Apple holds grip on 5th place in Fortune 500 thanks to iPhone, Mac sales
Fortune on Thursday published the 2015 edition of its annual Fortune 500 list, as last year ranking Apple fifth among U.S. corporations in terms of revenue, largely on the sales of iPhones and Macs.
Apple has a "product pipeline that's gotten Apple fanboys lining up all over again," Fortune said, including not just the iPhone 6 but new categories like Apple Pay and the Apple Watch. The magazine also commented on the company's market value, which rose nearly $200 billion in 2014 to over $700 billion, a result of stock prices climbing 40 percent.
Apple generated $39.5 billion in profits last year, off some $182.8 billion in revenue.
One future opportunity is said to be the company's upcoming streaming TV service, which Fortune remarked will square off with the cable industry.
Despite the company's success, Apple was still said to be facing its share of problems, such as declining iPad sales, rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers, and general competition from Android devices. While Apple is often the biggest individual smartphone maker in global markets, Android phones currently enjoy greater success as a platform.
The top four corporations on the list include Walmart, Exxon Mobile, Chevron, and Berkshire Hathaway. There are in fact no other technology corporations in the top 10 -- the next closest is AT&T, at number 12.
Apple has a "product pipeline that's gotten Apple fanboys lining up all over again," Fortune said, including not just the iPhone 6 but new categories like Apple Pay and the Apple Watch. The magazine also commented on the company's market value, which rose nearly $200 billion in 2014 to over $700 billion, a result of stock prices climbing 40 percent.
Apple generated $39.5 billion in profits last year, off some $182.8 billion in revenue.
One future opportunity is said to be the company's upcoming streaming TV service, which Fortune remarked will square off with the cable industry.
Despite the company's success, Apple was still said to be facing its share of problems, such as declining iPad sales, rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers, and general competition from Android devices. While Apple is often the biggest individual smartphone maker in global markets, Android phones currently enjoy greater success as a platform.
The top four corporations on the list include Walmart, Exxon Mobile, Chevron, and Berkshire Hathaway. There are in fact no other technology corporations in the top 10 -- the next closest is AT&T, at number 12.
Comments
Huh? Since when Apple faced competitions from cheap Chinese junks? Oh, btw, Apple face competition from iPhone rivalry and they beat their own record every time? The only rivalry for iPhone is iPhone itself. Dude, get real.
Cool, but this doesn't include Apple's increased growth in FY2015. This time next year, Apple will surely have risen to number 4 if not number 3.
FROM APPLE INSIDER ARTICLE
"Despite the company's success, Apple was still said to be facing its share of problems, such as declining iPad sales, rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers, and general competition from Android devices. While Apple is often the biggest individual smartphone maker in global markets, Android phones currently enjoy greater success as a platform."
iPad sales are down because people are buying 6+ instead of iPads. That is NOT a problem. A single sale of a 6+ generates more revenue, gross margin, and profits than an single iPad unit. This is anything but a problem. Its called customer choosing to purchase the more expensive product.
Rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers? Name me a single Chinese phone maker that is stealing sales from Apple? NONE. No one is buying a POS Xiaomi instead of an iPhone. They buy Xiaomi because they can't afford Apple.
And how the fuk is Android enjoying greater success as a platform? Apple has 90% of the industry profits. How the fuk is Android enjoying greater success with only 10% of the profits and every single Android maker with the exception of Samsung is losing money?
Try to relax please. The BS is from Fortune, not AI.
Try to relax please. The BS is from Fortune, not AI.
Fortune is nothing more than a damn troll. Who gives the fck about their 500 ranking crap? Ask Tim Cooks if he cares what rank Apple is in Fortune 500. He ain't. Consumers know Apple products without Fortune's ranking. In fact, over 90% Apple device owners don't know what Fortune ranking is.
FROM APPLE INSIDER ARTICLE
"Despite the company's success, Apple was still said to be facing its share of problems, such as declining iPad sales, rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers, and general competition from Android devices. While Apple is often the biggest individual smartphone maker in global markets, Android phones currently enjoy greater success as a platform."
iPad sales are down because people are buying 6+ instead of iPads. That is NOT a problem. A single sale of a 6+ generates more revenue, gross margin, and profits than an single iPad unit. This is anything but a problem. Its called customer choosing to purchase the more expensive product.
Rivalry from Chinese smartphone makers? Name me a single Chinese phone maker that is stealing sales from Apple? NONE. No one is buying a POS Xiaomi instead of an iPhone. They buy Xiaomi because they can't afford Apple.
And how the fuk is Android enjoying greater success as a platform? Apple has 90% of the industry profits. How the fuk is Android enjoying greater success with only 10% of the profits and every single Android maker with the exception of Samsung is losing money?
I agree wholeheartedly. I was especially miffed as to their claim about "Android enjoying greater success". That is 100% master story-spinning to say the least. Is this the same Android where less 90% of the Android handsets out there are on a release closer to 2 years old, if not older?
Is this the same Android where it's running a fork of Android that strips out all of Google's services like what Xiaomi does? Meaning, Google does all the work, and get's zero benefit from it?
Is this the same Android where virtually every handset maker is making barely anything (if at all) on their Android handsets?
Is this the same Android where its success can be tied to literally giving cheap, garbage phones away, two-for-one deals, and getting a new phone running an old OS after a few months when the prior new phone breaks?
I agree wholeheartedly. I was especially miffed as to their claim about "Android enjoying greater success". That is 100% master story-spinning to say the least. Is this the same Android where less 90% of the Android handsets out there are on a release closer to 2 years old, if not older?
Is this the same Android where it's running a fork of Android that strips out all of Google's services like what Xiaomi does? Meaning, Google does all the work, and get's zero benefit from it?
Is this the same Android where virtually every handset maker is making barely anything (if at all) on their Android handsets?
Is this the same Android where its success can be tied to literally giving cheap, garbage phones away, two-for-one deals, and getting a new phone running an old OS after a few months when the prior new phone breaks?
Android success? LOL, sometimes people just think giving away free pop corns will make them success instead of selling great chocolate. Fucking pop corns are not Chocolate.
iPad sales are down because people are buying 6+ instead of iPads. That is NOT a problem. A single sale of a 6+ generates more revenue, gross margin, and profits than an single iPad unit.
While that might be true for some consumers, iPad sales are still not increasing, primarily because the enterprise/education adoption is less than expected, at least that is my assumption. In those situations the iPad would not be replaced by iPhone 6+ devices. Perhaps iPads didn't turn out to be quite as useful in those markets as previously predicted.
Nonetheless, Apple is not and should not be a monopoly. Apple's phone units and profits increase every quarter. It defines the standard for what a smartphone should be. Apple is the largest tech company in the world by far. It has more cash than many countries.
In the age of Chinese manufacturers turning out clones for pennies, market share is completely irrelevant if you don't also consider profit.
It's actually unfair to define success as to what Apple has accomplished because no other similar company ever has or is likely to ever will match it. Apple is way beyond success. Success in consumer electronics used to mean that when you developed a new product, you sold 1 million units in the first one to two years. Apple now does that in days and they do it at premium prices. That's beyond success.
While that might be true for some consumers, iPad sales are still not increasing, primarily because the enterprise/education adoption is less than expected, at least that is my assumption. In those situations the iPad would not be replaced by iPhone 6+ devices. Perhaps iPads didn't turn out to be quite as useful in those markets as previously predicted.
The problem with crap like this is context. iPad sales are stagnant but does that imply other tablets are selling like hotcakes? Without that context stupid people jump to stupid conclusions. I can’t believe AI published this nonsense.
Exxon Mobile, huh. New iPhone competition?
I believe the ranking is on total revenue, not profit. Exxon sells a lot of gas but they don't make as much on margins as Apple does. A lot of people put the equivalent of the cost of an iPhone into their gas tank every couple months or so.
But when you think about it, gas is actually pretty cheap even though people say it is expensive. It seems expensive because you use so much of it, however if you buy a gallon of just about any consumer processed liquid such as laundry detergent or even a gallon of milk, it is generally about the same price as gas, so in that sense gas is not any more expensive than other refined liquids you buy, you just buy a lot more of it which is why Exxon's revenue is so high.
It is large amount of inexpensive stuff with low margins verses very few really expensive things with high margins.
I believe the ranking is on total revenue, not profit. Exxon sells a lot of gas but they don't make as much on margins as Apple does. A lot of people put the equivalent of the cost of an iPhone into their gas tank every couple months or so.
But when you think about it, gas is actually pretty cheap even though people say it is expensive. It seems expensive because you use so much of it, however if you buy a gallon of just about any consumer processed liquid such as laundry detergent or even a gallon of milk, it is generally about the same price as gas, so in that sense gas is not any more expensive than other refined liquids you buy, you just buy a lot more of it which is why Exxon's revenue is so high.
It is large amount of inexpensive stuff with low margins verses very few really expensive things with high margins.
Err, I think he was sarcastically pinging on the spelling/usage error for Exxon MOBIL
Kind of hard to pass a gas and company who provide life necessary products like Walmart. People spend more on gas every years than they do buying apple product, the same is true about feeding and clothing themselves.
Unlike the Google model of chasing every person on earth whether they will make money off them. Walmart actualy makes money of those people who can barely aford what they buy at Walmart those people also keep coming back and buying more. It is ashame to think Walmart makes money off those who can barely afford the walmart products. Apple on the other hand sell to most people who actually can afford and apple product.
I just notice that Forture still list Apple as a computer Hardware manufacture and techology company. Apple change this a number of years ago, they list themselves as a consumer electronics company. I am not sure why they are still listing them wrong. They also got Google listed as a retailer which makes no sense.
Kind of hard to pass a gas and company who provide life necessary products like Walmart. People spend more on gas every years than they do buying apple product, the same is true about feeding and clothing themselves.
Unlike the Google model of chasing every person on earth whether they will make money off them. Walmart actualy makes money of those people who can barely aford what they buy at Walmart those people also keep coming back and buying more. It is ashame to think Walmart makes money off those who can barely afford the walmart products. Apple on the other hand sell to most people who actually can afford and apple product.
Speak for yourself ;-) I can barely afford Apple Products...
People used to buy an iPhone and an iPad. If they're now only buying an iPhone then it is a problem.
You may have a point about the education market, but I think it is more about the long life cycle of the product. Older iPads are still usable with the latest OS (though performance does suffer some) so people are not as apt to replace them as they would a phone. Granted the Gen-1 iPad can't run the latest, but it is still serviceable for many things. With the IBM partnership ramping up, enterprise sales may start rising again as well. The iPad is still dominating the product category. Companies like Xiomi are no real threat to Apple, they are more of a threat to Samsung and other mid-to-low end Android phone manufacturers. If that is all Fortune can come up with for weaknesses then Apple is doing just fine.
Surprised to see Berkshire Hathaway on that list. Is fortune counting 'their' revenue, or the revenues of the companies they own? Do they really sell $200 billion in new shares every year? Aren't they just the equivalent of a large mutual fund?
No. They have percentage holdings in around sixty different companies many of them 100% ownership with lots top brands that you have heard of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Berkshire_Hathaway
You may have a point about the education market, but I think it is more about the long life cycle of the product.
You can't grow your business on repeat customers alone. There are billions of people on this planet and Apple has sold 200 million iPads so far. I think there is room for growth if the product is useful enough. My point is, it doesn't seem useful enough to me. I have two but rarely use them. It is sort of an extra in-between non-essential device, whereas a phone and a computer are considered essentials in a modern society. When you suggest that the long life cycle is affecting sales because people don't upgrade as often, that only supports the theory that iPads are not that important. There is really no reason to upgrade an iPhone every year either but more people do it because iPhones are more important to them.