Q: RiTdisplay Corporation is a fairly young company but one that has made rapid progress in OLED production. Can you give a few details of how the company came into being and just how far you have come?

A: RiTdisplay was originally a division of Ritek Corp. We began R&D in flat-panel displays around 1997. At that time, some in the company concluded that this type of technology has potential, that it could work, so we started to install equipment from 1999 onwards. In year 2000, we were spun off from Ritek and became RiTdisplay, and by that time we already had our own production facility.

At that time, the CEO of Ritek Corporation, Mr. Yeh, was exploring ideas for extending Ritek’s business. He was particularly interested in products that would extend the core technology of Ritek, especially its expertise in disc media production, as well as meet market demand. OLED display production fitted that requirement. For example, Ritek had already developed ITO sputtering for CDR production, and that process is also required for OLED production. Ritek also had spin-coating and vacuum-deposition processes for disc media production. Deposition processes are also required for OLED production.

A second key factor was the need for product differentiation. At that time, the flat-panel display market was undergoing major development, but most of the investment was in LCD displays. The question for Ritek was how to differentiate itself in the flat-panel market. Too many people were already working on TFT LCDs. OLED was one answer, in a situation where global demand for flat-panel displays was very positive. As well, there was little or no competition in OLED in Taiwan. Before, OLED production had always been handled by the Japanese and the Koreans.

Q: Did Ritek assume that OLED could be profitable, right from the start?

A: There was always an assumption that the market would be good, even though OLED production could be technically quite difficult. The thinking was that with the right kind of people involved in the project, we would be able to achieve OLED products within a reasonable timeframe. Ritek already had key technologies, so the expectation was that it would be possible to make OLED production profitable within three to four years.

Q: RiTdisplay has developed its OLED capability within a fairly short period. How much fabrication capability have you been able to build and equip in that time? Do you have any plans for expanding production capacity?

A: We now have two fabs. We had already built Fab 1 by the time we spun off from Ritek. Fab 1 was ready for mass production in year 2000. We had successfully tested products, by that time.

At the same time, we decided to start a second fab here [in Hukou, at the northern end of the Hsinchu Science Park]. Our old building, Fab 1, is much smaller, but it is fully installed and running. Here at Fab 2 there is still plenty of space available. All new products that we develop within the next three years can be made in this building.

At this time, we have no plans for building any further product facilities. Any further expansion would depend basically on technology development. Currently, we are using Gen 2 substrate, for example, so if we decided we needed to produce OLED panels at a size suitable for notebook PCs, then we would need a new fab. At the moment we have no such plan or schedule.

To date, Gen 2 (370 x 470) substrate is the size we are able to handle. For a 1-inch display, 200 displays can be cut from one substrate, and the target market is usually the second display on a mobile phone.

Major shareholders are Ritek, Intel, Dupont, GE and Futaba. They invest in RiTdisplay because this is a new technology, and they are hopeful that OLED could replace existing technologies such as TFT LCD.

Here at RiTdisplay, our OLED technology is somewhat different from that of other companies. There are basically two processes for TFT LCD, array and LCD. Currently, we implement an OLED process, but what we need is some support for TFT array, and this TFT array would need to be based on our specs. We need to be able to share technical information with the vendor, to ensure that the vendor is able to meet our requirements. We will not be making the array here, but we have released technical data and specs to vendors, to enable them to design an array that satisfies our requirements. The array process would have some similarity with the process for LCD array manufacture, but there would be some difference.

Q: What is the financial standing of RiTdisplay? What do the latest set of results look like?

A: Sales revenues in 2003 were US$48 million, with over four million displays shipped. We expect shipments to increase by 30%, this year.

Last year, our total shipments of OLED products made us the world’s number three producer of OLED displays, and we expect we will maintain the number three position in 2004. The world’s number one producer is Tohoku Pioneer, a subsidiary of Pioneer. The number two producer is SNMD, Samsung NEC Mobile Display, which this year changed its name to Samsung OLED, when NEC sold its stock to Samsung.

Tohoku Pioneer sells some 60% of output to the parent company. Samsung OLED (formerly SNMD) sells 90% of output to the parent company. Tohoku Pioneer produces OLED displays primarily for use in in-car audio products. Samsung focuses on production of OLED displays for use in mobile phones.

Here at RiTdisplay we sell OLED products for a variety of uses, but the major application is use in mobile phones – normally as the second or sub-display. There are customers with whom we have particularly good relations, including some well known brand names such as Motorola in Korea. We also have some major customers in China. We make some displays for mobile phones carrying the Philips brand name.

Q: What is your technical capability now? What technologies are already on offer and what are under development?

A: At RiTdisplay we are capable of a range of technologies. Using different kinds of material, our OLED displays can be divided into basically two kinds, SMOLED (Small Molecule OLED) and PLED (Polymer OLED). The majority of our production is of SMOLED-type displays. We have worked on the development of SMOLED displays right from the start, and in the process we have developed a good deal of IP (Intellectual Property). We have accumulated many patents. However, we do have one line where we are working with Dupont on the development of Polymer OLEDs – PLEDs.

Currently Polymer OLEDs – PLEDs – can only be produced as monochrome displays. SMOLEDs, on the other hand, can be monochrome, multicolor or full color.

From an application point of view, the future of PLEDs may well lie with the development of inkjet technology, which effectively prints the display rather than forms the display on a substrate. Using this approach, the polymer material is in a liquid form, and the inkjet technology normally uses the piezo-electric effect, as used in Epson printers – so Seiko-Epson is regarded as the technology leader in inkjet for PLED production. At RiTdisplay we do have an R&D team focused on the development of this kind of inkjet technology.

The use of inkjet technology should enable the production of full-color PLED displays. Another advantage of this approach is that there is, theoretically, no restriction on the size of the display. Normally the size of the display is restricted by the size of the substrate, the size of the shadow-mask and so on. However, the inkjet printing of PLEDs is still in development. The polymer materials and machines are not yet ready.

The two leaders in the development of inkjet-printed PLEDs are Seiko Epson and Philips. Both companies have demoed PLED displays produced in this way, and the results have been very promising. The displays were not as good as SMOLED displays in quality, but they were still quite good. Epson, in May of this year, demoed a 40-inch PLED display using four smaller displays joined together. Philips has demoed a smaller display. However, there is no product actually in the market that has been produced using this kind of inkjet technique. The technology is not ready yet.

At RiTdisplay we do not intend to compete in PLED technology with Philips or Epson. We have developed our own SMOLED technology. Nevertheless, it would be good if we could apply inkjet technology, so we have a team continuing to study it. It’s a question of market direction. If the technology reaches the point when it is ready and available, then we are ready. If at that time this kind of technology can make cheaper and better quality displays, then for sure we can make PLED displays also.

We are confident we could make PLEDs because for us there is only one process difference between SMOLED and PLED production, and that difference is the inkjet process. Otherwise the processes are the same for either type of OLED product, and the same machines can be used. It would be easy for us to make the switch from one type of product to the other, if necessary. All that would be required is an investment in inkjet technology.

Q: Do you have any technology development or transfer arrangements with other entities? Some display technology development in Taiwan has been funded by ITRI, for example. Other companies have technology transfer arrangements with Japanese companies, for example.

A: All of our technologies are our own technologies. We do not have any program for cooperation with other companies or other entities or agencies. We have no technology transfer from anywhere. However, we do need to have an OLED technology license from Kodak because they are the inventors of the technology.

Dupont has to have a license from CDT (Cambridge Display Technology), which has IP for Polymer OLEDs, and from Kodak for SMOLEDs.

Our relationship with Dupont is something like cooperation – technology cooperation. And of course Dupont also invests in us. Dupont and RiTdisplay are working together on the development of PLED technology.

Q: Are there any “killer” applications for OLED? What are the market attractions of the technology?

A: Typical applications for OLED displays are usually thought to be compact displays for mobile phones, in-car audio players, and personal electronic devices such as MP3 players. However, there is thought to be considerable market potential for the use of large OLED displays. It could be possible to make extremely slim OLED TVs, for example. They would be very slim because no backlighting would be required. OLED is of course an emissive display technology. The potential for these large displays exists because full-color OLED displays are only limited in size by two factors: the deposition process and the size of the substrate. Companies such as Sony have made an OLED TV their goal. As I know, in Japan there are currently two projects supported by the Japanese government. One is to produce a large OLED monitor, perhaps a large-size TV. The other is to make an OLED-based external light source. In other words, it’s possible OLED technology could be used for lighting in buildings and so on.

OLED is thought to be a particularly good type of display for TVs because it is an emissive technology. The image quality is considered superior to that of TFT LCD. As well, OLED does not have the limited response times of TFT LCD. We measure the response time of OLED displays in micro-seconds, not the milli-seconds associated with LCD displays. In other words, OLED is capable of response times a thousand times faster than those of LCD. The viewer cannot detect any delay in the response time of OLED displays, and there is no problem with the display of fast-action movies and sports.

As well, OLED does not have the restricted viewing angle associated with TFT LCD displays. Most LCD displays do not offer a viewing angle greater than 100 degrees. OLED, though, is capable of viewing angles greater than 170 degrees.

OLED does not require backlighting, and as a result the displays can be extremely slim. OLED has what is known as a thin-film structure, and in fact OLED displays could be flexible and curved. LCD displays, on the other hand, require a fixed cell gate in order for the liquid crystal to work well.

The natural brightness of OLED emissive displays is also a key advantage. OLED displays are capable of contrast ratios in excess of 400:1, and that is achieved without backlighting.

Q: A key disadvantage of OLED displays is thought to be their short lifetime. That’s one reason why they are considered satisfactory for the mobile handset market, where product lifecycles may be down to two years at the most. Can the lifetime be improved?

A: Certainly, lifetime is one of the concerns at the moment, and LCD displays are superior from that point of view. An LCD display has a typical lifetime of 50,000 hours, but OLED cannot match this. Currently, the lifetime of an OLED display is between 5,000 – 10,000 hours.

My own view is that the lifetime of an OLED display depends on two factors. One is the material from which the display is made. The second factor is the manufacturer. Can the manufacturer design a device with a longer lifetime? Progress is ongoing, and within one or two years we can probably achieve an OLED display lifetime that could meet consumer requirements. I think that in two or three years we could be seeing OLED displays with a lifetime of 20,000 – 30,000 hours.

Q: In the meantime, can an OLED maker such as RiTdisplay hope to compete realistically with TFT LCD technology?

A: We are competing with TFT LCD now! Although there are no new applications – with the exception of flexible displays, possibly – the major application for our products are sub-displays in mobile phones. These use a form of passive matrix OLED; they don’t need an array, just a driver.

We spent two years developing these passive displays, and now we are trying to step up to larger-size products and applications. Sometime this second half we will start to offer products that could be used as the primary display in mobile phones.

Currently in passive matrix displays we are offering a resolution of 128×128 pixels. The next step, starting in 2005 will be to offer an AMOLED (Active Matrix OLED). The size will be 2.2 inches, and the resolution will be QCIF+ (176×220). This AMOLED could function as the primary display of a mobile phone. We intend to offer it in two sizes – 1.5-inch at 128×128, plus the 2.2-inch at QCIF+. Maybe there will also be a 1.8-inch version. The 1.5-inch AMOLED will be available this year. The 1.8- and 2.2-inch AMOLEDs will become available in 2005.

Q: Although RiTdisplay is a pioneer in OLED production, you are not alone. There are two or three other companies in Taiwan active in this area. In what way is RiTdisplay distinct? Who are your direct competitors?

A: Actually, we are playing in quite a big market. This year, mobile phone production will require more than 600 million displays. Then you can add in all the small personal devices, such as MP3 players, that will also require compact flat displays. What this means is that our direct competitors are the LCD display makers, not the OLED makers necessarily.

The same is true of other OLED makers in Taiwan. Right now, the second major player appears to be Univision. TECO is producing some OLED displays, although so far only in small quantities. TECO’s capacity is much smaller than ours. CMO (Chi Mei Optoelectronics) is also thought to be developing an OLED capability, but right now we have no information about what they will produce and when.

Eventually we will be competing in larger-size OLEDs, but not until we are absolutely sure we are taking a good and reliable product to market.

Canon, Toshiba form joint venture on SED TVs
Canon and Toshiba will establish a joint venture next month to manufacture and market panels for large TVs using SED (Surface-conduction Electron-emitter Display) technology, the two companies said on Tuesday.

In a related move, Toshiba will phase out production of plasma display televisions in 2007 as the joint venture begins mass production with SED technology, Toshiba President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Tadashi Okamura said in an interview.

The new company, called SED, will launch in mid-October and begin production of about 3,000 50-inch or bigger-sized panels per month in August 2005. Volume production of 15,000 panels per month will start in 2007, according to Shunichi Uzawa, designated director and group executive of the new company, which will be based in Hiratsuka, Japan, west of Tokyo.

Canon and Toshiba will initially invest YEN 20 billion (AU$250 million). Canon will own 50.002 percent of SED and Toshiba 49.998 percent, the companies said in a statement. Canon and Toshiba will invest a further YEN 180 billion (AU$2.3 billion) between the end of 2005 through 2006 to ready the company for mass production, Uzawa said at a press conference.

By the end of 2007, SED aims to produce about 75,000 panels a month, with sales of YEN 30 billion (AU$389.5 million) for the year, according to Uzawa. By the end of the decade, the company expects to be profitable with sales of YEN 200 billion (AU$2.6 billion).

"By 2010, we want to be producing about 3 million panels per year, and if I have to put a figure on it, we want a 30 percent market share of global TV sales for 40-inch and bigger TVs by that time," he said at a news conference.

TVs and displays could be made under the Toshiba brand, but Canon is considering buying TVs assembled by Toshiba and selling them itself, possibly under the Canon brand, Uzawa said.

The announcement is the second major move in two weeks by heavy-spending Japanese companies eager to corner the market for flat-panel televisions and displays of all sizes as demand for digital and high-definition televisions (HDTVs) expands globally after 2006.

On August 31, Toshiba, Matsushita Electric Industrial and Hitachi announced a AU$1.4 billion joint venture investment in Hitachi Displays to begin mass production of 26-inch to 32-inch LCD (liquid crystal display) panels. That company intends to expand its output to reach the equivalent of 2.5 million 32-inch TV LCD panels after October 2008. Sony and Samsung Electronics' S-LCD joint venture plans to begin mass production of large-size panels from a factory in South Korea in the first half of 2005.

High-definition digital terrestrial broadcasting, which is currently available in Japan and the U.S. and slated for launch in China by 2008, and an expanding market for next-generation DVD technologies will push demand for flat panel TVs, said Toshiba's Okamura. Internal forecasts conducted by Canon and Toshiba estimate that global demand for displays of 40 inches or bigger will rise from about 1.5 million units this year to 8.5 million units in 2008 and 12 million units in 2010.

"As digital television and HDTV broadcasting expands, people will need high-quality screens that will reflect the quality of the broadcasts," Okamura said.

SED technology offers a superior picture to LCD and plasma displays, but uses between half and one third of the power that LCD and plasma panels, according to Canon and Toshiba. The technology is a combination of CRT (cathode ray tube) and LCD technologies. As with CRTs, electrons hit a phosphor-coated screen to emit light. But instead of being shot out of a gun, electrons are drawn out of an emitter through a slit that is only a few nanometers wide. A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter.

The result is a picture that is as bright as a CRT and does not have the slight time delay sometimes seen in pictures that have rapidly moving images, the companies said. In a demonstration of 36-inch SED, plasma and LCD TVs set side-by-side, the SED picture was noticeably brighter and crisper, and images of fast-moving objects lacked the slight blur seen on the plasma and LCD screens.

Toshiba and Canon began joint development toward commercializing SED technology in 1999. Canon started researching the technology in 1986, but lacked CRT, semiconductor chip and other essential circuit technologies to produce TVs, according to Fujio Mitarai, president and CEO of Canon. SED technology can be used for panels of many sizes including those larger than 60 inches, he said.

After Toshiba phases out plasma TV production, any sets larger than 32 inches will include SED technology, while TVs with 26-inch to 32-inch screens will feature LCD technology, Toshiba's Okamura said. The company intends to sell SED-based TVs at about the same price as LCD and plasma TVs of similar sizes.

"When U.S. and European customers see the quality and clarity of SED, we are sure demand for our televisions will increase significantly," Okamura said.

Notes:
Names of companies and products are trademarks or registered trademarks of the respective companies.

In addition, the SED display's emission efficiency of over 5 lumens/watt is much higher than the 1 to 2 lumens/W of PDPs. The prototype 36-inch panel requires about half the power needed for PDPs and LCDs when it displays movie content and one-third of PDPs and two-thirds of LCDs when showing