Your attention is my accelerant, pay attention to it, learn more about finance, learn about finance, and understand finance.
In recent years, there has been a strong "imaging wind" in the smartphone market, and major brands have competed in the field of mobile phone imaging, among which co-branding with well-known international imaging companies is a widely recognized method, such as Leica, Hasselblad, Zeiss, etc. Through the cooperation with these brands, many mobile phone brands have achieved excellent results in the field of imaging. However, there is now a kind of news circulating in the market: some domestic mobile phone brands plan not to renew their contracts after the expiration of the joint brand, and intend to develop on their own. This is actually the meaning of "kicking away" the co-branded manufacturers, and they decided to develop their own image brands. This approach has caused various comments from netizens, some people think that this is a routine for Chinese companies to learn from Huawei, after all, Huawei has carried out joint cooperation in the field of imaging at the beginning, and now Huawei is fully promoting independent research and development, whether it is an operating system or a chip. Therefore, these Chinese companies have also followed Huawei's example and started to play independent research and development. Internally, this is nothing more than a joke. However, judging from foreign media reports, many people believe that this is an act of crossing the river and demolishing the bridge. There is no doubt that the strength of domestic brands in the field of imaging comes from co-branded cooperation, such as cooperation with Leica, Hasselblad and other brands, which brings great competitiveness to mobile phone brands. However, now that these brands have developed steadily, they plan to abandon these co-branded companies and develop their own imaging systems. From this point of view, it is not an exaggeration to say that they crossed the river and demolished the bridge. However, I personally don't completely agree with this point of view. On the contrary, I think it's the general trend. Huawei's mobile phone business has made great achievements, and if Huawei continues to focus on the mobile phone business, it is bound to have better development. After all, Huawei's overall strength is strong, with Kirin chips and HarmonyOS operating system, and it is already ahead of many domestic mobile phone brands. However, in terms of operating systems and self-developed chips, it is difficult for domestic mobile phone brands to overcome this shortcoming. If you want to be more competitive, you can only start with the imaging system. In comparison, the entry point in this aspect is better, and it is more concise than the independent research and development of chips. Therefore, in order to establish market share, these manufacturers have to go to the path of independent research and development. This is not to cross the river and tear down the bridge, it can only be said that each brand has its own development strategy. In addition, the U.S. ban has long cast a shadow on these manufacturers, including co-branded collaborations with well-known imaging giants. Previously, Huawei's cooperation with Leica was terminated, and it was widely believed in the market to be related to the ban in the United States. Whether it is true or not, at least this matter carries a shadow, if domestic mobile phone brands encounter a similar situation, they may not have the strength of Huawei to resist. Therefore, it is also a good thing for domestic manufacturers to get rid of the burden of co-branding in a timely manner. On top of that, co-branding isn't actually a low-cost one. In the case of Huawei, for example, the previous cooperation with Leica was not entirely provided by Leica**, but was deeply involved. But even in such cases, the cost is still high. For the current weak smartphone market, it may be difficult for domestic brands to bear such high costs for a long time. Especially in the context of cost control starting to come to the fore, they are unlikely to spend huge sums of money on someone else's technology. What do you think about this? Feel free to leave a comment, like and share!
With the increasing competition in the smartphone market, image co-branding has become a popular trend. By cooperating with internationally renowned imaging companies, mobile phone brands can leverage their technology and reputation to enhance their capabilities in the imaging field. For example, working with Leica gives the phone more powerful photographic capabilities, and working with Hasselblad to deliver higher quality images. This collaboration not only promotes the innovation and advancement of imaging technology, but also provides consumers with a better shooting experience. However, there are also some problems and challenges with this model of cooperation. First, co-branding often comes at a high cost. The technology and brand premiums of imaging giants such as Leica and Hasselblad are very expensive, and mobile phone manufacturers need to pay huge fees to get cooperation opportunities. Secondly, co-branding cooperation also has a certain dependence on mobile phone brands. Once the partnership is terminated, brands may be at risk of technological disconnections and reduced market acceptance. Therefore, more and more mobile phone brands are beginning to consider independent research and development of imaging technology to reduce their dependence on co-branded cooperation. Not only image co-branding, but also product independent research and development is also a development trend in the current smartphone market. Whether it's software or hardware, mobile phone brands are trying to improve their technological capabilities to differentiate themselves from their competitors and meet the growing needs of consumers. 3. Advantages and challenges of independent research and development of image systemsWhen deciding to move towards independent research and development, independent research and development of image systems has certain advantages. First of all, independent R&D can provide greater freedom and room for innovation. Brands can quickly launch new products that meet the needs of consumers based on their own needs and market trends. Secondly, independent research and development can reduce costs. Compared with the high cost of co-branding, independent research and development can better control costs and give mobile phone brands more advantages in the competition. In addition, independent research and development also helps to establish the core competitiveness and reputation of the brand. Through the self-developed imaging system, mobile phone brands can form a unique photography style and brand image, and establish their unique position in the market. However, there are some challenges associated with in-house development of imaging systems. First of all, independent research and development requires a lot of time, manpower and financial resources. Technology R&D and innovation is a long-term and expensive process, not achieved overnight. In addition, self-developed imaging systems may also face technical difficulties and low market recognition. Consumers have certain expectations for a brand's imaging system, and if the self-developed system cannot meet these expectations, it may lead to a decline in market reputation. Therefore, mobile phone brands need to have technical strength and market insight when independent research and development to ensure that the self-developed imaging system can truly enhance brand competitiveness and meet consumer needs. In short, it is the general trend for smartphone manufacturers to choose to independently develop imaging systems, which can provide greater freedom and room for innovation, reduce costs, and establish core competitiveness, but also need to face a series of challenges.
If you like it, you can follow me, share financial advice regularly, and talk to you about financial topics.