German TADF developer Cynora presented its latest blue TADF material in May 2018 - with a CIEy of 0.14, EQE of 20% and a lifetime of 20 hours LT97 at 700 nits. Cynora expects to have blue material in the mass production by 2020.

Dr. Andreas Haldi - Chief Marketing Officer Cynora

Cynora's Chief Marketing Offer, Dr. Andreas Haldi was kind enough to answer a few questions we had regarding TADF emitters, the differences between next-generation emitter technologies, lifetime, color points and more.

Want to continue reading? Become a premium user now and get full access and more benefits!



This interview reeks of desperation

Looking forward to seeing these updates numbers - these conferences are only three weeks away.

Still strange approach and timing - if it’s only weeks, why are they lashing out against the competition now with nothing but claims and promises rather than wait until end of August to come with a much stronger, fact-based attack? Trying to appease or close any investors? 


Sti - objectively speaking, I

Sti - objectively speaking, I didn't see any "lashing out" - in fact I was impressed with how Andreas talks about Kyulux.

Ever heard of exciton lifetime?

Mostly correct facts, but this one is too much sugar coating the harsh reality for my taste:

”But we now know that the lifetime of fluorescent blue emitters is good enough for current OLED displays. TADF emitters are only special fluorescent emitters, so there is no reason why they cannot be as stable as the current fluorescent blue emitters in production.”

This is wishful thinking - TADF is not just “special” fluorescence, the exciton lifetime is roughly 1000 times longer, which gives them the identical achilles heel phosphorescent emitters suffer from. As we all remember, both UDC and BASF started strong as well but had to give up the race because of these effects. 

Not saying that TADF can’t be stable, but if the degradation causes by the long-living excited states is not mastered, it will not have a future.


Well, there is a certain

Well, there is a certain framing - recently Kyulux themselves described their 470 nm as the best blue around, while Andreas as a representative of their fiercest competitor 1) calls the color skyblue (which frankly cannot be estimated from just the peak emission, unless they know more than has been published) and 2) claims that Kyulux’s admirable performance is “meaningless” (come on!) and 3) unnecessarily and falsely claiming that Kyulux is traditionally only focused on green and red (they started with blue even before Cynora did and were vocal about this until some years ago. Lastly, 4) the remark that they are doing mostly PMOLED is also a thinly veiled jab. It is clear AMOLED is a much bigger market, but why not doing it to generate revenues and train sales managers??Material-wise, this does not matter at all, the same materials could go straight into a display (ok, not the yellow stuff).

Most of the interview is the truth and hard facts, so sneaking in (naturall) biased assessments about competitors in an otherwise ”educational” interview is really blurring the lines too much and plain unfair in my opinion. Would love to read what Kyulux has to say about this.