Samsung Electronics
MGMT 619 ± MW 7:20pm October 20, 2010
SCUCarvers: Anirvan Das Girish Navalgundkar Jakub Cech Kyle Kaido Prashanth Kalika Vivek Durairaj
Five Forces Analysis Level 1 and Level 2 of o f the five forces analysis are explained in detail deta il in Exhibit 1.
Barriers to Entry - The biggest barrier to entry into the DRAM industry is its huge cap ital
requirement. The cost of building a new fab is around $3 billion, while the DRAM market size is approximately $20 billion1 in 2003. Market leaders with with significant cost advantage can retaliate against new entrants. Overall, there are high barriers to entry in the DRAM market. The
Power of Suppliers - Memory industry suppliers can be divided into t wo categories,
semiconductor equipment producers and raw material producers. There are only a few major semiconductor equipment producers such as Applied Materials. Their supplier power is high because of this concentration and and a significant cost associated with with switching vendors. Silicon wafers are the main raw material for memory memory chips. Low differentiation between wafer designs makes it easy to switch suppliers, minimizing their supplier power. The Power of Buyers
- DRAM customers2 are highly fragmented and consider memory
reliability reliability as very important factor. This implies that buyer power po wer is somewhat limited. limited. On the t he other hand, this industry has become beco me commoditized and there is little differentiation. Buyers are extremely price sensitive due to price conscious consumers and thin margins. These factors suggest that buyers are powerful. The threat o f buyer power appears to be neutral neutra l to the industry. Threat
of Substitutes - There is no viable substitute to the DRAM memory. Research is being
performed on nanotechnology, but it is not in production yet. Rivalry Among Existing Competitors - Competitors in DRAM industry are highly committed
to their products. Some of them the m are sustaining consistent losses. Chinese competitors are new to the industry and enjoy significant backing from their government. The DRAM industry is 1
58% of $33.7 billion global memory market in 2 003
2
Since there is no data indicating differences in the buyer behavior, PC OEMs, telecommunication and consumer electronics manufacturers are treated as a single buyer group.
1
expected to enter a cyclical downturn in 2005. These factors make the threat of rivalry very high with an unfavorable effect on o n this industry. S ignificant barriers to entry exist Level 3 Analysis - Exhibit 1-h explains our Level 3 analysis. Significant for potential new entrants to the DRAM industry. Despite these barriers, Chinese companies supported by government backing continue to enter. The industry is facing a cyclical downturn and has reached maturity stage. The supplier groups are relatively powerful and intense rivalry r ivalry conditions exist. This rivalry will intensify as Chinese companies continue to enter. The effect of buyer power is neutral on the industry. The major favorable condition condition is the lack of substitutes substitutes for DRAM. Overall, these dynamics have resulted in a slightly unfavorable environment for competitors in the DRAM industry (with overall score of 2.9 and weighted score of 3.17). Strategy of C hinese Entrants
Chinese entrants plan to gain market share with a low cost strategy. Refer to Exhibit 2 for the comparison of costs. They have low cost structures and easy access to resources reso urces such as cheap labor, talented engineers, land and investments. They also have strong government backing and license technology from some of the more experienced incumbents. They have access to Chinese market, which is expected to explode soon. However, they can only offer low end products due to lack of manufacturing experience and tacit knowledge. They are quite behind in developing frontier memory memory products. Chinese manufactuers manufactuers are willing to price price below their own costs to gain market share. At the same time, they are in a better position to sustain losses than their competitors. As Chinese firms become more efficient they po se a significant threat because their approach will decrease margins even further and force many companies to exit the market.
2
Business Level Strategy
Samsung has achieved a variety based strategic positioning by producing memory products for manufacturers of PCs, cameras and many other consumer electronic products. In the t he DDR and SDRAM category, Samsung Sa msung follows follows a mixed strategy (see Exhibit 3). Samsung¶s primary strategy is cost leadership. Exhibit 3-b shows that Samsung has a better cost structure than its competitors. Samsung¶s brand and emphasis on quality qu ality allows for broad differentiation as it is able to charge an average a verage premium of 14.5% over competitors. Samsung also produces specialty products including RDRAM and DDR2. These T hese product lines display a focused low co st strategy. A common core design allows Samsung to produce different different products in a single s ingle production line at a low cost. With a low cost structure and volume vo lume production, Samsung has achieved a market share of more than 95% in RDRAM and DDR2 by volume. vo lume. Exhibit 4 shows Samsung¶s resources and capabilities in Value and Cost Drivers of Samsung - Exhibit light of value drivers and cost co st drivers. product s, Samsung has effectively taken advantage of o f its fab Resources - As a leader in memory products, capacity to achieve economies eco nomies of scale. A long learning curve is inherent to this industry. Samsung has continuously developed new process engineering capabilities and improved its older processes to maximize operational efficiency. Sams S amsung ung has its own o wn in-house product design and R&D which helps to quickly develop cutting-edge frontier products. The main R&D facility and all fab lines are collocated, helping to build camaraderie among design and process engineers. This collocation also results in faster resolution of design and pro cess related problems, while reducing overhead (fixed) costs. From 2000 to 2004, Samsung¶s brand value has more than doubled. Samsung¶s Sa msung¶s large product portfolio enables it to utilize economies of scope.
3
ot her design houses. This collaboration has Capabilities - Samsung provides R&D support to other helped develop new applications app lications for DRAM as well as customized products for niche markets. Samsung¶s Regional Specialist Program also helps creat e these customized products based on local customer needs. The company co mpany has also benefited from taking calculated risks in new, unproven process technologies. In certain certa in cases Samsung creates a competitive environment among its R&D departments to capitalize cap italize on innovation. The company is able to attract talented engineers through meritorious selection and evaluation. Its produ ctivity ctivity incentives encourage enco urage highly productive employees and aid a id in the retention of these employees. These benefits also create a culture with common goals go als and decrease costs through higher productivity. pro ductivity. Value-Chain Analysis - Activities contributing to the value-chain of Samsung are shown in
Exhibit 5. The interaction or fit fit of o f activities shown in this framework suggests that it is a difficult model to imitate and provides a considerable co nsiderable competitive advantage for Samsung. Cu stomization are the main value drivers dr ivers for V-C Analysis - Brand, Quality, Technology and Customization memory products. V-P= F1*Brand+ F2*Quality+ F3*Technology+ F4*Customization. Due to lack of data, betas are assigned based on the importance of each value driver. For example, as quality is considered to be more important relative to other value drivers, F2 is higher than other beta values. We have used F1 = 0.25; F2= 0.3; F3 = 0.25; F4 = 0.2 Brand ± A company¶s co mpany¶s history is an important factor contributing to its brand equity. The nu mber of years in operation is used to calculate the brand value factor. Technology- Design rule technology is used to t o measure technology prowess. Quality - Better R&D and process engineering engineer ing results in better quality products. The level of company investment in R&D is used as the t he measuring factor for the weight of Quality. Qua lity.
4
Customization - RDRAM was produced through co llaboration with Rambus and customized accordingly. We used the percentage of RDRAM production as a measure for the weight of customization. Samsung has the highest V-C compared to its competitors (Exhibit 6). V-C analysis shows that Samsung is both a cost and value leader. This Th is enables it to create the highest buyer and firm surplus in the industry. Both cost co st and value advantages are vital for Samsung¶s Sa msung¶s performance. VRIO Analysis - Based on the VRIO analysis (Exhibit 7), Samsung has multiple resources and
capabilities that provide provide a sustained sustained competitive advantage. Threats from Chinese manufacturers can become more significant in the long run if they catch up on value drivers in the temporary sustained competitive advantage advantage category. These include factors such as fabrication fabrication capacity, quality and product mix/customization capabilities. Our analysis highlights Samsung¶s value drivers in terms of technological advantages and intellectual property in their frontier products. These value drivers prevent imitation by new e ntrants. Samsung¶s quality and reliability value driver keeps customers from switching to competitors¶ products. Recommendations
Samsung needs to retain a leadership position in technology through R&D investment in its frontier products. It has already been successful in building its brand reputation through these products. R&D investment investment allows Samsung to introduce introduce new products ahead of the competition. This strategy creates a value driver because it increases Samsung¶s breadth of product line for customers. Customers value this new technology adoption, ado ption, allowing Samsung to charge higher prices. New products in the DRAM DRAM industry quickly become legacy legacy products, which can be sold in niche markets, creating creating a value driver for Samsung. Samsung. Flash memory memory also shows significant promise for growth. Investment in R&D R&D will ensure that Samsung Samsung capitalizes on opportunities
5
presented by Flash technology. techno logy. Samsung should also invest in further improvements to its manufacturing process. Samsung is the only on ly major memory manufacturer currently using 0.11µm as its main design rule. This superior superior processing technology is a cost driver driver because it allows for a smaller chip size, resulting in more outp ut and lower per unit costs. A downside of high R&D investment is the need to ensure the correct projects receive enough resources and funding to be successful. This requires effective project management skills and executive decisions. The DRAM industry is also expecting a downturn which can cause customers custo mers to become more price sensitive, unwilling to invest in new products without significant cost savings. Samsung should also enact a partnership with Chinese entrants for low end memory products. Chinese entrants are only at t he beginning stages of building DRAM manufacturing capability, and will need to undergo a steep learning curve in the next few years. This partnership can be in the form of licensing, where Samsung licenses its technology for low end memory products to a Chinese entrant. This strategy allows Samsung to direct its resources to next generation products, thus creating more value. It also serves as a cost driver for Samsung Samsung since it will be able to utilize China¶s capacity and a nd cheaper labor. A potential downside to this strategy is the threat it poses to Samsung¶s Samsung¶s trade secrets. There are intellectual property protection protection concerns since Chinese laws are loosely enforced or nonexistent. A more significant significant risk is the potential impact a new strategic strategic partner can have on Samsung¶s current current organization. Samsung¶s infrastructure is a cost driver due to increased efficiency. Introduc ing ing an outside o utside manufacturing partner can negatively affect this t his cohesiveness and productivity.
6
EXHIBIT 1: Five Forces Level 1/ Level 2 Analysis Exhibit 1-a: Barriers to entry Barriers to Entry
1. Does the factor pose a Barrier to Entry (BTE)? Assess the strength of the BTE 2. Why? Use data/evidence to support your analysis. Economies of Scale (Supply Exhibit 7a shows that with the exception of SMIC, there Side) exist reasonable economies of scale. With an increase of production volume, we see a decrease in the fully loaded costs of companies, but not consistently. consistently. The suppliers give discounts to high volume purchasers. Network Effects (Demand DRAM market is commoditized, commoditized, leading to minimal Side Scale) network effect. Customer Switching Cost DRAM market has become highly commoditized and DRAMs can be replaced very easily. There is however some brand loyalty, mainly due to reliability factor. factor. Capital Requirement Requirement Very high capital requirements. Cost of building new fab was $3 billion in 2004 compared to $20 billion industry indu stry.. Building manufacturing facilities is difficult and time consuming as the machinery is very sensitive to dust and electronic shock. Incumbency Advantage Incumbents have significant advantage due to the importance of reliability and economies of scale. However, the customers are extremely price-conscious, indicating that the incumbency advantage may be lost to cheap DRAM supplier. Unequal Access to The DRAM industry is highly concentrated. So a n ew Distribution Distribution Channel entrant may not have access to distribution channels readily. Restrictive Government There are no government policies that are restrictive. Policy However, certain governments (e.g. U.S.) impose restrictions to foreign vendors that prevent them from selling to those countries. Expected Retaliation Retaliation The current players can give deeper discounts to suppress the new entrants. Level 2 Conclusion: Hig h barriers to entry, low t hreat - Favorable 1. Capital requirement Most Significant Factors 2. Incumbency advantage 3. Economies of scale supply side
Score (1-5)
Rank /Wt
2
3
4
7
3
6
1
1
2
2
2
5
4
8
1
4
2
Exhibit 1-b: Supplier Power of semiconductor equipment suppliers
Factors underlying Supplier Power
Effect on Industry 1. Does the factor increase or decrease Supplier Power? Assess the strength of the factor for each supplier group. 2. Why? Use Data/Evidence to support your analysis Concentration Ratio for each Due to complex technology requirements, the equipment Supplier Group suppliers are more concentrated. Strategic Importance of the The $20 billion DRAM industry is strategically Industry to the Supplier important to this supplier group because it n eeds Group technology specific investments. Switching Costs The semiconductor semiconductor equipments need heavy investments
Score (1-5)
Rank/ Wt
4
3
2
5
4
2
7
Are the Supplier group¶s products/services differentiated? Are there Substitutes for the Supplier group¶s products/services? Do the Suppliers pose a credible forward integration threat? Level 2 Conclusion: Strength of the Force (1-5) Most Significant Factors
and so there th ere are significant costs associated with switching from one supplier to another. The semiconductor equipments from different suppliers 4 can be somewhat differentiated (in terms of features, precision). If DRAM companies go fabless, then the equipments are 4 not needed. However, due to low l ow margins, all companies have their own fab. Thus, there are no substitutes for the equipments. There is no forward integration integration threat from the 1 suppliers. Unfavorable (High threat from semiconductor equipment suppliers) 1. No substitutes 2. Switching costs 3. High concentration ratio
4
1
6
4
Exhibit 1-c: Supplier Power of raw material suppliers
Factors underlying Supplier Power
Effect on Industry 1. Does the factor increase or decrease Supplier Power? Assess the strength of the factor for each supplier group. 2. Why? Use Data/Evidence to support your analysis Concentration Ratio for each Many companies producing raw materials. Supplier Group Strategic Importance of the Exhibit 7-a shows that the raw materials cost is 20-25% Industry to the Supplier of the total DRAM cost. Thus this $20 billion industry is group strategically important to the suppliers of raw material. Switching Switchin g Costs Silicon wafers were standard standar d and so switching switchin g cost could be negligible. Are the Supplier Group¶s There is no n o differentiation between between raw materials from products/services different suppliers. differentiated? Are there substitutes for the There are no substitutes to silicon. Supplier Group¶s products/services? Do the Suppliers pose a There is no forward integration integration threat from the credible forward integration suppliers. threat? Level 2 Conclusion: Favorable (Low threat from raw material suppliers) 1. Products not differentiated differentiated Most Significant Factors 2. Switching costs 3. Strategic importance
Score (1-5)
Rank/ Wt
1
4
2
3
2
2
2
1
4
6
1
5
2
8
Exhibit 1-d: Buyer Power
Factors underlying B uyers¶ Bargaining Power
1. Does the factor increase or decrease Buyer Power? Assess the strength of the factor for each buyer group. 2. Why? Use Data/Evidence to support your analysis
Are Buyers concentrated or are there a few high volume Buyers?
Buyers are numerous and an d extremely fragmented. For example, no single OEM controlled more than 20% of the global PC market. The DRAM market is highly commoditized, even though some firms are able to effectively effectively differentiate by being more reliable than competitors. competitors. DRAMs DRAMs are a highly commoditized market with very little differentiation. On the other han d, customers still give considerable importance to r eliability, eliability, and an d were ready to pay a premium for a reliable supplier. This leads to moderate switching costs. Given the high capital requirements to set up and maintain the facilities and equipment, it is difficult for buyers to integrate backwards into manufacturing memory chips. Price Sensitivity Memory represents 4%-12% of material costs for an OEM PC producer and 4%-7% of material costs for a mobile phone producer. PC manufacturers negotiate hard on prices due to intense rivalry. Rivalry between manufacturers of PCs, mobile ph ones and consumer electronics is very intense, as th ey have to face very price-conscious consumers. This forces DRAM buyers to be very price-sensitive. There could be some very small groups of buyers such as video game manufacturers that may enjoy higher h igher profits. A DRAM is critical to the functioning of the buyers¶ products. If the DRAM does not work as expected, the buyers¶ products will be useless. DRAMs do not result in any cost savings by the buyer. As a result, there is no relation of this factor to the DRAM market. Neutral threat from buyers 1. Buyers not concentrated 2. Low switching costs 3. Buyer¶s low profits
Are the products differentiated? Does the Buyer face low or high switching costs?
Do the Buyers pose a backward integration threat?
Factors underlying B uyers¶ Is the product a significant fraction of the Buyer¶s costs?
Does the Buyer earn low profits?
Is the quality of the Buyer¶s product affected by the industry¶s product? Does the industry¶s product affect the Buyer¶s other costs? Level 2 Conclusion: Most Significant Factors
Score (1-5)
Rank/ Wt
1
1
3
4
3
2
1
7
4
6
4
3
4
5
3
8
3
Exhibit 1-e: Threat of Substitutes
Factors underlying of Substitutes
Threat
Buyer¶s propensity to substitute Price/Performance Price/Performance of the th e substitute Level 2 Conclusion
Score (1-5)
1. Does the factor increase or decrease the threat? Assess the strength of the factor. 2. Why? Use data/evidence to support your analysis. No other viable substitutes
1
No substitutes
Favorable (No threat from the substitutes)
Rank /Wt
1 1
2
1
9
Exhibit 1-f: Rivalry among existing competitors
Factors underlying Rivalry
1. Does the factor increase or decrease Rivalry? Assess the strength of the factor. 2. Why? Use data/evidence to support your analysis. Industry Concentration The DRAM market is very concentrated (CR4~90%). The industry is quite unpredictable and the r ules of the game are unknown, leading to an increase in rivalry. Demand Conditions The case states that the growth in the DRAM industry /Industry Growth Rate closely follows the PC market, which was becoming a Is the industry growing at a mature single-digit growth market. Also, the memory decreasing rate or increasing chip industry is expected to enter a cyclical downturn in rate? 2005. Exit Barriers Exit barriers are very high due to the high fixed costs. High Commitment Commitment by Rivals Rivals are are highly committed. While some companies companies are bent on maintaining and gaining market share, the Chinese entrants are committed to establish market share at any cost. Diversity of Competitors: The competitors are very diverse, with different goals. Do firms have different Samsung wants to maintain a competitive competitive advantage, goals/ideas about how to while the Chinese entrants are sacrificing profits to gain compete or are they playing market share. This results in unpredictability, leading to by the same set of rules? an increase of rivalry conditions. Degree of Product The DRAM market is highly commoditized. The only Differentiation: differentiation differentiation that players can offer is reliability. This Opportunities for leads to moderate switching costs for buyers and Differentiation? therefore is a neutral factor of th e rivalry force. Fixed Costs/Variable Costs The industry has huge capital requirements and Ratio comparatively low variable cost (Exhibit 7). Is capacity added in large Memory chip producers need to generate as a s many increments? individual chips in a single production step a s possible, and also minimize defects at the same time. As a result, capacity needs to be added in large increments in order to be efficient. Conclusion Unfavorable (Very high threat from rivalry) Level 2 Conclusion 1. High commitment by rivals Most Significant Factors 2. High exit barriers 3. Not much product differentiation
Score (1-5)
Rank /Wt
4
5
5
4
5 5
2 1
4
7
4
3
5
6
4
8
5
Exhibit 1-h: Five Forces Level 3 Analysis
Competitive Competiti ve Force
Effect on Industry
Score
Ranking Ra nking
Rivalry
High rivalry, unfavorable
5
2
Buyer Power
Neutral threat
3
Barriers Barrier s to Entry Threat of Substitutes Supplier Power Overall
High barrier to entry Favorable, no threat Little bit unfavorable
2 1 3.5 2.9
Weights
Weighted score
4
27%
1.33
4
2
13%
0.40
1
5
5
1 3 15
33% 7% 20% 100%
0.67 0.07 0.70 3.17
3
Reverse ranking
10
EXHIBIT 2: Costs Exhibit 2-a: Cost Comparison: Samsung vs. SMIC
Exhibit 2-b: Cost Structure: Samsung vs. SMIC
11
EXHIBIT 3: Business Level Strategy
Exhibit 3-b: Comparison of financial ratios between Samsung and Competitors for DRAM in 2003 (256MB (256MB equivalent)
Samsung
Competitor's Average
Average Selling Price
5.68
4.96
4.43
Raw materials
1.18
1.83
1.84
Labor
0.54
0.74
0.23
R&D
0.6
0.62
0.8
0.65
0.87
0.34
COGS /Selling Price
30%
52%
47%
R&D/Selling Price
11%
13%
18%
SG&A/Selling Price
11%
18%
8%
SG&A a
SMIC
Notes: (a) COGS is Raw Material + Labor
12
EXHIBIT 4: Value Drivers and Cost Drivers Resources Infrastructure -- R&D and Fab lines in one location 1) increases collaboration between between design engineers and process engineers - improving process efficiencies 2) helps in promoting Samsung's culture emphasizing on product quality and process effectiveness as it is under one roof 3) savings in fab construction costs. Product Design Engineering ± In-house product design unlike its Chinese competitors - helps in developing the cutting edge products. Global Presence -- Multinational presence with customers all over the world. Brand -- High brand value - $12.6Billion $12.6Billion in 2004. Product Breadth ± 1,200 Variations in DRAMs. Product Widt h -- Multiple product architecture with same core design. Frontier products to legacy products. Decreased volume production of legacy products would also affect economies of scale. Production Capacity ± Scale of fab Investment: Market leader with economies of scale. Process Engineering -- Multiple product architectures on each production line- 0.11Qm Process Technology DRM rules- Better yield.
Capabilities Ability to influence government --Samsung is part of Chaebol in Korea. High political influence. Ability to respond to t he needs of regional customers - Regional Specialist Program. Ability to take calculated risks ± Early adoption of new technology like 12-inch process. process. Ability to instill competitive environment ±separate competitive teams in different locations to produce frontier technology. Ability to capture t he most value out of products - legacy products into niche products. Product Performance -- High reliability of the products with multiple industry awards. Ability to attract talented employees - Meritorious Evaluation/ Sponsoring of higher education. Collaboration with design houses - Develop new uses for memory products. Ability to maintain productivity - Productivity Incentives.
Value Drivers Organizational Practices
Cost Drivers Organizational Practices
Vertical Integration Accessibility Brand Value Variety Economies of Scope Economies of Scale Learning Curve
Value Drivers
Cost Drivers
Favorable Government Policies Customization
Government Incentives
Technology Lead/Brand Reputation Technology Extended Product Life Cycle High Quality Favorable Labor Conditions Customization/ Product Extension Favorable Labor Conditions
13
EXHIBIT 5: Value C hain Analysis
14
EXHIBIT 6: V-C Analysis Technology
Main design
Customization
RDRAM Vol
Samsung Micron
0.11 0.13
4.20% 0
5
3
Samsung Micron
Infineon Hynix
0.14 0.13
2 3
Infineon Hynix
0.40% 0
1 0
SMIC
0.5
1
SMIC
0.00%
0
Brand
Yrs of Opr.
R&D
Full cost
Ratio
Weight
0.6 0.57
4.31 6.61
0.139211 0.086233
5
3
0.71
5.02
0.141434
5
Samsung Micron Infineon Hynix
5
Weight 5
Samsung
4
5
1
Micron Infineon
Weight
0
Hynix 4 0.58 0.108818 4 5.33 1 SMIC* 0.8 4.84 0.123967 0.12396 7 4 As SMIC lags behind the industry by 10 years, its weight is discounted by 2 5% Micron
Samsung Beta* Rating Rating Brand b1=0.25 Quality b2=0.3
Quality
30 26 21 4
SMIC
Weight
Rating
Infineon
Beta* Rating
Rating
Hynix
Beta* Rating
Rating
Beta* Rating
SMIC Beta* Rating Rating
5
1.25
4
1
1
0.2 5
4
1
1
0.2 5
5
1.75
3
1.05
5
1.75
4
1.4
4
1.4
Technology b3=0.25
5
1.25
3
0.75
2
0.5
3
0.75
1
0.25
Customization b4=0.2
5
1
0
0
1
0.2
0
0
0
0
Added Value
5.25
2.8
2.7
3.15
1.9
$5.68
$4.93
$ 5.05
$4.97
$4.43
$10.93
$7.73
$7.75
$8.12
$6.33
Cost
$4.31
$6.61
$5.02
$5.33
$4.84
V-C
$6.62
$1.12
$2.73
$2.79
$1.49
Price Total
Value
15
EXHIBIT 7: Samsung¶s VRIO Analysis
Resources/ Capability
Valuable?
Rare?
Difficult to Imitate?
Exploited by the firm?
Competitive Implications
Semi-Conductor Process Technology (0.11m)
YES
YES
YES
YES
Sustained Sustain ed Competitive Advantage
Technology and Production Line Capabilities
YES
YES
YES
YES
Sustained Sustain ed Competitive Advantage
Employee Selection and Retention Retention Policies
YES
YES
YES
YES
Sustained Sustain ed Competitive Advantage
Quality
YES
YES
YES
YES
Sustained Sustain ed Competitive Advantage
Brand Value
YES
YES
YES
YES
Sustained Competitive Advantage
Product Mix & Customization
YES
YES
NO
YES
Temporary Temporar y Competitive Advantage
Fabrication Capacity
YES
YES
NO
YES
Temporary Temporar y Competitive Advantage
R&D and Production Facility at Same Location
YES
NO
-
YES
Parity
Partners and OEM Customers
YES
YES
NO
YES
Temporary Temporar y Competitive Advantage
16
