Money: Why iPod Can't Save Apple (merged)
There is an interesting 2 page article on Apple and the iPod and how it WILL NOT help Apple in the long run. Most of it seemed true and kept my attention, other parts made me mad as a mac fanatic. It was all in all saying the iPod with it's low profit margin isn't doing much because it's not luring many customers to the mac side, and all this is while it's market share is shrinking.
I guess nothing we didn't really know but an interesting read that makes me want to sell my stock after watching today and yesterday as it drops like a rock. I knew it would do that, but I didn't expect that fast. I'll probably just let it go maybe. I wonder if the not reaching 100 million has anything to do about it, even though they are by far the best on the market. People just love to hate Apple.
I guess nothing we didn't really know but an interesting read that makes me want to sell my stock after watching today and yesterday as it drops like a rock. I knew it would do that, but I didn't expect that fast. I'll probably just let it go maybe. I wonder if the not reaching 100 million has anything to do about it, even though they are by far the best on the market. People just love to hate Apple.
Comments
Since so many mac owners are professional content creators, or whatever you want to call them/us, it's going to dilute the value of market share to some extent. The values that matter are software sales. I would be willing to bet that macs account for at least 10% . . . possibly even 33%. . . of all non-game, non-OEM software revenue.
Are Journalists really THIS bored?? We have CNET making news up. Money pontificating about iPods being the savior of Apple when Apple never said "this will save our company".
I'm seeing far too much useless information being spewed from established sources. Must be nice to be in Journalism where if you're wrong you just shrug your shoulders.
Whenever I hear one of the above type stories, I immediately tune out and realize it's more of the same wrong, know-nothing shit I've heard before.
At what point do people look like goons for saying it publicly? Isn't there a journalistic graveyard somewhere, littered with the bones of all the idiot writers and "industry pundits" who, over the years, have been nothing but flat-out wrong when they talk about Apple?
If not, there should be.
is it a Money magazine story? Link? (which I was going to ask for anyway)
the history of advertising is full of companies who used one product as lure for the bigger hook
spreading the Apple brand may be valuable, iPod as the chic gadget does more,
and exposing those audiences to the superior design and UI adds another level
all while making a serious profit on the hardware from each iPod.
sounds like a formula with no downside.
is Money mag on the Napster/MS "Apple is doomed" FUD payroll?
Apple Death Knell Counter
Whoop dee frickin doo.
Apple wont die, no matter how many "analysts/experts" say it will.
It didn't really say that Apple was doomed and going under per se, but more, they weren't really a sound investment, even though it may seem like it. It said how the kind $4.8 billion Apple has in the bank made more than Apple's operations by itself and made up for the $1million dollars. It was saying the Apple stores are a miss too as they aren't increasing market share and are bleeding money. It mentioned the Apple stores posted $5million in the red last year, have been complained about and Apple is being sued for unfairness between the Apple Stores and other retailers. "One of the plaintiffs, estimates that Apple's stores would have lost as much as $80 in 2003 has they have been paying the same prices for inventory as the resellers paid." Apple has said before they pay the same prices though.
"Job's mass appeal strategy has crimped the company's historically high profit margins."
It said this was different than when Sculley was CEO and focused Apple at graphic/video production. It made Suclly sound like he did a good job at making profit for Apple.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
It said how the kind $4.8 billion Apple has in the bank made more than Apple's operations by itself and made up for the $1million dollars. It was saying the Apple stores are a miss too as they aren't increasing market share and are bleeding money.
ast3r3x, I'm not shooting the messenger, but bleeding money? Last time I checked, Apple was increasing their wad of cash on a regular basis. AAPL could continue in perpetuity at the rate they're going. Even if they never make a cent profit on computers, they're not going anywhere. How can a company with no debt and making a mint on it's cash go bankrupt? It's not possible.
Could you quote choice parts of the article for us?
Originally posted by torifile
ast3r3x, I'm not shooting the messenger, but bleeding money? Last time I checked, Apple was increasing their wad of cash on a regular basis. AAPL could continue in perpetuity at the rate they're going. Even if they never make a cent profit on computers, they're not going anywhere. How can a company with no debt and making a mint on it's cash go bankrupt? It's not possible.
Could you quote choice parts of the article for us?
Well my Dad took the mag, so I don't have the article here...I could have made that a direct quote though, the article did use the term bleeding money! I know I was thinking that too, Apple could just go on forever with it's money in the bank. Hopefully it never comes to that though
I probably picked more negative parts of the article to show, but if I get the mag back tomorrow I'll post the story.
AAPL could continue in perpetuity at the rate they're going. Even if they never make a cent profit on computers, they're not going anywhere. How can a company with no debt and making a mint on it's cash go bankrupt? It's not possible.
That big wad of money (while helpful) isn't quite as useful as you think. It was explained to me once but I can't remember all the details. Essentially, they will go out of business long before that money bleeds away. I'm not sure if it is the shareholders who would never allow it (it's their money) or what... but it is nowhere near as cut and dry as you make it out. It's what also keeps Apple from just dropping large sums of money at will.
Cheers,
C.
Although with 4.8 billion, Apple could begin re-writing all the important software and release it under it's brand.
But deep in the basement in Cupertino I'm willing to bet there is software to replace Photoshop, Indesign, OfficeMac etc., if it ever came to that.
It would probably run better, be more powerful and be more easier to use than anyone elses offering.
I think Apple is going to just keep humming along, as one PC company after another bites the dust.
Apple will innovate and enjoy a lead with a new product, the others will immitate and slowly kill the marketshare.
Successful innovation has been Apple's focus and the ability to create interest in it's new products.
It's posting a profit and in the black, people want their computers and stuff.
http://macnn.com/news/23877
Personally, I think Apple is doing just fine and the writer of this article has no clue what he's talking about. Apple could be doing better and has to play its cards right with the iPod and iTunes, but it's not like Apple is going out of business. The only problem is Apple isn't gaining marketshare, but it can still make profits without gaining marketshare.
I merged them instead of just locking yours, because at least you managed to get a link to an article, unlike OTHER PEOPLE.
Originally posted by murbot
I merged the existing thread with your new one, dferigmu. It was 4 days old, so you just didn't look back far enough.
I merged them instead of just locking yours, because at least you managed to get a link to an article, unlike OTHER PEOPLE.
Thanks!
Originally posted by murbot
I merged the existing thread with your new one, dferigmu. It was 4 days old, so you just didn't look back far enough.
I merged them instead of just locking yours, because at least you managed to get a link to an article, unlike OTHER PEOPLE.
If you will look, at the time of reading the article and making the thread it was on the 16, and that macnn page was created on the 17. I looked at money.com but couldn't find the article so lets not hate the hated member for no reason!