Owing to its enormous population, Latin America has in recent years become a hotly contested market for smartphone brands. More specifically, the penetration rate of smartphones in Latin America rose from 32% in 2014 to 68% in 2020, with smartphone usage being the highest in Chile and Venezuela and lowest in Peru.
TrendForce’s investigations indicate that smartphone penetration rate in Brazil reached 72% in 2020 owing to high demand from young consumers and to the country’s massive population, the highest in Latin America. More than 85% of the 18-34 year old population group in the country consisted of smartphone owners, making Brazil the fourth largest smartphone market in the world behind only China, India, and the US. Notably, smartphone is the primary means of internet connection for most Brazilians.
With regards to smartphone brands, the Brazilian smartphone market is currently dominated by Samsung, Motorola (a Lenovo subsidiary), Xiaomi, LG, and Apple, with Samsung possessing the highest market share. Samsung’s success can mainly be attributed to its focus on customer experience. For instance, Samsung has established service centers in major cities including Sao Paulo and Campinas, where customers can not only experience the brand’s range of products, but also enjoy such value-added services as smartphone charging and free Wi-Fi, in addition to one-to-one consultation with Samsung staff.
As such, the company was able to achieve a 43.1% market share in Brazil last year. Trailing behind the Korean brand was Motorola, which took second place with a 20.5% market share. For the domestic market, Motorola’s handsets are manufactured by the Brazilian branch of global EMS giant Flex (previously known as Flextronics). Xiaomi rounded out the top three, with an 8.9% market share in 2020. Other Chinese smartphone brands such as OPPO, Vivo, and realme (the most aggressive among Chinese brands) have been entering the Latin American market since 2021.
Physical storefronts and one-stop-shop customer experiences are the keys to success in the Latin American smartphone market
Of course, entering the Brazilian market is no easy feat. TrendForce notes that some of the challenges involved with expanding in Brazil include the drastic movements of the Brazilian Real’s value as well as the country’s sky-high import duties, which have resulted in high retail prices for smartphones. Furthermore, shifts in domestic policies regarding smartphone manufacturing and online sales mean that smartphone brands must now establish domestic facilities for smartphone assembly. Apart from the high costs of domestic labor and components, Brazil’s taxes alone are able to significantly cannibalize the profitability of smartphone sales.
An appropriate case in point is Xiaomi’s 2015 venture into the Brazilian smartphone market. Xiaomi made its exit within a year of entering Brazil. Aside from the aforementioned high import duties, the company’s premature exodus took place because its online-based sales strategy was ill-suited for Brazil, where smartphone customers made purchases predominantly through major retail stores, and fewer than 20% of customers bought smartphones online.
Combined with Brazil’s prohibitive transportation costs, Xiaomi found itself unable to leverage its advantage of affordably priced handsets. Fast forward to 2019, however, as the Latin American market saw increased smartphone penetration, Xiaomi once again made its entrance, this time by focusing on developing its offline presence, including physical storefronts (called “Mi Stores”) in Colombia, Uruguay, Mexico, and Chile, which allowed it to score its first win in the Latin American smartphone market.
The ramp-up of the Intel Ice Lake and AMD Milan processors is expected to not only propel growths in server shipment for two consecutive quarters from 2Q21 to 3Q21, but also drive up the share of high-density products in North American hyperscalers’ enterprise SSD purchases, according to TrendForce’s latest investigations. In China, procurement activities by domestic hyperscalers Alibaba and ByteDance are expected to increase on a quarterly basis as well. With the labor force gradually returning to physical offices, enterprises are now placing an increasing number of IT equipment orders, including servers, compared to 1H21. Hence, global enterprise SSD procurement capacity is expected to increase by 7% QoQ in 3Q21. Ongoing shortages in foundry capacities, however, have led to the supply of SSD components lagging behind demand. At the same time, enterprise SSD suppliers are aggressively raising the share of large-density products in their offerings in an attempt to optimize their product lines’ profitability. Taking account of these factors, TrendForce expects contract prices of enterprise SSDs to undergo a staggering 15% QoQ increase for 3Q21.
Looking ahead to 4Q21, TrendForce expects a decline in server shipment to bring about a corresponding downward correction in enterprise SSD procurement capacity. Meanwhile, clients will continue to validate higher-layer PCIe G4 products from Kixoia and Micron. On the other hand, as the shortage of SSD components becomes alleviated going forward, enterprise SSD suppliers’ production capacities will likely increase as well. As a result, enterprise SSD contract prices for 4Q21 will likely remain relatively unchanged from 3Q21 levels.
Suppliers are making a strong push to develop PCIe G5 and CXL products as these new interfaces become available for server applications next year
Intel and AMD are expected to kick off mass production of Eagle Stream and Genoa CPUs, respectively, in 1H22. In addition to being compatible with PCIe G5, these server processors will also support the CXL (Computer Express Link) interface. TrendForce’s investigations indicate that NAND Flash suppliers have been fast-tracking their production of PCIe G5 SSDs in response to the upcoming mass production of Eagle Stream. As such, these SSDs are likely to see market release between 2Q22 and 3Q22.
Micron, on the other hand, has also announced its development of CXL products. Because CXL enables optimized data transmission between CPU and other components, such as memory, GPU, ASIC, and FPGA, memory solutions with CXL interface are likely to experience rapid growth in the hyperscale market, which is constantly in pursuit of faster data transmission speeds. TrendForce believes that the release of increasingly fast data transmission interfaces will bring about a massive increase in the expenses and technological challenges associated with SSD controller IC development. Enterprise SSD suppliers will subsequently have to jostle for market share by leveraging their respective unique competitive advantages.
For more information on reports and market data from TrendForce’s Department of Semiconductor Research, please click here, or email Ms. Latte Chung from the Sales Department at firstname.lastname@example.org
Chinese and European suppliers of base station equipment are expected to once again account for a global market share of more than 70% in 2021, and the top three suppliers (along with their respective market shares) are, in order, China-based Huawei (30%), Sweden-based Ericsson (23%), and Finland-based Nokia (20%), according to TrendForce’s latest investigations. Remarkably, although Huawei remains banned by the US government, the company still manages to dominate its competitors in terms of market share due to its products’ cost advantages as well as the enormous demand from the domestic Chinese market.
It should be pointed out that Samsung has similarly benefitted from its relatively low costs and successful 5G commercialization efforts, both of which helped propel its market share this year to 12.5% and secure the fourth place in the global ranking. Not only is Samsung supplying base station components to the three largest mobile network operators in Korea, but it is also collaborating with operators in the US (including AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon) while having established supply agreements with NTT DoCoMo in Japan. On the other hand, Japanese supplier NEC has received its first ever overseas orders this year, from British mobile network Vodafone. Japan-based Fujitsu, likewise, has also been chosen by the British government as an alternative supplier of 5G base station equipment in place of Huawei.
TrendForce indicates that the proliferation of distance learning and WFH applications has brought about a massive 40% increase in average global network bandwidth consumption as the world works to bring the COVID-19 pandemic under control. As such, the 5G network is able to satisfy the current market demand due to its high bandwidth and low latency characteristics. Furthermore, as 5G commercial demand rises in various countries, the GSA (Global mobile Suppliers Association) announced that “the number of announced 5G devices has surpassed 800 for the first time and now stands at 822 announced 5G devices”. These products, including both consumer and enterprise applications, have been released in response to the demand for faster, more convenient network connections across a broad range of applications. In sum, all of the aforementioned factors are drivers of increased 5G base station build-out worldwide.
Key to Huawei’s market share leadership, 5G users in China account for 90% of the global total in 2021
Owing to the ongoing China-US trade war, both Huawei and the three largest mobile network operators in China have been barred from engaging in investment-related activities with US companies. In addition, in July 2021, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) finalized a US$1.9 billion plan that subsidizes domestic telecom companies to replace base station components from Chinese suppliers, such as Huawei and ZTE, that the FCC considers a potential risk to US national security. Huawei and ZTE have subsequently become unable to acquire key RF front-end components from US suppliers, thereby prompting Huawei to shift its base station infrastructure business towards the domestic Chinese market instead.
Regardless, TrendForce’s findings indicate that, as of late-2020, the number of 5G users in China surpassed 160 million, which represented about 89% of the global total. As of July 2021, the three largest mobile network operators in China, including China Mobile, China Unicom, and China Telecom, have established 916,000 5G base stations domestically, which comprise 70% of the global total. Not only does this number point to the impressive magnitude of the Chinese telecom market, but it has also been the key to Huawei’s leadership in the base station market for nearly two years.
The massive rise in market demand for notebook computers in response to distance learning needs and WFH applications from 2020 to 2021 has generated not only a double-digit growth in notebook panel shipment, but also a price hike of more than 40% for notebook panels, according to TrendForce’s latest investigations. As various suppliers subsequently scramble to manufacture OLED, LTPS, and oxide panels, TrendForce forecasts these high-end notebook panels to reach a 17.8% market share in 2021 and 21.4% in 2022.
Panels based on OLED technology are primarily supplied by SDC, whose OLED notebook panel shipment for 2020 reached 800,000 pcs. SDC is expected to ship more than four million pcs of OLED notebook panels in 2021, with room for further growth in 2022. In addition to SDC, EDO is also expected to begin mass producing OLED notebook panels in 2H21-1H22. As such, TrendForce expects OLED panels to reach a 1.3% penetration rate in the overall notebook panel market this year. Although BOE and CSOT are currently fully engaged in Hybrid OLED development, Hybrid OLED panels will not enter mass production until 2023 due to technological and cost-related bottlenecks that are yet to be resolved.
The top three suppliers of LTPS panels are, in order, AUO, CSOT, and Tianma. Thanks to such advantages as low power consumption and narrow borders, LTPS panels are widely used in high-end notebook computers. In the overall notebook panel market, LTPS panels are expected to reach a penetration rate of 3.7% this year. With regards to LTPS suppliers, AUO will likely expand its L6K fab’s production capacity of LTPS notebook panels in 2022. Innolux, on the other hand, currently allocates the LTPS production capacity in its Luzhu-based panel fab primarily for smartphone displays. Innolux is expected to mass produce LTPS panels for notebooks some time in 2H21. CSOT and Tianma will likewise gradually increase the share of LTPS notebook panels in their overall panel production in spite of their lack of capacity expansion plans at the moment.
Finally, oxide panels are primarily supplied by LGD, Sharp, and BOE. Much like LTPS panels, oxide panels have the advantage of low power consumption and narrow borders. However, oxide panels are relatively more cost-competitive compared to LTPS panels, as the former require fewer mask layers during the manufacturing process. Hence, oxide panels currently possess the highest market share among all high-end notebook panel types. TrendForce expects oxide panels to reach a 12.8% penetration rate in the notebook panel market this year. With regards to suppliers, IVO and HKC are expanding the production capacities at the Kunshan-based Gen 5 fab and Mianyang-based Gen 8.6 fab, respectively, for oxide panels this year, while CSOT is also planning the same for its new Gen 8.6 fab in Guangzhou. Once these three suppliers finalize their expansion activities, their oxide panel capacities are expected to exceed 70K sheet/m, and these capacities will be gradually available for mass production across 2022-2024.
The arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic last year prompted enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation efforts. As such, the year 2020 marked the turning point for the AR/VR industry, with an increasing number of global enterprises now paying close attention to AR/VR headsets and applications. Two such applications which show the most significant short-term growth are “virtual collaboration platform” and “remote support”, particularly in the relatively small-scale AR headset markets.
TrendForce indicates that annual AR headset shipment is expected to increase from 580,000 units in 2020 to 1.3 million units in 2021; on the VR headset front, annual shipment is expected to increase from 4.43 million units in 2020 to 5.65 million units in 2021, with the key enablers of these shipment growths being entertainment applications from the consumer side and commercial applications from the enterprise side.
It should be noted that, however, as VR headsets have lower prices and technical barriers to entry compared to AR headsets, many companies are opting to purchase consumer VR headsets for use in commercial applications. Despite the growth of the AR/VR headset market in recent years, the ongoing shortage of semiconductor components is expected to put some downward pressure on these headsets’ shipments this year.
Enterprise demand is the primary driver of telecom companies’ efforts to combine 5G with AR/VR applications
With remote commercial applications generating an increasing demand for AR/VR headsets, use cases such as remote interaction and real-time sharing of 3D objects will require an enormous amount of network bandwidth. Likewise, the demand for low-latency and smooth user experiences will continue to drive 5G demand from the commercial sector, thereby compelling major telecom companies such as Ericsson, China Mobile, NTT DoCoMo, and Chunghwa Telecom to release dedicated 5G plans geared specifically for AR/VR applications in order to ensure the highest quality connections for these applications.
For telecom companies, building 5G infrastructure demands an enormous cost, but the current use of smartphones is unable to completely saturate the total 5G bandwidth. In other words, telecom companies are unable to recuperate their 5G investment costs, and this predicament is what led them to seek out other applications/products that can potentially make use of 5G connectivity, such as IoT, video streaming, and AR/VR.
What should suppliers that aim to enter the AR/VR markets pay attention to?
TrendForce believes that suppliers wishing to enter the AR/VR markets must take into consideration two factors, which are “cost” and “profit distribution”. First of all, both AR/VR headsets and dedicated 5G connections require enormous investment costs. Most companies involved in these applications are therefore still in the small-scale trial period at the moment.
Given the limited funding that these companies are allocating, real-life user experience has suffered as a result, leading to a reduced willingness by potential clients to continue adopting AR/VR solutions going forward. For instance, if network infrastructures do not provide sufficiently comprehensive coverage or sufficiently high bandwidth, the resultant latency or signal loss can lead to poor remote collaboration experiences on the user side.
The second issue that suppliers must confront has to do with profit distribution. Most AR/VR solutions are provided to users at a flat subscription fee which covers the costs of AR/VR headsets, 5G network connections, and software platforms. This type of flat fee structure is attractive for customers as it is relatively simple and straightforward.
However, on the supply side, the fair distribution of profits among AR/VR headset suppliers, telecom companies, and software platform vendors remains a critical issue. In particular, since AR/VR headsets and 5G networks are all extremely costly, along with the fact that the 5G rollout is still in its infancy, unfair distribution of profits can potentially lead to certain suppliers being unwilling to participate in the AR/VR market in the long run.