After Verdict, Assessing the Samsung Strategy in South Korea

The following is an excerpt from an article in 

The New York Times
Monday, September 03, 2012

After Verdict, Assessing the Samsung Strategy in South Korea

By CHOE SANG-HUN

SEOUL, South Korea — When a jury in San Jose, Calif., ordered Samsung Electronics to pay $1.05 billion in damages for violating Apple’s patents for the iPhone and iPad, it did more than decide who had infringed upon whose intellectual property. To South Koreans, the legal battle highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of both Samsung and their economy in general.

“The ruling makes us reconsider the brand value of Samsung because it depicts Samsung as a copycat,” said James Song, who monitors Samsung for KDB Daewoo Securities in Seoul. “But a copycat or not, what Samsung has done with its smartphones was a brilliant move.”

“Look what has happened to companies like Nokia, Motorola and BlackBerry, which didn’t do as Samsung did,” Mr. Song added, referring to competitors whose failures to adapt quickly to the smartphone boom driven by iPhones have drastically reduced their market shares. “Samsung may lack in innovation, but right now, no one can beat Samsung in playing catch-up.”

For months, the South Korean media have watched avidly as Samsung, the world’s largest technology company by sales, clashes with Apple, the world’s No. 1 company by market value, over patent lawsuits in various countries.

Calling Samsung South Korea’s biggest, most profitable and most globally recognized brand barely explains the intense and often mixed emotions the name evokes among South Koreans.

In Samsung, they see the crown jewel of their country’s transformation from a war-torn agrarian society into a global technology powerhouse.

Once an assembler of clunky transistor radios, Samsung is now the world’s top seller of smartphones and high-resolution television sets, as well as memory chips and flat-panel displays that allow those devices and others to store and display data.

Japanese companies have beaten rivals to the market with hardware innovations like flat-panel televisions and high-end mobile phones. Samsung waited for the others to test the market, and when it determined the time was right, it joined the fray to cash in.

Samsung’s strategy was to build something similar to another company’s product but to make it better, faster and at lower cost. When it pounced, it flooded the market with a wide range of models that were constantly updated with incremental improvements at a speed its rivals found hard to match — a strategy best illustrated by its smartphone business. Heavy investments have not been a problem; it once secured low-cost loans from a government-controlled banking sector friendly to big businesses and now draws on its own coffers, which are sloshing with cash.

For more, visit www.nytimes.com.