EXHIBIT 2179
`EXHIBIT 2179
`
`
`
`

`
`1=1 E
`
`Fi
`
`Volume 9
`
`July 2011
`
`Number 7
`
`Technology, Product, Market and Business News and Analysis for Large Area Display Systems, Components
`and Supply CI:ail,
`
`21
`
`Market Intelligence
`3
`By the Numbers
`3DTV Market
`3
`When Objectivity Gets Tossed Out the Window
`5
`TV Viewership: Up, Down or Irrelevant?
`6
`PDP's "Good Enough.' Is Gaining Momentum
`8
`Projector Sales to Grow Sharply Through 2015
`9
`LG Says Constimers & CU Prefer Passive 3DTV
`11
`Industry Events
`13
`Tidbits From Projection Summit
`13
`Of Projectors and Tablets
`14
`Display in Taipei
`16
`Wednesday in New York: Rain, Tablets and 3D Products
`17
`Stereoscopic 3D Conference From SMPTE
`19
`Business & Strategic
`20
`LCD Display Makers Sued Again for Price-Fixing
`20
`OSRAM Initiates Patent Infringement Litigation Against Samsung
`Legal Actions Focus on LED Technologies
`and LG
`21
`Dolby Licenses High Dynarnic Range linage Display Patents to
`Sony
`RED Partners With 3ality Digital
`LED/Laser Devices
`Luminus Introduces Surface Mount LEDs
`Electronics
`Digital Video at InfoComm
`Emerging Technology
`Fraunhofer Looks to Nature to Improve Display Readability
`Electronic Digital Signin
`LED/Laser Projectors
`Casio Shows Hybrid Line at InfoComm
`EIS Optics Discusses Laser/Phosphor Light Source Designs
`eeColor Shows Projector, Color Correction System
`2D/3D Digital Signage
`The Game Changer Has Arrived
`Eye-Catching Displays at InfoComm
`Christie Digital Wows at InfoComm
`New Commercial Displays Abound at InfoComm
`Large Screen FPD & Tiled Projection Displays
`Introducing the Matrox Mura Display Wall Controller Board
`Interactivity Drives Digital Signage Forward
`Chilin Solutions Shows Off Product Mix
`3DFusion's AS-3D Digital Sign Hits Las Vegas
`AV Control Systems
`AMX Changes the Game
`Multi-Megapixel Displays
`
`22
`22
`23
`23
`25
`25
`27
`28
`28
`30
`31
`33
`33
`34
`37
`39
`45
`50
`51
`53
`55
`55
`55
`57
`
`Mechdyne Showed 3D Visualization Applications at InfoComm
`2011
`57
`Screens
`58
`DNI's New Screen Exceeds 15,1 Contrast Requirement
`58
`Stewart Debuts 5D Material for 2D/3D Apps & More
`59
`3D Projection Screens from Da-Lite and Vutec
`61
`Business Projectors
`62
`Projectors & Trends at In IbComm
`62
`2D/3D Digital Cinema
`68
`RealD Discusses XL and XLW Systems
`68
`Panavision Quietly Builds 3D Theatrical Installs
`69
`DTV Content Standards
`71
`Adaptive Bit Rate and the Rocky Road to Smooth Web Streaming71
`Educational Market
`73
`An Educational Take on InfoComm 2011
`73
`Technology Helps Boost Student Performance, Staff Productivity75
`3D Industry
`76
`The 3D Sky Is Not Falling
`76
`3D Content Creation
`77
`The Bolving Role of the Stereographer
`77
`3D Projection Accessories
`79
`New 3D Content Converter Box From ViewSonic
`79
`Volfoni and LightSpeed Show Polarization Switchers
`80
`3D Glasses
`81
`NVIDIA Introduces New 3D Vision Wired Glasses for $99
`81
`3D Components
`81
`Powertip Targets LC Modules for 3D Applications
`81
`3D Cameras
`82
`3D Lens Adapter May Make Electronic News Gathering Cost
`Effective
`3D Gaming
`Optoma Launches GT750 3D Gaming Projector
`3DTV
`Vizio Increases Commitment to Passive
`LGE Liking FPR 3DTV
`Mits Debuts 92-incher
`Sharps Unveils L Series Line in Japan
`Westinghouse to Offer 3DTV
`3D Monitors
`Sony Announces PlayStation 3D Monitor
`3D Broadcast & Distribution
`Samsung's Launches 3D Service in the U.S
`
`82
`83
`83
`83
`83
`85
`85
`86
`87
`87
`87
`88
`88
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without pertnission is prohibited.
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-1
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`NHK Sends Full-HD 3D to Each Eye Using "Dual Stream"
`Technology
`AS-3D Displays
`Will the Move to AS-3D Be Sooner Rather Than Later9
`DTI Reveals Impressive New Approach
`3DI Offers a New Autostereoscopic Touchscreen Display
`3RD Dimension Technologies Shows AS-3D Demo
`Zecotek Granted U.S. Patent for 3D Display System
`MasterImage 3D and Rightware Form AS-3D Partnership
`Advanced 3D Displays
`
`89
`90
`90
`91
`93
`93
`94
`95
`96
`
`InnoVision Labs Shows "3D Hologram Projector"
`NHK Integral 3DTV
`Insight Media News
`Projection Summit Proceedings Available
`Insight Media Releases Report on Stand-alone Picoprojectors
`Insight Media University Launched
`Newsletter Editorial Matrix
`About Large Display Report
`
`96
`96
`98
`98
`98
`99
`101
`102
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic fonvardine and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`2
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-2
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`!Market Intelligence
`3DTV Market
`By the Numbers
`Below is a summary of recent market data on the 3DTV market.
`
`Chris
`Chinnock
`
`Bronnosholt
`
`LCD Panel Makers Have Aggressive 3D TV Targets
`According to DisplaySearch, worldwide Q1'11 shipments of LCD
`3DTVs increased 104% from Q410 to reach 1.9M units. That represents a
`Stew
`Soch.
`3.9% penetration of all LCD TV shipments, which panel makers hope to
`expand rapidly to 16.8% by Q4'11 so that overall 2011 penetration levels reach 12.3%.
`While the sale of a 3DTV counts toward meeting this penetration level, whether it is used to
`actually watch much 3D content is another issue. In fact, there are two adoption cycles
`happening with 3DTV simultaneously.
`The first is a technology upgrade cycle. This can happen quite rapidly, as represented by the
`move to LEDs, 240Hz panels, Smart TV functions and 3D capability. This cycle establishes the
`functionality in the TV.
`The use of this feature is on a different penetration curve. Use of the LED backlight is
`universal among purchasers of LED TVs, but the use of dynamic dimming may not be universal
`because of the impact on picture quality (it can make film content look like video, which many
`object to). Use of the Smart TV feature is coming quickly too, as Internet gateways from the TV
`and many accessory devices are enabling delivery of over-the-top content.
`But adoption of 3D has many different adoption factors. It requires all new content, the use
`of glasses to see the effect, and the possibility of getting sick is a concern. All these factors will
`make the USE of the 3D feature on a much slower penetration curve. The point it, which
`increasing hardware penetration numbers are a necessary step, they do not reflect the use of the
`feature in real life.
`According to DisplaySearch, worldwide QI'll shipment of shutter glass type 3DTV panels
`reached more than 1M units, while pattern retarder type 3DTV panels followed closely behind
`with approximately 880K units shipped.
`The panel premium for the 240Hz panels need for the shutter glass type 3DTV has been
`reduced from $50 last year to $25. While this premium is thought to be lower than the addition
`of the Film Patterned Retarder (FPR), FPR makers are not stuck using 240Hz panel to create a
`3DTV solution. In fact, they can use 120Hz and even 60 Hz panels, as a well as CCFL backlight
`something shutter glass type 3DTV makers
`units, to create value-oriented 3DTV solutions
`can't do very well.
`3DTV panel production is lead by four companies: Samsung Electronics, LG Display, AU
`Optronics (AUO) and Chimei Innolux (CMI).
`
`U.S. Market Off to Good Start in Q1'11
`According to NPD data, 3DTVs from Samsung Electronics accounted for more than half
`(51.1% to be precise) of 3DTV unit sales in the U.S. from January to April 2011. The company
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`3
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-3
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`also led in LED-backlit LCD television, Internet-enabled TV (IETV) model (48.1% unit share),
`and, for the first time, plasma panel display (41.8% unit share).
`As a result, Samsung remains the number one TV brand in the U.S. in terms of both unit
`sales and revenue.
`According to Quixel Market Research (Portland, OR), 586,276 3D televisions were shipped
`to U.S. dealers during the first quarter of 2011, up 352% from the same period a year before.
`However, this rate is exaggerated because 3DTVs only first came on the market in March of last
`year. Plasma 3DTV sales represented about 153K, LCD about 340K, with the rest spread
`between front- and rear-projection 3D products
`In 2010, Quixel says 1.23M 3DTVs were shipped in the U.S., which compares to Insight
`Media's forecast (issued in Feb. 2010) of 1.2M units. For 2011, Quixel is quite bullish on
`3DTV, predicting 6.2M units for U.S. dealer sell-in. Quixel says that 60% of the 40-inch and
`larger flat panel TV offering now have the 3D feature.
`3DTV shipments continue to build momentum in the years ahead, with forecasts of 10.3M
`3DTVs in 2012, rising to 18.6M for full year 2014, which remains ahead of Insight Media's
`forecast.
`Passive flat-panel 3DTVs are expected to have a big impact rising for 5% of sales in Q1 to
`nearly 18% by year's end. Vizio, LG and Toshiba are the most aggressive brands in the U.S.
`For more on Insight Media's Passive Polarized 3DTV report, see the link below:
`http://www.insightmedia.info/reports/20113dpassivedetails.php
`
`China 3DTV Sales
`The China Electronic Chamber of Commerce (CECC) estimates that 5M 3DTVs will be sold
`by the end of 2011. Meanwhile, consulting firm China Market Monitor Co. (CMMC) said that
`3DTVs would take about 12% to 15% of the share in the panel television sector by the end of
`2011, and Displaybank estimated that more than 86% of plasma TVs will support 3D technology
`by the end of 2013.
`Consumers in China are starting to buy 3DTVs, as reports on the Labor Day holidays in
`early May suggest that 3DTVs accounted for 10% of all LCD TV sales. According to CMMC,
`FPR technology grabbed a 45% of market share in April, an increase from zero in less than five
`months.
`DisplayBank said that 3D panel supply share recorded 14.2% of the total in April 2011, an
`increase that was supply limited and dominated (82%) by Korean suppliers. Total panel
`shipment toward Chinese TV brands in April 2011 recorded 2.91M units, which increased 11%
`Y/Y.
`DisplayBank reads the Chinese tea leaves a bit differently. It says the current Chinese TV
`market is moving toward premium-class TVs fi-om low-cost models. Sales of premium-class
`panels, namely large-size, LED backlit and 3D-enabled panels from the top six Chinese TV
`including Changhong, Haier, Hisense, Konka, Skyworth and TCL
`show a gradual
`brands
`increase.
`Other reports suggest that Chinese consumers are reacting very favorably to the low-cost
`FPR 3DTV models. Clearly, this an important market to watch.
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. Al! rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`4
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-4
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`LG Targets Middle East and Africa
`According to news reports, LG Electronics is hoping to capture a 40% share of the 3DTV
`market in the Middle East and Africa. It thinks its FPR technology can be used to create the
`value products this market wants.
`DisplaySearch thinks the sales potential for 3DTVs in the Middle East and Africa will be
`730K units in 2011, 1.69M in 2012, 2.74M units in 2013 and 3.89M units in 2014.
`
`Taiwan 3D TV Market Still Developing
`Domestic sales of 3DTVs in Taiwan are reported as slow. Local TV makers hope to change
`that. For example, according to a Digi Times article, Chimei Innolux (CMI) and BenQ will be
`introducing new lines of 3DTVs in the second half of 2011.
`CMI plans to adopt active 3DTV panels for its large-size LED TVs, while BenQ will adopt
`passive 3D panel technology for its 3DTV product line. -Chris Chinnock
`
`Quixel Market Research, Tamaryn Pratt, [I] 503-460-0078, tamaryn@quixelresearch.com
`
`When Objectivity Gets Tossed Out the Window
`Over the past couple of weeks, we've seen numerous studies released about consumer
`preferences and spending habits with regards to consumer electronics
`more specifically, 3D
`televisions and pay TV services from cable, fiber optic and satellite service providers.
`Two of these studies were noteworthy because (a) they either used a flawed research
`methodology to draw unsupported conclusions or (b) had such an obvious bias that their
`conclusions were essentially part of an orchestrated campaign to advance a specific agenda.
`The first study was conducted by the Digital Entertainment Group and was released on May
`24. This study claimed that 3DTV owners were overwhelmingly happy with their 3DTV
`purchases. All well and good, except that the DEG stretched the truth a bit in analyzing the data
`from this survey, often counting middle-of-the-road responses (neither for nor against, neither
`likely nor unlikely) as part of the "in favor" or -definitely or possibly" groups. That's a big no-
`no in the research world!
`I've dissected the survey results pretty thoroughly at HDTVexpert.com and provided a
`rebuttal to just about all of the conclusions, some of which were laughably mistaken. Here's an
`example: "With an average of 2.38 pairs of glasses at home, it is clear that 3DTV owners are
`actively using their 3DTVs for viewing 3D.-
`How in the world did the DEG and pollster SmithGeiger arrive at that conclusion? Were
`they aware of the many 3DTV bundles that include two free pairs of glasses? (LG was, at one
`point, throwing in four pairs of glasses with its Infinia 3DTV5.) All the DEG number proved is
`that the average 3DTV owner has 2.38 glasses. It says nothing about how they are used, if they
`are being used at all. (You can find the entire DEG report here.)
`The second study was released on May 31 by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA),
`and it claims that no more than 10% of consumers plan to drop pay TV services (what we call
`but that they are not substituting free, over-the-air digital TV. No, the
`"cutting the cord")
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 201! by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-5
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`111r71." L-AI=IGE 1:115PL,Ale
`REROR-r
`
`CEA study claims these cord-cutters are getting their video via the Internet instead, and that the
`number of all homes that rely on OTA digital TV has dropped to only 8%.
`That seems harmless enough, except that the CEA has of late been beating the drum loudly
`for more wireless broadband spectrum, a position likewise taken by the chairman of the FCC,
`Julius Genachowski. CEA is also organizing a series of small business events on Capitol Hill,
`getting face time with congressmen and congresswomen to remove "... new laws, new
`regulations and new costs ... instead of imposing additional burdens, policymakers should be
`creating small businesses to invest, expand and create additional jobs."
`The release also went on to say that CEA was organizing a -Virtual Lobby Day" for all of
`its members to (quote) "... encourage them to act on one key issue affecting small businesses:
`incentive spectrum auctions ... purchasers could redeploy the spectrum for wireless broadband
`that could generate $33 billion for the U.S. Treasury and would allow endless opportunities for
`innovation in small business."
`Brilliant! First, commission a study that shows even though cord-cutting is a concern right
`now to the likes of Comcast and Time Warner, don't worry
`those pesky cord-cutters aren't
`even giving free digital TV a second thought. Next, organize the troops to put pressure on
`Congress to clear out more UHF TV channels for yet-defined wireless broadband services. After
`all, who's watching any of those TV channels?
`Biased, flawed studies like these could generally be ignored
`except that there are plenty
`of influencers, people in positions of power, that believe such surveys at face value and don't
`read between the lines. Unfortunately, both DEG and CEA missed golden opportunities to find
`out more about consumer likes, dislikes and preferences when it comes to TV and broadband.
`The really interesting news came from a third study that had a much more rigorous
`methodology, based on what I could tell. This study by research firm Ideas and Solutions!
`revealed that a large percentage of Generation Y television viewers are -at risk" of dropping pay
`TV services because they are too expensive.
`How large is "large?" Try 69%! That's a far cry from the 10% cited in the CEA study;
`although to be fair, the latter didn't look exclusively at Gen Y viewers. That 69% group also
`spends nearly half their time watching Netflix streaming and Hulu. (No mention of what
`percentage of the study group also watches free OTA digital TV, though.)
`As I said in my analysis, I haven't found too many Gen Ys who pooh-pooh free HDTV
`when they try it out, especially when they can watch American Idol, The Voice, The Office, NFL
`Football, Major League Baseball, the NBA playoffs, auto racing, and other shows in HDTV
`and supplement it with Netflix streaming, YouTube and Hulu.
`without spending a dime
`The moral of the story is this: Always read consumer preference surveys with a skeptical
`eye, and drill down to see what the real purpose of the survey is. You may be surprised at how
`often there's an agenda involved.
`That's what happens when objectivity gets tossed out the window. -Pete Putnam
`
`TV Viewership: Up, Down or Irrelevant?
`Is Over-The-Air (OTA) TV becoming an outdated technology? Or, is the medium holding
`its own, with a healthy and continuing (although shifting) audience? Apparently, it all depends
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`6
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-6
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`something that can't be escaped in industry surveys. While TV
`on one's own vested interest
`viewing appears to be up, and more ways of consuming content exist than ever before, the
`statistics describing the actual medium used
`tethered vs. untethered
`and the audience
`numbers using one over another are hard to pin down.
`In their recent Cross-Platform Report, Nielsen said that Americans spent more time
`watching video content on traditional TVs, mobile devices and the Internet than ever before.
`According to their findings, overall TV viewership increased 22 minutes per month per person
`over last year, remaining the dominant source of video content for all demographics. With
`broadcast-only homes at less than a tenth of U.S. TV households, the interpretation was that
`consumers are willing to pay for high-quality TV content.
`According to new research by Knowledge Networks (KN), the number of Americans now
`relying exclusively on OTA television broadcasting in their home increased to almost 46M, up
`from 42M just a year ago. The 2011 Ownership Survey and Trend Report found that 15% of all
`U.S. households with TVs rely solely on OTA signals to watch TV programming, up slightly
`from 14% of homes for the previous three years. Overall, KN estimates that more than 17M
`households representing 45.6M consumers receive television exclusively through broadcast
`signals.
`At the same time, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) says that consumers are
`relying less and less on OTA TV signals. In a phone survey of 1,256 adults conducted in
`December 2010, CEA found the number of homes that rely on OTA signals for TV programming
`plummeted last year to 8% of all U.S. households with TVs. OTA TV viewing has been steadily
`declining since 2005, according to CEA's research, which says that 96% (114M) of U.S.
`households own a TV and that there are just 9M homes now exclusively watching over-the-air
`TV.
`
`In response to the CEA poli, National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) Executive Vice
`President of Communications Dennis Wharton counters, -CEA apparently is not aware that the
`number of broadcast TV viewers is growing, not shrinking, as evidenced by the surge in pay TV
`cord-cutters. Moreover, every survey, but for those funded by CEA, finds that most Americans
`continue to rely on broadcasting as their primary source for news."
`Midwest anterma manufacturer Antennas Direct is similarly contradicting the assertions of
`the CEA survey, issuing a statement by company President Richard Schneider, saying, "How is
`it possible that an organization who claims to be representative of the consumer electronics
`industry seems to be blissfully unaware that a multiyear Inc. 500 honoree and one of the fastest-
`growing consumer electronics companies in the United States is none other than an HDTV
`antenna manufacturer? [ CEA CEO Gary] Shapiro's assertion of the cable-cutting movement as
`'illusory' is at odds with Antennas Direct's eighth year of triple digit growth, where sales were
`up 225% in Q1 2011 alone."
`A similar debate ensued in the '00s, when the U.S. broadcast industry ended analog TV
`transmission in favor of the more-efficient digital transmission system. Then, as now, there were
`differing viewpoints on the relevance of OTA broadcast, depending on the perspective of the
`argument. NAB argued then (as now) that there were more OTA-connected sets than CEA was
`claiming. (In the end, Congress approved the spending of $1.5B to prevent disenfranchising
`OTA-only viewers.)
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`7
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-7
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`Basically, the CE industry wants more and more versatile devices (meaning more diverse
`competition for features), and broadcasters want to retain their legacy platform for delivering
`content. On the surface, while this could appear to be an argument between (new) pioneers and
`(entrenched) luddites, the true picture is difficult to see clearly because of the way statistics can
`be manipulated to produce desired results (search on Mark Twain's views on the subject). For
`example, while the number of OTA-only viewers may be discernable from an interview
`question, it's easy to ignore (or overemphasize) the total number of TVs that use an antenna,
`because of multiple sets in households. And, OTA TV may eventually become a mobile-only
`something that would change the entire broadcast industry as well.
`service
`The whole debate may be moot, anyway, as we increasingly see technology provide content
`the way people want to consume it, despite the goals of vested interests. Therein lies the real
`solution to the debate
`give people what they want, and stop bickering over how they get it.
`The real winners will be the enablers of that vision. Aldo
`
`Two oat of Me arms PD? .111okors support dot Pismo Dispkr
`Cooltior pro:wain tko
`irsWo technology wow gaisioy few'?
`asiowf thryty cottramors
`
`41111111Irsommow
`
`PDP's "Good Enough" Is Gaining Momentum
`Do you lcnow someone buying a new flat screen TV this summer? If it is a plasma, chances
`are (almost 66%) they won't buy a full HD resolution set but rather a 720p HD. But, at 10 feet
`or so, depending on display size, that 720p HD set delivers the high-resolution image so well, the
`eyes can't see the difference between the full-HD model. This "good-enough" 720p HD display
`technology is driving plasma sales to new records, according to recent numbers from CEA, NPD
`and Quixel Research.
`The CEA numbers for example, say that between January and May of this year, over 1M
`PDP sets sold, with just under two-thirds of them of the 720p variety. NPD's retail sell-through
`for PDP shows 1M sets sold by April, and this was a jump of almost 200K units over the same
`period in 2010, representing a growth of nearly 25%. NPD pegs LCD sales growth at just 2%,
`but keep in mind, PDP is only about 7% of the total flat panel display market, so growth rates
`can be much higher.
`On the revenue side, PDP sales showed a strong 12% year-over-year revenue growth,
`according to Quixel
`Research, whose
`Q1'11 volume for
`PDP is at 900M
`units. PDP numbers
`are moving in the
`right direction, and
`getting there because
`of a favorable price
`point that are less
`than full-HD
`resolution PDP
`models and much
`less than LED LCD
`TVs. The remaining
`
`1
`
`The Ultimate Home Entertainment Experience
`
`PLASMA DISPLAY COALITION
`
`LG
`
`Panasonic
`
`PLASMA
`
`*woo
`
`Pxture Pewlect Pee
`
`How A Rama Voto
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`8
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-8
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`PDP suppliers (Panasonic, Samsung and LG) are also major TV brands and market leaders in
`LCD with trusted brand image among consumers.
`PDPs also deliver the goods. Its emissive technology has very low black levels and displays
`viewing angles that some analysts consider the standard in the flat-panel industry. The
`technology is also inherently fast, with image response times up to 600Hz, they are an order of
`magnitude quicker than typical LCDs. This also makes plasma a very good candidate for
`3DTVs, and Panasonic in particular was an early driving force in launching 3DTVs in the
`consumer space. Between Panasonic and LG alone, the two members of the Plasma Display
`Coalition (PDC), 42 models are selling, including 16 with 3D capability.
`PDC said the group has been fighting misinformation about plasma technology, particularly
`around issues of power consumption and image burn-in. For instance, the group is promoting a
`"Get The Facts" sheet with mythbusters like: "FACT: A new 2011 42-inch plasma digital
`HDTV uses less than one-third of the electricity of the best-selling 36-inch conventional
`cathode-ray tube TVs ... 42-inch plasma HDTVs consume as little as 69-79 watts, while typical
`36-inch color TVs draw some 270-310 watts." That's great, but who compares a PDP to a CRT
`in retail today?
`It is nevertheless true that PDP has made great strides in energy use. That 69W number
`today was at a 158W, or a whopping 60% higher, just three years ago in 2008 models. The key
`lesson here is that the PDP industry successfiilly addressed the power concerns of the consumer
`(and EnergyStar), and delivered the goods on power use.
`While PDP has found ways to meet challenges from EnergyStar and LCDs so far, can this
`continue? Can PDP survive on good enough or will new strategies emerge? Steve Sechrist
`
`Projector Sales to Grow Sharply Through 2015
`Both Pacific Media Associates (PMA) (Menlo Park, CA) and Insight Media (IM) (Norwalk,
`CT) discussed the forecasts for projector sales at Projection Summit 2011, held recently in
`Orlando in association with InfoComm.
`Insight Medias Matt Brennesholtz focused on the market for picoprojectors and broke that
`market into three segments: standalone picos, picos embedded in digital cameras and picos
`embedded into phone handsets. These categories are believed to represent the main market sub-
`segments in
`80
`picoprojectors and
`include most
`picoprojector sales.
`The forecast growth
`for each segment is
`shown in the figure.
`Currently,
`picos embedded into
`handsets is the
`smallest of the three
`market segments but
`is expected to have
`
`o
`
`O.
`Ui
`
`70
`
`60
`
`50
`
`40
`
`30
`
`20
`
`10
`o
`
`Embedded-Handset1
`
`IN Embedded-Camera
`
`Stand-alone
`
`Source: Insight Media
`
`2010
`
`0.04
`
`0.30
`
`0.47
`
`2011
`
`0.28
`
`0.60
`
`0.84
`
`2012
`
`0.99
`
`1.2
`
`1.7
`
`2013
`
`5.5
`
`2.2
`
`3.1
`
`2014
`
`12.8
`
`3.5
`
`6.2
`
`2015
`
`22.4
`
`5.7
`
`11.7
`
`2016
`
`40.3
`
`8.6
`
`21.5
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`9
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-9
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`I_AF1GE
`
`REPORT
`
`the highest growth rate, with a CAGR from 2011 2016 of 171%. This growth is expected to
`be particularly strong in 2013 and beyond, when picoprojector technology catches up with the
`requirements of the phone handset industry and the consumer. Overall sales of picos of all types
`will grow from about 1.7M in 2011 to 39.7M in 2015 and 70.4M in 2016, for a CAGR 2011
`2016 of 110%. Brennesholtz emphasized in his presentation the large uncertainties in these
`forecasts. These are due to the uncertainties in the consumer acceptance of picoprojectors going
`forward, given the range of alternative display technologies available to most consumers.
`He added that picoprojectors have sold better in developing countries than in countries such
`as the U.S. with advanced economies. He believes that roughly two-thirds of all picoprojectors
`are being sold in developing countries and only one-third are sold in countries with advanced
`economies. Due to the lower Average Selling Price (ASP) in developing countries, the revenue
`share in developing countries is expected to be slightly lower, about 60%, with 40% of the
`revenue coming from advanced economies. This ratio between developing and advanced
`economy sales is expected to continue, with minor variations, through the end of the forecast
`period in 2016.
`PMA divides the projector market into three broad categories: New Era projectors (<500
`lumens), mainstream projectors (500-4,999 lumens), and high-end projectors (5,000+ lumens).
`PMA unit sales forecasts for
`Projector Unit Sales (Millions)
`these three categories are
`CAGR
`2010
`2015
`shown in the table.
`90%
`27
`The New Era category in
`11%
`11.9
`this table is dominated by
`0.425
`21%
`picoprojector sales. Note that
`36%
`39.7
`Insight Media forecasts higher
`Source: Pacific Media Associates
`sales by 2015 than does PMA,
`Compiled by Insight Media
`with forecasts of 39.7M and 27M, respectively. Due to the large uncertainty in picoprojector
`sales in the Insight Media forecasts, the PMA forecast is well within the possible range of
`forecasts from Insight Media.
`In his talk at Projection Summit, Dr. William Coggshall, president of PMA, focused on
`projectors for the education market. According to his data, the K-12 education market is the
`fastest-growing market sub-segment in the mainstream projector segment, growing from 29% of
`the total market in 2008 to 39% of the market in 2010, with continued growth in market share
`expected.
`In the education market, interactive projectors are challenging the domination of interactive
`whiteboards, in part because of their lower cost. Coggshall presented the ASPs of various
`options for interactive systems for the classroom, showing an interactive whiteboard with a
`short-throw projector is clearly the highest price option.
`While the U.S. and the UK have the highest penetration of interactive systems (whiteboards
`and projectors), these markets are saturating. Coggshall expects future growth to be in China
`and emerging markets in Asia, Latin America and Africa. China, however, is dominated by
`home-produced systems because of the cost and language advantages. These interactive K-12
`markets, regardless of country, are largely driven by government funding.
`
`New Era
`Mainstream
`High End
`Total
`
`1
`7
`0.165
`8.5
`
`July 2011
`
`Copyright 2011 by Insight Media, LLC. All rights reserved.
`
`Electronic forwarding and reproduction without permission is prohibited.
`
`10
`
`REALD INC.
`Exhibit 2179-10
`MASTERIMAGE 3D, et al. v REALD INC.
`IPR2015-00035
`
`

`
`Total System Cost for Popular Alternatives
`$5A5
`
`$4.905
`
`$3.690
`
`$3.42
`
`$2.421
`
`$6.000
`
`$5.000
`
`$4.000
`
`$3.000
`
`sz000
`
`$1.000
`
`SO
`
`Interactivity in the
`commercial market for
`corporate training and other
`functions is not used as much as
`it is in the education market.
`Coggshall estimates that only
`about one-tenth of all
`interactive systems are sold into
`the corporate market.
`Short-throw projectors, i.e.,
`all projectors with an image
`Interactive
`Interactive
`ablet +
`tablet (with
`width >1.1x the distance
`normal -throw bundled PC)
`between the projector and the
`+ normal-
`projector
`screen, are popular in the
`throw
`projector
`education market because the
`teacher casts less of a shadow on the screen. These projectors are often used in combination with
`interactive systems. On the other hand, the cost of these short-throw projectors is significantly
`higher than normal projectors, and the energy efficiency is lower. For example, Coggshall said
`that in 2011, a normal throw projector has an ASP of $731 while, an ultra short-throw projector
`with a throw ratio of <0.38 has an ASP of $1,603, for a 2.2x higher price. This price differential
`can inhibit sales in price-sensitive markets such as K-12. PMA forecasts this price differential to
`decline so the normal and ultra short-throw will be priced at $566 and $890, respectively, in
`2015, for a 1.6x higher price. This price differential remains even in 2015 because of the
`fundamentally higher cost of manufacturing a very short-throw projection lens. Matthew
`Brennesholtz
`
`Interactive
`Integrated
`IWB + 3rd
`IWB + short-party short-short-throw
`projector
`throw
`throw
`projector
`projector
`
`Source: Pacific Media Associates
`
`Insight Media, Matthew Brennesholtz, +1-203-831-8464, matthew@insightmedia.info
`PMA, Bill Coggshall, +1-650