In addition to performing ordinary reporting, the media may be able to witness the changes in the industry from a fresh perspective because Intel and Samsung Electronics are frequently moving to target their shared opponent TSMC.

When an Intel Pentium chip malfunctioned in 1995, I was the director of MIC. Andy Groves, the company’s CEO at the time, said in the well-known book “Only the paranoid survive!” that if you are an industry leader, others will strive to steal your successes until you have nothing left. Entrepreneurs don’t typically create books to share their ideas, but rather to forewarn or prepare themselves for potential future competitive situations.

Is there a chance that Samsung may surpass TSMC? I find it to be really challenging. Does it intend to work with Intel? Everyone would have done it long ago if sharing cutting-edge technology could be done in this manner. Definitely not one that just joined two forces throughout the industrial age, the competitive model that actually alters the coopetition relationship. Geopolitics, or the global division of labor in the context of the G2 (the US and China) paradigm, is the main determinant.

From a political standpoint, positioning South Korea and Taiwan as the first technology island chain and the first line of defense against China represents the US’s best chance. Taiwan and South Korea should gain in one way or another as a buffer. Both TSMC and Samsung would be destined for sacrifice if the US was unable to control the situation and made the “worst decision” of fleeing to Intel or Silicon Valley.

FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, SOUTH KOREA We can wonder if it was part of Samsung and LG Electronics’ “plan to destroy Taiwan” when they cancelled deals with significant Taiwanese LCD panel suppliers. I discovered a long time ago that the only remaining component of the Taiwanese industry that truly overlaps with Samsung is the foundry business.

On the surface, Samsung appears to be a formidable competitor, but in the age of the Internet of Everything, Samsung will require more assistance from Taiwan’s business community to maintain a diverse bottom-up supply chain structure. Although Samsung is reluctant to do business with Taiwan, it has no other options. You should be able to understand that companies that were once rivals will undoubtedly have a chance to work together in the future given the large number of businesses that have joined the Foxconn-initiated MIH EV development platform.

When Apple reduces orders, the Taiwanese refer to it as the US client’s action to correct supply-demand imbalances; when Samsung reduces orders, they refer to the Korean client’s murderous plot. This is utterly absurd. Who has the power to obtain instructions simply determines the situation. Taiwanese manufacturers wouldn’t treat their fellow competitors any better than anyone else. When business structures are similar, rivalry inevitably outweighs collaboration.

I am an unbiased researcher with no industry “expertise,” only knowledge. Internet and startup companies in South Korea are reducing their reliance on major corporations. IC design and industrial control applications, which are all business potential in the hands of Taiwanese enterprises, will not appeal to the youthful population in South Korea. We can establish a win-win situation together because we know one other. Who could Samsung turn to for the production of a wide range of goods in tiny quantities if they don’t seek cooperation with Taiwan?

For Samsung, Taiwan is simply a minor issue compared to the major players in China and the US.


You may also like