二極體為半導體中存在最久、技術發展最成熟，而競爭也為最激烈的產 業。綜觀全球2010 年市佔率排名，並無任何一家廠商其市占率超過10%，由此可見二極體產業並非國際大廠的主要營收來源，就算國際一級大廠無意多投放資源經營此一產品，但台灣的廠商亦無法在此成熟產業中獲取更大的利益。 個案公司成立於1959 年，以區域貿易為導向的美國地區二極體貿易商，在 面臨公司被拍賣、由台灣廠商買下重整，重新審視並建立其核心競爭能力，再依此核心能力，不斷藉由生產品質的提升、生產成本的降低，以及創新產品來獲取更大的市場，然後再藉由併購來進行生產的垂直整合與擴充產品線，現今已成為全世界排名第十一的二極體供應商。 本論文藉由個案公司的發展歷程，並透過Michael Porter 的競爭優勢理論，成本領導、差異化領導以及專注策略，來整理並分析個案公司的競爭優勢與競爭策略，進而提供台灣二極體廠商的相關未來發展參考。 / Diode is the most mature industry in semiconductor, and its competitive environment is much more challenging than other semiconductor industries.From the marketing data of 2009, we can find that there no player can gain more than 10% market shares, which means Diode is not the major products for the first‐tier companies to develop in the future. However, all the Taiwan players seems can't get any more benefit or more market share from such environment even the first‐tier companies try to maintain such competition environment. This thesis studies a company that was founded in the US in 1959,and was subsequently acquired by a Taiwanese company for restructuring after it went bankrupt. After several years’ efforts, this company has built up its core competence in quality, improved its cost structure, and expanded its market shares. Furthermore, it took actions for vertical integration and expanded its products portfolios through globally acquired activities. Finally the case company has become the first‐tier players in Diode industry. Taking the overall cost leadership, differentiation, focus theory of M. Porter, to analyze D company, this thesis comes up with the development suggestions for Taiwanese companies who would like to build their own development strategy.

發光二極體也就是俗稱的LED(Light-Emitting Diode以下簡稱LED)，而LED具有省電、使用壽命長、反應速度快等優勢，因此在全球環保意識高漲下，逐漸成為發展主流的綠色能源。台灣在發展LED產業已長達30餘年，從最早期的封裝產業開始，慢慢逐漸向上游藍寶石基板、LED導線架等產品以及下游端的消費性產品的應用，發展至今已經形成相當完整的LED供應鏈且累積一定的技術水平及研發能力，不論是上游或中游供應廠商皆能夠向世界一流大廠相互競爭；但從2010年開始大陸政府投入相當大量的資金與節能政策，使得大陸地區成立許多的LED廠商，此舉讓台灣的LED廠商受到相當大的威脅。也因為供給的增加再加上全球景氣持續低迷情況下，造成供需失衡的問題持續惡化，直到2011年開始韓系廠商推出低價應用的直下式電視搭配大陸家電下鄉政策，一舉提升了LED的需求量，但預期從2014年開始由於背光市場的LED滲透率已經趨近於99%，因此成長動能會逐漸趨於緩和。使得LED應用的終極產品照明市場開始浮出檯面，在LED產業快速的變動下以及大陸地區廠商的競爭下，台灣LED供應商必須提早佈局因應未來的市場變動。因此本研究目的透過分析LED市場的需求發展趨勢以及LED導線架與產業的特性，找出最適當的經營發展策略。 本研究將以LED導線架廠商為主軸首先透過四競技場分析了解LED導線架市場所面臨的環境狀況，然後再以SWOT分析個案公司本身的優劣勢並作為發展策略的依據，最後找出LED導線架廠商在全球不同區域的經營發展策略方向。本研究主要鎖定台灣導線架龍頭廠I公司為探討對象，透過對於I公司分析結果如下： 一、大陸地區LED導線架場的崛起以及低階照明應用的成長，因此必須透過嚴格的成本控管以及低階市場的研發，與大陸地區龍頭廠進行策略同盟，藉由彼此資源與現有客戶的整合，開拓彼此間的出海口，聯手穩固市佔率，確保低階應用市占率。 二、高階市場產品透過內部組織建立相關研發實驗室，並與國際大廠的聯手開發藉由彼此間資源整合強化高階市場LED導線架佔有版圖。 / Light-Emitting Diode, commonly known as LED, contains the strengths of power saving, longer life time, fast reaction ability as well as other advantages. Following the global trend of eco conscious, LED has become the main stream of green energy development. In Taiwan, LED industry has been developed for over 30 years. From the early packaging industry gradually extend to the upstream industries includes sapphire substrate and LED lead frame; followed with downstream industry such as the applications of consuming products. Up to date, mature LED supply chain system has been formed and the technical skills as well as develop ability are all compatible to those pioneers of the world in this field. However since 2010, China government started to have huge investment on power saving policy. Many LED factories were established with the support of China government and it has become huge threats to Taiwan’s LED industry. At the same time, with the increase of supply plus the downturn of global economy, the imbalance of supply and demand kept exaggerates until 2011 Korean factory promoted the low price LED TV and China government carried out the “Home appliance going country side” policy, led to the dramatic increase of LED demand. However as of 2014, the LED backlight will already have the penetration close to 99%, low growth of this market can be expected. Thus, the ultimate application of LED in lightning market starts to show on the stage. With the fast moving of LED industry and the competition from China factories, LED suppliers in Taiwan must be prepared in advance in order to react to the market change. The main goal of this research is to analyze the demand and trends of LED market with the characteristic of the LED lead frame industry to finally find the best appropriate tactic for management. This study will mainly base on LED lead frame factory, first through the “Four competition” analyze to understand the current environment of LED lead frame market followed with SWOT analyze of the lead frame factory for a basis of future developing strategy. This research targets on the leading lead frame factory in Taiwan- I company, and the results are as follow: 1.To react to the growth of lead frame factory in China and the increasing demand of lower level lighting application, setting strict cost control and improve research and develop abilities to contain the market share is a must. In addition to firm the market share, in alliance with leading factories in China, through sharing resource and integration of customers should be taking into serious consideration. 2.To form research and develop lab for high level products, through cooperation with leading factories from globe to integrate resources and extend business to the high level LED lead frame market.

環境保護議題在今日已成為人類經濟活動中，除了「全球化」以外另一個引人重視的議題，而為達到環境保護，以維持共生環境之永續發展之目的，減少環境資源消耗與廢棄物的排放（節能省碳），可以說是效用最大的方法。歐盟在2006年7月1日RoHS法令開始施行後，在可預見的短期時間內，注重或從事環境保護相關的企業，將格外具有投資的價值，而在另一方面，隨著新興市場經濟的急速發展，對於資源的需求殷切，使得國際原油價格居高不下，並且可能持續漲升，所以從事節能相關的研究與應用，不僅是未來的趨勢，亦是企業未來的商機所在。因此，本研究選定具有環保及節能雙重利基的發光二極體（light-emitting diode, LED）晶粒產業進行研究與分析，目的在於提供企業經營者對於未來經營策略方向之參考，以及提供投資人採用價值投資法進行投資之考量依據，而研究結果對於後續研究者，亦將具有相當程度之參考價值。 本研究項目內容包括研究動機與目的及研究範圍與限制、文獻回顧與探討、產業整體分析、評價模式說明、實證研究結果與分析及結論與建議等六大項。 本計畫研究方法採用三階段現金流量折現模式。首先，對LED產業進行整體分析，然後就個案公司營運情況進行企業評價之前提分析，並將個案公司初步評價結果與股價歷史資料比較，以檢視評價結果之績效，且以產業未來可能發展景況評估個案公司股價合理區間；其次，將評價結果與目前市場股價作比較，並探討目前股價背後所隱含之變數值；最後利用敏感度分析來觀察個別關鍵評價因子對股價之影響程度。 在分別對銷售導向及盈餘導向DCF法採用不同權重進行綜合評價時，可得知晶電、璨圓、華上及泰谷公司，在銷售導向及盈餘導向DCF法評價結果之權重值分別為60%-40%、70%-30%、70%-30%及70%-30%時，有相對較低之年平均Theil’s U值0.272516、0.190505、0.138237及0.135523，即在該權重值下各個案公司之綜合評價結果可獲得相對較佳之評價績效。依據上述較佳評價績效之權重值，以2007年12月31日為評價日，進行晶電、璨圓、華上及泰谷公司之綜合評價，其合理的股價區間分別為每股61.07~134.88元、16.7~32.05元、9.87~31.19元及10.86~32.69元。 在影響股價變動的關鍵因子判斷上，由分析結果可知晶電公司盈餘成長率、總投資率及銷售成長率等因子每變動1%，對於股價之影響程度（包含正向或負向變動）皆大於1%，顯示此三項因子應為影響晶電公司股價變動之關鍵因子；對於璨圓公司而言，影響股價變動之關鍵因子則為銷售成長率及盈餘成長率；而影響華上公司股價變動之關鍵因子則僅有總投資率；至於影響泰谷公司股價變動之關鍵因子則包括總投資率、盈餘成長率、邊際利潤率及銷售成長率等4項。

知識經濟時代的來臨，對於智慧財產之知識管理成為產業經營皆須重視的一項投入工作，無論國家、政府或產業界均以其擁有之智慧資產作為衡量未來競爭力的指標；其中又以專利代表的技術創新能力備受矚目。雖有許多衡量產業發展的方法，但由於近年來對專利資訊的利用，可用來支援經營管理與商業策略的參考，因此專利分析亦成為產業界的重要工具，不僅高科技產業希望能經由專利技術之分析確實反映產業的技術現況，政策制訂者亦以此作為衡量創新研發成果與科技發展方向的依據。因此，對台灣LED產業發展而言，當務之急除致力技術研發以及累積自身專利之保護傘外，如何藉由專利所提供的訊息瞭解當今產業技術現況，以作為輔助企業決策者參考用，成為相當重要的課題。 有鑑於此本研究以LED產業之專利佈局為研究，並著重在應用於大尺寸液晶背光源之白光LED進行產業技術個案研究。利用智慧資源規劃方法所述之從產業結構看智慧財產來進行本研究。由於智慧財產的經營必須建構在產業結構的連結，以及與特定產業供應鏈和價值鏈具有因果關係，並有系統且有效的將智慧財產權各類業務與企業各經營構面同步交叉連結，進而發展出與有體財產等值或超值的無體財產。 基於上述之說明，本研究以智慧資源規劃 ( Intelligence Resources Planning ， IRP ) 之觀念及方法進行，首先以LED產業之產業結構為背景，透過產業結構、技術結構、產品結構先了解整個產業上、中、下游間的關係，藉由產業鏈的分析蒐集與檢索該產業中技術領導公司相關之專利，進而了解其技術現況以及專利佈署情形等資訊，以作為進行下列研究分析用： 1. 市場佈局概況掌握 透過專利檢索找出其對應於該產業內各公司技術分佈及產業鏈位置，了解各領先廠商所擁有之技術與產品或有新興的潛在競爭者以及未來可切入利基點等。 2. 專利佈局之分析研究 利用產業鏈上的廠商分佈，進一步檢索其專利，並透過專利檢索的分析結果，用以分析每個公司於哪一個年度、哪些區域佈署哪些專利，並以產品/技術結構為基礎，分析產業鏈上廠商對應產品/技術結構的專利分佈，了解LED產業中領先廠商於各國專利佈局狀況，以及個廠商的產品發展情形。再由不同年代對應產品技術結構所產生的專利分佈，進而得知每個公司的專利佈署以及技術發展。除此之外，本研究更以現LED產業於技術發展所遇問題，例如增加LED光取出之技術方式，以該產業上主要領先的廠商為主進行檢索，進而整合產業調查與專利分析成果作為LED 專利分析資料庫，完整掌握LED產業的產業及專利資訊，提供國內廠商未來進行研發工作與專利佈局策略之參考。 故本研究主要以LED產業結構，以及連結LED產業的專利檢索調研與分析，了解LED產業中領先廠商所擁有的專利技術分佈矩陣分析，進而提出台灣LED廠商於專利佈署上之機會，以及建議台灣LED廠商可充分運用智慧財產之各種形態、群集、組合及區域佈署，進行全球之專利佈局，完整的專利佈署除可作為自身的保護傘外，也可免於國外大廠的專利威脅，進而也可讓自己在市場上佔有一席之地。 / Intellectual Property management becomes an important issue for business management in the age of knowledge-based economy. It is an indicator concerning the evaluation on potential competency of a country, government or industry. Management of Patent, which is deeply involved with technology innovation ability, is especially highlighted. Patent information, among many evaluation methods for industrial development, is used as reference for business management and strategy in recent years. Hence, patent analysis become an important tool for industry. High-tech industry depend on patent analysis to mirror updated technology development while policy makers take it to evaluate R&D results and direct technology developments. Therefore, it is significant for Taiwan LED industry to know updated technology developments and make business strategy through patent information, other than the R&D investments and accumulation of patent barriers. Thus, this thesis focuses on the patent strategy in LED industry, specifically on the case study of white LEDs applied in large LCD Backlights. The research will follow the IPR theory (Intellectual Resource Planning) to analyze intellectual property from the perspective of industrial structure. IP management should be built upon the interconnection of industries and is highly involved with the industrial supply chain and value chain. IP management need to systematically intertwines intellectual property and every aspect in industrial management to develop intangible assets of a value equal to or higher than tangible assets. The research begins with the construction of supply chain in LED industry through patent analysis on the technology of leading companies to provide a clear picture of the current status of technology and patent mapping. Such research can provide information as follows: 1. Market plan Patent search will show different companies’ technology distribution and positions in the supply chain. It can offer a better understanding for leading companies’ technology and products as well as possible new competitors and potential niche in the market. 2. Patent map Patent search will show the date and area of patent applications of different companies. Through a geographical and historical analysis, the patent map and technology development of different companies in the supply chain can be revealed. Besides, the thesis will focus on R&D problems in LED industry, for example, technology to increase extraction efficiency. The research will search patents of the leading companies and integrate industry survey and patent analysis to construct a LED patent analysis database. Through offering complete industrial and patent information in LED industry, the research can provide a reference for domestic companies to develop technology and patent strategy. The thesis will combine the industrial chain research and patent analysis in LED industry, further elaborating the patent and technology matrix analysis on the leading companies. It will propose some patent tactics for Taiwan LED companies to fully utilize every aspect of intellectual property to construct a global strategy. A complete patent map can offer better protection against international enterprises and achieve a preferable position in the market.

本研究希望經由全面深入的分析，尋找個案公司成功的創新產品及經營策略。LED產業正澎湃成長，擬定策略以因應未來快速變遷的環境。本研究有三大目的： 1.分析個案公司所在的LED產業經營環境，找出機會、威脅以及關鍵成功因素為何。 2.分析個案公司的營運狀況，找出優勢、劣勢提出如何發展產品創新策略建議。 3.分析個案公司的產品創新案例，為個案公司的產品創新流程，歸納出一個創新管理模式。 本研究的架構係採用Robbins和Coulter的理論架構來進行內.外，在分析與策略規劃。1.首先進行內、外在分析，以界定外在環境中機會與威脅，以及該產業的關鍵成功因素，並了解個案公司所擁有的優劣勢。2.根據以上分析，歸納出該公司所面臨問題。3.提出可行的策略，在該策略下擬定營運策略。 經過本研究分析LED產業照明事業關鍵成功因素為銷售通路、研發能力、成本控管能力，要具備此三項競爭能力，才有經營能力。本研究建議個案公司：1.積極投資LED照明產品的研發與生產。2.創造出高光學品質的產品，避免與T5燈管在亮度上競爭。3.創造出市場需要的產品，尤其是工廠型客戶需要的燈管。 本研究對政府的建議為：加強對LED節能減碳優點宣導，補助來提高人民使用率，積極推動國內學術單位培養專業光學技術人才與研究機構。

照明產業現在正面臨前所未有的革命，發光二極體正慢慢地取代我們所稱的燈泡、燈管。當新科技取代舊科技的同時，產業也跟著洗牌，各國政府莫不傾政府之力來推動照明產業的革命，企圖在產業洗牌後能夠佔據一席之地。目前全球五大LED公司分別是日本的日亞化學、豐田合成、美國的Cree、歐洲的Philips Lumileds、與德國的Osram。本論文特別針對Cree公司的發展歷程與策略加以分析，期望藉由探討國外公司的優勢、劣勢，提供國內產業一借鏡。 策略是企業一連串搭配的活動組合。本論文以吳思華教授的策略三構面、競技場理論對Cree公司的各種活動組合進行分析。由產品範疇、核心能力、事業網路的分析可知，Cree公司善用事業網路的資源來建立自身的核心能力，並不斷地重新擬定產品範疇。於核心能力的部分，本論文引用周延鵬教授智慧資本理論，透過分析更能瞭解利用專利的商業策略，透過事業網路也能快速地建立智慧資本─核心能力。 本論文認為Cree公司發展分為三階段。第一階段1987～1998年，為產品範疇的定義時期，以DOE與Defense Department的美國政府計畫做為研發經費來源、NCSU的博士生帶入技術能力，並維持一定的合作，而以兩大客戶Osram與住友來支持整體公司的營收。第二階段1999年～2002年，Cree以智財與技術的授權 (Nitres與UCSB技術連結)、訴訟 (Lawsuit partners: NCSU、BU、Rohm與中村修二)、併購Nitres的策略佈局，將營收快速擴張到2億美元。第三階段2003年以後，Cree選擇封裝產品、LED燈具產品進行10億美元的營收目標，實際併購Cotco、LLF與Zumtobel策略合作，以LED city、LED University、Led workplace，再聯合照明系統伙伴提供光、電、熱的LED照明解決方案，推廣與教育更多的LED照明。 以策略競技場分析，可以很清楚比較出Cree所處的LED產業與其他競爭者的競爭態勢，第一個競爭比較層次是產品/服務的「價值/效率」競技場，Big 5與台廠分屬於價值與效率的兩端。第二層次競爭比較是企業總體的「結構/能耐」競技場，Big5廠商以專利交互授權形成結構障礙，而台廠處於能耐的一端。第三層次競爭是產業網路的資源比較，Osram、Philips Lumileds、TG、Nichia以母集團的自身能力而處實力一端，Cree積極的採用合縱策略串起自身的供應鏈體系，台廠則以台灣內需的上下游供應關係形成自己的體系。Cree不斷地利用體系的力量來建立競爭優勢，符合四競技場理論的架構。 台灣LED產業發展甚早，產業鏈分工完整、研發投入、研發成果、企業獲利、、、等等比起Cree公司毫不遜色。 （一）從價值─效率來看，Cree擁有產品性能(價值)後，於是Cree併購Cotco，增加規模降低成本，能繼續帶給客戶效率；LED台灣廠商如晶電，不斷藉著水平整合、增加規模、降低生產成本，達到了良好的效率。接著應當思考給客戶效率的同時，再給予更高的價值。 （二）從結構─能耐來看，五大廠商藉由專利與訴訟、較長的學習曲線和較大的經濟規模擴充，建立起相當的結構的競爭的進入障礙。台灣廠商如晶電，發展和專利的佈局較五大廠晚，但卻憑藉著工研院研發團隊建立起的技術，再透過自有研發與產業併購，累積起足夠的能耐。如能再學習Cree靈活運用專利與訴訟之策略，能使結構的競爭力更加強大。 （三）從體系─實力來看，台灣廠商與Cree相同，靠的是善用體系的力量來競爭。例如晶元光電、億光電子、光寶電子、、、等許多國內LED產業形成一完整、高效率的供應體系。然而台灣的體系實力，從電子業、IT產業發展歷史來看，多半侷限在製造體系，微笑曲線的最前的研發與最後的品牌通路一直都不發達。 從Cree的經驗來看，體系的競爭力可以擴展到製造之外，此時Cree正在進行的是建立一個以Cree為核心的照明體系，能不能成功是未知數，但對於善於運用體系、創造Win-Win的Cree來說無疑是一大機會。 因此善用體系競爭的台灣廠商，也可思考如何擴大體系力量的範疇，使體系的分工能夠結合前瞻研究、研發、專利、生產、標準、規範、物流、品牌、行銷等等。 / Lighting industry is confronted with an intense revolution that light emitted diode (LED) lighting is replacing traditional lighting. The change of technology results in the change of industry. Every government tries hard to promote the development of LED lighting industry to take over the share in the new market. The top five LED companies (Big 5) are Nichia from Japan, Osram for Germany, Philips Lumileds from Netherlands, Cree from America and Toyota Gosei from Japan. The thesis will analyze the history, management, business and competitive strategy of Cree to provide a good case model to Taiwanese LED companies. A strategy is performed with a series of actions in a company. The thesis will apply Dr. Se Hwa Wu’s Three Dimensions of Strategy and Strategy Arenas Theory to analyze every action in Cree. From the analysis of the three dimensions, it can be observed that Cree is good at employing their business networks to build up their core capabilities and continuously re-define their coverage of product line. The thesis will also apply Prof. Y. P. Jou’s Intellectual Property Theory to analyze Cree’s core capabilities and elaborate the patent strategies and how to rapidly create the core capability as intelligent capital through business networks of a company. Cree’s development can be divided to three stages. Stage I was the definition of product lines, from 1987 to 1998. Cree obtained their R&D funding from DOE and U.S. Defense Department and their R&D ability from North Carolina State University. Cree’s two major customers, Osram and Sumitomo, supported their revenue. From 1999 to 2002, Cree used their intelligent property and technology licensing (allied with Nitres and UCSB), lawsuit partners (NCSU, BU, Rohm and Shuji Nakamura) and merger and acquisition with Nitres to increase their revenue up to 200 million U.S. dollars in the end of stage II. After 2003, Cree used LED packages and LED lighting fixtures to increase their revenue to 1 billion U.S. dollar. Cree merged with Cotco and LLF while establishing strategic alliance with Zumtobel. Cree promoted LED with different projects, such as LED city, LED university and LED workplace. Cree also collaborated with their lighting partners who supported total solutions of optics, electron and heat dissipation, to achieve those promotions. Through analysis based on the Strategy Arenas Theory, the competitions between Cree and their competitors in the LED industry will become more obvious. The first arena of strategy is a competition of value and efficiency of product/ service. The Big 5 companies occupy the position closer to the extremity of value and Taiwan companies stay closer to the other side of efficiency in the value chain. The second arena is a competition of structure and capability. Big 5 take more advantages by structural block formed with cross licensing, while Taiwanese companies own greater capability of production. The third arena is an industrial networks level, a competition of networks and strength. Cree and Taiwanese companies both use industrial networks as their advantage, while Osram, Philips Lumileds, Nichia and TG use the strength of their own company to maintain their market share. Cree continuously collaborate with and allies outside resources from partners to establish their competition advantages. Taiwan has developed our LED industry for nearly 30 year manufacturing. The industrial chain, R&D investments, R&D achievement and company revenue are all well established. All these achievements make Taiwanese companies as well qualified as Cree in the LED market. 1. Value vs. efficiency: Cree merged with COTCO Luminant Device Limited, a Hong Kong company (Cotco), to achieve cost down by mass production and to increase production efficiency. A similar example can be seen in Taiwan LED companies, Epistar Corporation. Epistar continuously used horizontal merger and acquisition, to increase production scale, decrease cost and achieve better efficiency in production. Epistar have to perform higher value to their customers at the same time. 2. Structure vs. capability: Big 5 constructed strong entry barriers by patents, lawsuits, longer learning curve and larger finance scale. Taiwan LED companies, Epistar Corporation for example, take the strength of the R&D team of ITRI, in-house R&D, and merger and acquisition to try to catch up on the gap of belated developments and patents arrangement. If Epistar can well apply patents and lawsuit as their strategy, the company would gain more advantage in the competitions. 3. Networks vs. strength: Taiwan LED is similar with Cree to take strength of industrial network. Many LED industries in Taiwan, such as Epistar, Everlight, and Lite-On, have formed a complete and efficient industrial network. However, the network is limited within manufacturing. From the history of electrical industry and IT industry in Taiwan, it can be observed that R&D and marketing, both extremities of Smile Curve, are usually ill-performed. According to the case of Cree, the competition of networks can be expanded out of manufacture. Cree is developing a LED lighting industrial networks from the core of Cree. It is still unknown whether Cree can succeed, but there will be a big chance of Cree who know to well employ networks to create Win-Win strategies. In conclusion, Taiwan companies who well use networks can also think about broadened their networks to combine R&D, manufacture, standardization, SOP, logistics management, trademark and marketing.

近來LED在日常生活中的照明應用如火如荼，幾乎到處可見到它的蹤跡。由於不但輕薄短小，更具節能環保特性，因此發展潛力無限，已被視為取代傳統照明的明日之星。 從較小功率的訊號指示燈運用開始，隨著開發與製造技術的提升，逐漸擴展應用到液晶電視背光板，而後家用照明、商業照明，進而車用照明等更高發光效率、更大功率、更廣色域的運用領域，儼然已成照明主流。 然而，在車用領域，雖然照明的需求非常多，諸如方向燈、煞車燈、標示燈、儀表燈、閱讀燈、晝行燈、霧燈、頭燈等，都是LED潛在的應用市場，但各家車廠在追求時尚與科技感的同時，亦無法忽略安全與耐久性的考量。尤其是在同時具有高度車廠品牌識別功能的頭、尾燈及晝行燈照明方面。 因此，從LED照明供應商至車廠，無不花費巨資、卯足全力，競相研發、推廣，如何及時將LED新產品引進到車上，以能更快更多地擄獲潛在車主歡心，取得整體商品價值與銷售市占提升的相輔相成效果。 本研究之目的，正是針對引進新產品LED照明的國產小客車，以產業龍頭公司個案為例，探討如何結合產品、訂價、通路、促銷，以及人員、流程、有形展示等7Ps行銷組合(marketing mix)策略，達到促進LED新產品在國產小客車市場的擴大應用。 本研究除了將針對企業市場競爭策略，及行銷策略組合的理論基礎加以探討外，也將同時對LED小客車的產業環境，以及個案公司有關LED國產小客車市場競爭策略、行銷策略與業務規劃等一併進行了解與分析，冀望藉此進一步推移出未來國產小客車用照明市場中，LED新產品引進及銷售的提升與發展方向。

LED(Light Emitting Diode，發光二極體)的應用已由最早的數字顯示器和指示器發展出一些新的應用，與生活息息相關，四處可見，包括出口指示燈、裝飾燈、交通號誌、舞台燈、室外照明和投射燈等。LED提供的好處包括體積小、使用壽命長、低熱量輸出、節約能源和耐用性，它也擁有設計的靈活性，譬如由將小單體封裝成不同的形狀、顏色、大小及亮度可以達到顯色及調光的各種不同變化。但是LED技術發展限制使得它在整體光源輸出、演色性及可靠性仍不如規格宣稱可以達到的境界，因此在某些應用上還不普及，尤以取代傳統照明的應用市場目前較難達成。然而其餘LED在包括零售展示，彩色燈光，需要較暗光線的狹小空間照明，外部照明和應用一體化的光源的建築、娛樂與劇場照明等應用領域已經漸漸形成市場。由於台灣基於半導體產業的興盛，讓LED產業也隨之蓬勃發展起舞。 Philips公司進入LED照明產業後，積極地展開規劃佈署，主以併購的方式，於2005至2009年共併購了9間LED照明相關公司。從上游研發與製造LED晶片與元件公司Lumileds，到中游LED照明控制廠商Color Kinetics、TIR system、Bodine與Dynalite，以及下游LED燈具製造商PLI、Genlyte與Selecon，將LED照明產業鏈上的的關鍵公司納入旗下，對本身LED照明產品線進行垂直整合以及組織重整，Philips公司藉此以大規模的併購動作向全球宣告自身於LED照明產業的龍頭地位。 本研究針對LED照明產業作一系列的探討與分析，先從目前LED照明發展概況、主要廠商LED照明產品技術結構分析開始作初步探討，最後以Philips公司為個案探討該公司在LED照明的商業模式，如在LED照明產業的組織設計、投資、併購、合資、研發、授權與專利佈局…等。透過上述分析資料及結果，本研究歸納出Philips公司於LED照明產業的經營模式與發展策略，並對應到台灣企業目前的發展狀況。對台灣企業發展LED照明而言，當務之急除致力技術研發，累積自身專利之保護傘，以及對國外廠商的大規模授權動作亦必須要進行充分的研究與了解外，仍需借鏡Philips公司經營LED照明產業的方法與經驗，重新規劃自身的商業模式與競爭策略，避免重蹈過往台灣廠商在LED晶粒與封裝段遭遇的困境，逃脫不了向國外大廠取得授權或是被告的命運。 / The application of LED (Light Emitting Diode) evolved from digital display and indicators to more utility devices close to daily life, such as indicator lamps, decorative lamps, traffic lights, stage lights, outdoor lights, and projection lights. The limit of current technology restricts LED from so-claimed full performance concerning global illumination, color rendering, and reliability so that it is less available in certain applications, especially in the market of traditional lightings. However, LED becomes popular in retail display, color lighting, illumination of a small space, exterior lighting, illumination of integrated building, entertainment lighting and stage lighting. In addition, the prosperity of Taiwan semi-conductor industry encourages the development of LED industry in Taiwan. The LED companies have developed into a complete industry chain in Taiwan and will play an important role in the global LED industry. Philips aggressively merged 9 LED companies between 2005 and 2009. These companies ranges from upstream to downstream of the LED industry chain, including LED chips manufacturer Lumileds, LED controller companies Color Kinetics, TIR System, Bodine, Dynalite, and LED module and system manufacturer PLI, Genlyte, Selecon. The strategy of Philips is to complete its LED product line through vertical merger and reorganization of these important LED companies, proclaiming its leading position in global LED industry. This thesis begins with an introduction about the latest development of LED lighting and the technology analysis on LED products of the main companies. Further, the thesis will take Philips as the case study to elaborate its business model in LED lighting, such as organization, investment, merger and acquisitions, joint venture, R&D, licensing and patent strategy. Through the analysis on Philips’ business model and strategy in LED industry, the research will propose some suggestions for Taiwan LED companies. Taiwan LED companies should increase their own R&D energy, strengthen their intellectual property and keep up with the updated status of international licensing events. They should also take Philips as an example to examine their own business strategy in case that they may be trapped between high Royalties or lawsuits to international enterprises, a dilemma which Taiwan LED die and package companies encountered.

本文檢視了包含半導體、面板、發電太陽能、及發光二極體等四種在最近十五年來高科技電子設備產業於日本、韓國、中國、新加坡、馬來西亞、與印度等亞洲國家中發展的情況。文中包含針對不同高科技電子設備產業的高研發成本、高資本密集、涉及國防及國土安全的高敏感性、及以設備搭售服務的商業模式等特性，在面對亞洲國家在文化、制度、及經濟上類似但卻又不完全相同的環境時，跨國高科技電子設備商所採取因應策略的探討。 / This thesis reviews the development of four targeted high-tech equipment industries of Semiconductor, Flat Panel Display, Photovoltaic (PV) Solar, and Light Emitting Diode (LED) in Asia countries including Japan, South Korea, China, Singapore, Malaysia, and India. Business and operational strategies from individual high-tech equipment industries characterized of high R&D cost, high capital investment, trade sensitive requirement, and equipment bundling service business strategy dealing with similar but not identical cultural, institutional, and economic environment of targeted Asia countries were also reviewed.

企業評價對於投資決策有重大的影響，不論是發行上市、或是機構投資人選擇投資標的、乃至於併購或是清算，企業評價都是一切的基礎。再加上近來各界對於節能產業的重視，發光二極體封裝產業正如日中天的高度成長，如何能夠正確地衡量此產業的企業價值，實是機構投資人或是一般大眾關心的課題。此外，實務界長久以來詬病證管會所採用的承銷價格公式，乃是結合不同評價模式的方式來評斷發行股票公司之正確股票價值，但實證結果往往發現此公式會造成股價被低估的現象。 本研究以台灣地區共六家發光二極體封裝產業上市櫃公司為例，以其民國八十七年至九十四年的財務數據和資料，以五年為一階段，利用七種不同的評價模式：三階段成長現金流量折現法、三階段成長本益比法、三階段成長股價淨值比法、三階段股價銷售額比法、市場比較本益比法、市場比較股價淨值比法以及市場比較股價銷售額比法，預期九十二年初至九十五年初之理論實際股價，並與實際的市價作一比較，利用THEIL所提出的THEIL’S U值來比較不同評價模型與實際市價差距的績效，以選出最適合發光二極體封裝產業之企業評價模式。 本研究更進一步探討長久以來被實務界所詬病的綜合評價模式（結合不同的評價模式），試著經過第一階段實證結果的篩選，利用簡單權重結合本產業最佳和次佳的企業評價模式，以得到一個評價績效更勝於最佳評價模式的綜合評價法。 實證結果顯示，發光二極體最佳評價模型乃為市場比較股價銷售額比法(THEIL’S U=0.3515)，而三階段成長現金流量折現法，則適用於產業較穩定的情況下。突破性的發現則為，利用THEIL’S U值來比較評價績效而選出的最佳和次佳模型，在分別給予簡單權重（ex：50％：50％、60％：40％等）的情況下所得到的綜合評價法，其THEIL’S U值（<0.3515）比當初單一最佳評價法--市場比較股價銷售額比法(0.3515)還要來得低，顯示綜合評價法的有效性的確存在，並值得各界參考。此外，亦發現給予最佳評價法較大權重時，更可以進一步提昇綜合評價法之績效。此結果反駁了實務界長久以來對於綜合評價法的不信任，也給予證管會一個修正承銷價格公式的方向。跨類型的評價法結合並不是不可行，但是需要第一階段各個評價法的評價績效驗證，讓較佳的評價模式彼此結合以產生資訊互補的效果。