Capital Wealth
THU CLOSE · SEP 17   S&P 500 7,637.76 ▲1.14%  ·  DJIA 51,778.04 ▲0.61%  ·  NASDAQ 26,418.30 ▲1.69%  ·  10-YR 4.946%  ·  2-YR 4.688%  ·  WTI $101.91 ▼0.5%  ·  GOLD $4,360.20 ▲0.3%  ·  VIX 15.44 ▼12.8%
Off Duty · The Human File · Behavioral

“Let Us Know When You’re Done Reheating Our Leftovers”

Samsung shipped the first mainstream foldable in 2019 and roughly twenty models since. Apple shipped one, and suddenly everybody understands why you’d want a folding phone. There is a lesson in here about being early.

By Sean Anees Saifi · Capital Wealth · Published Friday, September 18, 2026 · Source: The Wall Street Journal, September 18, 2026 edition, whose market figures are the Thursday, September 17 close
Key Points
2019
Samsung’s first mainstream foldable
~20
foldable models released since
1.4B / 1B
iPhones versus Samsung devices in use
2027
when Counterpoint sees Apple taking the majority
An arcade claw machine full of plush toys, a hand on the joystick, the cabinet glowing in a dim arcade.
Samsung beat Apple to jumbo screens, 5G and the first mainstream foldable, in 2019, and has released roughly 20 foldable models since. There are now more than 5 billion smartphones in the world.
In one line: Being first is a fact. Being rewarded for being first is a separate event, and it does not always happen.

Rasheed Richmond has owned several Samsung foldable phones. It has been a lonely existence. He is typically the only non-iPhone user at work meetings and social gatherings, and worse, people don’t even recognize his device. The 48-year-old tech chief executive in Los Angeles has tried to persuade people to try Samsung’s version. Few are biting. “They don’t feel brave enough,” he said.

Then Apple introduced the iPhone Duo, its first foldable phone, and Richmond’s phone started buzzing with a consistent refrain: “Now I understand why you have a fold.”

Timothy W. Martin and Sooyoung Rhee’s front-page story in Friday’s Journal is a small comedy about a large business phenomenon, and it is the most quietly instructive piece in the paper.

The grievance, itemized

Samsung beat Apple to jumbo-sized screens, to 5G connectivity, and to the industry’s first mainstream foldable phone, in 2019. It has released roughly twenty foldable models since. Weeks before the iPhone Duo’s unveiling, it debuted a nearly identical-looking device.

Apple chief executive John Ternus acknowledged rivals’ foldables in his introduction, then added that those incumbents feel “like two phones awkwardly stuck together,” while the Duo brings an “entirely new design… while preserving everything you love and expect.” Samsung’s official U.S. Mobile account replied on X: “Let us know when you’re done reheating our leftovers.”

The fan response has been, to use the Journal’s word, indignant. Message boards are dissecting Apple’s promotional photograph — don’t the fingers look unnaturally long? Is the Duo discriminating against left-handed users? Samsung owners report strangers excitedly asking “Is that the new iPhone?” and describe the resulting collective eye roll. One iPhone-owning comedian posted that “this one-sided beef needs to end,” on the grounds that iPhone users don’t even know when Galaxy phones are released.

What the numbers say

With just a few months of sales, the iPhone Duo is projected to nearly match Samsung’s entire annual volume in the growing U.S. foldable market this year, and then take a majority in 2027, according to Counterpoint Research forecasts. “When Apple does anything, it gets the spotlight,” said Counterpoint’s Tarun Pathak.

And this is the thing: Samsung is not a weak company. It has display and semiconductor divisions that push genuine technical frontiers, and Apple buys some of that chip and display technology. What Apple has is the operating system, the software ecosystem, and a vast affluent installed base — about 1.4 billion iPhones against more than a billion Samsung devices, out of more than five billion smartphones worldwide.

Our read

There is a well-worn investment lesson here and a better planning one.

The investment version: first-mover advantage is frequently the opposite of an advantage. The first mover pays the cost of educating the market, establishing the category and discovering what customers actually hate about version one. The second mover reads the notes. Apple sued Samsung in 2011 for copying the iPhone and won $539 million from a jury before the sides settled; fifteen years later Samsung is the one saying its rival is reheating leftovers. Both complaints are partly true. Neither determined who made money.

The planning version is closer to home. The reason so few of Richmond’s colleagues would try a foldable is not technical. It is that they didn’t feel brave enough — his phrase, and a precise one. People do not adopt an unfamiliar thing until a trusted party makes it socially safe, and then they adopt it all at once and describe it as obvious.

That is the exact mechanism behind most household financial inertia. The default fund in a 401(k), the bank that has paid 0.44% for three years, the insurance policy nobody has priced since 2019 — none of those persist because anyone concluded they were best. They persist because changing requires being the first person in your circle to do something slightly unusual, and almost nobody wants to be that. The fifteen-minute review exists mostly to make the obvious thing feel safe enough to do.

What It Means For Your Portfolio

Hold — first is not the same as rewarded

Being first is a fact; being rewarded for it is a separate event. And the reason people don’t switch is almost never technical — it’s that nobody wants to be the first in their circle to do something unusual.

General planning principles, not advice for anyone in particular. The investing point is that innovation and investment returns are only loosely related: the company that invents a category frequently funds the education of a market that a later entrant monetizes.

The behavioral point is the more useful one for a household. Financial inertia is rarely a failure of arithmetic — most people know that a 0.44% savings account is worse than a 3.8% Treasury bill. It is a failure of permission. Which is why the practical fix is almost always to reduce the decision to a single concrete action with a deadline attached, rather than to produce more evidence that the change is a good idea.

Book a 15-Minute Review → Back to Edition No. 173 →