Smartphone sales data from IDC

[I7guy]

You do realize that stock value is the determining factor on overall profitability of a publicly traded company? If iPhone sales decline, the entire value of Apple crumbles, because Apple is literally a one product company. Look at the current situation over the last month as a prime example. Not many companies could lose $70 billion in market cap and still be okay. Of course, this allowed Google/Alphabet to swoop on in and claim the rights as most valuable company in the world. Diversification is key here. Not depending on a single product ensures you never go under or lose billions of dollars in valuation when hardware saturation hits. Apple's forecast does not look pretty until the end of this year when the next iPhone comes out. Wonder how many billions will be stripped from their stock between now and September?

P.S. Samsung could sell 5 phones a year and still be fine. They make a ton of cash from their personal foundries to produce silicone and displays for iPhones. They make cash in producing and developing tech for TV's, fridges, microwaves, large cargo haulers, weapon systems and so forth.

Ah. Let's discuss Samsung the corporate conglomerate and other businesses vs Samsung's cell phone business that is largely not doing very well. That works every time. Not.

You mean like alphabet being dependent on advertising? Glad they diversified.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

You do realize that stock value is the determining factor on overall profitability of a publicly traded company? If iPhone sales decline, the entire value of Apple crumbles, because Apple is literally a one product company. Look at the current situation over the last month as a prime example. Not many companies could lose $70 billion in market cap and still be okay. Of course, this allowed Google/Alphabet to swoop on in and claim the rights as most valuable company in the world. Diversification is key here. Not depending on a single product ensures you never go under or lose billions of dollars in valuation when hardware saturation hits. Apple's forecast does not look pretty until the end of this year when the next iPhone comes out. Wonder how many billions will be stripped from their stock between now and September?

P.S. Samsung could sell 5 phones a year and still be fine. They make a ton of cash from their personal foundries to produce silicone and displays for iPhones. They make cash in producing and developing tech for TV's, fridges, microwaves, large cargo haulers, weapon systems and so forth.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. I am so glad that cash on hand means nothing. I am really glad you sorted that out.

 

[Lloydbm41]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. I am so glad that cash on hand means nothing. I am really glad you sorted that out.

They don't have much cash on hand here in the US. Why do you think Apple (and other huge tech companies) horde their cash overseas? Your cash on hand comment doesn't mean much if Apple can't actually touch it without losing 35% of the value, minus currency exchange rates on the day. Nothing is that simple my young padawan.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Have you actually read their financials? I mean I already know the answer, but you should just admit it. Go ahead and sell your Apple stock. I will happily buy.

 

[pedrom]

You do realize that stock value is the determining factor on overall profitability of a publicly traded company? If iPhone sales decline, the entire value of Apple crumbles, because Apple is literally a one product company. Look at the current situation over the last month as a prime example. Not many companies could lose $70 billion in market cap and still be okay. Of course, this allowed Google/Alphabet to swoop on in and claim the rights as most valuable company in the world. Diversification is key here. Not depending on a single product ensures you never go under or lose billions of dollars in valuation when hardware saturation hits. Apple's forecast does not look pretty until the end of this year when the next iPhone comes out. Wonder how many billions will be stripped from their stock between now and September?

P.S. Samsung could sell 5 phones a year and still be fine. They make a ton of cash from their personal foundries to produce silicone and displays for iPhones. They make cash in producing and developing tech for TV's, fridges, microwaves, large cargo haulers, weapon systems and so forth.

No it isn't. At all. It never was. It never will be. They have absolutely no relation with each other. That's why we measure P/E ratios, to try and determine how out of touch the market is. I mean, you are putting a company that is 5x less profitable than Apple, with slower growth in revenue and profits on all fiscal quarters of 2015, a company where the vast majority of their profits in mobile (area of growth) comes from iOS users, a company that never had a original single product or feature adopted on their OS gaining growth and financial power since, like, 2008, and failed on any single initiative to diversify their ads dependency, to the point where all of those "moonshots" would quickly putting Google's growth on the red, so they had to unload all of that trash from Google (and created alphabet) to artificially inflate the health of their business?

If iPhone sales decline (they will, growth on the high end will slow down a lot, and then Apple will only sell phones to upgraders (with longer intervals), and the last few people still buying high end Android devices, a minority. Not much left. Anyway, Apple will keep selling a great deal of dozens of millions of them every quarter and the userbase will keep growing) Apple will still be way more lucrative than Google ever was, or MS ever was, without the need of a single good product.

Not depending on a single product? 97% of Google's profit come from a single product. A single product that has seen its value stumble for the last few years (this fact was only compensated because the higher number of people getting online could offset that situation. But saturation will come. I'm talking about cost per click Vs clicks, Google's only product) and is now getting under attack by Facebook, and Apple is getting ready to fight it, with initiatives like content blockers and their news.app. Also, users don't like the way Google runs their business, so Adblock usage is exploding. With an iPhone, I won't have to root my device and install Adaway. Talk about freedom.

As far as I care, Apple could lose all of its valuation and go private. They will still be more profitable and offering better products and value than all of the other companies mentioned on this conversation. Their forecast looks amazing, with many quarters of high profits and investments for the next years and waves of tech. Yes, I'm also of the opinion that if they care about stock market, they should hype the hell with everything that they are experimenting (like Material Design and its 98% useless white space on tablets this, Google Reader there, Google talk here, Hangouts there, Useless robot dogs that no one wants here, Useless planes beaming 5g net there because they are scared of facebook there, Android one bringing stock Android that no one cares and conquering the world with security and timely updates here, ****ing up Nest there, A tiny self driving vehicle with exposure since the most alpha stage from a company that can't even design a decent tablet app, you name it.)

Samsung isn't like Apple. Apple doesn't need to sell phones to be highly profitable and successful. Samsung does. Despite everything that the conglomerate does (that you listed, trying to impress someone.Don't know who), close to 80% of their net profit comes from Samsung Eletronics. Samsung Mobile, Samsung Display and all of their foundries are part of Samsung Eletronics. Unfortunately for them, Samsung Mobile is now irrelevant (Despite selling 500 billion phones every day. They are all cheap, profitless, irrelevant sales.), and this means that all of the other components of Samsung Eletronics will be more dependent on supplying components to other companies.

Guess who is the only company buying/ordering high end components in the necessary quantities to make that business viable.

But don't worry, Apple will be fine. Now that encryption and right to privacy are getting more and more exposure, Apple is in the right position to gain even more power. Where is Larry Page, on all of this? What is his position?

Most likely, you will die before Apple does.

 

[yellowscreen]

The fanboys who blasted Android phones because they bested them on all benchmarks. Stating benchmarks don't mean anything...it's all user experience. Then when the A9 bested all the Android phones......yep here they came....bragging about how great the A9 was and how it was the fastest chipset on the market. All of a sudden benchmarks matter again! Who would have figured!!!

Typical Apple fanbiy fashion:

2. When Apple's product offers higher benchmark, then Apple fanboys wants everyone in the earth know how competitors sucks. When competitors' product gets higher benchmark score, they claim iPhone has only dual core and benchmark does not mattet. It is the real user experience.

Actually the thing about benchmarks is they are not important. But when a certain product has only benchmarks going for it, and it looses even that edge to a competing product that was overall better even before said benchmarks, its worth mentioning, dont you think? actually, its a catastrophe for the overall health of the market.

in other words, if iPhone had a7 instead of a9 in 2016, it would still be practically the only phone in the world people are willing to buy in its price bracket. but it doesnt. it has a9. get it?

and please spare me your niche usage habits, i dont care, i really dont.

Apple and its fanboys need recognize that Apple is facing tough competitions and should wake up from their dreamland.

in case you didnt notice, apple is in its best position ever relative to the industry. 99% of its competitors are operating in red. but thats not nearly important as the brand it commands. iPhone vs a bunch of other generic phones competing on price. and its all googles doing. The main factor in differentiation is software. android oems dont have that kind of luxury. and they have shown over and over again they dont have the skills nor do they have the resources (as i have mentioned) to pull of that kind of investment, investing in their own software and infrastructure.

So sales are sales unless they meet high end status? How very arrogant of you. Low end sales don't count? Tell that to the people that can't afford a high end phone. Typical Apple fan mindset.
Sales are sale buddy...they all factor into total sales for a company. I am sure you would rather have only portion of the reported sales count when comparing them to Apple huh? wouldn't that be nice for you? Would that bring balance back to your Apple point of view? Awww...let's not count all sales...just some sales so Apple can win the sales battle and you can feel better about it.

1. When Apple is dominate the market, they laugh at competitor's marketshare and claim Apple is best becuase it sells the most phone. When Apple is not dominate the market, they claim marketshare is not important, user experience is the most important and claim competitors' stuff offer inferior user experience.

Actually yes. if i made a phone tomorrow, specs comparable to 2012 high end smartphone, and i started giving them away through a bunch of retailers around the world, how long do you think it would take me to reach 60% marketshare of shipped units? a month? would it even matter what OS it was running?

thats why in market analysis you segment different price points. renault twingo doesnt belong to the same bracket as a ferrari, does it? any sane person would not compare the marketshare of the two, right? so, what do you do if you want to see how ferrari or twingo is performing? you put them against products competing in the same price bracket, right? so lets do that now, shall we?

but we cant. we dont have the data. we can only interpolate it from the overall sales and profits. considering practically only samsung is in black, we can assume other manufacturers are either selling many flagships earning them profit and at the same time selling a bunch cheap phones at a cost so they end up in red, which plainly put sounds stupid, or they can move only irrelevant number of phones making profit and chase revenue number and marketshare by competing on price, selling a bunch of phones apparently at a cost and ending up in red. I think its the latter. considering apple makes 95% of profits in the industry, i think their marketshare in the price bracket they are competing in is hovering around the same percentage, dont you think? i would also be grateful for a better analysis.

so i wouldnt be far out saying apple target market renders them 95% marketshare, right? you wouldnt measure apple market share in brazil if it doesnt sell phones in brazil, would you? so why would you pit them against market price bracket they dont compete in?

And the list can go on forever.

let it then. i think the next one is customization.

i really dont get it, maybe we're reading different data, thats the only thing that would explain disparity between our statements.

only one other thing would explain the disparity. you are both obviously smart, so stupidity is out of the question. so it must be the usual: please, to you, and to all the smart people of the world, please - more thinking, less feeling. the world will be a better place.

 

[LovingTeddy]

Actually the thing about benchmarks is they are not important. But when a certain product has only benchmarks going for it, and it looses even that edge to a competing product that was overall better even before said benchmarks, its worth mentioning, dont you think? actually, its a catastrophe for the overall health of the market.

in other words, if iPhone had a7 instead of a9 in 2016, it would still be practically the only phone in the world people are willing to buy in its price bracket. but it doesnt. it has a9. get it?

and please spare me your niche usage habits, i dont care, i really dont.

I do not get it.. It is pretty clear to me that iPhone 6S is not the only one people willing to buy in this price bracket. I have hard te believing that you actually think people only want buy iPhone at this price bracket.

in case you didnt notice, apple is in its best position ever relative to the industry. 99% of its competitors are operating in red. but thats not nearly important as the brand it commands. iPhone vs a bunch of other generic phones competing on price. and its all googles doing. The main factor in differentiation is software. android oems dont have that kind of luxury. and they have shown over and over again they dont have the skills nor do they have the resources (as i have mentioned) to pull of that kind of investment,

Again, do you have any proof that 99% of competitor operating on red? Even if they operating on red, it does not really affect competitive landscape. Really, if you think about it, majority of PC manufactories are posting thin margin, and yet most PC makers are still around.

What is so great about Apple making billions of dollars? It is not like Apple willing to share penny to you or me?

Again, please open your eyes and take look at competing offering. You would find some very interesting ideas.

About rest of your post, I really find not worth to respond. It is basically dismissing other while praise Apple for making billions of dollars from their overly expensive phones.

Take Xiaomi for example, they basically selling their phone at cost or near cost. They making big profit for selling services and slowly building their ecosystem. They selling all these IOT stuff that tightly integrated with their Xiaomi phones. They also selling themes, stickers, ringtones etc to make money. There are plenty of way to making money than simply charge 600 dollars for your phone. Simply dismissing competition as they selling lower priced phone is laughable at best. Not every company choice to go with high price high margin route.

 

[mi7chy]

No smart consumer cares about making someone else overly profitable. A less profitable product means you're getting a better product for less.

 

[I7guy]

I guess some people buy on the profit margin of the selling company (which means they have to try and Devine these numbers) while others buy on the products value to them and how the service of a product will be to them. Who is the smart consumer?
[doublepost=1454315312][/doublepost]

I do not get it.. It is pretty clear to me that iPhone 6S is not the only one people willing to buy in this price bracket. I have hard te believing that you actually think people only want buy iPhone at this price bracket.



Again, do you have any proof that 99% of competitor operating on red? Even if they operating on red, it does not really affect competitive landscape. Really, if you think about it, majority of PC manufactories are posting thin margin, and yet most PC makers are still around.

What is so great about Apple making billions of dollars? It is not like Apple willing to share penny to you or me?

Again, please open your eyes and take look at competing offering. You would find some very interesting ideas.

About rest of your post, I really find not worth to respond. It is basically dismissing other while praise Apple for making billions of dollars from their overly expensive phones.

Take Xiaomi for example, they basically selling their phone at cost or near cost. They making big profit for selling services and slowly building their ecosystem. They selling all these IOT stuff that tightly integrated with their Xiaomi phones. They also selling themes, stickers, ringtones etc to make money. There are plenty of way to making money than simply charge 600 dollars for your phone. Simply dismissing competition as they selling lower priced phone is laughable at best. Not every company choice to go with high price high margin route.

so if a xiaomni is your critical device and it dies while you're in the middle of a business trip how do you get it fixed?

 

[jamezr]

I guess some people buy on the profit margin of the selling company (which means they have to try and Devine these numbers) while others buy on the products value to them and how the service of a product will be to them. Who is the smart consumer?
[doublepost=1454315312][/doublepost]
so if a xiaomni is your critical device and it dies while you're in the middle of a business trip how do you get it fixed?

The same thing could be said about any phone maker. I have had great customer service from Apple, Samsung and HTC. I can walk into any corp carrier store and get a warranty replacement phone.

But then as you say if I am on a business trip and my business critical phone dies....i will let the company replace that for me. Happens all the time.

 

[I7guy]

The same thing could be said about any phone maker. I have had great customer service from Apple, Samsung and HTC. I can walk into any corp carrier store and get a warranty replacement phone.

But then as you say if I am on a business trip and my business critical phone dies....i will let the company replace that for me. Happens all the time.

I guess I was asking about xiaomni, didn't even know you can buy them in a carrier store hence the question. I personally do byod so I'm responsible.

 

[jamezr]

I guess I was asking about xiaomni, didn't even know you can buy them in a carrier store hence the question. I personally do byod so I'm responsible.

You said

so if a xiaomni is your critical device and it dies while you're in the middle of a business trip how do you get it fixed?

If it is a critical business device then your business has a plan to replace the phone. You can't just go buy another one. Businesses have an special images and software for their specific business devices. Each business has their own security protocols in place to replace phones for critical business people who travel.
If it is a Xiaomi...then they have a plan in place to have the phone replaced.

 

[LovingTeddy]

I guess some people buy on the profit margin of the selling company (which means they have to try and Devine these numbers) while others buy on the products value to them and how the service of a product will be to them. Who is the smart consumer?
[doublepost=1454315312][/doublepost]
so if a xiaomni is your critical device and it dies while you're in the middle of a business trip how do you get it fixed?

If it is corporate issued iPhone, I don't think you can just go to Apple Store for repairs. For most corporate issued devices, you need to through corporate's IT department for other devices.

For example: some corporate will white list MAC address, so if you have devices that not on the list, you will not allow to connect corporate network. If your device got changed by Apple Store, you will likely not able to connect to your company's network. You will also get into trouble when you need hand over that particular device.

 

[I7guy]

You said


If it is a critical business device then your business has a plan to replace the phone. You can't just go buy another one. Businesses have an special images and software for their specific business devices. Each business has their own security protocols in place to replace phones for critical business people who travel.
If it is a Xiaomi...then they have a plan in place to have the phone replaced.

My business does not support xiamomi amongst others, to use this one device as an example, as a corporate device. I am asking about those who byod mail order brands and use them as their work phone. But I guess you're right, it's in their own hands. Thanks.
[doublepost=1454331987][/doublepost]

If it is corporate issued iPhone, I don't think you can just go to Apple Store for repairs. For most corporate issued devices, you need to through corporate's IT department for other devices.

For example: some corporate will white list MAC address, so if you have devices that not on the list, you will not allow to connect corporate network. If your device got changed by Apple Store, you will likely not able to connect to your company's network. You will also get into trouble when you need hand over that particular device.

There is a process to deal with such issues with iPhones; which is why I was asking about those who byod Mail order phones.

 

[yellowscreen]

I do not get it.. It is pretty clear to me that iPhone 6S is not the only one people willing to buy in this price bracket. I have hard te believing that you actually think people only want buy iPhone at this price bracket.

looking at the ASP across the industry, that is exactly what is happening. Even the most popular of high end android smartphones falls of that bracket merely a couple of months after its release. that should be enough to reach that conclusion. android phones just arent moving if priced the same as iphone, so they compete on price and that caught them in the downward spiral, no profitability, ASP at the lowest year after year, cca 200 bucks, and the chronic inability to make large software/hardware/infrastructure investments. its as simple as it gets. the smartphone market is arguably the least healthy of them all. its a catastrophe.

Again, do you have any proof that 99% of competitor operating on red?

lets make this easier. find android manufacturers operating in black and post their financials here. it should be waay easier than me posting financials of all the OEMS operating in red. thank you

Even if they operating on red, it does not really affect competitive landscape. Really, if you think about it, majority of PC manufactories are posting thin margin, and yet most PC makers are still around.

Japan's Sony, India's HCL Infosystems and South Korea's Samsung and LG are among the players leaving the PC business or at least scaling back, he noted.

Sony sold its PC business, VAIO, to investment fund Japan Industrial Partners in 2014, while HCL said in 2013 it would gradually phase out PC manufacturing. Samsung stopped sales of laptops in Europe last year, while LG said early in 2014 it would leave the "traditional PC market."

What is so great about Apple making billions of dollars? It is not like Apple willing to share penny to you or me?

my ability to rationalize and actually plainly just talk to people is massively hindered by a problem very well highlighted in this statement. buddy, nobody cares about you and me. nobody cares, and nobody talks here about you and me. what you think and what i think, what we feel, its the least important thing in conversations like this. so please, try to overcome your ingrained subjectivity (its not easy, it actually takes a lot of years and a lot of thinking). if you dont, you are not a person capable of having a conversation in a true sense of a word. talking with a purely emotional being is regularly a catastrophe. its in vain, don quixote style.

i dont care in which color you see the world, i care only about what is happening. please, try harder.

but to respond, what is so great about earning billions while your direct competitors operate in red?

this:
FingerWorks
Silicon Color
Proximity
P.A. Semi
Placebase
Lala.com
Quattro Wireless
Intrinsity
Siri
Poly9
Polar Rose
IMSense
C3 Technologies
Anobit
Chomp
Redmatica
AuthenTec
Particle
Novauris Technologies
OttoCat
WiFiSlam
Locationary
HopStop.com
Passif Semiconductor
Matcha
Embark
AlgoTrim
Cue
PrimeSense
Topsy
BroadMap
Catch.com
Acunu
SnappyLabs
Burstly
LuxVue Technology
Spotsetter
Swell
BookLamp
Beats Electronics
Prss
Dryft
Camel Audio
Semetric
FoundationDB
LinX
Coherent Navigation
Metaio
Mapsense
VocalIQ
Perceptio
Emotient
LearnSprout
Flyby Media

i think i said it two times already, software/hardware/infrastructure investments.

just to give you a context:

All told, Apple now spends 3.5% of its revenue on R&D, whereas Google spends 15%, Qualcomm spends 22% and Facebook spends 21%. That said, Apple is still spending $8.1 billion a year on R&D, which is higher in nominal terms than any of the above mentioned companies other than Google.

do you get it now?

also worth noting:

One reason Apple doesn’t have to spend 15% or more of its revenue on R&D is that a lot of third-party component suppliers are in fierce competition to win its business every year and thus offer the company its cutting-edge hardware innovations. In other words, Apple’s component suppliers do a lot of work on its behalf in the hopes of winning its very lucrative business.

but remember, its all about outlook, long run.

Again, please open your eyes and take look at competing offering. You would find some very interesting ideas.

i do. but im not here to talk about ideas, or wants, or likes. im here to talk, as the title of this thread implies, about statistics and what is happening in the overall market. what you think and what i think is of no interest to me in this conversation. please refrain from spilling your subjectivity, i dont care for it. thats why im not offering you mine. please, less feels.

About rest of your post, I really find not worth to respond. It is basically dismissing other while praise Apple for making billions of dollars from their overly expensive phones.

yes, dismissing based on actual data. i dont have feelings towards those companies. i like numbers though.

Take Xiaomi for example, they basically selling their phone at cost or near cost. They making big profit for selling services and slowly building their ecosystem. They selling all these IOT stuff that tightly integrated with their Xiaomi phones. They also selling themes, stickers, ringtones etc to make money. There are plenty of way to making money than simply charge 600 dollars for your phone.

yeah, lets take xiaomi, its a perfect example.

Xiaomi's average smartphone price fell to $122 in the third quarter from $160 a year earlier, despite China's smartphone sector moving upmarket, according to IDC. The average price of a smartphone in China rose to $240 from $202. Huawei's rose to $209 from $201. Xiaomi's best-selling model last year was its cheapest, the $76 Redmi 2A, IDC analyst James Yan said.

The lack of a diversified customer base is another challenge for Xiaomi. It remains "locked in a Chinese demographic ghetto of mainly males 18 to 30," said Peter Fuhrman, chairman of China-focused boutique investment bank China First Capital. Xiaomi's focus on low prices has hit its brand image, he said.

"Mobile services, e-commerce, branded consumer products--these still are largely just a figment rather than a huge and growing source of profits that could validate last year's sky-high valuation," said Mr. Fuhrman.

i understand the idea about xiaomi, but its not happening, at least not yet. meanwhile, they had to revise their sales target two times, from 100mill to 80, than to 60. and im talking about asp of 122. so their growth is eroding even with them selling phones for 100 bucks, and their business depends on number of their phones, considering they are building an ecosystem. so, your feeling aside, would you invest in this company? how would you grade this company outlook? i know its hard, i know its one of spotlight android oems, but try hard to set your feelings and ideology aside. thank you

Simply dismissing competition as they selling lower priced phone is laughable at best. Not every company choice to go with high price high margin route.

im dismissing competition solely based on their inability to make money in their mobile businesses. in other words, people are refusing to buy their product at the prices which make them profit. in other other words, its the market telling them their product is not good enough to be economically viable.

is there any other criteria for evaluating a certain business other than this? humanitarian or?

i appreciate you not resorting to name-calling. thank you.
[doublepost=1454333688][/doublepost]

No smart consumer cares about making someone else overly profitable. A less profitable product means you're getting a better product for less.

try to see beyond the role of a costumer.

 

[jamezr]

l
try to see beyond the role of a costumer.

As a customer......i don't care how many billions a company has in cash reserves. It does not factor into my buying decisions. I buy Apple products because I like them. I would buy them even if Apple operated in the red.
I buy Samsung products for the same reasons.

 

[yellowscreen]

As a customer......i don't care how many billions a company has in cash reserves. It does not factor into my buying decisions. I buy Apple products because I like them. I would buy them even if Apple operated in the red.
I buy Samsung products for the same reasons.

what makes you like apple products? could it be connected with apple ability to for example buy a company/invest in r&d to offer you certain functionality that you want?

do you see what i'm getting at?

 

[Truefan31]

As a customer......i don't care how many billions a company has in cash reserves. It does not factor into my buying decisions. I buy Apple products because I like them. I would buy them even if Apple operated in the red.
I buy Samsung products for the same reasons.

Well that's certainly in your right to do but since you're the thread starter I'd venture based on the thread you wanted to see perspective from more than just a customer's personal view.

 

[jamezr]

what makes you like apple products? could it be connected with apple ability to for example buy a company/invest in r&d to offer you certain functionality that you want?

do you see what i'm getting at?

No...i don't care what companies they acquire. I only care about the feature set they have currently. Since Apple is one of the most secretive companies when it comes to future products and its features it really does not factor into my buying decision.
Look at Amazon...they are one of the biggest online retailers. Yet for most of their existence they have operated in the red. That hasn't stopped people from continuing to buy products from them.
[doublepost=1454337723][/doublepost]

Well that's certainly in your right to do but since you're the thread starter I'd venture based on the thread you wanted to see perspective from more than just a customer's personal view.

Nope.....the thread was about sales and market share metrics. But some want to make it about cash reserves and cash on hand. Those are different topics and metrics altogether.

 

[yellowscreen]

No...i don't care what companies they acquire. I only care about the feature set they have currently. Since Apple is one of the most secretive companies when it comes to future products and its features it really does not factor into my buying decision.
Look at Amazon...they are one of the biggest online retailers. Yet for most of their existence they have operated in the red. That hasn't stopped people from continuing to buy products from them.

you use way too much 'I'

i thought it would be harder, but i think i isolated the main problem of our civilization.

two actually.

the 'I' and 'living in a moment with absolutely no regards to the future'

if you do it here, it stands to reason you're doing it in all aspects of your life. sorry but i cant respect that.

amazon is not a product based company, its service based. they are actually a supermarket, selling other companies wares. either that or you meant the fire phone/tablet. hows that going?
[doublepost=1454339639][/doublepost]

Nope.....the thread was about sales and market share metrics. But some want to make it about cash reserves and cash on hand. Those are different topics and metrics altogether.

so discussing profit of those sales off topic?

maybe we should broaden the theme with a philosophical question? when you're selling something at a cost, are you selling it or giving it?

maybe we should have two market statistics? one for those who are selling the phones, one for those who are giving it away?

 

[pedrom]

No...i don't care what companies they acquire. I only care about the feature set they have currently. Since Apple is one of the most secretive companies when it comes to future products and its features it really does not factor into my buying decision.
Look at Amazon...they are one of the biggest online retailers. Yet for most of their existence they have operated in the red. That hasn't stopped people from continuing to buy products from them.
[doublepost=1454337723][/doublepost]
Nope.....the thread was about sales and market share metrics. But some want to make it about cash reserves and cash on hand. Those are different topics and metrics altogether.

Not really.

This thread was about someone (that has no idea of what he is talking about) painting pictures of success and failures just by looking at the number of smartphones being sold, and praising companies that sell more phones TODAY than they did in the last few years, despite the fact that in order to do so, those companies lost profit, relevance in the market space, ability to sell their flagship models, and will now go on to cut in investments, work force and becoming technologically inept, like what is happening/happened to Sony, HTC, Motorola, Lenovo and soon, if things keep following this path, Samsung and LG.

Only one company is successful at selling phones. Only one company makes makes high end devices worth their price, and Mr. Market agrees. Unfortunately, to understand such things, one must understand economies of scale, investment in technologies (like almost betting the company on flash storage agreements, Aluminium and CNC machinery and respective techniques, ARM 10 to 20 years before you start selling products around it), investment in talent that can solve problems (If you give 20000 B$ to someone to built a little ship, and that someone is a dog... Well, money won't get you that ship.) and make great decisions that hold their value from a business, design and engineering point of view.

When all of this comes together, you get great advantages at implementing and mastering such technologies, and leave your competitors fighting for scraps. In those cases, in order to get the same materials, they have to pay significantly more now than you (Apple) did a couple of years ago. That's why HTC always had crappy cameras (Apple was eating the sensors.). That's why Sony had crappy cameras despite producing the sensors (they didn't invest in talent in order to properly optimize their image processing software). This is why Samsung finds itself in trouble as far as SoC are concerned, despite being a ****ing foundry and making them (no talent for design), etc.

All things considered, Apple ends offering the biggest value for a particular price range, selling the best product and enjoying the biggest margins. Their profits (and this would be the same even if they earned half of what they do) ensures this trend will go on, as it has been going since the iPod. And now, more then ever, when we are playing a game of investing in ecosystems, it's a very important thing to have.

But let's be real, someone that even dares to paint a nicer picture for the current Samsung Mobile situation, when selling more cheap phones is better, can't possibly understand any of this. So, there's that.

Anyway, you are wrong.

 

[jamezr]

you use way too much 'I'

i thought it would be harder, but i think i isolated the main problem of our civilization.

two actually.

the 'I' and 'living in a moment with absolutely no regards to the future'

if you do it here, it stands to reason you're doing it in all aspects of your life. sorry but i cant respect that.

amazon is not a product based company, its service based. they are actually a supermarket, selling other companies wares. either that or you meant the fire phone/tablet. hows that going?
[doublepost=1454339639][/doublepost]

so discussing profit of those sales off topic?

maybe we should broaden the theme with a philosophical question? when you're selling something at a cost, are you selling it or giving it?

maybe we should have two market statistics? one for those who are selling the phones, one for those who are giving it away?

Lol use don't use "I" enough

Amazon is an product based company. They sell products I use and I like them very much. See I think Amazon does does make their own products rebranded under different names. I buy from them regardless of what cash reserves they have on hand. It makes no difference to me...

Then if you want to go off topic..... Start your own thread and discuss that. Simple easy solution other than trying to derail this one. I like that idea.

 

[Truefan31]

No...i don't care what companies they acquire. I only care about the feature set they have currently. Since Apple is one of the most secretive companies when it comes to future products and its features it really does not factor into my buying decision.
Look at Amazon...they are one of the biggest online retailers. Yet for most of their existence they have operated in the red. That hasn't stopped people from continuing to buy products from them.
[doublepost=1454337723][/doublepost]
Nope.....the thread was about sales and market share metrics. But some want to make it about cash reserves and cash on hand. Those are different topics and metrics altogether.

So as your customer point of view you care enough about overall sales and market share to post graphs and threads but not the underlying caveat that Apple is the company selling the most phones that actually make a company money. Lol ok then.

 

[jamezr]

So as your customer point of view you care enough about overall sales and market share to post graphs and threads but not the underlying caveat that Apple is the company selling the most phones that actually make a company money. Lol ok then.

lol yep because others want to just derail the thread and make it all about cash reserves and profits.

 

[mi7chy]

what makes you like apple products? could it be connected with apple ability to for example buy a company/invest in r&d to offer you certain functionality that you want?

do you see what i'm getting at?

Apple R&D expenditure is towards the bottom. Guess where Samsung is and why their products are the best?