Apple is looking to BOE as the main supplier for OLED panels of iPhone SE 4
iPhone SE 4 expected to launch in 2025 with major upgrade including all-screen design
Samsung declined due to pricing issues and Tianma failed quality standards
Apple is reportedly looking to China's BOE as the main supplier for the OLED panels of its upcoming iPhone SE 4. This decision was made after Samsung declined to make displays for the phone due to pricing issues, and Tianma failed to meet Apple's quality standards. The iPhone SE 4 is expected to launch in 2025 with a major upgrade that includes an all-screen design.
Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4
Apple will use the display from the iPhone 13 in the iPhone SE 4
BOE has been awarded a sole contract to manufacture displays for Apple's iPhone SE 4
Tianma failed to meet Apple's quality standards for the display
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4 due to a disagreement over price with Apple. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article and may be misleading readers who assume that Samsung made an active decision not to participate in the project.
The article reports on a Korean report stating that all iPhone SE 4 displays will now be made by China's BOE after Samsung withdrew from negotiations. However, this information is not confirmed by any official sources and may be subject to change.
The article states that Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4 due to a disagreement over price with Apple. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article and may be misleading readers who assume that Samsung made an active decision not to participate in the project.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a false dilemma fallacy. The author presents the situation as if there are only two options: Samsung makes the displays or BOE makes them. However, it is possible that other companies could have also been considered for the contract. Additionally, there may be other factors at play in this decision beyond just price.
Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4
BOE took the lead in becoming the screen supplier of Apple's iPhone SE 4
Bias
(85%)
The article reports that Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4 due to a disagreement with Apple over price. This is an example of monetary bias.
> The Korean report says that Samsung was unable to reach agreement with Apple on the price of the displays, and so they will instead be made by China's BOE <br> > According to South Korean media ZDNet Korea, BOE took the lead in becoming the screen supplier of Apple's iPhone SE 4, and Samsung showed that it withdrew from negotiations due to price problems
BOE has been awarded a sole contract to manufacture displays for Apple's iPhone SE 4
Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4
Tianma failed to meet Apple's quality standards for the display
Accuracy
BOE has apparently won the skirmish against Samsung on the pricing front and will likely be the exclusive panel supplier for the iPhone SE 4.
< Apple's iPhone SE 4 OLED orders were previously said to be fought over by suppliers Samsung and BOE.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Apple's iPhone SE 4 OLED orders were previously said to be fought over by suppliers Samsung and BOE. However, this information is not accurate as there was no previous report stating this fact. Secondly, the author states that Apple aimed for a $25 price per panel for the iPhone SE 4 but could not reach an agreement with Samsung. This statement is also incorrect as it implies that Apple had already agreed to pay $30 per panel and then changed its mind, which was not true according to ZDNet Korea's report. Thirdly, the author claims that BOE may enter Apple's supply chain and become the sole supplier of iPhone SE 4 OLEDs due to Samsung not wanting to go below a certain price point. However, this information is also incorrect as it implies that Samsung had already agreed to produce OLED panels for the iPhone SE 4 at $30 per panel, which was not true according to ZDNet Korea's report. Lastly, the author states that Apple will save $75 million in production costs by using BOE instead of Samsung. However, this information is also incorrect as it implies that Samsung would have produced OLED panels for the iPhone SE 4 at a higher price point than BOE if they had agreed to produce them.
The article claims that Apple's iPhone SE 4 OLED orders were previously said to be fought over by suppliers Samsung and BOE. However, this information is not accurate as there was no previous report stating this fact.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it states that BOE may enter Apple's supply chain and become the sole supplier of iPhone SE 4 OLEDs, as reported by ZDNet Korea. This statement implies that the report from ZDNet Korea is a reliable source of information without providing any evidence or context for this claim. The second fallacy is an inflammatory rhetoric when it states that Apple might appear stingy about not wanting to go above $25, but bear in mind that the iPhone SE 4 will be produced in the millions and just the component costs alone would have reached $450 million if Samsung's quote of $30 was accepted. This statement is meant to create a negative impression of Apple for being stingy while also exaggerating the cost savings by using inflammatory language.
BOE may enter Apple’s supply chain and become the sole supplier of iPhone SE 4 OLEDs, as reported by ZDNet Korea.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes Samsung by implying they are greedy for not wanting to go below $30 per panel. Additionally, the author implies that Apple is stingy for not agreeing to a higher price with Samsung.
Apple seemingly had its eyes locked on that $25 figure.
The Korean manufacturer did not want to go below the $30 mark
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Omar Sohail has a conflict of interest on the topic of OLED displays as he is reporting on BOE's alleged outpricing of Samsung to win iPhone SE 4 OLED orders from Apple. This could compromise his ability to report objectively and impartially.
BOE Allegedly Outpriced Samsung To Win iPhone SE 4 OLED Orders From Apple
Omar Sohail is reporting on BOE's alleged outpricing of Samsung for iPhone SE 4 OLED orders.
The iPhone SE 4 is rumored to have a 6.1-inch OLED display.
Samsung Display reportedly out due to pricing disagreements with Apple for the iPhone SE 4 displays.
BOE, a Chinese manufacturer, is likely to take over display production for the iPhone SE 4 as it has clinched the contract on its own after Samsung stepped back from negotiations and Tianma didn't meet Apple's quality standards.
The reason Samsung pulled out of discussions was that Apple suggested a price of $25 per display, which is lower than Samsung's earlier offer.
Apple apparently offered this price to all three companies in the running for the contract: Korean giant Samsung Display, along with Chinese producers BOE and Tianma.
The iPhone SE 4 is expected to launch in 2025.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Samsung Display has stepped back from negotiations due to pricing disagreements when it was actually because of low margins. This misrepresents the reason for Samsung's withdrawal and creates a false narrative about their involvement with the iPhone SE 4 project.
The article states that 'Samsung Display reportedly out due to pricing disagreements.' However, this is not accurate as Samsung withdrew from negotiations because of low margins. This misrepresents the reason for Samsung's withdrawal and creates a false narrative about their involvement with the iPhone SE 4 project.
The article states that 'Samsung is reportedly out of running to supply iPhone SE 4 displays due to price disagreements.' However, it was actually because of low margins. This misrepresents the reason for Samsung's withdrawal and creates a false narrative about their involvement with the iPhone SE 4 project.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that Samsung Display is Apple's long-time screen partner without providing any evidence or context for this claim. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the potential low margins and rejection of price by Samsung Display.
Samsung Display is Apple's long-time screen partner
The iPhone SE 4 might sport a single 48MP rear camera
Apple supplier BOE has taken the lead in becoming the OLED panel supplier for the fourth-generation iPhone SE.
BOE is likely to win most of or even all of the orders due to its lower pricing offer compared to Samsung's final offer.
The panel prices for the iPhone SE 4 are said to be a lot lower than suppliers charge for the OLED displays used in higher-end models like iPhone 15, since they will use legacy parts identical to those used in iPhone 13 and iPhone 14.
Accuracy
Samsung Display, BOE, and Tianma have all been in discussions with Apple to supply the OLED panels.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that Samsung Display has been in discussions with Apple to supply the OLED panels. This statement implies that Samsung is a credible source and their involvement in negotiations lends weight to BOE's position as the likely supplier for the iPhone SE 4. However, this assumption may not be accurate as there are no other sources mentioned in the article supporting this claim.
]The panel prices for the iPhone SE 4 are said to be a lot lower than suppliers charge for the OLED displays used in the iPhone 15[
Samsung's final offer was $30, which is lower than the two Chinese manufacturers.
Bias
(85%)
The article reports that Apple supplier BOE has taken the lead in becoming the OLED panel supplier for the fourth-generation iPhone SE. The author mentions Samsung Display and Tianma as other potential suppliers but does not provide any information on their discussions with Apple or why they withdrew from negotiations. The author also notes that BOE's final offer was $30, which is lower than what Samsung offered, indicating a possible bias towards BOE. Additionally, the article mentions that Tianma has not yet met Apple's stringent quality requirements and does not provide any information on why this is the case. The author also notes that display manufacturers have been bidding to supply the panels since at least last August but does not provide any information on how long they have been doing so or if there were other factors involved in their decision-making process.
$30 is lower than what Samsung offered, indicating a possible bias towards BOE
BOE has taken the lead in becoming the OLED panel supplier for the fourth-generation iPhone SE
Samsung Display and Tianma are also potential suppliers but do not provide any information on their discussions with Apple or why they withdrew from negotiations
BOE will likely be supplying the bulk, if not all, of the 6.1-inch OLED panels for the upcoming iPhone SE 4.
Samsung dropped out of the race due to low pricing offered by Apple.
$30 at Samsung
$25 per panel from Apple
BOE and Tianma remain as potential suppliers with BOE probably taking all orders for iPhone SE 4.
People familiar with the matter say that Samsung wasn't invested in the deal due to low margins, so once Apple asked for an even lower price per unit, Samsung ended negotiations.
Accuracy
Samsung declined to make displays for the iPhone SE 4
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that BOE will likely be supplying all of the OLED panels for iPhone SE 4 when it's not clear if this is true or not. Secondly, the author states that Samsung dropped out of the race due to low pricing offered by Apple but fails to mention any other reasons why Samsung might have ended negotiations with Apple. Thirdly, the article uses a biased source and does not provide any evidence to support its claims.
BOE will likely be supplying all of the OLED panels for iPhone SE 4.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it states that a single 6.1-inch OLED unit costs around $30 at Samsung and Apple was offering $25. This statement assumes that the pricing information provided by the source is accurate and reliable, which may not be true. Additionally, this statement also implies that Samsung's price is higher than what other Chinese makers are asking for a similar product, but there is no evidence to support this claim.
According to an industry source,
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement that implies bias towards BOE as the primary supplier of OLED panels for iPhone SE 4. The author mentions Samsung dropping out due to low pricing offered by Apple and then states that BOE will likely be supplying all or most of the panels. This suggests an anti-Samsung sentiment, which could indicate a political bias.
According to an industry source, BOE will likely be supplying the bulk, if not all, of the 6.1-inch OLED panels for the upcoming iPhone SE 4.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Ivan has a conflict of interest with Samsung and Apple as he reports on the topic of BOE manufacturing iPhone SE 4 displays. He also mentions low margins which could be related to his financial ties with Tianma.
Samsung dropped out of the race due to low pricing offered by Apple
Tianma remains as a supplier with BOE probably taking all orders for iPhone SE 4.
