There is really no reason for Samsung to buy PANL. emitter as a percentage of total OLED cost is low and falling over time. Buying PANL would do little to move Samsung's needle but would create a ton of issues in terms of anti-trust. I mean think of what would have happened if Motorola had bought Qualcomm and shut out other handset vendors or creating a permanent cost differential - this just wouldn't happen because the courts wouldn't allow it. And it won't happen here because the risk far outweighs the reward. Samsung is a GIANT company, they will be happy getting the volume discounts build in to their contract.
Eventually someone is going to take out PANL, probably once the tv ramp is confirmed last this year. But it won't be an OEM, it will be a chemical company or a semicap equipment company - someone who can bundle PANL's products with their own offerings and drive more sales of both.
I'm with you on this one - it sounded more like Samsung is looking of some small companies like 100M in size.
Moreover, I think, if there is an article about Samsung going on shopping spree then it's most likely nothing going to happen in next 3 months at least.
On the other hand, consider Samsung side :
simple estimates - say UDC gets 100M per year from Samsung for next 5 years. It is a bit less this year but it's going to increase, so 100M on average is probably underestimate. That's half billion already. Would it make sense to pay 4x more just to keep it whole for itself ? And then LG may want to chip in - split it 50-50 and it's not that expensive after all.
If PANL market cap is 1.4B now then 2B would be 40% premium - all the longs here would hate it but this is in line with general acquisition practice. $300 pps is 1000% premium, nobody pays that, not even 300% (or $100 pps) , sorry.
Well, enough of that - we all agreed that it's up to management anyway, not Samsung or Apple or LG.
I think that first article about Samsung and LG going to cross license each other OLED technology is more interesting - how much it would affect UDC. If Samsung is going to build chemical plant (or rebuild the one that exploded recently) will they undermine UDC chemical sales? UDC has exclusive clause in the contract with Samsung but LG may not.
This could certainly rekindle the fire on that speculation finally giving a specific suitor that actually makes a lot more sense than Apple. The justification would be to protect their IP position so that Apple could not make an acquisition of PANL and continue a new front in the IP war they have already waged against Samsung. If you look at the size of the stock moves on speculation of an IDCC takout we saw swings on IDCC takeout from 23 to a high of 82 back when they were openly evaluating strategic alternatives, and one move to low sixties after their review was over, I am pretty sure.