upvote
China is about to flood the market and prove this notion wrong. If there is demand they want to meet it with supply.

But to your point, that is exactly how American companies like to play now. No one is stopping them from screwing over the consumer.

I have a Micron near me and they are building another chip facility but we are years away still so I suspect China will beat them to the punch.

reply
Yeah, more global competition in DRAM would be great.

SK Hynix and Samsung are South Korean.

reply
> SK Hynix and Samsung are South Korean.

The Korean memory makers are playing the same game as Micron and simply moving existing capacity up-market.

GP was referring to upstart Chinese memory manufacturers like ChangXin, who - if their yields manage to catch the wave - could not have asked for a more favorable market after the big 3 have abandoned the consumer market. Consumers who would have otherwise turned up their noses at CXMT will not have the luxury.

reply
I suspect Chinese factories will get built first, but quality may take a few years to really nail down.

Basically:

China floods the market with cheaper but less QA'd parts, makes a gazillion dollars, is able to spend said money to fix yields / QA issues and streamline operations, by the time that happens Micron and maybe a few other existing players will have new memory production, and then we'll have a flood of cheap, reliable memory. 4yr, maybe?

reply
If the existing memory makers retains control of the market and don't defect from the optimal-long-term equilibrium for themselves, that's true. It just takes one player to defect for short term gains as we've seen with some past boom-and-bust cycles. Alternatively, it takes a sufficiently-resourced player with enough incentive to enter the market themselves (NVidia, Google, Amazon, the PRC government through one of many companies...)
reply
Relevant article posted on HN about this a few days ago: https://davidoks.blog/p/ai-is-killing-the-cheap-smartphone
reply
Reminds me of how Samsung is giving out $340,000 per person bonuses. Shows you how much of a stronghold they have in market.
reply
Supply and demand always balance out. There is no way manufacturers aren’t going to compete away these inflated margins, as long as they feel like this demand is sustainable.
reply
You know there's other strategies? Companies can be more clever than naively undercutting each other...

Memory in particular ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_price_fixing_scandal

The entry-cost to getting into memory is on the order of $billions and years - you can do just about anything...

reply
Only in the most naive sense.

If it costs you $1B and five years to build out new supply and you think demand will not sustain for more than three years, it does not make sense to expand supply.

Instead you will maintain your margins currently and await demand to decrease back to your current supply.

This is pretty common and as others have pointed out is even more common in markets where competition is slow and lead times are long.

Ammunition is a great example over the last decade or so as political turnover caused relatively short lived demand spikes and manufacturers didn't expand supply because they knew once political winds shift, demand would decrease.

reply
There's very few manufacturers, I believe 3 globally? And there's a large moat. Nobody can compete with them in the next 10 years. It's really not hard to coordinate action between 3 companies.
reply
There are trillions to be made. That moat won't be as insurmountable in hindsight.
reply
There really aren't though. The reason there's only three is because memory is a commodity and margins are historically very low. It's not a very good business to be in, generally.

In the past when memory supply was short and then rebounded, many companies went out of business because making memory was no longer profitable.

reply
Apple could always decide to build their own fab or some such thing.
reply
That’s not the Apple way, but they might fund a supplier to build out capacity in return for priority access.

The thing is they tend to only do that when they can get a technological competitive advantage. The priority access gives them a locked in competitive edge, for a while. It’s not clear there is an opportunity like that in memory.

reply