 And here, this is a very special TV and hi, so who are you? I'm Paul Gray, I'm research director at IHS Market and I lead our TV research. So is this cool? It's fun, this is really fun. So what we've seen in the past couple of years is that OLED has managed to get recognised by consumers especially in Western Europe as being the premium TV technology. I'll emphasise that often what is the best technology depends on when you're looking at it. If you're watching in a bright room then probably LCD has an advantage. If you watch in the dark then OLED has an advantage. But one of the things that TV brands have been trying to do is to make products that bridge that gap so that they're not different and one of the things that we're really seeing at the moment is lots of new ideas with LCD TV to improve that contrast performance and get those really, really deep blacks that we all enjoy with OLED. So here we see 8K and here is the 4K ULT-XD. It's kind of like the pre-mode dual cell demo right now, no? Right, that's right. So one of the things that you can do with LCD is to go to modulate and control the light that's coming through to the LCD panel. All LCD panels leak a little bit of light and by putting an extra panel behind it then you can reduce the amount of light that leaks out and so you get a better black. So to prevent the light leaking and how close does it get to pixel dimming which is one of the selling points of the OLED? OK, so the idea with OLED and the key thing that OLED has is that you can just light up one single pixel in the whole display for example should you want to. And that hasn't been possible with LCD without a little bit of a halo. What they've done instead is they've put a panel with 1080p resolution behind it and you use that to control the backlight and obviously you can still have dimming zones but you have millions of dimming zones and that's the principle behind it. Pretty much 2 million dimming zones, right? Yeah, that's right. 1,920 by 1,080, so let's call it 2 million. And somehow it's black and white, it's this second layer, the second cell is the backlight. So you've got a backlight, then you have the control layer and then in front of that you have the conventional LCD that we all know and love so well. And the point is that you're then reducing any light that goes to the switched off pixels and because of that you end up with deeper blacks and the leakage is less. And that layer doesn't leak anything. It leaks far, far less. Yeah, it's like another LCD layer. So each time, so if you say that 1,000th of the light leaks through, then you add a second one on top of that and that means that it's a millionth of the light leaks through. So that's what they mean by a million dimming zones, even though it's 2 million pixels behind but it's about leaking. So the key issue on this one is the amount of light that leaks out. So have you looked at this, what do you think? What do you think of this 8K dual cell? What you see is the really deep blacks and that really intense contrast that looks just like an OLED. And it's got that real OLED-like performance that you can have bright white text for example when you're running the credits on a movie on a black screen and you don't see that gray halo around it very noticeable. So potentially this can lower price, potentially because the 88 inch 8K is not 88,000 dollars but it's half of 88,000 dollars, it's 40,000 something. This could potentially be less than 5,000. I don't know on the prices and costs. On all LCD panels in particular then it always depends on supply and demand and the crunch one is that an LCD panel fab is like running an oil refinery. You make money when it's full, if it's not full then you run the risk of losing money and anything that you can do to make sure that your fab is full puts you in profit. Now at the moment the industry in China has structurally over-invested in LCD capacity. About 20% of it is not being used. Suddenly you've got a technology where almost that extra cell comes at very very low cost because otherwise it would be doing nothing. And so it's an interesting way for the LCD industry to use oversupply productively to improve product performance. Of course it depends on cost. And this is now where the engineers are going to start getting really clever and seeing how they can do that. So for example one way that they may do it is that at the moment you've got two cells each of which has two layers of glass and LCD in between. And maybe you make something more like a club sandwich where you have three sheets of glass and two layers of LCD in between them. So there's lots of room for imagination from engineers and creativity. So this a lot of action happening right there, it can be just over here. I think this one looks also and as far as I understand this one is on the market in China already and is selling for 20,000 RMB. So that's like 2,500 or something like that. It's not really half the price of an OLED but potentially it can go down. I don't know about the margin structure on that one and of course it's a very early product. It's a very early product. They've only made a few thousand and therefore costs aren't going to be optimal. And I think everybody at the moment is evaluating what the market reception is to it. How consumers view these things. Do they just want OLED for the sake of having OLED? Or is there something different going on there? So at the moment it's a very new product. It's rather experimental. However it offers another good example about how LCD is such a versatile system and you can really reinvent the different parts of it and squeeze all kinds of different performance out of it. This is the OLED without the XD single layer and it's the top of the class. I don't think they're trying to trick it or something. And just with my camera I can clearly see the difference in black levels is just more black here. It's totally black which is kind of like the selling point of the OLED. That's right. So the main thing that OLED has always excelled at is if you watch in the dark then the blacks are black and as a result you don't get that rather gray, leaky black level. And how about Nanosys is market leader for Quantum Dot, right? And there's a whole bunch of Nanosys stuff in there. There's the Quantum Dots. How does the quality of the colors get better with this OLED XD? So in the end on Quantum Dots then they allow you to have very, very pure colors. If you have a leaky panel then the purity of that color is degraded by the leakage. So going to a panel with a dual cell allows you to get that extreme color purity which of course is what you always see with OLED. So this is exciting in terms of colors. It's exciting in terms of contrast. They are talking about a 150,000 contrast ratio. What is OLED talking about in contrast ratio? I think the answer is that it's broadly comparable. Nobody can achieve a million to one contrast ratio because actually the light reflecting off your face back onto the screen will degrade the black level. So over 100,000 I think at that stage you can say that we take it off the we take it off the table and it then depends on things like the room conditions like are you sitting in a room with a white wall? So when I did the interview with Hisense at Display Week I think he was mentioning about it getting up to dual 4K but you don't think it's necessary? The risk when you go and add the same resolution is that first of all you've got to make sure that the two cells match exactly. Otherwise you start seeing that the black stripes in between them overlap each other and you get a reduction in the light coming through the panel. How did they align? That's their secret source in the process. So I think on this one this is about returns to scale. So what one do you get most benefit for least cost? And that's the best value and whether going all the way down to a single pixel is necessary I think is very debatable. In the end put the two next to each other, put on your content and see whether you can see a difference. If you can see the difference then think about how much it's worth to you. If you can't see a difference don't pay for it like all these things. As far as I understand the 8K demo which maybe is the first time they show is more or less the same NITs. I think they had one last year. They had 8K dual cell. I think they had not dual cell no. Dual cell but more or less the same NITs potentially as an OLED but this one is supposed to have twice the NITs. It's important to have more NITs. Yes it is but at the same time you've got to remember the energy consumption. So that's a warm screen. An 8K screen has 35% less transmissivity in its glass compared to a 4K screen because you've got to have all the conductors and things to connect the transistors up and you've got to have the black layers in between the pixels. And therefore 8K screens are less efficient than 4K. If you go and look at some of the energy performance of 8K screens they're using a lot of power. So 65 inches of 500 watts is getting very very close to the legal limit of what you can have on a TV in Europe. So 8K has an energy consumption problem and the ways that people can use to reduce the energy consumption are going to be critical. Is there something to do so if you do an 8K with LCD technology you're losing four times their brightness or two times or something like that but in OLED there's no lose and loss but they're limited to their... No I mean on OLED you have other problems related to things like screen loading and so on so very definitely you can't do resolution for free. Emissive technologies typically have more problems with fine pixel structures than LCD because the energy has to be transported through those pixels and out whereas in LCD of course it's just a switch. All I think is clear at the moment is that 8K is another step again that's worse on efficiency and that's a major problem. So I think this looks really amazing. It looks like potentially this is the best LCD in the market right now. But there's other stuff happening. There's other dual layers. So I know of at least three brands that have got dual layer that they've shown publicly. I'm sure some other ones have them in their private areas that they've been showing to dealers and industry insiders which obviously I can't talk about. At the same time people are also looking at other ways to solve this problem. So another way to do it is you put in literally thousands and thousands of LEDs and the micro and mini LED technology allows you again to have backlights with many, many, many zones. Not 255 like we're seeing at the moment. But maybe 2000, 10,000 zones. And again, it gets you to that point that you really minimize the amount of light that gets wasted in the back of the panel. So what's going to be best? Dual layer or mini LED? Don't know. Let's wait and see. Dimming. I really have no idea. I think the creativity of the engineers and how people design these things and the optical components they put in will be critical at the moment. I wouldn't want to call it in the end. It doesn't matter what the spec says, what matters is what it looks like. And often creating a product that is very well balanced is more important than doing one thing well. So the ones that are publicly announced that are doing dual layer that's showing stuff, is it a company like? So so as an example, then Panasonic's doing an interesting one, which is dual layer with OLED and it's to be transparent. And then you can switch the LCD on in the back to give you a good black level. So I think we're really at an early stage. The products that we see at the moment in dual layer are really only prototypes. A few of them have been test marketed, but it's a very immature technology that the ideas are really just beginning on this one. So they're combining a transparent OLED with LCD? Transparent OLED with an LCD behind it. What's the point in doing? The problem with a transparent display is it's like projection, is that the black level is only ever as black as the ambient lighting condition. And so where people have done transparent OLED displays, they look rather fun, but it's a gray and white display. The black level is always very washed out. So to return that black, which is of the unactivated screen, then they put an LCD at the back of it. It's a prototype, but it's a fun idea. And again, it's something interesting to look at. It probably would be more expensive than just an OLED. Oh, yeah. Because you get an OLED and an LCD, you have to align them and everything. There's a lot more components in there. You probably only need a single cell on the LCD, because it's only going to be black and white. But we'll see. I think we're seeing, again, a lot more ideas that people are doing on this. And it just goes to show that evolution on LCD is really not finished. So is this also a single layer LCD in the back, because it's just a black and white 1080p in the back? Where's the single cell? I don't know. It's the answer. So I think that it's a 1080p panel. I'm just trying to talk about the second layer. I think a 1080p panel. So that for every four UHD pixels, you've got a single lighting box behind that. That only does black and white. Yeah, that's all you need. And it's the same LCD technology than the front layer, more or less. But it's like... Yeah, exactly. You take out the color filter and you just use an extra light switch that gives you the pattern of a many, many, many zone backlight. Light switch. Yeah, this is what LCD is. It's a switch. Yeah, it turns the light on and off. So if we jump over just over here, here are high sensors showing something else. They're showing a chip that they have right here. Because my understanding over the past years, we also did a couple other interviews, is that sometimes high sensors or other companies, they have panels that might be from Samsung or from LG or some kind of that. Or they could be from BOE or others. And sometimes the main difference is the processing between the different brands. So the TV video processor chip is much forgotten. I think most enthusiasts get very, very, very bothered about the make of panel. And they forget about the video processing. Now, everybody in OLED is using the same display. There may be some very slight detail differences, but it's basically the same OLED panel from LG Display. However, if you put a Sony, a Philips, Panasonic, and everybody else, LG, of course, put their OLED TVs together, you line them all up, then they look different. They look really amazingly different. And that is down to the video processor inside it. So potentially Sony has a really sweet one. That's why some people say they have the best OLED. I think on all these things, it always goes by what you like. I think people emphasize different things. So some people want to make the image look very busy and very exciting. Some people want to make the image look very natural. Both are right and it's about taste. Is there any chance that company like Hisense or TCL or Skywars, which is over here, is it possible that their engines are apart with the other ones? I think there's an experience curve. This is a subjective business. In the end, you enjoy watching video content, TV, movies, whatever. Just like music and what kind of stereo to buy or whatever, it depends on what you like. It's like saying, what's the best car in the world? Yeah, okay. A Ferrari Scuderia is a pretty great car, unless you want to take free bags of cement home from the builders. In which case, it's a pretty terrible car. And it's about what's appropriate for what you want. And I don't think that there's a case of what's the best TV. It's what's the right TV for you. And here, as you walk over here, there is... Here's some demos with Hisense showing Android TV. They also have their read-out. I'm thinking, why doesn't everybody just use Android TV and stop doing all these different... I think that's one of the saddest things about the smart TV whole thing, is that there's fragmentation. Everybody should use Android, but Google doesn't want to share the revenue. What's the problem? Right. And so this is the key one, is this about business models, first of all. I think the other one is that it turns out the value proposition of TV is watching TV. And a lot of things in interactivity and app stores and things like that are frankly irrelevant for TV. A TV is a shared device. If you want something personal, you keep it on your phone. If you want to order a pizza, you're going to do it with your phone. Why? Because that's got your bank details in it. Would I want my bank details inside the TV? No, because I've got 17-year-old children. Yeah, and I think that that makes them fundamentally different. Most people only watch a few channels, most people only use a few video apps, and the question is really whether Android TV is just totally over-specified for the task that is really demanded of it. So that's why, for example, I don't know if it's HiSense or maybe TCL Day using Roku in the US. Somehow it's preferred over there, it's simpler, or I don't know. Right. So Roku is a very, very simple user interface. It's extremely clear, it's easy to use, it's stable, it's simple, it does what it says on the packet. And that is very, very different from these over-complicated other systems. And I think this is always about creating something that is appropriate to the market. And Android TV is imagining that the phone is a 65-inch smartphone. Sorry, the TV is a 65-inch smartphone. The TV is not a 65-inch smartphone. You do something totally different with it. Most of the time with the TV, you're not interacting with it. You're just watching it. And so... Sure, but maybe this is... I don't know if the Android TV market is growing, I guess it probably is. But isn't it a little bit of a failure on Google's part? It's a huge company. Why can't they make something simple? Right. And I think one of the things is that Google is an internet company. Google expects products to change every couple of years to evolve very fast. And then you've got the TV, which most people keep for, say, six to eight years. A device that spends most of its time playing back, not being an interactive device like the phone. And therefore, it's something completely different. AI in a washing machine. How often do you want to talk to your washing machine? Well, not very often. Do you want to operate your washing machine remotely? No, because you've still got to put the clothes in and take them out. And so I think that often with Android, there's a misunderstanding of what people really want to use a TV for, and that they've put too many functions in, most of which aren't used. I think Google should have said from the beginning, 70 or 80% revenue share goes to the manufacturer. They don't need to like... I think they're scaring them off by, you know, wanting to control the future of all revenue. Right. When Google should just be making revenue on their advertising and stuff, they don't need to control the whole thing. Right. And I think the other issues on all this are, of course, personal data and privacy. And very, very definitely, TV set makers are somewhat concerned that Android TV is a bit of a trap. They remember what happened in OSs in PCs, where you just get relegated to being unable to control anything different about your hardware. And all the profits were just Microsoft and Intel. And all the manufacturers mean nothing. Yeah, it was a very, very tough business making PCs. Still is. If they're worried about that in TV, I'd argue it's happened already just between the hypercompetition between brands. But again, they see this as a kind of trap. Also in fairness, up until very recently, there hasn't been much choice in OS. Suddenly, in Europe, we're now getting Roku and Fire TV. We've never had those before. So there's only been one open OS. The US has been very, very different, very diverse world of OSes there. So I think this is introducing more competition into it. And Android TV is a complicated thing. And a lot of the time in the market, then the hardware cost just has not justified the extra functionality. I think this bad strategy, and hopefully they'll fix it, but what Android TV has kind of missed the thing, it created a place for Netflix and Amazon Prime to just dominate totally. Right. Because it's hard for a startup to start making an app that works in seven different smart TVs. Right. Well, the Netflix and Amazon works everywhere, but a startup cannot develop for seven platforms. And I talked to one company who was doing apps for TV, and they said that 75% of their R&D spend was just porting. So that's not the stuff that's creating new apps. It's not improving the apps. That's just making them work. That's a huge barrier to the success of smart TVs. It's a massive barrier to the success. The other problem with smart TVs is that this is a slow selling product by comparison with mobile phones. For every TV that gets shipped every year, then there's five phones. Then you split it up between brands and OSs, and you end up with very small quantities. It's also not a market that is homogeneous worldwide on a couple of mobile phone standards and things like that. You've got lots of local broadcast standards, people use and watch TV differently in every country. And so as a result, it's a very, very, very diverse market. I hope it gets better in this thing, because I think it's a little bit... I'm a little bit disappointed that there's a big happening. I think they should just go Android TV. But let's go over there one more. Over here, there is some interesting aspect ratio going on here. But this is kind of like just a demo, right? Do you think people are going to be buying this? This is, I think, the third time around. We've seen 21 by 9. Well, all broadcast content is 16 by 9. So for the rest of the time, you're going to be watching, you know, this is 105-inch TV. And so most of the rest of the time, you're going to have a 65-inch TV experience at a 105-inch cost. Even when you look at Hollywood content, then if you take the Blu-ray, yes, it has the black bars top and bottom, but you're then going to be stretching those remaining lines. And that's not going to be the same resolution as the panel. Yeah, so I don't think that it makes a great deal of sense. Most content is 16 by 9. There is, of course, the cup. But, okay, okay, this shortly is the DLP. I think it's cool, but it's different than... Excellent, I can't. Yeah, okay, cool. Okay, and then behind there is some other stuff, I guess, but this is more like... This is just rounded edges. It's probably also something that's just for trade show. What do you think? It's a bit of fun. I think one of the things that we're really seeing this year at IFA is that people are doing lots of ideas to change the design of the TV from just being a big black slab on the wall or just sitting in front of the wall. We've seen a lot of TVs look like furniture. We've seen invisible TVs that turn into pictures. Okay, they've been around a couple of years. Everybody is now looking at this, which is saying, let's make a TV that somebody loves. Yeah, let's make a TV that offends some people and other people love it. Whereas up until now, we've just had products that offended nobody, but nobody felt excited about them. And do you know what? I've got a bit of affection for this one. There's not much in that little corner that you're ever going to miss. Really? In the future. There's not much you're going to miss there. And it looks sleek. I think that's a bit of fun. I'd rather like that. A lot of phones are doing rounded edges also. Yeah, absolutely. It's kind of like having a big phone. So we've got a 75-inch smartphone there. And it hasn't got a notch either. Now, I think this is a bit of fun. And I think this shows that the industry is becoming a bit more playful. Right. So just very shortly, this IFA is a little bit like being a kid in a candy store, right? There's stuff happening with the TCL also. There's some new stuff. I think the pace of innovation is slowing compared to five or 10 years ago. It's a mature business. The TV business globally is barely growing. And it's a replacement market. And we're now talking about refinements rather than breakthroughs. It's also a market that's really struggling with overcapacity. It's a market that's struggling with low profitability. And so what we're seeing now is a lot of effort put in to try and bring value back to this market. And a lot of these little playful gimmicks and fun things and design are really going to become much more important in the future. And IHS Market, your company that does analysis of all this stuff? We researched this business. We forecast this business. So you have all kinds of customers who are interested to know what's happening, right? So our customers include the brands, the panel makers, the component makers, and above all, this is a big business. So it also includes all the people who finance this business, for example. And last, shortly, High Sense was up on the dual layers, partnering with BOE. And BOE is at the display week, we're said to be the biggest capacity. They do. They have, in terms of area, they make far more now than anybody else. So there's a lot of... Hopefully there'll be customers for all this stuff, right? That is the issue, that at the moment, then Chinese companies have staked billions, or even tens of billions of dollars, on everybody wanting a 65 or a 75-inch screen. And they've worked on the Field of Dreams business case that if they build it, then people will come. At the moment, there is overcapacity. There's a lot of overcapacity. And that risks... It is already damaging profitability. And so making sure that the industry manages to go around the black hole and not down, it is a critical problem. So there's not everybody in India going to buy one? It's got to be at a price that they can afford. It's just like smartphones. In the smartphone business, the growth area is sub-$30 smartphones. In India, people buy 23-inch TVs because they can't afford a 32. And even if you sell a 32-inch TV at $100, which, by the way, means you don't make any money, then for many, many consumers, that is too much money. All right. But thanks a lot for this video. No problem at all, Nikola. Thank you for seeing this innovation happening. I think Ifai is pretty awesome. Yeah. Thank you.