Asymco

Asymmetric Intelligence

The Memory Shock: Six Readings from a Supply-Chain Conversation

Nota Bene · 2 comments

by

Here is a summary of wide-ranging conversation about the 2026 memory-price shock and its consequences for Apple. Six of my answers worth separating out.


1. Why pick on memory? The politics of a commodity

My estimate is that Apple will increase by about $100 the average price of iPhones. Beyond that, I can’t analyze politics. What I do know is there are plenty of suppliers, and the memory is sourced from Asia anyway, which raises the question of why it matters so much that it not be Chinese. The memory makers are in South Korea, Taiwan supplies the processors, Japan is in there with lenses and batteries and camera modules, and there’s plenty of US content too. It’s a global train. If the decision is to pick memory out and call it "strategic", I don’t see the logic, because the penalty for not doing something is simply that there’s no supply. How does that benefit Americans? Apple is a multinational with good customers everywhere, and of all the components you could single out, memory is a peculiar one to choose.


2. How long it takes to qualify a memory supplier

When people ask how long it would take Apple to qualify a new memory supplier at meaningful volume, the answer isn’t months. Apple works on a two-year cycle for its own products. The camera lens, the battery system, the screen are all planned that far out, with targets set for suppliers to hit the quality and scale for a launch window two years away. Memory is a slightly different case, because there’s on-chip memory and there’s storage; files versus DRAM. The on-chip part has to be designed together with the system-on-a-chip, so that’s at least a year in advance. The storage memory can wait a little longer, but not much less than a year. Pricing might not freeze until six months out, which is exactly what we’re seeing now: the prices have come up because of what they’re going to be shipping late in the year.

3. Apple’s purchasing power, undermined

Apple’s strength was always that it prepaid, bought years in advance, and bought in enormous quantity, with contracts spanning hundreds of millions of devices. Nobody came close, not even Samsung [due to their far broader mix of products]. That leverage is now being undermined by new buyers willing to commit the equivalent amount, except they aren’t serving hundreds of millions of devices, they’re serving data centers measured in the single tens of millions of processing units. Orders of magnitude fewer devices, but far more memory per device. It’s been a lot of money dangling in front of a few suppliers, who decided it was better to take the cash and run. But this may pass. Two years from now, the ones who screwed Apple may find that Apple has a long memory and a grudge.

4. The hundred-year flood

Tim Cook said he’s never seen anything like this in forty years. A hundred-year flood. So when his warning came through the Wall Street Journal, it surprised me, because it suggested things may not be lining up into next year. His phrasing was careful: running out of options. Part of that could be cover for John Ternus, framing the trouble as on Tim’s watch so John can take over in the fall and look like the hero, though I won’t read it that far. What I will say is that Tim is the man who works on exactly this, the planning and predictability and negotiating in advance, and it’s his forte. It felt like he was shaken. It sounded unprecedented to him, and he wasn’t in his element.


5. Memory is the new gold

Price-insensitive buyers are purchasing everything in sight and skewing the entire market. This was supposed to be a settled issue, a commodity nobody worried about, and yet here we are. It belongs in the same family as the battery and rare-earth and quality crunches we’ve weathered before. It’s a moving target, and the memory case shocked everyone precisely because we thought it was long gone. Even Tim said he hasn’t seen anything like it in forty years. A hundred-year flood, and we’re all out of our element.

6. If Apple sneezes, everyone else catches a cold

The analysts watching the whole industry think the phone market collapses 12 to 20% this year, which would be the worst year for smartphones on record. We’ve never seen a double-digit decline, not even during COVID. Profits will evaporate. The number-three vendor globally is already down around 60% on the year, and Oppo and Vivo will almost certainly be in the red. That leaves Samsung, who happens to be a huge memory maker and whose stock has actually benefited. If Apple sneezes, everybody else has the flu. The silver lining is that Apple may gain share in a shrinking market, which has already happened in the first half, helped by the supplier inventory it carried over.


Subscribe to Asymco One for more in-depth analysis and commentary like this.

Asymco One gives you full access to our research, analysis, and commentary: Nota Bene, Research, the weekly Bulletin, the Asymetric podcast, and monthly Office Hours. Subscribe at asymco.com/one.

Posted by:


2 comments

  1. Sacto Joe ·

    “Take the money and run” is apt. It reminds me of collusion around hydrocarbons by the big players. Some of us remember the long lines during the original oil embargo, when the monopolists revealed their power.

    They are still “talking the money”, to this day…but thanks to anti-global warming activism, that may not be the case for much longer.

    In the meantime, this isn’t a geographically-constrained move, and eventually new production capacity will cone online (and hopefully by Apple - revenge is a dish best served cold, as Star Trek’s Kahn put it.’

  2. FredHS ·

    Looking at the memory crunch with an 'outside in' perspective on margin stacking, Apple is in the best position.

    There are two outside constituents, personal and commercial users of AI.

    Personal: Apple has a two year lead in personal agentic AI, since they have cross platform privacy. Apple customer can absorb price increases which amount to about $4 to $10 per month*. Thus there is no margin stacking concern for Apple. Memory cost increases hurt their competitors more as they already have lower margins and less affluent customers.

    Commercial users can choose from a variety of AI as a Service suppliers who run on various cloud hyper scalars who buy the memory and storage. The hyper scalars stack their margin on top of the margins of memory/storage plus GPU/CPU (on top of TSMC's 75%) plus turbines and Bloom Energy suppliers. 3 layers of margin stacking seems risky.

    *Some Apple customers will pay well over $10/month averaged over 4 years because they use Apple products for a business. They're really commercial users.

Leave a comment

Getting the form ready…