iPhone Duo Foldable OLED Economics Report Model

Based on reported $250 Samsung screen supply cost via @WatcherGuru
High Margin Flagship Tier
BOM & Production Parameters
$250
Reported contract cost paid to Samsung Display per foldable panel unit.
$1,799
Estimated consumer MSRP for Apple's debut dual/folding flagship.
$550
Processor (A-series/M-series), titanium hinge chassis, dual batteries & triple cameras.
85%
Defect & stress test pass rate during ultra-thin glass (UTG) & OLED substrate layering.
15M
Total projected model lifetime or 12-month production run units.
Unit Profitability & Financial Split Real-time Model
Apple Gross Profit / Unit
$999
Margin: 55.5%
Samsung Display Profit / Unit
$162.5
Effective Fab Cost: $87.50
Total iPhone Duo Revenue
$26.985B
At 15.0M units shipped
Total iPhone Duo BOM Cost
$800
OLED Screen is 31.3% of BOM
Per-Unit Retail Value Allocation (USD) Samsung Display vs Other BOM vs Apple Margin
Economic Component Entity Per Unit ($) Total Total ($B)
Samsung Foldable Screen (OLED + UTG) Samsung Display $250.00 $3.750B
Non-Display Components & Assembly Foxconn / TSMC / Others $550.00 $8.250B
Apple Unit Gross Margin Apple Inc. (AAPL) $999.00 $14.985B
iPhone Duo Retail MSRP Consolidated Gross $1,799.00 $26.985B
Apple GP: 999
Margin: 55.5%
Samsung Unit Profit: 162.5
Status: High Margin Flagship Tier
Revenue: $26.985B
Export downloaded successfully

Component margins and yield: an assumed supply-chain model

Read the explanation

The saved foldable-display model enters one thousand seven hundred ninety-nine dollars retail, two hundred fifty display cost and five hundred fifty other bill of materials. Costs sum to eight hundred, leaving nine hundred ninety-nine unit gross profit. Dividing by retail gives approximately fifty-five point five percent. Bars compare assumed retail and gross profit at three tenths of a pixel per dollar. These saved inputs, product descriptions and company labels are not verified device announcements, supplier contracts, current prices or reported company margins. The model excludes operating expense, distribution, taxes, returns and research, so its gross profit is not net income. The source fixes a panel fabrication base at seventy-four dollars thirty-seven and a half cents. Dividing that by an eighty-five-percent yield assumption gives eighty-seven dollars fifty effective manufacturing cost. Subtracting this from the entered two-hundred-fifty-dollar selling cost produces one hundred sixty-two dollars fifty unit supplier profit. Bars compare manufacturing cost and supplier profit at three pixels per dollar. This division assumes rejected output redistributes all base cost over good panels; it does not observe a factory, recycling, rework or actual supplier accounting. Yield is a percentage input, not proof of a manufacturing process. The dollar result is rounded before display while the larger aggregate uses underlying unrounded values. At fifteen million assumed units, nine hundred ninety-nine dollars gross profit each scales to fourteen point nine eight five billion dollars. The high-yield preset changes retail to sixteen hundred ninety-nine, display cost two hundred ten, other materials five hundred twenty, yield ninety-two percent and volume twenty-two million. Unit gross profit becomes nine hundred sixty-nine and aggregate twenty-one point three one eight billion. The bars compare baseline fourteen point nine eight five with that larger aggregate at thirty pixels per billion; the second endpoint is six hundred thirty-nine point five four pixels. A volume assumption can raise aggregate despite lower unit profit. These are scenarios, not shipment forecasts or financial advice. Full original export values and resets remain preserved.

Super generates helpful tools and automates fact-checking across the internet proactively. If you enjoyed this tool, build your own with Super and share it with a friend.