Apple tops tech rivals in sales, profits & assets for first time in Forbes Global 2000
For the first time, Apple is now the world's biggest technology corporation not just in terms of market capitalization, but also in sales, profits and assets, according to new rankings published on Monday.
Based on figures available by April 6 -- notably excluding the company's record March quarter -- Apple managed $200 billion in sales, a net profit of $45 billion, and $260 billion in assets, according to Forbes's latest annual Global 2000 rankings. The company's next closest competitor was Samsung, which achieved $195 billion in sales, $22 billion in net profit, and $210 billion in assets.
Immediately below Samsung were Microsoft, Google, and IBM. Rounding out the top 10 were Intel, Cisco, Oracle, HP, and chief Apple supplier Foxconn.
Apple retained the highest market capitalization in any sector, with a worth of about $740 billion, more than twice Google's. Despite doing well in the most important metrics, Samsung's market cap was below not just Apple and Google's, but also that of firms like Alibaba and Facebook.
Forbes remarked that positions in the Global 2000 are based on a combined weighting of sales, profits, assets, and market cap.
During the March quarter, Apple took in $13.57 billion in net profit, based off $58.01 billion in revenue. Most of Apple's income in recent years has been attached to the iPhone, and strong sales of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus since September have pushed the company even higher. Macs and iPads continue to contribute to the bottom line, but iPad sales have been on the decline in recent quarters.
Based on figures available by April 6 -- notably excluding the company's record March quarter -- Apple managed $200 billion in sales, a net profit of $45 billion, and $260 billion in assets, according to Forbes's latest annual Global 2000 rankings. The company's next closest competitor was Samsung, which achieved $195 billion in sales, $22 billion in net profit, and $210 billion in assets.
Immediately below Samsung were Microsoft, Google, and IBM. Rounding out the top 10 were Intel, Cisco, Oracle, HP, and chief Apple supplier Foxconn.
Apple retained the highest market capitalization in any sector, with a worth of about $740 billion, more than twice Google's. Despite doing well in the most important metrics, Samsung's market cap was below not just Apple and Google's, but also that of firms like Alibaba and Facebook.
Forbes remarked that positions in the Global 2000 are based on a combined weighting of sales, profits, assets, and market cap.
During the March quarter, Apple took in $13.57 billion in net profit, based off $58.01 billion in revenue. Most of Apple's income in recent years has been attached to the iPhone, and strong sales of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus since September have pushed the company even higher. Macs and iPads continue to contribute to the bottom line, but iPad sales have been on the decline in recent quarters.
Comments
So scary that this company relies so heavily on one product. I pray Apple diversifies ASAP. Make a car! Samsung makes appliances.
Apple's basket is nearly all of consumer tech - that is, the big areas that draw the crowds.
The most profitable PCs
- the most profitable AIOs
- the most profitable notebooks
The most profitable tablets
The most profitable smartphones
And now, the most profitable smartwatch
Not to mention services like iTunes, etc.
Additionally, an entire industry has grown up around accessorizing and enhancing all of these products.
Apple makes $$$ like no other, and it's right across the board with all of their products, not just the iPhone. The iPhone is immensely profitable, but Apple beats the competition in profit for all of the other products listed.
And... "so scary"? "So scary" that Boeing relies so heavily on planes, Ford relies so heavily on cars, etc.
Nearly the same sales, half the profits, that's the Samsung way!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
You make good points, but so did the OP. All those devices became profitable because of the iPhone. In essence those devices stand on the shoulders of the iPhone, and if the iPhone stumbles then the whole house is capable of coming down. It's far fetched, but nonetheless a possible reality.
That's the average way. What Apple has done is truly unique, and virtually impossible to duplicate.
You kind of miss the point. Even Apple's hobbies make most companies' major divisions look small. It's all relative. But then again maybe you were trying to be negative.
I'm so tired of every time we have a story about how Apple is finally doing well financially, someone jumps in first thing and says it's actually a scary or bad thing, because it all hinges on one product.
Newsflash, Apple had a huge portfolio of products and almost went out of business, literally! Steve Jobs came back to save the company and axed almost everything. If you were CEO at that time, what would you have done? Steves unusual way of doing Inge seems to have had a positive impact.
Don't think if it like every product but the iPhone is a failure in comparison, think of it like, the iPhone is killing it. The sales and profits are astronomical. The better the iPhone does seems to mean the worse every other of their products is with you 'scared' people. And when Apple tries to enter new categories like the watch, you're critical until it's as big as the iPhone. They can't win for winning.
Seems to be ok for Google, Microsoft et all to have one blockbuster profit generator, but Apple needs to have many products that generate the same amounts of profit or they are in for a major downfall. I look at it as motivation for Apple to continue to release great phones so that does not occur. They don't need competition from Samsung and Google to stay motivated.
All those things you list are great but what percentages are they when compared to the iPhone business. I'm an Apple fan and stock holder. Microsoft is giving away their OS. Google is trying to diversify into cars and space. IBM is the business model I like. I don't expect Apple to be the leader forever.
This is one of the lists I found
http://www.forbes.com/global2000/list/
All those things you list are great but what percentages are they when compared to the iPhone business. I'm an Apple fan and stock holder. Microsoft is giving away their OS. Google is trying to diversify into cars and space. IBM is the business model I like. I don't expect Apple to be the leader forever.
Tried to find a point in your non-sensical post, but failed to do so. Why is it a GOOD thing that Microsoft, a company that relies on software for most of its profits, is giving away (well, not really, limited time offer, with a bunch of caveats) their OS? You know they're doing it out of desperation to stay relevant, right? I don't see how I'd be pleased at this if I were a Microsoft shareholder. Nor will it have any effect whatsoever on Apple's business model. Google is "trying to diversify"? Ok, and? How many of these experiments have actually bore fruit? If Apple had an epic failure like Google Glass, they would be finished, and their stock would be pretty much wiped out. But Google can have as many of these failures as they want with no negative effect, because they are held to a standard of zero. How long till the car thing becomes a real consumer product that creates profit?
It's funny (and so insanely hypocritical) how you downplay Apple's other successful products because they don't compare to the iPhone business, then turn around in the next sentence cheerlead Microsoft's free OS, and Google's car initiative, both of which have not earned these companies a dime and will not do so for the forseeable future, so that you can advance your concern trolling and hand-wringing agenda. You're desperately trying to spin something into negativity and make some sort of point where none exists. No, Apple won't be the leader "forever". Neither will any of us be alive "forever". Nor will humanity or the universe. Lazy, cop-out statement and word by those who can't find real, valid critisism with Apple's business. This same useless, meaningless statement was uttered billions of times in Steve's time.
Apple's basket is nearly all of consumer tech - that is, the big areas that draw the crowds.
The most profitable PCs
- the most profitable AIOs
- the most profitable notebooks
The most profitable tablets
The most profitable smartphones
And now, the most profitable smartwatch
Not to mention services like iTunes, etc.
Additionally, an entire industry has grown up around accessorizing and enhancing all of these products.
Apple makes $$$ like no other, and it's right across the board with all of their products, not just the iPhone. The iPhone is immensely profitable, but Apple beats the competition in profit for all of the other products listed.
And... "so scary"? "So scary" that Boeing relies so heavily on planes, Ford relies so heavily on cars, etc.
I wouldn't waste my time to respond to that dude: 14 posts in 3 years. That means he'll never read anyone's response.
All those things you list are great but what percentages are they when compared to the iPhone business. I'm an Apple fan and stock holder. Microsoft is giving away their OS. Google is trying to diversify into cars and space. IBM is the business model I like. I don't expect Apple to be the leader forever.
Tell BMW not rely on cars. People just don't use their brain. Smart phones become like cars for Americans. It's no longer a nice-to-have piece of gadget. People replace their cars every 5 years on the average and this is true for phone also (2 years life cycle). That means, people keep repeating the pattern of buying cycle and there's no end to it unless another category coming out to replace the phone. At this point, there's none and I don't see anything can replace the smart phone in the next 10 years.
If you are scared then sell your "Apple stock". You sound like a tech busy body. Never happy with Apple, never will be. Of course you don't realize that Apple has many different categories that other companies would kill to have. They have like 3 separate businesses that could make it onto the Fortune 500 separately. But, somehow this makes it all seem 'scary' to you. All I can say is, I think Steve Jobs had a different outlook than you, and I'm glad it was him running the company, not you.
IBM is the business model I like.
Is that the model where you sell off all your hardware divisions because you've failed to differentiate and make a significant profit so you go into services instead? I don't see that as a successful model for Apple, tbh.
Apple relies on iPhone for profits - but hey, it is the most profitable business on the planet apart from oil, I guess.
Apple should diversify like Samsung, which makes tiny profits on all its other products? WTF?
Maybe Apple could diversify like MS and SS buy investing in uncompetitve practices. It worked so well for them...
How about Apple begins developing software and tech integrated into its mobile devices that support banking, health, gaming, and enteprise?
Oh, wait...
The problem is perception. It seems that Apple is too focused on one product for profit.
Tell BMW not rely on cars. People just don't use their brain. Smart phones become like cars for Americans. It's no longer a nice-to-have piece of gadget. People replace their cars every 5 years on the average and this is true for phone also (2 years life cycle). That means, people keep repeating the pattern of buying cycle and there's no end to it unless another category coming out to replace the phone. At this point, there's none and I don't see anything can replace the smart phone in the next 10 years.
This is (one of) the key points that media and some analysts miss. The modern "smartphone" is of course really a mobile computer, which the most important consumer device of the day. It is considered by many a necessity. This is not a single-purpose device which is a fad. These devices are increasingly at the centre of the populations lives. I believe a majority would give up many other services and devices before their smartphone. And the market is continuing to grow.
Couple this with Apple's sticky ecosystem, and highest consumer satisfaction ratings, and it is clear that Apple's installed base should be looked at more like an annuity, rather than a house of cards that could collapse in a couple of years. It is yet again why the media and some analysts consistently get Apple wrong.