Samsung Absorbs Memory Cost Pressure, Betting Market Share for Future Profits
Nashnova编辑部
Memory prices doubled, yet Samsung raised phone prices just 7% — posting a quarterly loss to reclaim the global No. 1 shipment rank, wagering that today's share gains convert to profit once costs normalize.
Memory costs doubled — why did phones rise only 7%?
In H1 2026, Samsung's handset division paid 211% more for mobile memory versus the 2025 full-year average, yet average phone selling prices rose only about 7%.
This means → Samsung absorbed nearly all of the cost surge instead of passing it to buyers.
The price showed up instantly: the mobile and networks unit posted a ₩700 billion quarterly loss in Q2 2026, on revenue of roughly ₩33.2 trillion (~$24 billion).
Doesn't making your own chips help — what is vertical integration really worth here?
Samsung manufactures its own DRAM and NAND flash, but internal procurement costs rose 211% while the memory division's external average selling price rose about 220% — virtually the same.
In plain terms = the advantage is no longer "cheaper in-house chips." It is "when rivals can't get supply, Samsung still can."
This reflects a structural moat: in a tight market, supply certainty itself becomes a competitive barrier — and competitors cannot easily replicate it.
Why can't Samsung just raise Galaxy A prices?
Counterpoint data show that in Q3 2025, five of the world's ten best-selling phones were Samsung models — and all five were Galaxy A devices.
This means → the mid-to-low-end A series is the ballast of Samsung's global shipment volume; hiking its prices would directly surrender share in emerging markets and carrier channels.
Samsung therefore runs a two-track product strategy: Galaxy S and Z protect premium branding, while Galaxy A safeguards the volume base.
What are competitors doing — and why does Samsung dare go the other way?
Counterpoint forecasts a 14.3% year-on-year decline in global smartphone shipments for 2026. Apple falls 2.1%; Chinese brands Honor, OPPO, vivo, Xiaomi and Transsion drop between 15% and 34%.
Samsung's shipments are expected to rise 0.8%, lifting full-year share to roughly 22.6% — just above Apple's 22.5% — potentially reclaiming the global No. 1 spot.
In plain terms = almost every rival is cutting volume to protect margins. Samsung alone is willing to lose money to grab territory — a rare configuration.
What is this "counter-cyclical bet" actually staking?
Samsung's strategic logic: if the memory-supply crunch eases after H2 2027, the users, channels and share defended today at slim markups can convert into higher profits later.
DX division head Roh Tae-moon recently told employees that expanding market share will be a core operating priority in the second half.
This reflects Samsung treating the current losses as an entry cost — but whether share advantage translates into profit in the next smartphone upcycle is the make-or-break test of the strategy.
市场有风险，内容仅供研究参考，不构成投资建议。