Galaxy S6

[jamezr]

What are u talking about?

I alluded to what? Can you show me where I said iPhone doesn't have to compete? I'm sure I didn't say that but again I don't mind being wrong so let me know.

I never said sales are the end all be all. Can u show me where I said that? i do feel it's an indicator of successful products. Apple wants the iPhone to sell, Samsung wants the s6 to sell. Those are both their high profit, flagship models. If either don't, like the s5, it's considered a disappointment by the company.

Comparing iOS vs android is not my debate. Those are imo a part that make up the product. Even Samsung puts their spin on it with touch wiz. So why are you talking this up?

I'm not punishing android oems, what does that even mean?

I've already said it looks like the s6 is a great device. Imo that doesn't mean Apple isn't competing successfully. Why does there need to be a negative result from this? People say apples brand is being chipped away or Apple needs to change things. Where's the real evidence to show this? If you own both devices great. You like the s6, so be it. But again it's your personal feelings. Can you show me on paper how Apple is now reeling because of a seemingly good/great s6?

Really thats what you going to do now? Plead ignorance? Answer questions with questions so you don't have to answer anything? Nice....credibility lost..... sad..... really you haven't answered any questions. I have shown you concrete proof what you said what wrong and in error and all you do id ask what? What are you talking about.

Here it is really simple for you......
You keep side stepping your own words.

Originally Posted by Truefan31
Again there's seemingly a very small group of people here that think Apple isn't competing. And that's fine. There's other options out there. But the evidence shows an overwhelming majority that enjoy and are happy with the iPhone. The sales are a reflection of that, year after year after year.

Truefan31]Sales is an indicator of success imo.

Yet sales are not comparable to Android phones with more features and batter hardware. So how does sales equate to a product being successful again?

 

[epicrayban]

Imo I think Apple is competing successfully.

So the answer is essentially, no, Apple doesn't need to compete more than what they are doing.

Gotcha. At least it's official.

So we agree while Apple does a few things very well, it ultimately doesn't do things in abundance nor quickly (because they pride themselves on being very focused).

And we agree their competitors, namely Samsung, is somewhat the opposite. The competition, again namely Samsung, offers more and does so more aggressively and quickly.

I believe I have everything right so far, yeah? By the way... (and I say this again only because you seemed to long for this) .... there's your evidence that Apple isn't competing at the rate others are.

And so from that, there are two general schools of thought:

1) That Apple should heed the rising competition and perhaps change their strategy a bit in response, i.e. compete more both on the hardware and software fronts.

or

2) That Apple should just continue the way they are at the same pace they have been because it's still working wonders for them.

Fair enough.

I think the former is better for all iPhone users. You disagree or otherwise think it doesn't matter.

I think the former is better because I've actually tasted, put to practice, and actually experienced the S6's hardware/software features that the iPhone 6 doesn't have that have made my smartphone experience better. You disagree despite not having had any in-depth experience with the S6, the primary competing device in question.

Let me know if I've got any of that wrong, but that's my take away from all this.

At least for once you didn't bring up Apple's profits/sales this time around.

 

[FFR]

Imo I think Apple is competing successfully.

Your right sales is the metric for success, and it is measured ONLY BY PROFIT.

Profit is similar to oxygen for businesses, without it, they can't survive and Apple is the beast in the room sucking up all the oxygen.
How long can the competition hold its breath?
Samsung included, they have been receiving less and less of said oxygen, which equates to less profit.



I wouldn't put too much stock on some of the posters in this thread, I believe at some point they were predicting Symbian would remain dominant against iOS. Smh you should have seen some of the moronic points they brought up on hofo, brand power, if he was in any of my finance classes at university, the prof would have kicked il him out, brand power/profit. ROFLMAO.
That made my day.

Ps Jam zr is mistaken, he is displaying units shipped or sell in, not sell through or recognized sales, once the sale is recognized that's when they record the profit, sadly that is not happening in android land.

 

[epicrayban]

What are u talking about?

I alluded to what? Can you show me where I said iPhone doesn't have to compete? I'm sure I didn't say that but again I don't mind being wrong so let me know.

Really TrueFan? You're going to make us go hunting for your own words?

Fine. I'll help Jamerz out here.

Here's one example:

My point was that people all a sudden felt like Apple "needed" to do these things now, when there's absolutely no evidence to show they do. Samsungs marketing for the last several years has been exactly what I read here: all the extra things it can do iPhone can't. Yet I don't see Apple suffering at all. In fact it was Samsung who lost with their s5.

Again can Apple do it? Sure. Do they need to like some say? I don't think so, and evidence shows they're doing well and not "suffering"

That's at least alluding to Apple not needing to compete to the same level.

Here's another:

I guess this is where we disagree. U feel like Apple needs to do things but for the most part Apple does their own thing. What evidence is there shows that Apple is suffering right now? Because of the s6?

The thread asks can Apple, sure they can imo. But do they have to? There's nothing saying they have to other than a small group who feel so.

Will three examples be enough:

I'm not against adding features. I don't think anyone is. It's the sentiment that some feel Apple isn't doing enough in their eyes. And that's fine. There's options like the s6. But without criticizing the s6, it now doesn't mean Apple needs to do anything dramatic.

Again, maybe not in those exact words "Apple doesn't need to compete" but at least alluding to, which is what you asked to be shown.

If I recall correctly, you also quoted and agreed with a lot of other posters there who more or less espoused the same idea that Apple is fine and doesn't have to compete or change their tune in the face of rising competition.

All those posts you made, too, about how Apple sales are doing great, so much so that there's nothing for them to worry about... all those posts also bolster the notion that Apple does not need to compete more.

Satisfied?


PS. You also just said "Apple is competing successfully" which I took to mean Apple doesn't need to compete more.

Again, that's was the focal point of that thread "Can Apple catch up". The focal point was, can and should Apple compete harder, more, faster, etc. in light of the S6 and other rising competitors. Your answer is, if I'm not mistaken, still a no. That's the fundamental difference.

 

[jamezr]

Ps Jam zr is mistaken, he is displaying units shipped or sell in, not sell through or recognized sales, once the sale is recognized that's when they record the profit, sadly that is not happening in android land.

Oh really the old shipped versus sold strawman argument...so i have posted the sources for my metrics and screenshots do you have yours?

EDIT:

The Company (Apple) recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the Company defers revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of loss on these sales during transit.

The bolded above also is product shipped to retailers and big box stores. It is shipped from the warehouse and Apple counts it as a sale.

This is what Apple counts as sales in their quarterly reports:
Apple DOES count sales to retailers at the time of shipping.
Apple DOES count online sales after they arrive to the customer.
Apple DOES count end user sales from their physical stores.

 

[FFR]

Oh really the old shipped versus sold strawman argument...so i have posted the sources for my metrics and screenshots do you have yours?

As my prof use to say:
The proof is in the profits.
If those units shipped sold, they would make a profit, they are not selling, and the only company that does, Samsung has seen its profits fall sequentially.

Your metrics are useless because they do not translate into sales or profit.

 

[jamezr]

As my prof use to say:
The proof is in the profits.
If those units shipped sold, they would make a profit, they are not selling, and the only company that does, Samsung has seen its profits fall sequentially.

Your metrics are useless because they do not translate into sales or profit.

Oh...so now your proof is profit? Wow.....now backing off of the strawman argument of shipped versus sold.


Quote:
The Company (Apple) recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the Company defers revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of loss on these sales during transit.
The bolded above also is product shipped to retailers and big box stores. It is shipped from the warehouse and Apple counts it as a sale.

This is what Apple counts as sales in their quarterly reports:
Apple DOES count sales to retailers at the time of shipping.
Apple DOES count online sales after they arrive to the customer.
Apple DOES count end user sales from their physical stores.
__________________

 

[FFR]

Oh really the old shipped versus sold strawman argument...so i have posted the sources for my metrics and screenshots do you have yours?

EDIT:


This is what Apple counts as sales in their quarterly reports:
Apple DOES count sales to retailers at the time of shipping.
Apple DOES count online sales after they arrive to the customer.
Apple DOES count end user sales from their physical stores.

Yes and those sales translates into profit, not so with the competition.

Perhaps you have a rudimentary understanding of how finance works?

If you sell something you make a profit.
If you don't sell, you won't make any money or profit.

 

[epicrayban]

Here are generally the two definitions of the word 'compete':


com·pete
kəmˈpēt/Submit
verb

strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same.


This is Merriam's:

Full Definition of COMPETE

intransitive verb

: to strive consciously or unconsciously for an objective (as position, profit, or a prize) : be in a state of rivalry <competing teams> <companies competing for customers>


So, I think from those two definitions, we can say this:

1) Apple is competing very well in terms of profits/sales. I don't think anyone would argue this.

2) Samsung is competing very well in terms of offering more hardware/software features. Again, I don't think anyone would argue this.


The question, then, I think, is this: What are the threads about?

The two threads in question being: "Can Apple Catch Up to S6 Hardware" and this thread, simply titled "Galaxy S6."

Your honor, I motion to declare that the two threads we've been deliberating in is about...

Hardware/software features of the devices in question!

Ding ding ding. Case closed? I think so.

 

[FFR]

Oh...so now your proof is profit? Wow.....now backing off of the strawman argument of shipped versus sold.





Quote:

The Company (Apple) recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the Company defers revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of loss on these sales during transit.

The bolded above also is product shipped to retailers and big box stores. It is shipped from the warehouse and Apple counts it as a sale.



This is what Apple counts as sales in their quarterly reports:

Apple DOES count sales to retailers at the time of shipping.

Apple DOES count online sales after they arrive to the customer.

Apple DOES count end user sales from their physical stores.

__________________

Putting words in my mouth won't win you this argument.

It has always been about profit.

 

[jamezr]

Yes and those sales translates into profit, not so with the competition.

Perhaps you have a rudimentary understanding of how finance works?

If you sell something you make a profit.
If you don't sell, you won't make any money or profit.

yes....and as I have said as much in this thread....Apple is one of if not the most profitable company in the world. Being able to make more money from less sales. Over charging and making more money from less sales is a very nice position to be in. Kudos Apple!

 

[epicrayban]

Putting words in my mouth won't win you this argument.

It has always been about profit.

See my post above.

Maybe you want to start your own thread. If you insist on only talking about profits, well, it'll be a quick conversation! Ready? Okay, Apple wins. Duh. No one has been, nor would argue that. That was never in contention. Satisfied...?

Can we move on and go back to talking about the Galaxy S6 in this Galaxy S6 thread?

 

[FFR]

Jam zr: you do realize that apple negotiations and contracts are not industry standard. They have leveraging power even over Samsung, and they have exercised it.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Wait does I7guy think apple sold more phones then samsung? I must admit I've skipped many pages in these 2 threads.



Lol

He's probably referring to the flagship devices rather than the entire Samsung range. You can pick a Samsung phone up here for £10 with £10 top up at Argos or Tesco and in my mind that is a totally different market altogether. When I think of iPhone competitors I think of the S6, S6 Edge, S5, and Note 4. They are the devices competing for the same type of user.

My Mums got a Galaxy Young that I bought her for her birthday last year. It only cost me 40 quid. The iPhone wasn't even a consideration because of the price. Different market in that instance.

Having said that if others want to compare and use Samsung's entire range as a comparison that's fine. I just don't get that to be honest. Out of interest have we seen realistic figures for the S6 on sales? It must be doing good as it's the best non-Apple phone I've seen to date. It feels like they've raised the bar somewhat and I hope this is the standard now.

 

[jamezr]

Putting words in my mouth won't win you this argument.

It has always been about profit.

No one is putting words in your mouth........you are doing fine without help.

You said shipped is not the sames as sales. Shipped is sales.....Apple reports it this way

Ps Jam zr is mistaken, he is displaying units shipped or sell in, not sell through or recognized sales, once the sale is recognized that's when they record the profit, sadly that is not happening in android land.

 

[Truefan31]

Really thats what you going to do now? Plead ignorance? Answer questions with questions so you don't have to answer anything? Nice....credibility lost..... sad..... really you haven't answered any questions. I have shown you concrete proof what you said what wrong and in error and all you do id ask what? What are you talking about.

Here it is really simple for you......
You keep side stepping your own words.




Yet sales are not comparable to Android phones with more features and batter hardware. So how does sales equate to a product being successful again?

Image

Image

Where have I sidestepped? I keep saying sales are an indicator of a successful product. I've never said it's the end all be all. I've also said growth yearly in both sales and profits indicate a company's success. I'm not backing down, sidestepping, etc.

Your proof is showing me the iPhone vs all android oems. That's weak proof. Your last question "So how does sales equate to a product being successful again?" Let's see. Let's take a product, the s6. If it projected to sell 70 million by eoy and it meets or exceeds it, I'm sure the Samsung board room would say it's a successful product, competing successfully. Now the s5. It was a sales disappointment. The management gets changed, redesign, etc. it's safe to say Samsung felt it wasn't a successful product, not competing successfully. Is that hard to understand?

----------

He's probably referring to the flagship devices rather than the entire Samsung range. You can pick a Samsung phone up here for £10 with £10 top up at Argos or Tesco and in my mind that is a totally different market altogether. When I think of iPhone competitors I think of the S6, S6 Edge, S5, and Note 4. They are the devices competing for the same type of user.

My Mums got a Galaxy Young that I bought her for her birthday last year. It only cost me 40 quid. The iPhone wasn't even a consideration because of the price. Different market in that instance.

Having said that if others want to compare and use Samsung's entire range as a comparison that's fine. I just don't get that to be honest. Out of interest have we seen realistic figures for the S6 on sales? It must be doing good as it's the best non-Apple phone I've seen to date. It feels like they've raised the bar somewhat and I hope this is the standard now.

I've read the s6 passed 10 million, released in 20 countries. Seemingly an improvement from the s5, which did 11 million in the first month but was released in way more countries, I think I read like over 100.

 

[FFR]

yes....and as I have said as much in this thread....Apple is one of if not the most profitable company in the world. Being able to make more money from less sales. Over charging and making more money from less sales is a very nice position to be in. Kudos Apple!

It's a wonderful position.
But if you think that their profits are primarily from higher profit margins, you would be mistaken. Apple sales have increased substantially since the iPhone 6 and 6+ launched. Apple has sold more iPhone 6 and 6 plus in a week then the s6 has launched in a month.

You see with Apple it is pith profit and sales.

Now if Samsung manages to sell all of trier inventory they would make more profit then if they only sold half.
Are you following?

But they are not and most android oems are not making any profit, I believe with the exception of lg.

But you have to remember both lg and Samsung are suppliers for Apple. Must be happenstance.

 

[Truefan31]

So the answer is essentially, no, Apple doesn't need to compete more than what they are doing.



Gotcha. At least it's official.



So we agree while Apple does a few things very well, it ultimately doesn't do things in abundance nor quickly (because they pride themselves on being very focused).



And we agree their competitors, namely Samsung, is somewhat the opposite. The competition, again namely Samsung, offers more and does so more aggressively and quickly.



I believe I have everything right so far, yeah? By the way... (and I say this again only because you seemed to long for this) .... there's your evidence that Apple isn't competing at the rate others are.



And so from that, there are two general schools of thought:



1) That Apple should heed the rising competition and perhaps change their strategy a bit in response, i.e. compete more both on the hardware and software fronts.



or



2) That Apple should just continue the way they are at the same pace they have been because it's still working wonders for them.



Fair enough.



I think the former is better for all iPhone users. You disagree or otherwise think it doesn't matter.



I think the former is better because I've actually tasted, put to practice, and actually experienced the S6's hardware/software features that the iPhone 6 doesn't have that have made my smartphone experience better. You disagree despite not having had any in-depth experience with the S6, the primary competing device in question.



Let me know if I've got any of that wrong, but that's my take away from all this.



At least for once you didn't bring up Apple's profits/sales this time around.

If you like the s6 that's great. That's not my point. Again I'm not criticizing the s6, if it's taken that way it's not what I meant to do.

You feel like because of your experience Apple needs to compete more. I'm saying the numbers show Apple is competing successfully already

 

[FFR]

No one is putting words in your mouth........you are doing fine without help.



You said shipped is not the sames as sales. Shipped is sales.....Apple reports it this way

No apple negotiates contracts this way.
Keep up.
Apple contracts are not industry standard.
Do you know why that means?
No, ok.
If a retailer or an oems purchases inventory from Apple they are not allowed to return it. Which means they have to options, sell it or lose money.

Now the other android manufacturers and Samsung do not have the same agreements as Apple. Which means if the Samsung devices aren't selling the retailer will return back to the android manufacturer and they will make less profits or if it didn't sell at all, a major write down.

This is how finance works. Unless you are claiming that android I and Samsung is a charity, then I would be wrong. .

 

[jamezr]

Where have I sidestepped? I keep saying sales are an indicator of a successful product. I've never said it's the end all be all. I've also said growth yearly in both sales and profits indicate a company's success. I'm not backing down, sidestepping, etc.

Your proof is showing me the iPhone vs all android oems. That's weak proof. Your last question "So how does sales equate to a product being successful again?" Let's see. Let's take a product, the s6. If it projected to sell 70 million by eoy and it meets or exceeds it, I'm sure the Samsung board room would say it's a successful product, competing successfully. Now the s5. It was a sales disappointment. The management gets changed, redesign, etc. it's safe to say Samsung felt it wasn't a successful product, not competing successfully. Is that hard to understand?

Dude...go back and read your own posts! Epic and I both have shown your own posts in this thread where you allude to sales defining a successful product.

Then after being shown metrics show how far behind the iPhone is in sales you change your tune.

You have said and or alluded that Apple doesn't need to add hardware/software/features to IOS/iPhone because of its sales position. Yet IOS/iPhone sales are very far behind Android.

Apple only sell one phone. The iPhone....you can only get the iPhone on one platform that is IOS. So.........watch carefully.......stay with me. IOS sales are iPhone sales/ Are you still with me? Samsung sells Android phones so here are the sales for you.......just between Samsung and Apple/IOS

 

[Truefan31]

Really TrueFan? You're going to make us go hunting for your own words?

Fine. I'll help Jamerz out here.

Here's one example:



That's at least alluding to Apple not needing to compete to the same level.

Here's another:



Will three examples be enough:



Again, maybe not in those exact words "Apple doesn't need to compete" but at least alluding to, which is what you asked to be shown.

If I recall correctly, you also quoted and agreed with a lot of other posters there who more or less espoused the same idea that Apple is fine and doesn't have to compete or change their tune in the face of rising competition.

All those posts you made, too, about how Apple sales are doing great, so much so that there's nothing for them to worry about... all those posts also bolster the notion that Apple does not need to compete more.

Satisfied?


PS. You also just said "Apple is competing successfully" which I took to mean Apple doesn't need to compete more.

Again, that's was the focal point of that thread "Can Apple catch up". The focal point was, can and should Apple compete harder, more, faster, etc. in light of the S6 and other rising competitors. Your answer is, if I'm not mistaken, still a no. That's the fundamental difference.

No. Again I've never stated I hate android, that I love everything Apple, or that Apple doesn't need to compete. I've said Apple by the numbers is already competing successfully.

 

[epicrayban]

I'm saying the numbers show Apple is competing successfully already

Sir, we're in threads talking about hardware and software features.

Maybe you ought to start a new thread where people want to talk about numbers and not actual user experience.

Cause um... that's what we're trying to do here.

 

[FFR]

I've read the s6 passed 10 million, released in 20 countries. Seemingly an improvement from the s5, which did 11 million in the first month but was released in way more countries, I think I read like over 100.

Actually that's not true the reason, reason the s6 was launched in fewer countries than the s5, was because the operators did not agree to samsungs terms.
The s5's flop has decreased samsungs negotiating power.
And if the s6 doesn't sell well I would expect fewer launch countries for the s7 next year.

 

[jamezr]

No apple negotiates contracts this way.
Keep up.
Apple contracts are not industry standard.
Do you know why that means?
No, ok.
If a retailer or an oems purchases inventory from Apple they are not allowed to return it. Which means they have to options, sell it or lose money.

Now the other android manufacturers and Samsung do not have the same agreements as Apple. Which means if the Samsung devices aren't selling the retailer will return back to the android manufacturer and they will make less profits or if it didn't sell at all, a major write down.

This is how finance works. Unless you are claiming that android I and Samsung is a charity, then I would be wrong. .

Now you are changing the whole topic from what I was arguing with the the other two guys. Now you are backing away from the shipped versus sold from this quote

Quote:
Ps Jam zr is mistaken, he is displaying units shipped or sell in, not sell through or recognized sales, once the sale is recognized that's when they record the profit, sadly that is not happening in android land.

So your changing it around to saying Apple makes more money. You are correct they do. So what does that have to do with the topic of conversation? You did keep up witht he conversation i was having with the others right...you have the context? Because what you are saying is out of context.

----------

Actually that's not true the reason, reason the s6 was launched in fewer countries than the s5, was because the operators did not agree to samsungs terms.
The s5's flop has decreased samsungs negotiating power.
And if the s6 doesn't sell well I would expect fewer launch countries for the s7 next year.

Sources?

 

[FFR]

Dude...go back and read your own posts! Epic and I both have shown your own posts in this thread where you allude to sales defining a successful product.



Then after being shown metrics show how far behind the iPhone is in sales you change your tune.



You have said and or alluded that Apple doesn't need to add hardware/software/features to IOS/iPhone because of its sales position. Yet IOS/iPhone sales are very far behind Android.



Apple only sell one phone. The iPhone....you can only get the iPhone on one platform that is IOS. So.........watch carefully.......stay with me. IOS sales are iPhone sales/ Are you still with me? Samsung sells Android phones so here are the sales for you.......just between Samsung and Apple/IOS



Image

Where did I Change my tune?
What I have been saying from the beginning jam is that those sales are not sales, if they were they would translate into profit. They are not.