LED產業進入及併購成長策略之個案研究

Abstract

白光LED技術經過十多年的發展，在需求量快速拉升的情形下，帶動了整個LED產業投資熱潮，形成產業規模經濟及技術改善的加速成熟，從而使得LED在照明市場的應用也提早來臨。然而，台灣LED業者在這一波LED快速發展過程中，除了要面對原有國際五大LED廠的競爭外，尚需面對韓國大廠挾著擁有終端產品的品牌及通路優勢，以及大陸的廠商在政府十二五計劃經濟的優惠補助政策及資本巿場的協助下，大量擴建LED產能的競爭。因此，LED產業雖看似仍在初期發展階段，但由於產能的快速開出，LED產業發展快速走入現在的上中游產能過剩，下游削價競爭的困境，許多體質不佳的廠商陸續倒閉或被併購。 有鑑於此，本研究針對台灣LED產業過去採取的分工模式，以及選取一家以垂直整合與併購方式進入市場的個案公司，進行深入的研究，以了解如何能夠在動態競爭的環境中，建立可持續的競爭優勢。 本研究發現，台灣LED產業過去係採取小而美的垂直分工模式，雖然因此而擁有全球最完整的LED供應鏈，但由於缺乏上下游的密切整合，導致創新動能不足，只能在細分市場提供產品和服務。但當白光LED導入LCD面板產業發展初期與快速成長階段，台灣許多專工的廠商面對面板應用市場所需的專利保護、快速反應、品質、成本、技術、服務、規模等要求，並無法發揮一站式快速服務、技術和產能的優勢，導致整體競爭力下降。 本研究發現個案公司以一條龍垂直整合的進入策略，先透過策略合作取得完整的專利保護，排除專利障礙，以取得進入TFT-LCD面板市場先機。其後，更不斷以併購方式，進行垂直、水平整合的成長策略，以取得人才、技術、產品、產能及市場等，快速提高營收並維持獲利，整合技術並累積專利數量，優化應用市場和產品及客戶組合，從而提高公司的競爭力。本研究發現，個案公司在母公司作為主要出海口的支持下，採取垂直整合的進入策略，並未因此失去經營彈性與成本優勢。最後，本論文並探討垂直整合策略對市場進入的策略意涵與限制。

After a decade of technology development in the white light LED, a rapid demand on its applications to the backlight module for various forms of LCD displays triggered the segment growth around the years of 2010, which attracted increasing amount of investments to the entire LED industry and therefore boosted up the scale economies of production and the advancement of applied technologies. Such fast development also stimulates the progress of the LED applications in the lighting market. Despite such fast growth and development, Taiwanese players in this sector have to face fierce competition from not only the original five international LED companies, but also the existing Korean and the late-entry Chinese players. These Asian competitors are backed up by either abundant resources or governmental policies. Due to increasing entrants, the LED industry soon becomes commoditized with price erosion and excess capacity. Many companies shut down operations or eventually exit. Within such a competitive context, we found that a new entrant who undertakes vertical integration (VI) approach and M&A strategy to successfully boost its growth and eventually establishes its position in the LED industry. While such VI approach is very different from the majority of Taiwanese players in the electronics sector, which commonly takes vertical specialization approach, our research therefore takes in-depth case study on this company and hopes draw practical lessons for future purposes. Our case study indicates that VI entry strategy would be competitive when new applied markets require one-stop-shopping kind of services those include patent protections, quick response, quality, costs and quick scale ramp-up, etc. Such strategy would be more feasible if the new entrant can control down-stream product orders to a certain extent. To execute VI strategy, the case company undertakes several successful M&As to make its vertical configuration completed. Overall, the case company put all factors in this game and therefore won the battle. Implications of using VI strategy to enter into emerging markets are also discussed.