Apple claims 6 percent US marketshare for holiday 2007

[AppleInsider]

While few companies have yet to produce their official shipment numbers, estimates generated by the two research firms have Apple shipping between 1.04 and 1.05 million Macs in the US for the last three months of the past year, resulting in a fourth-place spot for the computer maker and growth of anywhere between 28 percent (Gartner) and 30.9 percent (IDC) over the same period in 2006.

The results should net Apple anywhere between 5.7 and 6.1 percent of the market in the region depending on whether IDC or Gartner is used to collect the data. However, both companies are clear as to the gain: in each case, Apple's share of the PC business is believed to have snapped up a full percentage point more of the entire US market between the same periods in 2006 and 2007.

The other, Windows-based computer designers produced more modest results, according to the two studies. Both agree that Dell successfully turned around its results to grow by about 15 percent and maintain a small lead over HP. The now combined Acer and Gateway jointly occupied the third-place position with about 9 percent.

Gartner fourth quarter 2007 results (courtesy of Gartner).

IDC also took the extra step of tallying year-long results in its analysis and believes that Apple climbed higher still over the year. At third place, the Cupertino, California-based company will have shipped about 5.8 percent of the market's computers for 2007, or just short of 4.1 milliion Macs.

On a worldwide basis, Apple once again did not gain enough marketshare to register in the top five, which have Dell, HP, Acer, Lenovo, and Toshiba occupying the leading spots.

Neither Gartner nor IDC has commented on the Mac maker's performance, though their figures reveal a strong PC market overall in which Apple had "another good quarter," according to Gartner.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[solipsism]

Way to go Dell! I would have though HP would be #1 by now.

[walshbj]

I thought the analysts were predicting a 2 million Mac quarter ?

[mbene12]

I have no idea how this can jibe with PiperJaffs estimates of 2.3 mil. He cant be that wrong. I checked and the stays on this article claim to include "mobiles" but I have to think these are just imac and mac pro numbers.

[Mr. H]

Originally Posted by mbene12

I have no idea how this can jibe with PiperJaffs estimates of 2.3 mil. He cant be that wrong. I checked and the stays on this article claim to include "mobiles" but I have to think these are just imac and mac pro numbers.

The just-over-1 million estimates are for the U.S. only. The over 2 million estimates are for total world-wide shipments.

[Beachin]

Originally Posted by mbene12

I have no idea how this can jibe with PiperJaffs estimates of 2.3 mil. He cant be that wrong. I checked and the stays on this article claim to include "mobiles" but I have to think these are just imac and mac pro numbers.

These are North America only numbers.

[mbene12]

well guess North American sales explains it somewhat. I am surprised that less than half of their unit sales are from the US. The vast majority of their retail is US. Guess they must clean up with their foreign Apple.com webstores.

[zunx]

Thanks for specifying US vs worldwide market share. That is important to know.

[anantksundaram]

The more I read about "market share" numbers, the more confused I get: are they talking about US or non-US or both; about this quarter/this year or cumulative (if so, for how many years); laptops or desktops or both; from this company or that; and so on.

These point estimates are FUD to the point of being completely meaningless. The only comparisons that make any sense at all are those over time, using the same methodology and definitions, from the same company.

[SpamSandwich]

AAPL is getting soundly bodyslammed today. Man, oh, man!

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

AAPL is getting soundly bodyslammed today. Man, oh, man!

Yeah, how bout that.
I was thinking that if I had $$ it would be nice to drop some on AAPL when it got down to the 170s. A bargain at that, I thought. So at 159 I guess it is a steal!

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

AAPL is getting soundly bodyslammed today. Man, oh, man!

Here are the 3-day -- i.e., day before, day of, and day after -- announcement effects for AAPL (after adjusting for the movement on the S&P):

2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.08%
2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -7.67%


The market is underwhelmed. We can hope that the market is wrong, but "man, oh, man" is right.

[icfireball]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Here are the 3-day -- i.e., day before, day of, and day after -- announcement effects for AAPL (after adjusting for the movement on the S&P):

2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.08%
2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -7.67%


The market is underwhelmed. We can hope that the market is wrong, but "man, oh, man" is right.

You can't really make this comparison. All stocks have just been dropping and dropping like crazy.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by walshbj

I thought the analysts were predicting a 2 million Mac quarter ?

This is US sales. Worldwide sales will be larger. They are also likely to be conservative.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Here are the 3-day -- i.e., day before, day of, and day after -- announcement effects for AAPL (after adjusting for the movement on the S&P):

2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.08%
2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -7.67%


The market is underwhelmed. We can hope that the market is wrong, but "man, oh, man" is right.

The market is down because of far greater issues than Apple. Apple may have gone down a few points on its own, but was pulled down by the mortgage crisis, the credit crunch, and the looming recession.

[nofear1az]

Yes, SJ's expo is not the reason AAPLs stock has been jumping ship. Since last Friday, the whole stock market has been affected by more mortgage companies dumping bad credit... i.e. Meryll Lynch, Citibank, Country Wide to name the few that have affected the stock market. Sorry to say, but recession is practically looking unavoidable to financial experts. And not to mention oil prices rising.

I am really happy to see Apple's market share rising... this is good news in all of this....YEH!
Keep up the innovation Apple.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by icfireball

You can't really make this comparison. All stocks have just been dropping and dropping like crazy.

Umm..... (with apologies to Wilco).... surely, you understand what I meant by "after adjusting for the movement on the S&P?"

Just in case you didn't (since I probably didn't state that well), here's the raw data for the 3-day excess return around 'Day 0', the day of SJ's speech (and, I hope you understand that SJ's speech has nothing whatsoever to do with the S&P, for heaven's sake; it is standard practice any such analysis to isolate a firm-specific -- in this case AAPL-specific - effect by subtracting from it the market movement; one can also get more complicated than this by adjusting for risk factors, but that would be unnecessary):

AAPL, 2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.11%
S&P500, 2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +0.03%
=> Net AAPL 2007 Excess return = +12.08%

AAPL, 2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -10.70%
S&P500, 2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -3.03%
=> Net AAPL 2008 Excess return = -7.07%

(If you'd like me to show you the same calculation with the Wilshire 5000 index instead of the S&P500, I'd be happy to: Let's just say that I'd bet a bottle of 2003 Chateau Petrus that the net announcement effect will be close to identical.)

[melgross]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Umm..... (with apologies to Wilco).... surely, you understand what I meant by "after adjusting for the S&P?"

Just in case you didn't, here's the raw data:

AAPL, 2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.11%
S&P500, 2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +0.03%
=> Net AAPL 2007 Excess return = +12.08%

AAPL, 2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -10.70%
S&P500, 2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -3.03%
=> Net AAPL 2008 Excess return = -7.07%

(If you'd like me to show you the same calculation with the Wilshire 5000 index instead of the S&P500, I'd be happy to: Let's just say that I'd bet a bottle of 2003 Chateau Petrus that the net announcement effect will be close to identical.)

You know that there's a lot of coincidence in the timing here.

There was pull to the upside for Apple's stock. But the tremendous drag of the market pulled it down. With Intel's good (great) sales and earnings report, the stock got dragged down for two reasons.

One was that they were expecting even better numbers. The recession possibilities has clouded the near future.

Apple is mostly a consumer company. Intel's drop will be reflected here as well.

Citicorp's 10 point slide because of its $10 billion loss pulled the market down with it, and Apple again followed.

With a credit crunch, and people losing their homes in large numbers, ther may not be as much to spend on secondary items such as Apple's products. Or the products of other consumer companies.

We'll see how Apple's sales and earnings look in a few days.

If they are in line with expectations, then that will be just barely ok, by todays standards.

But if they manage to beat expectations again, during a holiday season with disappointing sales, Apple's stock will do well.

I also think that the broad decline in the markets will level off in the next few days. Though what will happen afterwards is anyone's guess.

[anantksundaram]

Originally Posted by melgross

You know that there's a lot of coincidence in the timing here. etc etc

I edited my post quite a bit between the time you read it and I read your reply, since I realized that the problem may have been the way I was wording it.

May I please suggest you re-read. I think what I mean to say is clearer now. (Sorry - I guess I should have been more careful the first time I posted).

[melgross]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

I edited my post quite a bit between the time you read it and I read your reply, since I realized that the problem may have been the way I was wording it.

May I please suggest you re-read. I think what I mean to say is clearer now. (Sorry - I guess I should have been more careful the first time I posted).

I see where you're going with that. I'm not a strict "by the numbers" person. My broker is always hassling me about the "technicals".

[piot]

Full details are here:
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=584210

[mbene12]

There is definetely some conflict between these numbers and PiperJaffs.

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com...ce=yahoo_quote

PJ says 43% growth from last year (worldwide)

These numbers say 30%. I know they are US only but do you think foreign sales were up 50%? I dont know. Foreign revenue might be up by that much due to the anemic dollar, but unit sales are unlikely to be that much higher than US. Getting nervous about next Tuesdays numbers.

Have Gartner/IDCs numbers been historically accurate?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by piot

Full details are here:
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=584210

One should notice that these numbers include x86 based servers.

If one removes that from the mix, Apple's share would be higher. Dell and Hp each sell more than a million x86 based servers, while Apple sells just a few.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by mbene12

There is definetely some conflict between these numbers and PiperJaffs.

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com...ce=yahoo_quote

PJ says 43% growth from last year (worldwide)

These numbers say 30%. I know they are US only but do you think foreign sales were up 50%? I dont know. Foreign revenue might be up by that much due to the anemic dollar, but unit sales are unlikely to be that much higher than US. Getting nervous about next Tuesdays numbers.

Have Gartner/IDCs numbers been historically accurate?

They are just estimates. We have to wait for the real numbers.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Here are the 3-day -- i.e., day before, day of, and day after -- announcement effects for AAPL (after adjusting for the movement on the S&P):

2007 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: +12.08%
2008 MWSF Jobs' Keynote Speech: -7.67%


The market is underwhelmed. We can hope that the market is wrong, but "man, oh, man" is right.

My portfolio (although overweighted with AAPL) has dropped from +16% to just +9%. OMG... blah! The whole market is getting killed... I'll probably load up on more HPQ, and I'm really seriously looking at CMG (that one's a rocket).

[serrano]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

My portfolio (although overweighted with AAPL) has dropped from +16% to just +9%. OMG... blah! The whole market is getting killed... I'll probably load up on more HPQ, and I'm really seriously looking at CMG (that one's a rocket).

Got into AAPL a little late, eh?

[e1618978]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

My portfolio (although overweighted with AAPL) has dropped from +16% to just +9%. OMG... blah! The whole market is getting killed... I'll probably load up on more HPQ, and I'm really seriously looking at CMG (that one's a rocket).

it is just a burp - killed would be +16 to -40%

[running]

i did some Excel math (yes, i prefer excel) to see the future

well, if the market is going to rise in the same 7% and apple is going to rise with the same rate, as well as dell etc, apple will have 7.3% of the market in 2008, 8.7% in 2009 and 10.3% in 2010. Quite slow. First time, they will have 30%, is in 2016, very far future - and my counting system is probably wrong, because it tells me that in 2023 apple will sell more computers than sold on the whole market (104%). Well. Nothing is perfect

[melgross]

Originally Posted by running

i did some Excel math (yes, i prefer excel) to see the future

well, if the market is going to rise in the same 7% and apple is going to rise with the same rate, as well as dell etc, apple will have 7.3% of the market in 2008, 8.7% in 2009 and 10.3% in 2010. Quite slow. First time, they will have 30%, is in 2016, very far future - and my counting system is probably wrong, because it tells me that in 2023 apple will sell more computers than sold on the whole market (104%). Well. Nothing is perfect

I'm not sure I understand what you said.

You said that if the market is going to rise by 7% a year? And if Apple is going to rise by the same amount (I'm assuming that's what you meant by saying "...as well as Dell etc,).

You then say that Apple's marketshare will rise.

That doesn't follow.

Could you clear that up for me?

[running]

Originally Posted by melgross

I'm not sure I understand what you said.

You said that if the market is going to rise by 7% a year? And if Apple is going to rise by the same amount (I'm assuming that's what you meant by saying "...as well as Dell etc,).

You then say that Apple's marketshare will rise.

That doesn't follow.

Could you clear that up for me?

hehe..sorry, english is my 2nd language

well, i looked at the table in the article and i said to myself - whole market has grown 7% from 2006 to 2007, so I suggest it to rise 7% by every year (means *1,07). Then I looked on Apple - it has grown 36% from 06 to 07 and I suggested it would rise +36% every year, too (this means *1,36) - and this is, of course, what I did wrong, because it is impossible - because after few years (cca 20), the overall market numbers are smaller than only the apple part, so the apple has 104% of the market

ok, i am flooding this thread a little bit

[Mr. H]

Originally Posted by running

hehe..sorry, english is my 2nd language ]

Your English doesn't seem all that bad to me.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by serrano

Got into AAPL a little late, eh?

Not at all. AAPL is the only thing saving my bacon right now. I've been a proud AAPL owner for many years.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by e1618978

it is just a burp - killed would be +16 to -40%

Sure. It's just degrees of getting killed.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by running

hehe..sorry, english is my 2nd language

well, i looked at the table in the article and i said to myself - whole market has grown 7% from 2006 to 2007, so I suggest it to rise 7% by every year (means *1,07). Then I looked on Apple - it has grown 36% from 06 to 07 and I suggested it would rise +36% every year, too (this means *1,36) - and this is, of course, what I did wrong, because it is impossible - because after few years (cca 20), the overall market numbers are smaller than only the apple part, so the apple has 104% of the market

ok, i am flooding this thread a little bit

That's what I thought you meant, but I rather had you explain.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Sure. It's just degrees of getting killed.

Not unless you're forced to sell. Don't forget that two years ago it went to 86, and then dropped through most of the rest of the year. Then more recently, it was close to 200 but slipped to about 150. Now it was at 200, and has slipped to 160. The market dropped a lot today, but Apple remained steady. Let's hope it stays that way.

I recently bought more, with the money from my sale of Clearwire. I"m below that now (I bought at 171,63), but I'm confident it will surpass it.