You didn't point out how it's a ridiculous claim. You completely ignored my point how LCD is not replacement for eInk and just decided WELL THEY ARE DIFFERENT DISPLAY STACKUP AND HAVE DIFFERENT VOLUME.
Imagine this. There are 4 LCD manufacturers that combined make a total 1 million units a year. There is 1 eInk manufacturer that also makes 1 million units a year. Assume production costs are the same between the two. The LCDs are all essentially fungible. If a company wants to build a tablet with an LCD screen they can receive bids from multiple manufacturers who may be willing to reduce their margin per unit to land the client. For a company looking to build an eReader they only really have the choice of one company that's not willing to reduce their margin per unit because there's no point to. The eInk displays are more expensive because there is only one option to buy and the manufacturer is keeping a greater percentage as profit.
Imagine this. There are 4 LCD manufacturers that combined make a total 1 million units a year. There is 1 eInk manufacturer that also makes 1 million units a year. Assume production costs are the same between the two. The LCDs are all essentially fungible. If a company wants to build a tablet with an LCD screen they can receive bids from multiple manufacturers who may be willing to reduce their margin per unit to land the client. For a company looking to build an eReader they only really have the choice of one company that's not willing to reduce their margin per unit because there's no point to. The eInk displays are more expensive because there is only one option to buy and the manufacturer is keeping a greater percentage as profit.