HP patents see-through screens! Is the stock now a buy?

delad

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18719608

Sounds incredible, my question is will this translate to a big rise in profits or will competitors like samsung just come up with their own versions?

It seems like it would be perfect for googles augmented reality glasses.

HP shares are currently priced at about 7 times earnings, so whats the consensus- is the stock a buy or will this not affect their bottom line by a huge amount?

AlmightyCushion

I've seen other companies with see through displays (Samsung being one of them, they actually showed off a laptop with a see through display a couple of years back) so the technology isn't exactly exclusive to them although I don't know the details of any of these screen technologies so one may be vastly superior to the rest for all I know. I wouldn't put too much money on this. The technology will be slow to take off, has limited uses (I can't imagine every laptop, phone, TV, tablet etc. using this whereas OLED and AMOLED wouldn't surprise me once the costs come down) and other companies are already all over it. And in the display business, I'd favour Samsung over HP.

martyoo

And in the display business, I'd favour Samsung over HP.

I would trade my ol lady for some Samsung stock.

HP shares are currently priced at about 7 times earnings, so whats the consensus- is the stock a buy or will this not affect their bottom line by a huge amount?

Believe it or not but sometimes stocks are cheap for a reason. HP has been badly managed for a long time so unless the new CEO can turn things around I would be wary.

A Primal Nut

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I've seen other companies with see through displays (Samsung being one of them, they actually showed off a laptop with a see through display a couple of years back) so the technology isn't exactly exclusive to them although I don't know the details of any of these screen technologies so one may be vastly superior to the rest for all I know. I wouldn't put too much money on this. The technology will be slow to take off, has limited uses (I can't imagine every laptop, phone, TV, tablet etc. using this whereas OLED and AMOLED wouldn't surprise me once the costs come down) and other companies are already all over it. And in the display business, I'd favour Samsung over HP.

According to the BBC article, HP filed for this patent in 2006, so it probably still precedes Samsung. That said, I'd imagine Samsung's technology is different and they would have no problem patenting theirs too.

If they filed for the patent in 2006, does that mean the product has been around since then? Thought we would have heard more about it by now in a commercial sense.

Jim2007

delad wrote: »

Sounds incredible, my question is will this translate to a big rise in profits or will competitors like samsung just come up with their own versions?

The big question is how is this useful to the average company??? Budgets are still very tight and that being the case if I a CIO thinking about priorities which will come first outfitting my people with tablets or see through screens???? I think you know the answer......

delad

Jim2007 wrote: »

The big question is how is this useful to the average company??? Budgets are still very tight and that being the case if I a CIO thinking about priorities which will come first outfitting my people with tablets or see through screens???? I think you know the answer......

Its not just about the average company, its about the average consumer. These are the future, every phone, laptop, tablet and television will be transparent. Its obviously not going to happen in the next couple of years but it will happen.

They will also be about a million other uses for this technology.

HP can sell or license this technology to the likes of google and apple, thats where the big money will come from.

The doubts I have are about how advanced the technology is at the moment and how far along samsung and other competitors are with their versions.

AlmightyCushion

delad wrote: »

Its not just about the average company, its about the average consumer. These are the future, every phone, laptop, tablet and television will be transparent. Its obviously not going to happen in the next couple of years but it will happen.

They will also be about a million other uses for this technology.

HP can sell or license this technology to the likes of google and apple, thats where the big money will come from.

The doubts I have are about how advanced the technology is at the moment and how far along samsung and other competitors are with their versions.

It's not that obvious. Seriously, think how annoying a transparent display would be on a laptop, TV, phone or tablet. Why would I want to see what's behind my TV or laptop while I'm watching/using it. I find animated ads distracting enough when I'm on laptop, imagine how distracting it would be to see everything that is happening behind your laptop. On a phone/tablet it's just stupid, all you'll see is the battery and components behind the screen. If they move the components (difficult because thee devices have huge batteries) so they don't obstruct the screen then you'll just see your hand.

I can't see this technology taking off where screens are traditionally being used but they will have their purposes. Also, I can't see Google or Apple licensing this seeing as they don't make displays. If any one licenses this it will be the people making the displays and they won't license it if they have their own tech that is just as good or better. Is the technology Samsung showed off using HP's IP or infringing it? If so, how close are other manufacturers to making a transparent display without infringing this IP (because you can bet your ass if this becomes successful Samsung, LG etc will not want to be throwing giving lots of money to HP if they can do it themselves)?

Jim2007

delad wrote: »

Its not just about the average company, its about the average consumer.

Actually it is very much about the average customer, because HP is a stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap outfit.... It might be very cool, but of what practical use is it to day and how can they exploit it in the next year or two???

HP need to be profitable today, if they are to in position to exploit new technologies down the line. And right now the concentration is on mobility and being connected all the time, and in this space they don't have much to offer...

delad

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It's not that obvious. Seriously, think how annoying a transparent display would be on a laptop, TV, phone or tablet. Why would I want to see what's behind my TV or laptop while I'm watching/using it. I find animated ads distracting enough when I'm on laptop, imagine how distracting it would be to see everything that is happening behind your laptop. On a phone/tablet it's just stupid, all you'll see is the battery and components behind the screen. If they move the components (difficult because thee devices have huge batteries) so they don't obstruct the screen then you'll just see your hand.

I can't see this technology taking off where screens are traditionally being used but they will have their purposes. Also, I can't see Google or Apple licensing this seeing as they don't make displays. If any one licenses this it will be the people making the displays and they won't license it if they have their own tech that is just as good or better. Is the technology Samsung showed off using HP's IP or infringing it? If so, how close are other manufacturers to making a transparent display without infringing this IP (because you can bet your ass if this becomes successful Samsung, LG etc will not want to be throwing giving lots of money to HP if they can do it themselves)?

I use my laptops/tablets on the sofa and on the train, where there is nothing going on in front of me. I suspect the vast majority of people use these devices in that way also. I don't know where the fcuk you use your devices where theres loads going on in front of you :pac:

Smart phones will only have a limited life span, I suspect they will be completely done away with in 10 years, its not a good user experience trying to use the internet on a tiny screen. Smartphones will be replaced by 7 inch tabs in the near future for internet browsing.

In the medium term, google's augmented reality glasses will be the next big thing. They are due on the market in 2013 (but probably late 2014 is more realistic). They are perfect for this kind of transparent screen technology.

In the long term 3d holographic displays will be the norm but that is probably a good 15 years away.

So HP should be able to make some dough from this transparent screen technology in the next few years, its just how much that I'm trying to figure out.

Jim2007

delad wrote: »

Smart phones will only have a limited life span, I suspect they will be completely done away with in 10 years, its not a good user experience trying to use the internet on a tiny screen. Smartphones will be replaced by 7 inch tabs in the near future for internet browsing.

Here's the thing, these people don't surf the net... They use the device to stay connected, they use apps rather than a browser and a small device that slips into the pocket is what is needed for this. It is all about staying in touch, not browsing!

delad wrote: »

In the long term 3d holographic displays will be the norm but that is probably a good 15 years away.

So HP should be able to make some dough from this transparent screen technology in the next few years, its just how much that I'm trying to figure out.

Any advantage HP might have in this area will not be reflected in the share price for years to come, so why enter the market so early? The technology might be overtaken by something else or HP might go to the wall before they can take advantage of it. Why not wait until the picture becomes clearer?

delad

Jim2007 wrote: »

Any advantage HP might have in this area will not be reflected in the share price for years to come, so why enter the market so early? The technology might be overtaken by something else or HP might go to the wall before they can take advantage of it. Why not wait until the picture becomes clearer?

Because as the saying goes, "if you wait for the robin, spring will be over".

Jim2007

delad wrote: »

Because as the saying goes, "if you wait for the robin, spring will be over".

So your investment strategy is "make or bust"???? nice one!

Mine is a little bit more basic: achieve an annual return of around 12% pa over the long run and to take on no more risk that is necessary to achieve that level of returns, achieving that means I double my money every 5 years.

There are plenty of investment opportunities that allow me to achieve that objective without going in highly speculative investments, like this, so I'll be passing on this one.

delad

Jim2007 wrote: »

So your investment strategy is "make or bust"???? nice one!

Nope, I never said that.