Sharp

Company history

Founded
1912
Head office
Sakai, Osaka, Japan
Listed
1949 · TSE 6753
Founder
Hayakawa Tokuji
Revenue · FYE Mar 2026
$12.0B (¥1.89tn)
Net profit · FYE Mar 2026
$299.7M (¥47bn)
Sharp: long-term performance & turning pointsSales (¥ bn)Net margin (%)

1912From a mechanical pencil to Osaka radios

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports & corporate yearbooks
  1. 1912Hayakawa Tokuji sets up on his own in Honjo, Tokyo
  2. 1915The Ever-Sharp propelling pencil — the source of the company name
  3. 1923The Great Kanto Earthquake destroys the factory
  4. 1924Founds Hayakawa Metal Works in Osaka
  5. 1925Japan’s first crystal radio, at ¥3.5 — half the imported price
  6. 1942Renamed Hayakawa Electric Industry
  7. 1949Listed on the Osaka Stock Exchange

Sharp began in 1912, when Hayakawa Tokuji, a metalworking craftsman, set up on his own in the Honjo district of Tokyo, doing subcontract work on small metal fittings — belt buckles, fountain-pen caps. In 1915, at a stationer’s request, he developed the Ever-Sharp propelling pencil, patented in both Japan and the United States, and in making it moved from jobbing subcontractor to a maker of his own products. The company’s present name comes from that pencil. It took eleven years for a tiny metal shop to grow into a business of some 200 workers with a real presence in the stationery trade.

In September 1923 the Great Kanto Earthquake took his wife and children, his factory and his patents all at once. Unable to repay his debts, Hayakawa signed the mechanical-pencil patent over for nothing and moved to Osaka, scraping a living by instructing the transferee’s factory. The total loss of eleven years’ work was, for a sole founder, effectively bankruptcy. Yet the disaster is what pushed Sharp toward becoming a Kansai-based electrical maker — the geographic starting point of its postwar coexistence with Matsushita.

Rebuilding at Abeno in Osaka, Hayakawa developed Japan’s first crystal radio receiver in 1925 and sold it at ¥3.5 — half the price of imports — following in 1929 with a vacuum-tube set at a tenth of the imported price. Localize a new technology, then get to market first at a fraction of the majors’ price: the pattern set with radios — “for radios, Sharp” — would recur, in changed form, through black-and-white televisions, transistor calculators and LCD panels. It was the template of a mid-tier maker that builds a brand by being first into the mass-price band.

Read the full history in Japanese →


1953Televisions, calculators, and betting on semiconductors

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports & corporate yearbooks
FY1959 · unconsolidated
Revenue$35M
Net income$5M
Net margin14.6%
FY1970 · unconsolidated
Revenue$335M
Net income$14M
Net margin4.3%
  1. 1953RCA tie-up; 14-inch black-and-white TV at $486 (¥175,000)
  2. 1954Aims to become a full-line home-appliance maker
  3. 1962Sharp Electronics Corporation founded in the US
  4. 1964CS-10A — the world’s first all-transistor calculator
  5. 1970Renamed Sharp Corporation; $20.8M (¥8bn) to in-house semiconductors

The founder’s company found its footing in the postwar boom. In 1952 Sharp — then Hayakawa Electric — tied up with RCA of the United States and, a month before television broadcasting began, launched a 14-inch black-and-white set at $486 (¥175,000). It built a dedicated TV factory in 1954, reached 20,000 sets a month, and held the top domestic share for four straight years from 1953. Trade journals credited it with “a kind of foresight” for gearing up for a television boom before it came.

But the pattern that would recur throughout Sharp’s history first showed itself clearly here. As Matsushita and Hitachi entered in earnest, their sheer scale and keiretsu sales networks told, and within a few years Sharp’s share fell from first place. To keep its dealers viable it broadened into a full-line home-appliance maker from 1957, tripling white-goods capacity in three years — a follower’s diversification, but one that entrenched a nationwide dealer network.

The more consequential move was into electronics. In 1964 Sharp built the world’s first all-transistor calculator, the CS-10A — a 25-kilogram desktop machine at $1,472 (¥530,000). Having struggled to source LSI chips from American suppliers, the company resolved to make its own. In 1970 it renamed itself Sharp Corporation, skipped the Osaka Expo, and committed $20.8M (¥8bn) — some 70% of its capital — to bringing semiconductors in-house, rewriting its self-definition from an appliance maker into an electronics company.

Read the full history in Japanese →


1971The device maker: semiconductors and the LCD kingdom

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports & corporate yearbooks
FY1971 · unconsolidated
Revenue$414M
Net income$17M
Net margin4.1%
FY2005 · consolidated
Revenue$23.1B
Net income$697M
Net margin3%
  1. 1973EL-805 — the world’s first LCD calculator
  2. 1986LCD division established
  3. 1998Machida becomes president; declares an all-LCD TV line-up by 2005
  4. 2001AQUOS LCD-TV brand launches
  5. 2004Kameyama large-panel LCD plant — “made in Kameyama, for the world”

The semiconductor bet was executed at a new research centre in Tenri, Nara — roughly 70% of Sharp’s capital, at a time when only integrated giants like NEC and Toshiba ran their own chip lines. “Sharp will be ruined by its semiconductor spending,” the trade press warned; management answered that three to five years of hardship were only to be expected. Owning its own LSI freed Sharp from bought-in component prices and underwrote the mass production that carried it through the calculator war with Casio — and in 1973 it put the world’s first LCD calculator, the EL-805, on the market, seeding the display technology that would define its next thirty years.

The sharp yen after 1985 made labour-intensive mass production untenable against Korea and China, and Sharp reinvented itself around what it judged its true core — TFT liquid crystal, semiconductor lasers, LEDs. Once “a byword for cheap goods, a 1.5-tier brand,” it was now, one magazine wrote, closing on the first tier, its margins topping even Sony’s and Matsushita’s. It set up an LCD division in 1986 and raised it to a business group by 1990.

In 1998 Machida Katsuhiko became president and declared that by 2005 every television Sharp sold in Japan would be an LCD set. His stated aim was “to make something Matsushita can’t take away” — a memory of how radios and TVs, both Sharp inventions, had been carried off by Matsushita on volume and sales power. The AQUOS brand launched in 2001, and in 2004 Sharp built a large-panel plant at Kameyama in Mie; the “made in Kameyama, for the world” tagline made the factory the embodiment of the brand, and the year to March 2005 brought record sales. Vertical integration maximized profit while demand rose — but was built to rebound as a depreciation burden the moment the market turned.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2006Sakai, collapse, and the Hon Hai era

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports & corporate yearbooks
FY2006 · consolidated
Revenue$24.1B
Net income$762M
Net margin3.2%
FY2026 · consolidated
Revenue$12.0B
Net income$300M
Net margin2.5%
  1. 2009Sakai Generation-10 LCD plant — the world’s largest
  2. 2013Record $5.6B (¥545bn) net loss
  3. 2016Hon Hai takes ~66% — first foreign takeover of a major Japanese electronics maker
  4. 2017Returns to the TSE First Section
  5. 2024Halts Sakai SDP; exits large-panel LCD

At the peak, Sharp doubled the bet. In 2009 it opened a Generation-10 LCD plant at Sakai — then the world’s largest, some $4.6B (¥430bn) including infrastructure — bringing its cumulative Kameyama-plus-Sakai LCD investment to around $10.7B (¥1tn). Then the premise failed on both counts: Samsung, LG, AUO and Innolux poured in matching capacity as panel prices fell, while the Lehman shock and a soaring yen shrank the TV market. Vertical integration turned into the heaviest burden in the company; the year to March 2013 brought a $5.6B (¥545bn) net loss, the largest in Sharp’s history, and in 2015 it cut some 3,000 jobs.

In August 2016 Sharp accepted investment from Taiwan’s Hon Hai Precision — a $3.6B (¥389bn) capital injection that took the group to roughly 66% of the votes. It was the first time in postwar industrial history that a major Japanese electronics maker had passed under foreign control. Under CEO Tai Jeng-wu, aggressive cost cuts and reward-and-punishment management turned the once loss-making panel business to profit from the year to March 2017, and Sharp returned to the Tokyo exchange’s First Section in December 2017.

The reckoning with self-reliance came last. In 2024 CEO Okitsu Masahiro halted large-panel production at the Sakai SDP plant and exited large LCD altogether, choosing an “asset-light” business that no longer builds finished goods from its own panels — letting go of the very symbol of the in-house creed that had begun with semiconductors in 1970. The Sakai site is being turned into an AI data centre; from 2025 Sharp recast itself into five segments and bet on AIoT appliances built with Hon Hai. A company that had always invested first and carried vast plant to fight the giants had crossed over to the side that holds no plant at all.

Read the full history in Japanese →


Key decisions — the author’s view

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY1973

Quitting the calculator price war for semiconductors and LCDs (1973)

Compete on price, or make the difference with your own technology

The heart of this decision was to step out of a price war with no visible winner and pour Sharp’s technology and capital into semiconductors and liquid crystals — core devices of its own. The calculator business was sinking into a war of attrition fought over whether prices could be driven below $36 (¥10,000). What Sharp chose was not to stay in the race to build ever cheaper, but to make for itself the components no rival yet had, and to set its products apart on what was inside them. That it kept investing even as people said “Sharp will be ruined by its semiconductor spending” shows a management that put the accumulation of technology ahead of near-term returns.

That said, this choice was no straight road to success. In the microprocessor — an outgrowth of the calculator’s circuitry — Sharp lost the initiative to America’s Intel, and its later concentrated investment in liquid crystals would pass through vast spending on large-panel plants and a steep fall in earnings before leading to the 2016 change of control. Even so, the 1970s choice to make a difference with its own technology rather than wear itself out on price became the starting point for both the brilliance of the years it was called the “LCD kingdom” and the trials that followed. Betting on proprietary devices in the middle of a price war, this decision put — early on — the question a technology-led company must forever face at the very centre of its management.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2004

Concentrating on integrated LCD production — the “Kameyama model” (2004)

How far may concentration on a proprietary device be pushed?

The heart of this decision was to take the liquid-crystal expertise Sharp had built up since its calculator days and, wielding it as a weapon, bind everything from panel to television into a single factory — holding its manufacturing know-how behind closed doors to keep its first-mover lead for as long as possible. Vertically integrated, end-to-end production yields a strength outsiders find hard to copy. Because it coincided with the rise of a market shifting to flat-screen sets, the Kameyama model hit its mark, bringing Sharp the top domestic share and its highest sales ever. Viewed to this point, it looks like a success story in which concentrated investment in proprietary technology led straight to competitive advantage.

Yet that success carried its limits within it. The head start bought by turning the process into a black box lasted only six months to a year and a half; Korean and Taiwanese makers threw up factories of the same scale one after another and drew level with Sharp. The enclosure held only for the brief interval in which the market was moving to flat panels, and the strength that vertical integration produced held good only so long as demand grew as forecast. How large a scale would this bet be allowed to reach next — the same question of concentrating on a proprietary device would return to Sharp in heavier form a few years later, in the still more colossal investment at Sakai.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2007

The Sakai bet: the world’s first Gen-10 LCD plant (2007)

Where do you stop the bet?

The heart of this decision was to pile a further bet, at the summit, onto the winning pattern proven at Kameyama. The vision of enclosing liquid crystal as a device Sharp alone possessed and, in the world’s largest factory, aiming even at outside sales was — if one simply extended the experience of success — a coherent expansion. Amid the momentum of the year ended March 2008, which recorded the highest sales in the company’s history, President Katayama’s move to commit some $3.7B (¥430bn) and advance to the world’s first Generation 10 was an aggressive decision taken when management looked at its strongest. The danger lay in resting that premise on being able to go on leading the market with its own technology and scale.

A world-largest factory premised on outside sales turns only when the maker can control demand and price for itself. The stall in large televisions brought by the Lehman shock, and the charge of the Korean and Taiwanese makers, knocked that premise out on both counts. Liquid-crystal panels turned into a component that could not escape price competition however tightly the technology was enclosed, and scale converted directly into the weight of fixed costs. The Sakai investment, in which raising the bet on a winning pattern became the trigger of a management crisis, shows how brittle a decision to chase scale as an extension of success can prove against a change in the environment. Where do you stop the bet — that question Sharp’s concentration on liquid crystal leaves open even now.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2016

Rebuilding under Hon Hai — Tai Jeng-wu remakes the cost structure (2016)

From consensus to speed — and the question left after

The heart of this rebuild lay less in plugging the financial hole than in remaking how decisions were made. What Sharp carried was not only the fact of its losses but a consensus-and-circulation process too slow to keep up with the speed of a crisis. When Tai, on his first day, cut the threshold requiring the president’s sign-off to less than a thirtieth of what it had been and pared the required seals down to three, it was also an attempt to swap the “everyone decides together” manner long assumed by Japan’s big companies for a “someone decides fast” one. Reward-and-punishment personnel moves and thoroughgoing cost cuts brought the numbers back, but it is this shift in decision-making that can be seen as the most fundamental change the foreign owner brought in.

That said, escaping a crisis through speed and centralization is a different question from being able to draw the next stage of growth. In the year ended March 2019, Sharp turned to its first fall in sales and operating profit since coming under Hon Hai, and the targets of its stated medium-term plan were revised downward. The foreign owner’s speed worked well to rebuild slackened costs and stalled decision-making. But the choice of what to invest in and which businesses to grow cannot be filled by speed alone. Hon Hai-owned Sharp’s rapid return to profit mirrors, within a single rebuild, both the power to remake Japanese-style decision-making and the challenge of growth that remains beyond it.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2024

Exiting large-panel LCD: halting Sakai SDP (2024)

When do you let go of a founding-scale business?

The heart of this withdrawal was the judgment of at what point to let go of the large-panel liquid-crystal business Sharp had once staked its fate on and raised. The success of Kameyama and the vast investment at Sakai pushed Sharp to the front of the world in liquid crystal, but they were also a choice to entrust the company’s core to an equipment-heavy industry of fierce price competition. Even when rising output from Chinese makers broke the economics, for a company holding the huge lines it had built and the many jobs that went with them, the decision to withdraw is easily put off. Counting from the temporary halt of 2011, Sharp went more than ten years unable to let go of large-panel LCD.

After eight years under Hon Hai, President Okitsu chose to close large-panel LCD — not only production but research and development too — and to recast the business into a shape that holds no such assets. That the Sakai site is turning into an AI data centre, and that the company, having cut away the liquid-crystal losses, returned to profit, can be counted as one outcome of the wind-down. Even so, the sale of the Kameyama No. 2 plant did not come to fruition in talks with Hon Hai, and how the vacated sites will be used and the next source of earnings built remained undecided as of this writing. A decision to let go of a business raised to founding scale deepens the wound if taken too late and nips future shoots if taken too early — that difficulty is what Sharp’s closing of the large-panel LCD curtain reflects.

Each heading links to the full Japanese analysis — background, decision and outcome, with sources.


References & sources

This is a condensed English edition. The full, source-by-source history — with the detailed narrative, financial tables, shareholders and executives — is maintained in Japanese: 日本語版(詳細)— Sharp full history in Japanese →

  1. Sharp Corporation — 有価証券報告書 (annual securities reports).
  2. Nikkei Business — 日経ビジネス (Nikkei BP): 14 Apr 1975; 12 Jan 1981; 19 Aug 1991; 19 Apr 1993. June 2019 feature.
  3. Shukan Toyo Keizai — 週刊東洋経済 (Toyo Keizai), 27 Mar 2004.
  4. Jitsugyo no Sekai — 実業の世界, June 1959.
  5. Gekkan Keizai — 月刊経済, October 1964.
  6. The All-Out Sprint of a First-Class Company with No Top Brand『トップ・ブランドなき一流企業の全力疾走』, 1984.
  7. Yomiuri Shimbun (Osaka) — 読売新聞, 15 Sep 2012.

Yen amounts are converted at the average rate of each figure’s own year — not today’s rate; revenue charts are shown in yen. Exchange rates & sources — the full ¥/US$ table →