Samsung's co-CEO told Reuters today that "no one can escape" the memory shortage. What he didn't mention: Samsung is making $14 billion this quarter while deliberately cutting consumer production 20%.
On January 5, 2026, TM Roh gave Reuters this quote:
"As this situation is unprecedented, no company is immune to its impact. The crisis affects not only mobile phones but other consumer electronics, from TVs to home appliances."
TM Roh, Samsung co-CEO
Dig into Samsung's earnings calls and capacity reports, though, and you get a different picture. Samsung is deliberately cutting consumer DRAM production by 20%+ while posting their highest quarterly profit in company history.
$14 billion. One quarter. While consumers pay double for half the RAM. Call it what it is: engineered scarcity dressed up as market tragedy.
The Lie: "No One Can Escape"
What TM Roh conveniently didn't mention:
- Samsung is cutting conventional DRAM production by over 20%
- They're reallocating 80,000 wafers per month—30-40% of certain production lines—away from consumer products
- Samsung's DDR5 server memory has 75%+ profit margins
- Q4 2025 operating profit projection: $14+ billion—their highest ever
Board rooms made these calls. Not market forces.
My take: Cutting consumer production 20%, redirecting capacity to AI margins, posting record profits, then playing victim on Reuters—textbook crisis manufacturing. TM Roh didn't stumble into this shortage; his division engineered it.
The Numbers
- Q3 2025: $8.5B profit, memory division all-time high, up 32.9% YoY
- Q4 2025: $14B+ projected—highest quarterly profit in Samsung history
- 2024 Full Year: $22.6B profit—5x from 2023
Quintupled profits in one year. During an "unprecedented crisis." Samsung's DS division employees are getting 43-48% of their annual salary as performance bonuses in early 2026. Nearly half a year's pay. For cutting your RAM supply.
The Timeline of "Deliberate" (With Receipts)
I went through supply chain reports. Here's what actually happened:
December 3, 2025: Micron announces they're killing the Crucial consumer brand entirely. Their words: "improve supply and support for our larger, strategic customers." Translation: consumers aren't profitable enough.
December 4, 2025: DigiTimes reports Samsung is reallocating 30-40% of DRAM production from HBM3E to DDR5 server memory. Not because HBM isn't profitable—it is—but because DDR5 RDIMM has 60%+ margins. Those 80,000 wafers/month? Going to servers, LPDDR5X, GDDR7. Not consumer DDR5.
November 2025: TMTPost reports Samsung plans to cut "more than 20% of conventional DRAM production." In favor of what? Everything with 60%+ margins. Budget DDR4? Consumer DDR5? Cut.
April 2025: Samsung phases out LPDDR4. Chinese smartphone makers shifted to domestic suppliers (lower margins for Samsung), so Samsung decided to prioritize more profitable products.
Every single one of these cuts consumer supply. Every single one prioritizes margin. And then TM Roh goes on Reuters acting like the market is happening to Samsung instead of because of Samsung.
The Margin Math (67x)
The HBM vs consumer memory economics I covered before—here's the Samsung-specific version:
What Samsung earns per product:
- Consumer DDR5 (32GB): ~$5 profit at old prices
- Server DDR5 RDIMM (64GB): ~$337 profit at 75% margin
- HBM3E unit: ~$300 profit
67x more profit on server memory. The math does the talking.
From a pure business perspective? Rational. But spare us the "crisis" theater while depositing record profit checks and cutting 43-48% bonus checks for the division responsible. If you're going to gut consumer supply, at least skip the victim act.
The HBM Pivot: Why AI Ate Your RAM
HBM production directly competes with consumer memory. The short version for why your RAM budget is now funding AI:
- HBM uses 3x more wafer area than DDR5
- 2x manufacturing complexity
- Lower yields (50-60% vs 80%+)
Every HBM chip cannibalizes capacity for 3-4 consumer RAM chips.
Samsung's HBM plans: from 170,000 wafers/month now to 250,000 by end of 2026. That's one-third of total capacity going to AI memory.
Consumer PC builders get whatever's left after servers and AI data centers. Table scraps.
The Stargate Effect
OpenAI's Stargate Project represents $500 billion over four years. Their anticipated memory demand: 900,000 wafers per month.
Samsung's total capacity: 650,000-700,000 wafers/month.
OpenAI alone could consume 130%+ of Samsung's entire production.
And they're not the only buyer. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta—all placing "open-ended orders" at whatever price.
Samsung signed these contracts. Made these allocations. Locked in AI customers at 25-30x consumer prices. The "sudden demand" was on their Q2 2024 investor slides.
The Options Samsung Won't Take
Option 1: Maintain consumer capacity, expand AI slower. Consumer DRAM runs 10-15% margins vs. 75% for servers. Shareholders would riot.
Option 2: Slow HBM expansion. Nvidia and Google contracts are locked. You don't have a contract. You pay retail.
Option 3: Prioritize consumer fabs. The $300+ billion in new facilities? All HBM4 and advanced nodes. Consumers are an afterthought in the budget, and the budget tells the truth.
The NCNR Contracts
This one's almost comical.
DigiTimes reported Samsung will require NCNR (non-cancellable, non-returnable) contracts for server customers starting Q1 2026. Customers commit to specific quantities, can't cancel, can't return.
Samsung is requiring binding contracts during a shortage they created. Creating a drought, then selling water at 10x markup.
My take: The CHIPS Act handed Samsung $6.4 billion in U.S. taxpayer subsidies for domestic capacity. American taxpayers funded the fabs; American consumers get gouged for RAM. Oh, and Samsung's Taiwan unit is reportedly under internal investigation for employees taking bribes from distributors trying to secure chip allocations during the shortage. When scarcity gets this profitable, people start cutting deals in parking lots.
Samsung's Own Divisions Are Getting Screwed
TM Roh specifically mentioned TVs and appliances in his Reuters interview. This is where it gets ridiculous.
Samsung TVs and appliances use DDR memory. Samsung's memory division is cutting legacy DRAM production because margins are low. So Samsung's memory division is effectively taxing Samsung's own consumer electronics division—and blaming "market forces."
Samsung's left hand squeezes Samsung's right hand, passes costs to consumers, and the CEO tells Reuters everyone's suffering together.
It gets better. Reports indicate Samsung's MX (phone) division has struggled to get DRAM allocations from DS (their own semiconductor arm) because DS prioritizes more profitable external AI contracts. Samsung's phone division is competing with Google and Nvidia for Samsung memory—and losing. When your own sister division treats you like a second-class customer, "unprecedented market forces" rings hollow.
What You Can Do
Practical advice in the AI memory bubble analysis and OEM laptop downgrades piece. Short version: buy now if upgrading, buy used RAM (doesn't degrade), support upgradeable platforms. Three companies control 93% of global memory. Individual consumers have almost zero leverage.
The Bottom Line
TM Roh isn't lying when he says the shortage affects everyone. It does.
What he's leaving out: Samsung created it. They cut consumer production 20%+. Redirected capacity to AI. Raised prices 50-100%. And now they're posting their highest quarterly profit ever.
"No one can escape" is technically true. Samsung shareholders escaped with $14 billion. You escaped with double-priced RAM and 8GB laptops.
Is it illegal? No. Samsung can allocate capacity however they want.
Is it ethical? Absolutely not.
Is "no one can escape" dishonest framing? Yes.
Samsung manufactured this crisis, cashed the check, and TM Roh's job is to make you blame "the market" instead of the executives running it.
My final take: When Benzies blamed "saboteurs" for MindsEye, we called it scapegoating. Samsung's "unprecedented market forces" is the same energy—blame external forces, pocket the profits, hand out 48% bonuses. Benzies lost £233 million. Samsung's making $14 billion and investigating their own employees for bribery. Different scale, same playbook.
Sources: Reuters (January 5, 2026), Samsung Electronics Q3/Q4 2025 earnings reports, TMTPost, DigiTimes, TrendForce market reports, Micron press releases, EE Times, Seoul Economic Daily, TweakTown, company financial filings