Samsung appears to be betting big on foldable, which it sees as the smartphone and tablet of the future. But, of course, with their considerably higher price tags, those haven’t been welcomed entirely in the market. This year, Samsung has solved this issue, particularly with the substantially more cheap Galaxy Z Flip 3, apparently selling well. As a result, Samsung appears to have raised its aims for 2022, hoping to create and sell over 10 million foldable phones, which might account for a fifth of its projected volume next year.
Foldable gadgets are attractive and intriguing, but they are still a long way from being the dependable mobile companions we require on a daily (and nightly) basis. Even with the tougher Ultra-Thin Glass (UTG) glass and new “Armor Aluminum” frame used by Samsung’s 2021 generation, durability concerns remain. While the Galaxy Z Flip 3 is unquestionably less expensive, the Galaxy Z Fold 3 almost makes up the difference because the unique S Pen is an additional purchase.
The Galaxy Z Flip 3, on the other hand, appears to be doing so well that it is hurting Samsung’s plans for 2022. According to a report in South Korean media, the corporation is committing around 10 million units of its production capacity to foldable devices. As a result, the Galaxy Z Fold 4 will receive 2.9 million devices, while the Galaxy Z Flip 4 will receive an astonishing 6.9 million.
Considering how new and fragile the foldable phone industry is at the moment, they are lofty goals. However, there’s also the issue of real manufacturing challenges, ranging from flexible screen yield rates to the current semiconductor component supply difficulty. Intel estimates that the situation will not improve until late 2022 or early 2023.
Those numbers certainly indicate Samsung‘s belief in foldable, but they’re not enough to compete with the Galaxy S series. Samsung plans to produce 14.1 million Galaxy S22 devices, 7.9 Galaxy S22+ units, and 10.9 Galaxy S22 Ultra units for the Galaxy S22. These figures match Samsung’s previous experience, in which the “Plus” model consistently underperforms the other two.
Source: thelec
