When the war of words has reached a fever pitch, some people can't help but question, "Who will benefit in the end from the internal strife in the Chinese TV industry? Do manufacturers really hope to beat the other side to death in the war of words? Will we be laughed at by Japanese and Korean companies that control core technologies?"

The cunning fisherman

"It's really funny that domestic TV manufacturers can't even produce screens. They all buy Korean products, but some buy Samsung and some buy LG. Or to be precise, they basically buy from both. Who are they standing up for in these debates?" After looking through some netizens' comments on this matter, one "childish and innocent" netizen exposed the "Emperor's New Clothes."

The current global TV panel market has always been in an oligopoly situation. The pattern of the competition between Korean and Taiwanese companies has never been broken in the past decade. A CEO of a TV manufacturer made such an account, "A 55-inch TV with a cost of 4,000 yuan, after deducting taxes, the cost of the panel is about 270 US dollars." Under the monopoly, domestic TV manufacturers as a whole lack bargaining power and can only pass on the cost to consumers.

Due to their control over panel technology, Samsung, LG, AUO and other companies have been punished for antitrust violations in the United States, Europe, the United States, South Korea and other markets. In 2008, LG, Sharp and Taiwan Chunghwa Picture Tubes violated antitrust laws in the United States and paid a total of US$585 million in fines, becoming the third largest monopoly fine in the history of the United States. At the end of 2010, the European Union sentenced the "panel price manipulation case", and LG, Chi Mei and AUO were all fined huge amounts. In October 2011, the Korean Fair Trade Commission announced a fine of 194 billion won on Samsung, LG and other Asian LCD panel manufacturers, setting a record high in Korean history. In 2013, my country also imposed monopoly sanctions on six panel manufacturers including Samsung, LG, Chi Mei and AUO, issuing RMB 353 million, becoming my country's first ticket for price monopoly against overseas companies, and also the highest price violation ticket issued at the time.

Observing these panel antitrust cases, we can find that in addition to the high fines, the targets of the fines are basically Samsung, LG and some Taiwanese manufacturers. And between these "brothers in distress" panel giants, "Infernal Affairs" is often played out.

At the end of 2010, the European Union sentenced the "panel price manipulation case". Among the world's four largest panel companies, LG, Chi Mei (under Guo Taiming's name), and AUO were all fined huge amounts, with Chi Mei being fined 300 million euros, the largest amount. Samsung, which had the largest shipments, was exempted from punishment because it "told" the EU. At the time, Guo Taiming angrily accused Samsung of "always stabbing its competitors in the back" and said, "If the two LCD manufacturers ranked first and second in the world did not lead the price manipulation at the time, would the two Taiwanese LCD manufacturers ranked third and fourth in the world have the ability to manipulate it?"

In response, Terry Gou also exposed Samsung's other "despicable tactics", saying that Samsung and LG had teamed up to suppress Taiwan's panel companies in 2008. At that time, Samsung had been continuously purchasing panel products from Taiwan's companies. After the financial crisis, it immediately withdrew its orders in large numbers, causing heavy losses to the Taiwan panel industry. However, Samsung took advantage of the situation to seize the market share that Taiwan's panel companies had reluctantly given up.

In light of various previous lessons, domestic TV manufacturers who "fight against each other" without the ability to produce panels are very likely to be used as thugs by the "cunning" giants.

Is there really no possibility of self-help?

There is a common perception among domestic consumers that "buying a TV is buying a screen." This is enough to show the importance of display technology and panels to a TV. Even at a time when smart TVs are everywhere, consumers still pay more attention to screens than software content.

Since panel technology is so important to the TV manufacturing industry, why can't it be "made in China"?

At present, in terms of panel technology strength, Korean, Japanese, Taiwanese and mainland companies are in the lead, Taiwanese companies are 2-3 years behind, and mainland companies are 3-5 years behind. Currently, Korean LCD panel market share is about 35%-36%, and Taiwan is about 20%-30%. In the past, domestic TV companies overemphasized the control of downstream channels and brands, thus ignoring the control of the entire industry chain, and eventually the upstream LCD panel production was controlled by others.

Domestic manufacturers and administrative agencies have not failed to notice this problem. Public data shows that this year alone, my country has put into operation a number of high-generation LCD panel production lines, including the 8.5-generation line of China Electronics Panda Nanjing, the 8.5-generation line of BOE Chongqing, and the first 55-inch panel of the second 8.5-generation line of Huaxing Optoelectronics Shenzhen. However, due to the limitation of the new production lines to 8.5-generation lines and the single nature of the production lines, domestic panel development is restricted.

It is worth noting that the production of LCD panels has extremely high requirements for electricity, ground conditions, air, and water sources, and the preparation funds are often tens of billions. If you want to develop this industry, it is basically impossible without government support. The development of the panel industry in South Korea and Taiwan is also the same. For example, the high-generation projects such as BOE Hefei 8.5-generation line, BOE Beijing 8.5-generation line, and BOE Chongqing 8.5-generation line have a total scale of up to 100 billion yuan.

Sharp's 10th generation line factory under construction in Osaka in 2008 (Picture from Zhihu)

Among them, 90% of the investment amount is used to purchase equipment, and most of these equipment are from Japan and South Korea. The amount of funds used for other production elements such as labor and management is not large. For example, the price of a single core equipment exposure machine is more than 100 million yuan. If you want to do the whole industry chain, the production expenses of backlight modules, polarizers, filters, glass substrates, etc. are also very huge.

The huge preparation costs for the LCD panel industry chain and the fact that “scarcity makes things valuable” have once again confirmed the reality that the core technology of the industry is monopolized. However, this does not mean that we can directly give up the research and development of LCD display technology, nor can it be an excuse for infighting among domestic TV manufacturers.

The television industry should be an industry that makes the nation proud. Over the past few decades, we have experienced the development of products from scratch, and have gradually entered the international market, competed with international companies, cultivated a large number of outstanding entrepreneurs and technicians, and become the mainstay of regional economic development.

In essence, domestic TV manufacturers have a single source of panel procurement, and it is even more difficult to find differentiation in panel technology. Each company cannot maintain its advantage for too long. At this stage, TV manufacturers are fighting for display technology schools, and they have spent a lot of manpower, material resources and public relations resources. It is not a wise move to drag the war of words into a tug-of-war.

In the future, only by not being restricted by others in technology and continuously optimizing software can the domestic TV manufacturing industry become truly strong.

As a winner of Toutiao's Qingyun Plan and Baijiahao's Bai+ Plan, the 2019 Baidu Digital Author of the Year, the Baijiahao's Most Popular Author in the Technology Field, the 2019 Sogou Technology and Culture Author, and the 2021 Baijiahao Quarterly Influential Creator, he has won many awards, including the 2013 Sohu Best Industry Media Person, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Beijing Third Place, the 2015 Guangmang Experience Award, the 2015 China New Media Entrepreneurship Competition Finals Third Place, and the 2018 Baidu Dynamic Annual Powerful Celebrity.