Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : OLED Universal Display Corp -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: toastr who wrote (29592)	8/27/2025 11:11:06 AM
From: qddb	7 Recommendations Recommended By Cooters occams_phasor oled2b slacker711 tech101 and 2 more members Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29713

I think you have shared what many shareholders are thinking. The opportunity cost of holding OLED in the faint hopes that blue is close becomes too much to believe. OLED suits have been preaching that blue is close for at least a decade and here we are still waiting. All the while OLED renews five-year contracts with every manufacturer at terms beneficial to SDC & LGD among others. Shareholders are not top of mind to the suits. Back to your question I sold 75& of my dinky holdings two years ago and am very happy. I am keeping a lower dinky number of shares in the event that blue actually happens or there is a buyout. I hope for a buyout. It's hard to think of a worse performance from a public stock which had a monopoly for so many years. As slacker noted this stock has been dead water for 7 years. Raising the dividend by a nickel every year doesn't instill confidence in my book. As always best of luck to all and thanks to slacker for keeping this board the best source for OLED. Cheers.

To: toastr who wrote (29592)	8/28/2025 1:23:55 PM
From: tech101	1 Recommendation Recommended By occams_phasor Respond to of 29713

The challenges for Blue attracts public interests and competitions. facing $OLED. One of the reasons to hold this niche company is for it being taken over before long.

To: toastr who wrote (29592)	11/6/2025 1:14:58 PM
From: ZikZak	7 Recommendations Recommended By Cooters Dkjunior143 FenTech ladcad mikeemarc and 2 more members Respond to of 29713

The 72% mystery toastr: "What are reasons to stay long, and what would be a good exit point or time?" This is the time of the quarter to ask ourselves these questions. I completely agree with slacker's points about the danger of SummerSprout and the disappointment of blue being not the game changer it had been advertised to be, but merely a modification to a niche product. Is there an optimistic side? Is there anything potentially positive that we should consider beyond the simple hope that there will be a breakthrough tomorrow? Home about this, the latest (Aug 2025) OLED investor presentation How do explain page 10, which makes this claim: Current performance (2025) Red & green PHOLED w/fluorescent blue. Decreased 72% Energy consumption compared to 2015. What would you have guessed as the efficiency improvement since 2015? A few percent? But 72%? Green started full commercial production Q1 2013. Up through 2012 the best free online location for the latest info on UDC's materials was the annual DOE Solid State Lighting Workshop. I just checked and those old presentations have finally been taken down. Anyway, by 2012 UDC had essentially achieved 100% internal quantum efficiency. Where could they go from there? What could have changed since 2015? Maybe a tenth of a volt or two were shaved from the emitting layer or blocking layer? Maybe, but not enough to explain 72%. It seems to me the lion's share for the 72% reduction must be extraction efficiency, also called light out-coupling efficiency. Page 8 of the presentation claims that Light Out-Coupling is a significant part UDC's IP. A simple bottom emitting OLED, even if it has 100% internal quantum efficiency, only emits 20-25% (external quantum efficiency) of the light generated in the emissive layer. The rest is reflected back and absorbed. So there's a lot of potential there. Note Plasmonic PHOLED, which impacts both light outcoupling and triplet lifetime, is shown as a separate IP. All the papers I've seen on plasmonics involve two-sided TOLEDs, and use a random array of tiny silver cubes to alter the surface plasmons. There is no reason to believe this has affected the 2015-2025 efficiency timeline. We really don't know much at all about what UDC themselves has accomplished in light out-coupling. But Dr. Stephen Forrest has published a great deal in this area. Here's a 2019 presentation of his titled "No Photon Left Behind: Challenges in OLED Outcoupling" One method that I heard him talk about as far back as 2001 was a microlens array. Page 11 shows that Forrest had achieved external quantum efficiency of 60% or so at 1000 nits with a microlens array, more than a 2X improvement. LGD has used this tech in their TV panels. So maybe that's part of the story. But we really need to know the full explanation behind the 72%. What is it? How much is UDC's IP and how much others? Can the UDC part lock out competitors? How much of that 72% can SummerSprout claim? We'll never know how secure our investment here is unless we know these things.