Important patents for LED phosphors will expire due to fierce price wars

However, the times are changing, mainly because the validity period of some important patents is about to expire. Many patents are valid for 20 years. These patents, which are about to expire, have played an extremely important role in maintaining market leadership for major patent owners of fluorescent materials such as Nichia, Osram and Samsung.

So, what changes are happening in the LED fluorescent materials market now?

Sales volume expands, but sales do not increase

In terms of sales volume, the scale of the LED fluorescent materials market is expected to expand more than twice in the period from 2015 to 2020. However, given the significant decline in the price of LED fluorescent materials, it is estimated that sales will not change. For the production of LED fluorescent materials, the technical threshold is very low if the most commonly used components are used. Because of this, there are constantly companies that are sourcing large-capacity manufacturing equipment and are involved in the LED fluorescent materials market. For these newcomers, quality management and R&D expenses are almost or completely absent. As a result, some newcomers are able to manufacture LED fluorescent materials at the same low cost as the 3-wavelength fluorescent materials used in fluorescent lamps. In order to gain market share, newcomers have launched fierce price competition.

As the main LED fluorescent material, YAG (yttrium aluminum garnet) phosphor related patents, will expire in 2017, China's large LED manufacturers will be able to enter the overseas market more easily. Beijing Yuji, Rare Earth, Yantai Hilde New Materials Co., Ltd., Jiangxi Yiluma Rare Earth Luminescent Materials Co., Ltd. and Xinli Light Source will expand the market and make YAG become a big road.

Pursuing high added value, turning to nitride, etc.

On the other hand, fluorescent material manufacturers have begun to shift their business focus to fluorescent materials with higher added value such as nitride. Nitride fluorescent materials have also experienced significant price declines over the past 20 years, but still maintain relatively high profit margins. Emerging suppliers and established suppliers such as Intematix will challenge Mitsubishi Chemical, which wants to strengthen its leadership in the field by strengthening intellectual property.

In terms of the price of high value-added fluorescent materials, the price of a certain material fell to 1/5 of the original three years ago, and has now fallen to the original 1/10. One reason is the increase in the number of suppliers. There are many fluorescent material suppliers in China, and some of them are competitive at least in the Chinese market.

Although the competitive environment has changed, fluorescent materials are still a special market. Technology and intellectual property are a major factor in determining market competitiveness. The performance and material stability of each manufacturer's products are significantly different, and only a small number of companies have strong patents required to supply products stably to the world. Among the large companies, Japanese companies such as Mitsubishi Chemical and Nichia Chemical Industries, as well as Osram and Samsung, have strong patents.

Quantum dots are worthy of attention

Technically speaking, although the yellow fluorescent material YAG is still the mainstream, the higher added value is the red fluorescent material. The red fluorescent material is required for the lighting market that requires a high color rendering index. In addition, new material compositions have emerged. General Electric Company (GE) has successfully developed a potassium fluorosilicate (PFS) fluorescent material (narrow-band luminescent red fluorescent material), which has been authorized by Sharp and Nichia Chemical Industry to be used in a variety of high color gamut LCD TVs. machine.

Quantum dot technology is poised to compete with traditional fluorescent materials in the field of displays. Quantum dots are characterized by adjustable narrow-band illumination that enables liquid crystal displays with gamut and efficiency equivalent to or higher than organic EL displays ( OLEDs ). Before the OLED is ready, quantum dot liquid crystal displays have ushered in an excellent opportunity to narrow the performance difference with OLEDs. If most consumers don't know the difference between the two technologies, the key factor to consider when purchasing a display is the price.

May trigger intellectual property disputes

For medium-sized LCD panel manufacturers that cannot make large-scale investments in OLEDs, quantum dots are an opportunity to improve the performance of liquid crystal displays without additional investment in the factory. Thanks to the adjustable narrow-band illumination, quantum dot technology allows for greater freedom of design. But this is not enough to be the reason for the large-scale adoption of quantum dots. Quantum dot liquid crystal technology also needs further improvements, such as the implementation of cadmium-free technology.

On the other hand, traditional fluorescent materials have not yet withdrawn from the historical arena. If the stability and decay period of the PFS fluorescent material is improved and a narrow-band green fluorescent material appears, it can dominate the competition with the OLED.

So, what will happen to this? The war surrounding intellectual property will rekindle in the next two years. At the same time, major IP owners and high-performance fluorescent materials manufacturers will work hard to find growth areas in the market, which is because they need high quality to maintain high prices. For general lighting and flat panel displays, consumers ultimately value quality, so the demand for high quality will not disappear.