He had his idiotogoly mixed-up the x-box and zune percentages.
P.S. Bill was the smart one, he made his exit in time so SB gets blame.
Anyone know the "growth" for MS Mobile"?
They had predicted 20 million licenses for the past financial year for MS, but sold just a bit over 18 million. They sold 11 million the year before. Pretty good growth, but not as good as they expected.
They get between $8 and $15, depending on the handset. So that's not a heck of a lot of money for the work they're putting into it, and since it's been around so long, it's just now really getting moving. But they had little competition before. Here in the States, mostly palm, with RIM moving slowly until recently.
Kind of a poor comparison if you ask me, considering that Apple launched the 3G iPhone while RIM didn't have any new product launches. I bet a lot of people were waiting (and if you're AT&T still are waiting) for the Bold, Storm, Pearl flip, etc.
I think this next quarter should be a much better reflection of who's winning the hearts of smart phone buyers between Apple and RIM.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
The flaw in your argument is...it doesn't matter if the handset it subsidized (given away or cheaper than from manufacturer). The fact it is SUBSIDIZED means the manufacturer gets their RRP (or close too) from the carrier, instead of the user of the phone.
The only difference between a unlocked phone and a subsidized phone is who bears the brunt of the handset cost. The REVENUE for the manufacturer remains the same in either case.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
The manufacturers DON'T supply any handsets for free. The manufacturer is paid for every single handset sold, either by the consumer or by the networks.
using their own numbers when they were claiming to be number 3 phone vendor on a revenue basis...$4.6B/6.9Mphones = $667 per phone sold on average. Pretty sweet. That has to be 50% or so margin.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
Free or subsidized has no impact on corporate revenues...That is handled by the mobile operators
Anyone else just a little bit concerned about the Mac growth rate?
20.7%
Previous 4 quarters.
42%
51%
44%
34%
I just like that warm fuzzy feeling when I hear "twice (or even three times) the PC growth"
Not at all. Netbooks are being counted in the unit sales and there was a fair amount of people waiting for the new Mac notebook updates before upgrading. In the end, what is important is the revenue and I think that Apple will still maintain it's revenue lead in the consumer market, and perhaps even garnish an overall increase.
I hate to be a stickler for facts, but this story is wrong, twice, in the opening paragraph.
First of all, RIM doesn't report in sync with calendar quarters. Its last report (released on the 25th Sept) covered the three months of June/July/August, not July/August/Sept (as Apple's does).
Second, RIM reported 6.1 million sales in its most-recent quarter. The 5.4 million figure which is cited here was for the previous quarter. To compare like with like, for the equivalent Apple quarter, it sold 717,000 iPhones, as supplies of the EDGE-based model were run down and demand dwindled in the run up to the 3G launch.
Not at all. Netbooks are being counted in the unit sales and there was a fair amount of people waiting for the new Mac notebook updates before upgrading. In the end, what is important is the revenue and I think that Apple will still maintain it's revenue lead in the consumer market, and perhaps even garnish an overall increase.
I understand that people waiting for new MacBooks will have slowed sales a little. But by that much? If Apple had had another 40 or even 50% growth quarter that would mean between 400K-600K more Macs. Not everyone knows about the rumours.
Netbooks will have helped the total PC figures. It shouldn't affect Mac sales.... unless people are buying them instead of Macs.
Revenue. Sure! But that unit growth of 20.7% is the lowest YoY growth Apple has recorded in FOUR YEARS. (except for two quarters at the start of the Intel transition).
I understand that people waiting for new MacBooks will have slowed sales a little. But by that much? If Apple had had another 40 or even 50% growth quarter that would mean between 400K-600K more Macs. Not everyone knows about the rumours.
Netbooks will have helped the total PC figures. It shouldn't affect Mac sales.... unless people are buying them instead of Macs.
Revenue. Sure! But that unit growth of 20.7% is the lowest YoY growth Apple has recorded in FOUR YEARS. (except for two quarters at the start of the Intel transition).
Is it a trend or a blip?
Mea culpa. My comment about netbooks is that their low cost is making non-Mac PCs have a higher growth rate than Macs. but I wasn't clear that this was pointing to your last sentence about comparing Mac growth to the PC growth.
It's iPhone compared with ALL Blackberry phones. Apple beat them by about 800,000 units. It's slightly misleading since it's June-Aug 30 for RIM vs. July-Sept 30 for Apple, so it's not exactly an Apples-to-Apples comparison (or even an Apples-to-Berries).
Agreed, it is not a fair comparison. Moreover, Apple had almost a full quarter to laud its fancy new iPhone 3G, whereas RIM relied mostly on older models (the Bold didn't come out until August, and the Storm didn't arrive until September), so its numbers reflect older models. Given this, Apple didn't trounce RIM as bad as some people think. Especially since a good chuck of Apple's figure represents "recycled" sales, in other words the fanbois who absolutely must have Apple's flashy updated product. I wouldn't expect these sales to be as good for their 4th quarter.
But, in phones, unlike computers, it's the revenue that counts more.
With computers, if you don't have credible marketshare, you won't get the software, or the hardware, which limits the growth of the platform, and can even kill it, we've seen it happen many times over the years.
But with phones, the organized manner in which the iPhone and its ecosystem has been developed has been masterful.
The really cheap software helps very much. It becomes an impulse buy.
The variety of free and cheap apps finally sold me on the purchase of the iPod touch. It's an unbeatable combination.
using their own numbers when they were claiming to be number 3 phone vendor on a revenue basis...$4.6B/6.9Mphones = $667 per phone sold on average. Pretty sweet. That has to be 50% or so margin.
We don't really know what (and Apple didn't really explain) the $4.6 billion number means --- i.e. does it include previously deferred iphone revenues?
AT&T's $900 million iphone subsidies for 2.4 million 3G iphones --- $375 per iphone. So with price at $200 and $300, the actual real price is $575 and $675. Take the average, the average selling price is $625.
We don't really know what (and Apple didn't really explain) the $4.6 billion number means --- i.e. does it include previously deferred iphone revenues?
AT&T's $900 million iphone subsidies for 2.4 million 3G iphones --- $375 per iphone. So with price at $200 and $300, the actual real price is $575 and $675. Take the average, the average selling price is $625.
That seems about right.
I can't find it now, but in J&R's ad in the NY Times the other day, another smartphone, it may have been a Nokia, I don't remember, was selling, unlocked, for $850.
but I wasn't clear that this was pointing to your last sentence about comparing Mac growth to the PC growth.
I was actually comparing this quarter's Mac growth to Apple's previous quarters. It's down. By quite a bit. No problem I will just have to survive on iPhone figures (for my warmth and fuzziness)... till january.
Comments
Ballmer is not a idiot, just a dumb presenter.
He had his idiotogoly mixed-up the x-box and zune percentages.
P.S. Bill was the smart one, he made his exit in time so SB gets blame.
Anyone know the "growth" for MS Mobile"?
They had predicted 20 million licenses for the past financial year for MS, but sold just a bit over 18 million. They sold 11 million the year before. Pretty good growth, but not as good as they expected.
http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/...ile_sales.html
They get between $8 and $15, depending on the handset. So that's not a heck of a lot of money for the work they're putting into it, and since it's been around so long, it's just now really getting moving. But they had little competition before. Here in the States, mostly palm, with RIM moving slowly until recently.
Ballmer is quite the genius.
Jazz hands!
I think this next quarter should be a much better reflection of who's winning the hearts of smart phone buyers between Apple and RIM.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
The flaw in your argument is...it doesn't matter if the handset it subsidized (given away or cheaper than from manufacturer). The fact it is SUBSIDIZED means the manufacturer gets their RRP (or close too) from the carrier, instead of the user of the phone.
The only difference between a unlocked phone and a subsidized phone is who bears the brunt of the handset cost. The REVENUE for the manufacturer remains the same in either case.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
The manufacturers DON'T supply any handsets for free. The manufacturer is paid for every single handset sold, either by the consumer or by the networks.
The important words there are "by revenue." Many of the other manufacturers trounce Apple in unit sales because their phones are very cheap or even free with contract.
Free or subsidized has no impact on corporate revenues...That is handled by the mobile operators
Free or subsidized has no impact on corporate revenues...That is handled by the mobile operators
It has an impact. The manufacturer is still being paid by the carrier for the agreed upon amount per handset, even if the cost to the consumer is nil.
It has an impact. The manufacturer is still being paid by the carrier for the agreed upon amount per handset, even if the cost to the consumer is nil.
I think that Wolfman is, kind of, agreeing with you.
I think that Wolfman is, kind of, agreeing with you.
Then good, because I agree with me.
20.7%
Previous 4 quarters.
42%
51%
44%
34%
I just like that warm fuzzy feeling when I hear "twice (or even three times) the PC growth"
Anyone else just a little bit concerned about the Mac growth rate?
20.7%
Previous 4 quarters.
42%
51%
44%
34%
I just like that warm fuzzy feeling when I hear "twice (or even three times) the PC growth"
Not at all. Netbooks are being counted in the unit sales and there was a fair amount of people waiting for the new Mac notebook updates before upgrading. In the end, what is important is the revenue and I think that Apple will still maintain it's revenue lead in the consumer market, and perhaps even garnish an overall increase.
First of all, RIM doesn't report in sync with calendar quarters. Its last report (released on the 25th Sept) covered the three months of June/July/August, not July/August/Sept (as Apple's does).
Second, RIM reported 6.1 million sales in its most-recent quarter. The 5.4 million figure which is cited here was for the previous quarter. To compare like with like, for the equivalent Apple quarter, it sold 717,000 iPhones, as supplies of the EDGE-based model were run down and demand dwindled in the run up to the 3G launch.
Not at all. Netbooks are being counted in the unit sales and there was a fair amount of people waiting for the new Mac notebook updates before upgrading. In the end, what is important is the revenue and I think that Apple will still maintain it's revenue lead in the consumer market, and perhaps even garnish an overall increase.
I understand that people waiting for new MacBooks will have slowed sales a little. But by that much? If Apple had had another 40 or even 50% growth quarter that would mean between 400K-600K more Macs. Not everyone knows about the rumours.
Netbooks will have helped the total PC figures. It shouldn't affect Mac sales.... unless people are buying them instead of Macs.
Revenue. Sure! But that unit growth of 20.7% is the lowest YoY growth Apple has recorded in FOUR YEARS. (except for two quarters at the start of the Intel transition).
Is it a trend or a blip?
I understand that people waiting for new MacBooks will have slowed sales a little. But by that much? If Apple had had another 40 or even 50% growth quarter that would mean between 400K-600K more Macs. Not everyone knows about the rumours.
Netbooks will have helped the total PC figures. It shouldn't affect Mac sales.... unless people are buying them instead of Macs.
Revenue. Sure! But that unit growth of 20.7% is the lowest YoY growth Apple has recorded in FOUR YEARS. (except for two quarters at the start of the Intel transition).
Is it a trend or a blip?
Mea culpa. My comment about netbooks is that their low cost is making non-Mac PCs have a higher growth rate than Macs. but I wasn't clear that this was pointing to your last sentence about comparing Mac growth to the PC growth.
It's iPhone compared with ALL Blackberry phones. Apple beat them by about 800,000 units. It's slightly misleading since it's June-Aug 30 for RIM vs. July-Sept 30 for Apple, so it's not exactly an Apples-to-Apples comparison (or even an Apples-to-Berries).
Agreed, it is not a fair comparison. Moreover, Apple had almost a full quarter to laud its fancy new iPhone 3G, whereas RIM relied mostly on older models (the Bold didn't come out until August, and the Storm didn't arrive until September), so its numbers reflect older models. Given this, Apple didn't trounce RIM as bad as some people think. Especially since a good chuck of Apple's figure represents "recycled" sales, in other words the fanbois who absolutely must have Apple's flashy updated product. I wouldn't expect these sales to be as good for their 4th quarter.
Yup!
But, in phones, unlike computers, it's the revenue that counts more.
With computers, if you don't have credible marketshare, you won't get the software, or the hardware, which limits the growth of the platform, and can even kill it, we've seen it happen many times over the years.
But with phones, the organized manner in which the iPhone and its ecosystem has been developed has been masterful.
The really cheap software helps very much. It becomes an impulse buy.
The variety of free and cheap apps finally sold me on the purchase of the iPod touch. It's an unbeatable combination.
using their own numbers when they were claiming to be number 3 phone vendor on a revenue basis...$4.6B/6.9Mphones = $667 per phone sold on average. Pretty sweet. That has to be 50% or so margin.
We don't really know what (and Apple didn't really explain) the $4.6 billion number means --- i.e. does it include previously deferred iphone revenues?
AT&T's $900 million iphone subsidies for 2.4 million 3G iphones --- $375 per iphone. So with price at $200 and $300, the actual real price is $575 and $675. Take the average, the average selling price is $625.
We don't really know what (and Apple didn't really explain) the $4.6 billion number means --- i.e. does it include previously deferred iphone revenues?
AT&T's $900 million iphone subsidies for 2.4 million 3G iphones --- $375 per iphone. So with price at $200 and $300, the actual real price is $575 and $675. Take the average, the average selling price is $625.
That seems about right.
I can't find it now, but in J&R's ad in the NY Times the other day, another smartphone, it may have been a Nokia, I don't remember, was selling, unlocked, for $850.
but I wasn't clear that this was pointing to your last sentence about comparing Mac growth to the PC growth.
I was actually comparing this quarter's Mac growth to Apple's previous quarters. It's down. By quite a bit. No problem I will just have to survive on iPhone figures (for my warmth and fuzziness)... till january.