Tech

These Internal Samsung Documents Show The Company Is Obsessed With Apple

Read in app
Apple Samsung
One of Samsung's famous anti-Apple ads.  Samsung

Ever since 2009 — at least — Samsung has focused is strategy around one thing: Beating Apple.

We know this because the patent litigation between the two companies in a California federal court has revealed some of the Samsung's internal strategy documents for the first time.

One of these documents, published by Re/code, literally has the heading, "BEAT APPLE," in screaming capital letters.

Obviously, the two companies are competitors. That's not news.

But it's not until you see Samsung's documents that you realize just how focused Samsung is on beating Apple. It's almost enough to make you think the company might have an inferiority complex about Apple. (Except that in Q4 2013 Samsung did indeed "beat" Apple, shipping 86 million phone handsets to Apple's 51 million, according to market research firm Strategy Analytics.)

The most dramatic document comes from a 2011 strategy plan that Samsung distributed internally. The first page (after the cover) goes like this:

... HIGH-LEVEL INITIATIVES - BEAT APPLE

  • Beating Apple is #1 Priority (everything must be context of beating Apple)
  • Threat from Apple is extremely real and urgent (up t0 12.5M sell-in in 4Q)
  • ... Drive consumer pull: customers walk into stores asking for Samsung; understand why consumers buy Apple and develop countermeasures by carrier/retailer

Samsung's obsession with beating Apple began shortly after Apple launched the first iPhone in 2007, and those new "smartphones" began killing off the dumbphone or "feature phone" market.

In 2009, Samsung created this document to talk about that shift:

Apple Samsung
US Federal District Court

Nokia, of course, is now not much of a problem for either Samsung or Apple. But notice how Samsung realized — at still a very early stage in the smarpthone war — that "emotional" warmth of a smartphone interface was crucial in gaining and retaining customers.

Samsung asked its staff to consider the Samsung personality, versus rival companies':

Samsung Apple
US Federal District Court

We're guessing that the uptight dude in the white shirt is NOT where Samsung wanted its brand to be. Note how cool and relaxed the Apple character is. The rest of this document — you can download it all here — repeatedly talks about redesigning Samsung's user interface's to be more like Apple's, at least in terms of friendliness.

Fast-forward two years, and Samsung's war against Apple seems to have become more intense, according to the documents.

It's 2011, and the company is planning for 2012:

Samsung Apple
US Federal District Court
Later that year, Samsung began running this famous — and famously effective — campaign, in which Apple fans lining up at a store for a product launch were portrayed as delusional losers:

Through 2012, the campaign against Apple took its toll. Eventually, the media began writing stories about how Apple seemed to have lost its mojo, and how cool and interesting Samsung's products were becoming.

At Apple, chief marketer Phil Schiller blew up at his ad agency. He even admitted that Samsung was doing a good job:

Samsung Apple
US District Court

Now in 2014, we're seeing the endgame in this battle as Apple prepares to launch in the fall iPhone 6, which will likely be a large-screen version of the iPhone to compete with Samsung's Galaxy S5 and Galaxy Note phones.

Read next

Jim is the former editor-in-chief of Insider's news division.Previously he was the founding editor of Business Insider UK.He has also been managing editor at Adweek, an advertising columnist at CBS Interactive, and a Knight-Bagehot Fellow at Columbia Business School. His work has appeared in Slate, Salon, The Independent, MTV, The Nation and AOL.His investigative journalism changed the law in the US First Circuit Court of Appeals (U.S. v. Kravetz), the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (North Jersey Media v. Ashcroft), New Jersey (In Re El-Atriss), and New York State (Mosallem v. Berenson).The US Supreme Court cited his work on the death penalty in the concurrence to Baze v. Rees, on the issue of whether lethal injection is cruel or unusual.He won the Neal award for business journalism in 2005 for a series investigating bribes and kickbacks in the advertising business.Here's a selection of his past stories:   • The alleged betrayal in these photos, texts, and emails cost Snapchat $158 million   • Inside the conspiracy that forced Dov Charney out of American Apparel   • The Evolution of Ev: The creator of Twitter, Blogger, and Medium has a plan to fix the mess he made of the internet   • THE "KNOCK-IN SHORT": Nigel Farage and the massive bet against the pound on the night of the Brexit vote   • eBay worked with the FBI to put its top affiliate marketer in prison   • How Dunkin Donuts ended up hiring a psychotic credit card thief as director of communications   • BEJEWELED: The definitive, illustrated history of the most underrated game ever   • The CEO of Publicis told us how he stared down a furious internal rebellion to bet the future of his $11 billion company on artificial intelligence   • FBX: The billion-dollar Facebook business that never happened   • The €150 million check-kiting scam that bankrupted Leo Burnett in Greece   • My Polaroids of the September 11 attacks led me into America's secret court system for terrorist suspects   • YouTube deleted 130 rap videos to help police fight street gangs responsible for thousands of stabbingsDisclosure: I own shares of Twitter (TWTR).