Samsung leads as global smartphone shipments rise 2%
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tesla signs $16.5 billion chip supply deal with Samsung
Tesla has signed a $16.5 billion agreement with Samsung Electronics to source chips, a move that could support the South Korean firm's contract chip manufacturing unit, which has been under financial pressure, reported Reuters. The deal comes as Samsung, the world's largest memory chipmaker, seeks to increase its share in the foundry market where it trails rivals such as Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's SK Hynix. According to Samsung, the agreement will run through the end of 2033, although it initially withheld the client's name citing confidentiality. Reuters, citing three sources familiar with the matter, confirmed Tesla as the customer. Manufacturing in Texas Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that Samsung's new semiconductor facility in Taylor, Texas, will manufacture Tesla's next-generation AI6 chips. 'Samsung agreed to allow Tesla to assist in maximizing manufacturing efficiency,' Musk said in a post on X. 'This is a critical point, as I will walk the line personally to accelerate the pace of progress. And the fab is conveniently located not far from my house,' he added. Musk also noted that the $16.5 billion figure was a minimum estimate and that actual output could be significantly higher. Samsung's Taylor facility had faced delays and lacked major clients, leading to a postponement of ASML chipmaking equipment deliveries, according to a Reuters report from October. The start of production at the plant has been deferred to 2026. Ryu Young-ho, a senior analyst at NH Investment & Securities, said the order was significant for the Taylor fab, which had "virtually no customers," although it may represent a relatively small portion of Samsung's overall logic chip revenue annually. Strategic implications While a timeline for AI6 chip production was not disclosed, Musk had earlier said AI5 chips would be produced by the end of 2026, suggesting AI6 might follow in 2027 or 2028. Tesla's current AI4 chips, which power its Full Self-Driving system, are produced by Samsung, while TSMC is expected to produce the AI5 chip. The deal also highlights Tesla's shifting supplier strategy and its involvement in chip design and production efficiency. Samsung's foundry business, which manufactures logic chips for clients, currently holds just 8% of the global market compared to TSMC's 67%, according to Trendforce data. Pak Yuak, an analyst at Kiwoom Securities, estimated that Samsung's foundry losses exceeded 5 trillion won (approximately $3.6 billion) in the first half of the year. The Tesla deal is expected to reduce some of these losses. It is not yet clear whether the agreement is linked to ongoing trade discussions between South Korea and the United States. A South Korean trade ministry official told Reuters he was not aware of the deal being part of any negotiations.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Apple isn't leaving China. Its footprint is getting harder to see.
Apple's plans to make iPhones in India, components in Vietnam, and build new hubs across Southeast Asia reflect a meaningful effort to diversify away from China. But they tell only part of the story. In March, Apple CEO Tim Cook announced a new $99 million clean energy fund during a visit to Beijing. He didn't disclose project locations or recipients—only that Apple's commitment to China was 'expanding." The announcement came just two months before Chinese regulators delayed Apple's rollout of generative artificial intelligence features, the Financial Times reported. Those developments show how even one of China's most entrenched U.S. companies may face political and commercial friction as it tries to do business in both countries. As geopolitical pressure intensifies and investors look for clarity on decoupling, Apple's recent maneuvers offer a lesson for global businesses: A company need not leave China entirely so long as it can more effectively hide itself within it. Apple's behavior over the past several years shows it recalibrating its exposure to the actors and regions in China that carry reputational or regulatory risk. But it isn't ceasing to do business in China. Rather, Apple has stepped back from some of its direct affiliations and reduced its visibility without severing its ties to the business ecosystem in China, which remains dominated by the Chinese Communist Party. This model is instructive for other multinationals operating in China and other complex authoritarian environments. Confrontation and divestment are costly. Structural opacity, by contrast, offers flexibility—and protection. Apple needs to remain in good standing with regulators on both sides of the Pacific. That has led to unusual arrangements in China's western Xinjiang region. The Chinese Communist Party's policies of mass surveillance and forced labor there have deservedly drawn international condemnation. Congress passed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in 2021, banning imports tied to forced labor in Xinjiang. Many Western businesses have withdrawn entirely from doing business in Xinjiang. In 2016, Apple announced that it had taken minority stakes in four wind power projects in China as part of a strategy to decarbonize its supply chain. The projects were developed in collaboration with Goldwind, one of China's largest wind turbine makers. Goldwind has strong ties to state-led infrastructure planning and to Xinjiang. The company was formerly called Xinjiang Goldwind but dropped the word from its name in 2023. Though not sanctioned by the U.S., Goldwind has faced criticism for its ties to Xinjiang from European and U.S. politicians for its suspected ties to forced labor. An investigation by the Tech Transparency Project, a nonprofit organization, and The Information, a tech and business publication, linked Goldwind to state-run labor transfer programs and construction projects involving the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a U.S.-sanctioned paramilitary entity. U.S. pressure over forced labor in Xinjiang intensified in 2020. Companies such as H&M and Nike, which issued statements addressing forced labor allegations, faced backlash on social media in China. By 2021, Apple's affiliated entities no longer appeared as shareholders in the Goldwind wind projects in Xinjiang. Corporate filings, reviewed in a Chinese business registration database, indicate that the equity stakes were transferred to subsidiaries controlled by Goldwind. Apple didn't publicly disclose the move, and no mention appeared in its environmental or investor reporting: Apple's investment shift is being revealed here for the first time. Apple didn't respond to requests for comment. The company has addressed allegations of forced labor involving Xinjiang in at least one other case, saying it regularly audits its supply chain to avoid the practice. It cut ties with a Chinese supplier that had been accused of forced labor in 2021, Bloomberg reported. Apple may have found other investing strategies that allow it to maintain relationships with Chinese entities in less visible ways. In 2018, Apple had announced it and 10 Chinese suppliers would invest $300 million in China Clean Energy Fund. That fund allows Apple's capital to reach state-linked firms and potentially sensitive regions without appearing in public filings. Among the beneficiaries of the fund, disclosed in a Chinese business registration database, is China General Nuclear Power Group, a state-owned firm added to the U.S. Entity List in 2019 for military ties. U.S. companies face sharp restrictions on doing business with companies on the list. The initial clean energy fund, designed to last just four years, ended in 2022. This year, Apple announced a successor fund worth approximately $99 million during Cook's visit to Beijing—but this time disclosed neither project locations nor recipient companies, continuing its reliance on indirect investment vehicles. This isn't a retreat from China but a careful reconfiguration—one that allows Apple to meet its clean-energy goals while addressing government sensitivities in both the U.S. and China. In 2024, Apple ranked third for China exposure of large U.S. companies in Strategy Risks SR 250 rankings; it has since dropped to 27th. Apple continues to operate at scale within China's commercial and political systems, while relying on structures that make its presence less legible to outside observers. The company meets regulatory expectations in both Washington and Beijing, while it avoids direct exposure that could invite retaliation from either. U.S. sanctions law covers physical imports from Xinjiang, but it doesn't restrict capital flows. Financial contributions routed through investment vehicles, such as the CCEF, are legally safe—even if reputational risk persists. Apple isn't exiting China. It has re-engineered its presence there to be less visible and harder for outsiders to trace. Its energy partnerships, once direct and disclosed, are now filtered through funds. In Xi Jinping's China, the companies that endure aren't the ones that speak out. The ones that endure are the ones that adapt—and recede from transparency. Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron's newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit feedback and commentary pitches to ideas@
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Best of BS Opinion: How India is applying new fixes to old wounds
There's a particular discomfort in swallowing the same pill day after day and still feeling no better. At some point, whether it's for a persistent cold or a stubborn fever, you head back to the doctor — not for reassurance, but for a new prescription. Something different. Something that might actually work this time. That's where we are today, as a country, as a region, even as a workforce. Tweaking the dosage. Changing the medicine. Because the old ways aren't healing like they used to. Let's dive in. That shift is clearly visible in TCS's decision to let go of 12,000 employees, mostly from the middle and senior rungs. The reason? AI is becoming the new workforce. Like a treatment that makes older therapies obsolete, automation is reshaping how companies see value. But for India, where jobs are the lifeblood of growth, this change demands a rethink of skilling, education, and labour policy, argues our first editorial. We need a new formulation, and fast. In diplomacy too, there's been a shift in dosage. As tensions with the Maldives threatened to flare up, India quietly switched from confrontation to calibration, replacing troops with technicians, and aid with patience. Our second editorial notes how this non-invasive strategy is yielding a gradual thaw, possibly proving more potent than muscle-flexing. Akash Prakash, on the other hand, shows what the right medicine looks like. India's PLI scheme for smartphones, crafted carefully and administered diligently, has turned Apple into a believer and India into a serious contender in global electronics. The challenge now is to scale that formula to other sectors, with new incentives and coordinated policy muscle. Rama Bijapurkar writes that even the middle class, once thought to be the immune system of a stable economy, is mutating. Today's middle class isn't built on pensions or permanent jobs. It's a patchwork of gig workers, first-gen graduates, and economic tightrope walkers. Aspirations have become modest: not upward mobility but just a break from the grind. We need to redefine what it means to be 'middle class,' before our policies misdiagnose the patient. Finally, in The Trial that Shook Britain: How a Court Martial Hastened Acceptance of Indian Independence, reviewed by Amritesh Mukherjee, Ashis Ray reminds us that sometimes, history turns on a prescription no one expected. His retelling of the INA court-martial is less about law and more about contagion — how a courtroom drama spread outrage like wildfire, igniting mutinies, uniting a fractured country, and hastening the end of British rule. Sometimes, even the most unexpected prescription can trigger a revolution. Stay tuned!
