or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple responds to Android sales, says NPD data doesn't tell whole story
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple responds to Android sales, says NPD data doesn't tell whole story - Page 5

post #161 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum

That;s easy! They had a goal of penetration into a market new to them... They miscalculated (screwed up) and overpriced their offering (the iPhone) to meet that goal.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

They did?

Then maybe you can explain why the iPhone's adoption rate was faster than any smartphone in history. And why it's still the #1 selling phone model 3 years after introduction.

Too bad you're looking at only one side of the equation. Without the AT&T exclusive, the iPhone might well not be where it is today. Apple's deal with AT&T meant that Apple gave some things up but got some things in return. Apple is very happy with the results (based on their quarterly earnings conference call). What do you know that Apple doesn't?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capnbob View Post

They didn't miscalculate. It's basic business. AT&T were unsure of the product and didn't feel like subsidizing a device that diluted its control, so Apple took "the risk" and passed it on to consumers to prove the product. It sold like relative hotcakes at $600 (1M in 74 days - as fast as the $200 subsidized Droid), case proved, then reduce the price after the early adopters have been milked and then sell it subsidized is phase 3 where sales really take off. It was a great business plan, brilliantly executed. The $100 voucher was worth it alone in free advertising plus most people put those things towards larger purchases of high margin Apple products.


Obviously, I don't have any insider details of the initial pricing of the iPhone, the initial ATT subsidy (if any), or negotiations between Apple and ATT.

But, I have been observing Apple and Steve Jobs since 1978... and they have certain patterns of behavior.

This is my speculation based on events and my observations.

1) First, consider that:

-- Apple was entering a marketplace totally new to them.
-- Apple's stated goal was to sell a certain % of the smart phone market in its 1st year-- 10 million iPhones
-- It took over 2 months to sell the 1st million phones
-- at that run rate, Apple would not meet its goal
-- Apple's scheduling, manufacturing, pricing, profits are dependent on meeting a planned run rate


2) It is very likely, that Apple wanted a very high price on the iPhone for several reasons:

-- Apple wanted he iPhone to have a "perceived value" as close to the real value as possible
-- SJ wanted to force the industry to start selling phones based on the value of the device, rather than being buried in a subsidized plan
-- Doing this would give Apple more control over their device and force other mfgrs, devices to compete on a level playing field (Apple's playing field).


3) Apple drastically reduced prices (33%) very early in the product cycle, then offered partial refunds to most early adopters:

-- These two moves are very un-Apple. Apple likes to set a price for a new device, maintain it for a year, then replace the device with a newer/better device at the same or slightly lower price... often continuing to offer the older device at a reduced price.
-- A drastic price reduction is usually used by Apple as a last resort, meant to goose sales, because the device is not meeting sales objectives
-- Apple, very seldom offers partial-refunds. This is, in effect, saying: "we screwed up and charged you too much"


If the above observations are (mostly) true-- and I suspect they are, Apple had to do something!

So, I believe, they reduced their prices, changed their pricing model to be more in line with the industry (carrier subsidy), and ate some crow by giving refunds.

This got them back on plan (run rate) and the rest is history.

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #162 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by babiasu View Post

Actually, iPhone 3GS 8G in Japan is free, with two year contract. It's about $53/month, unlimited data (actually the limit is 300G).


its all a trick
i prefer upfront pricing

nokia now offers 3 for 1 deals
which inflates their sales number's
but sadly it also fill's the landfills with toxic garbage phones that much faster
nokia should make a sturdy long lasting green phone .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #163 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post

Sad and true. We are all guilty of this short sightedness.
Just as an curiousity, I wonder how much more these goods would cost if assembled here.

Balanced trade is good thing... free trade(trade imbalances) there is always a winner and loser. We Americans are losing in long run, but appears good in short run. Sigh.

Free trade benefits both parties. The exact amount of benefit can vary but free trade is a positive outcome for both America and China in the long run.
post #164 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

What if you want to compare the number of phones sold with iPhone OS to the number of phones sold with Android OS?

It's not really all that hard.

Sure, you could make that comparison (if you could find the data). However, it's a meaningless comparison.

The biggest use for this data involves advertisers and whether it's worth developing an app for a given platform. For that decision, the relevant figure is how many devices use your application (unless it is an application that only has meaning for a cell phone). If that's what you're trying to decide, then you want to know the total number of devices using the OS - so you have to add in iPod Touch and iPad.

OTOH, if you're trying to evaluate the success of a phone, you evaluate the number of each model of phone being sold. You can compare whether Model A sells more than Model B and so on.

You might be interested in a company's market share - in which case you'd look at total phones sold by a company - regardless of which OS they run.

There just aren't that many scenarios where you'd want to know how many PHONES (as opposed to devices) run a given OS.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #165 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

Yes, I recognized that rather than enter into a lengthy discussion about the myriad reasons why NPD's data are very likely inaccurate and NPD's conclusions are completely wrong, Apple chose to highlight the indisputable opportunity the iPhone presents to developers as compared to Android, Blackberry, Symbian, Palm, WinMo, yada-yada-yada. For apps, App-le is still the market leader.

Please note that your opinion differs from Apple's. When given the opportunity to raise the point you feel is important, they passed and simply tried to change the subject instead.
post #166 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

GS are not bloodsuckers, they are in business to make a profit and there are few companies who do it better. It's easy to kick a company when they are being presented as a scapegoat by the government to gain political advantage to push through absurd, ineffectual financial regulations.

Has GS been promoting & sell securities that they knew were worthless, or not?

Quote:
Have you actually studied the regulations proposed? They are virtually meaningless. You have been played.

The new regulations are supposed to be meaningless. Politics has been a sham for decades, if not longer. That's one reason I don't like seeing people sling political, because it's mostly empty.
post #167 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Has GS been promoting sell securities that they knew were worthless, or not?

My favorite part of the whole fiasco was when GS was testifying in front of Congress and stated that they ONLY made $500 M on one particular group of troublesome trades, so it wasn't a big deal.

First, the concept that you can get away with something just because the numbers aren't large is appalling. Maybe by that logic, you can shoot someone as long as they're short.

More importantly, you have to wonder how isolated from reality these guys are when they consider $500,000,000 to be an insignificant amount of money. It's a HUGE amount of money for the customers they defrauded.

It's long past time for that industry to be cleaned up - REALLY cleaned up this time rather than just the window dressing that was done over the past few years.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #168 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Has GS been promoting & sell securities that they knew were worthless, or not?

Is that relevant or not? They make the point that the corporate clients on either side of the transactions were not seeking advice. The point of a bank is to be as a conduit between counterparties with different exposures and views. It's not the job of every bank to save people from their different views, who then cry wolf when it didn't work out how they expected.

It's entirely sensible that buyers and sellers and those in between take a different view about value. Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for.
post #169 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoebetech View Post

You mean to tell me that offshoring jobs (like the manufacturing jobs that help put the iphone together) is ethical for the American worker? hmmmm.

I suggest you learn a little more about ethics.

Nationalism for the sake of nationalism is unethical. We live in a global economy. To refuse to offer people in developing countries the opportunity to better themselves through employment because of some notion that we should "only support Americans" is highly unethical.

Selling our well-designed products to people in China is not unethical.

Hiring overseas workers (while demanding good working conditions) is highly ethical, in that it supports those workers' pursuit of a better life.
post #170 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post


It's entirely sensible that buyers and sellers and those in between take a different view about value. Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for.

Emphasis, mine... Got any citations to support that statement... other than Apple's goal to do business at the best profit, so they can create even greater products to change people's lives for the better?

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #171 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

Is that relevant or not?

It is off topic to this thread, doesn't apply to this thread, but I had a hard time just letting it slide.

Quote:
They make the point that the corporate clients on either side of the transactions were not seeking advice. The point of a bank is to be as a conduit between counterparties with different exposures and views. It's not the job of every bank to save people from their different views, who then cry wolf when it didn't work out how they expected.

It's entirely sensible that buyers and sellers and those in between take a different view about value. Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for.

Even if there wasn't specific advice, the accusation that they knowingly offered lemon securities and possibly even knowingly helping in such an activity is a concern to me. It sure sounds like fraud, and I don't see the problem in investigating it.
post #172 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Emphasis, mine... Got any citations to support that statement... other than Apple's goal to do business at the best profit, so they can create even greater products to change people's lives for the better?

.

The best way of determining the difference is through the operating margin. Here's the citation.
post #173 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Apple doesn't care about being number 1 in market share, or even number 2. They're not after market share for market share sake, or for bragging rights.

But Apple does care about establishing viable products - Apple's goal at iPhone launch was 1% or 10M units in its first full year. So they dropped the price, and then changed their sales model (to subsidy) to make that happen.

Apple also does care about number of iPhone OS units sold for the sake of the iPhone OS PLATFORM. There is a unit/share threshold below which very few will develop Apps and content for the platform. The Mac almost died because the number of units sold (or market share) was too small - moving to OS X and establishing Quicktime as part of MPEG-4 saved Apple.

Apple's carefully crafted PR response today was clearly directed to developers who might be concerned. So that's why Apple points to 85M iPhone and iPod touch - both are part of the same platform.

+++ QFT

I missed this post, earlier--- Very well reasoned and presented!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #174 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

It is off topic to this thread, doesn't apply to this thread, but I had a hard time just letting it slide.



Even if there wasn't specific advice, the accusation that they knowingly offered lemon securities and possibly even knowingly helping in such an activity is a concern to me. It sure sounds like fraud, and I don't see the problem in investigating it.

It's an accusation yes. But it all turns on what representations were made. If they represented something was black and it turned out to be white then obviously that's a problem. If they did not claim or were not asked for advice whether the securities were of value then it must be seen in that context.
post #175 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

When will Google or any developer release some data about sales and revenue data resulting from selling apps for Android phones? Especially to counter data showing that free apps are even more dominant in Android Market (when compared to App Store).

Why hasn't any such data been released yet?

Those are interesting questions!

Assumably, Google would want to publish as much positive info as they can, as often as possible... to encourage developers to develop for their platform.

OTOH, for developers already developing for the platform, silence is better:

-- if they're making a lot of money, don't encourage competitive developers
-- if they're losing money or breaking even, why tell anyone (and embarrass yourself in the process).

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #176 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules View Post

Hahahaha Apple wont do this, Apple doesn't reply to that...

If Apple's market share or sales start declining, Apple will do ***** anything.

They haven't had to yet. But the signs are a bit worrying in some areas though you have to admit - Android in the number 1 spot. 150000 is a pretty reasonable sample size if you ask me. I'd be happy with it.

I used to be an Apple fan, but my enthusiasm has waned a bit over the years, chiefly due to not so much to the products Apple produces, they are still amazing, but more due to the attitude Apple takes to its customers.

Oh, you must mean things like this:

Quote:
BusinessWeek: Apple Customer Service Leads Computers & Electronics Industry (Again)
Monday, February 22, 2010
By OP Editor
In the latest BusinessWeek customer service rankings, Apple received high scores for its customer service. Apple scored 3rd overall, way above its direct competitors. Apple customer service even scores higher than hospitality heavyweights such as Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton. Google, RIM, or Microsoft is nowhere to be seen on the top 25 list.


and this:

Quote:
Apple Customer Service Leads Computers & Electronics Industry

In the Computers & Electronics industry, Apple receives the highest score again. In 2010, Apple scored 1016 as opposed to Dell which received a score of 872.

Bloombergs NewsWeek on Apple: The companys sleek devices and user-friendly software arent its only innovations. Appointments at Apples (AAPL) Genius Bars and its roving in-store checkout clerks are just two ways the company has pioneered new approaches to customer service.

Apple improved from 20th place in last years study on the basis of strong improvement in the quality of staff category.

Not in Top 25 Customer Service Ranking

In the Computers & Electronics industry, no other companies besides Apple and Dell made it to the BusinssWeek 2010 top 25 customer service list.

Google (Android), Palm, Motorola (Droid), HTC (Nexus One), Research in Motion / RIM the producer of Blackberry, and Microsoft are not in the BusinessWeek 2010 top 25 customer service champs list.

from:

http://obamapacman.com/2010/02/busin...nics-industry/

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #177 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

It's not a question of whether cheap phones should be available or not. Cheap smartphones are here. they're not as good as the more expensive models, but people will buy them. Apple sells its one year old model, which is still better than most smartphones on the market, for $99 here in the States. If some companies abroad want to sell an iPhone for little, or nothing, and suck up the cost, that's their business too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

You say they are not as good as a more expensive model, but is the iPhone really worth five times more than them?

Yes! Obviously they are worth it to the millions of people who buy them!

Shouldn't those people who want to, have the choice to buy a "best of breed" product?

Or must we all settle for the devices you deem to be fairly priced?

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #178 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

The best way of determining the difference is through the operating margin. Here's the citation.

I know that Apple is the most profitable company in the industry... that should be their primary goal.

You seem to suggest that this is a bad thing, and that Apple should be satisfied with lower profits!

How much lower? 20%? 50%? 100%? 200%?

Should Apple strive to sell products at break-even, or a loss?

Or, should they do everything they can to grow and sustain a company that has changed millions of lives for the better?

Sheesh!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #179 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

We have cell manufacturers selling 50 models of phones. from the cheapest junk to high end smartphones. They sell a lot of phones, like Nokia. But like Nokia, most of those sales are of cheap, hardly profitable models. Their individual smartphones don't sell that many, but all together they sell a lot. Unfortunately, that makes for less profit.

...

The same thing it true for their computers. Have you seen how many models Dell and Hp have? Dozens! And each comes in as many as a dozen versions. That's one reason why their profits are so low for that. Apple has few computer models. R&D costs, again, can be lower, yet accomplish so much more.

So Apple sold 8.75 million phones last quarter. Almost all were of one model phone. How many different Android models, from how many different manufacturers did it take to sell the number of phones they sold? Quite a few.

So far less profits.

It will always be thus.



It sounds like you are saying that Apple' strategies are good to its shareholders, but bad for its consumers.
post #180 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman View Post

Without a doubt, Apple has changed the whole mobile market and loosened the grip of the carriers in controlling the user experience for the better and everyone benefits.

While I can see Android supplanting the iPhone OS in short order, I see Android to be more in the disposable budget category phone business, rather than the premium sector.

I think that the newest, most fully-featured, coolest, most capable new phones will all be Android OS.

And too there will be lost and lots of other categories of Android phones and other devices.

Including the vast majority of disposable, budget category phones, as you predict.
post #181 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Would you have Apple discontinue doing business in China? That way all those handling hazardous materials would lose their jobs & die of starvation... if you were Chinese: Which would you choose, Which is better... worse... unethical?

.

I first saw this question arise in the late 1970's, when some students wanted universities to divest South African stocks.

The same points were made then.

Another point to consider is that by removing oneself, one cannot work towards better conditions.

It is all far from black and white.
post #182 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

Free trade benefits both parties. The exact amount of benefit can vary but free trade is a positive outcome for both America and China in the long run.

Free trade may or may not benefit both parties.

It depends on many factors. For example, if one country uses slave labor, and their customers lose their industrial base while temporarily enjoying cheap imported goods, that is bad in the long run for the customer countries.

Same with cheap goods made so by lack of environmental laws. Or any number of other practices.

Free trade can be optimum. But it is not necessarily so.
post #183 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Sure, you could make that comparison (if you could find the data). However, it's a meaningless comparison.

The biggest use for this data involves advertisers and whether it's worth developing an app for a given platform.


There are an infinite number of uses of such data.

It is a relevant statistic for many purposes.

Other statistics are useful as well, for various purposes.

And you have no real basis for submitting that "the biggest use for this data" is...
post #184 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Sure, you could make that comparison (if you could find the data). However, it's a meaningless comparison.

It's meaningless because it blows a hole in your opinions.

I suppose we can now break down windows marketshare, you know, based on the different companies that produce machines that run windows. Because, you know, it's meaningless to compile the number of users running windows, win2000, xp, vista, and win7 as a whole because why would we want to know what microsoft's marketshare is.

totally meaningless
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #185 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

OTOH, for developers already developing for the platform, silence is better:

-- if they're making a lot of money, don't encourage competitive developers
-- if they're losing money or breaking even, why tell anyone (and embarrass yourself in the process).

.

Though on the Apple App Store side, several developers have spoken, some we're making money (or lots of money), and some not.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #186 of 226
.

I want to state a few facts about Steve Jobs.

Then, because he is considered "evil incarnate" by some, I'll try to add some perspective.


Steve Jobs:

• is 55 years old
• is recovering from a recent liver transplant
• at age 21, helped found Apple computer
• at age 24, became a multimillionaire
• has worked in, and been a leader of, an electronics industry for 34 years
• has had many successes and a few failures
• in 2009 was ranked the world's 136th richest man
• has a net worth of $5.5 Billion (2009)


I've met Steve, but don't really know him!

My wife Lucy and I worked in Steve's world (though not for Apple) for 11 of those years-- they were the most difficult and rewarding years of our lives.

We left Steve's world in 1989, totally burned out-- didn't really do anything computer-related for 5 years (kinda' missed that Internet thingie). *

* I do have a complete set of AOL Internet Beverage Coasters, er, CDs, that I'm thinking of puttin' on eBay-- think of it 20,000,000 free hours of AOL access

In 1989 we were comfortable financially, healthy, and after working for 33 years, we retired (I age 49, my wife 47).



I am satisfied with my life and decisions, but observing Steve, I have to ask some questions:

• Why does Steve do it?

• It can't be for the money, can it?

• It can't be for the fame, can it? "Steve Jobs" is probably a household word in most sections of the planet.

• Is it for the power-- most would say he has conquered a good share of his world?

• What about the glory-- winning almost every contest he enters?


Money, Fame, Power and Glory-- Steve has it all! What else is there?

Why is Steve still working?

The only thing I can think of is that Steve has an inner dissatisfaction with the way things are and an overriding compulsion to make them better.


From my perspective, Steve, thanks for the ride!

You've made my life better!

You've helped change the world!

I wish you well, and as an AAPL shareholder, I say screw the Bozos and keep on, keepin' on!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #187 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

I think that the newest, most fully-featured, coolest, most capable new phones will all be Android OS.

"Newest" depends on when during the year. In June/July, it'll be iPhone. In other months, it'll probably be Android.

"most fully-featured, coolest, most capable" depends on what you mean by that. If you mean the one with the longest list of features, and the highest number of megapixels, then you're right, it'll not be Apple. If you mean the phone with best overall and balanced user experience - with well thought-out and simple-to-use UI, most responsive, most accurate and just-the-right-sensitivity-to touch, and the best ecosystem connected to the phone, I'd tend to think it will still be Apple.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #188 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Free trade may or may not benefit both parties.

It depends on many factors. For example, if one country uses slave labor, and their customers lose their industrial base while temporarily enjoying cheap imported goods, that is bad in the long run for the customer countries.

Same with cheap goods made so by lack of environmental laws. Or any number of other practices.

Free trade can be optimum. But it is not necessarily so.

The problem with that is the assumption that it assumes that the country providing labor is happy to see exploitation. The reality is that - popular conspiracy theories aside - countries do want the best for their people. Working and environmental conditions vary of course but even the least democratic countries face severe civil unrest when workers don't have reasonable conditions.

As to the other point about trading an industrial base for temporary cheap imports there's two errors in that. First cheaper imports aren't temporary, they're enduring. If one exporter gets expensive, imports will be sourced at the next most competitive country. Second, there's a question about the importance of an industrial base as a goal. Where the industrial base compromises making product no one want and costs far more to produce than it should that base does nothing but harm the country.
post #189 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I know that Apple is the most profitable company in the industry... that should be their primary goal.

You seem to suggest that this is a bad thing, and that Apple should be satisfied with lower profits!

How much lower? 20%? 50%? 100%? 200%?

Should Apple strive to sell products at break-even, or a loss?

Or, should they do everything they can to grow and sustain a company that has changed millions of lives for the better?

Sheesh!

.

Not sure where you're getting the view that I said that, or if you meant to quote someone else. Of course I want them to grow!
post #190 of 226
For those who pay attention to such things, AAPL market cap is within $20 Billion, and change of MSFTs.

$ 237,553,086,150 AAPL

$ 258,026,962,620 MSFT

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #191 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrumble View Post

I

That I did not know. I wonder if any statisticians would care to comment on whether that can be considered to be a representative sample?


Just stop there. It doesn't matter. They could have the best methodology in the world and it wouldn't matter. 150,000 people in an online survey is a joke. You have to look at reported actual sales. Nothing else matters. Apple sold X number of phones, phones with Android sold Y number. That's really all there is too it.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #192 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

Not sure where you're getting the view that I said that, or if you meant to quote someone else. Of course I want them to grow!

Here's what I was trying to respond to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by benicey benice


It's entirely sensible that buyers and sellers and those in between take a different view about value. Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for.

Emphasis, mine... Got any citations to support that statement... other than Apple's goal to do business at the best profit, so they can create even greater products to change people's lives for the better?

Then you responded with a link to Apple's operating margins.

To which I responded that you seem to think that's a bad thing...

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #193 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Here's what I was trying to respond to:



Emphasis, mine... Got any citations to support that statement... other than Apple's goal to do business at the best profit, so they can create even greater products to change people's lives for the better?

Then you responded with a link to Apple's operating margins.

To which I responded that you seem to think that's a bad thing...

.

I didn't say their operating margins are bad. Their margins are excellent, the envy of the industry, and I applaud that in it's entirety. I can't make it any clearer than that.
post #194 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

"Newest" depends on when during the year. In June/July, it'll be iPhone. In other months, it'll probably be Android.

"most fully-featured, coolest, most capable" depends on what you mean by that. If you mean the one with the longest list of features, and the highest number of megapixels, then you're right, it'll not be Apple. If you mean the phone with best overall and balanced user experience - with well thought-out and simple-to-use UI, most responsive, most accurate and just-the-right-sensitivity-to touch, and the best ecosystem connected to the phone, I'd tend to think it will still be Apple.



Likely we're both correct. IMO, we are each saying different things.

I think that Android will appear on a range of devices, from a range of manufacturers, with a range of different foci. Many will hit their niche, and many people will like them a lot.

Apple will continue down the path that you describe, and will make a product in the way you describe, and many people will like them a lot.
post #195 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

The problem with that is the assumption that it assumes that the country providing labor is happy to see exploitation.


It is not an assumption. It is an example.
post #196 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

Second, there's a question about the importance of an industrial base as a goal. Where the industrial base compromises making product no one want and costs far more to produce than it should that base does nothing but harm the country.



What about wartime? It was our industrial base that allowed us to survive WWII.

Some things are more important than cheap consumer goods. Energy independence, for one.
post #197 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

It is not an assumption. It is an example.

Chernobyl is an example too but isn't all you need to know about nuclear power.
post #198 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

What about wartime? It was our industrial base that allowed us to survive WWII.

Some things are more important than cheap consumer goods. Energy independence, for one.

I agree with you. Countries with no industrial base and with very good living conditions must assume that there are other ways to survive.
post #199 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by benice View Post

I didn't say their operating margins are bad. Their margins are excellent, the envy of the industry, and I applaud that in it's entirety. I can't make it any clearer than that.


But, you also said: "Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for."


To me, that makes Apple appear to be greedy and/or Apple's customers too dumb to know better (a constant theme of trolls on this site).


How, else, is one to interpret your reason for posting that?


If you wanted to discuss margin as a positive, wouldn't it go something like this:

Apple is happy that their customers see such significant value in their computers that they are willing to pay a higher price for them. This allows Apple to make higher profits, which they reinvest to produce even better products!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #200 of 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

But, you also said: "Apple also has a view that their computers are worth much less than what they sell them to us for."


To me, that makes Apple appear to be greedy and/or Apple's customers too dumb to know better (a constant theme of trolls on this site).


How, else, is one to interpret your reason for posting that?


If you wanted to discuss margin as a positive, wouldn't it go something like this:

Apple is happy that their customers see such significant value in their computers that are willing to pay a higher price for them. This allows Apple to make higher profits, which they reinvest to produce even better products!

.

The way you've put it is clearer for your angle but I wasn't making a comment about margin as a positive (though of course it is). I was making a comment about the differences in value between any buyer/seller. In fact the point was in relation largely to things other than AAPL. In any transaction, the buyer values the item more than the seller. Its the same whether you sell me a book, or AAPL sells me a computer.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple responds to Android sales, says NPD data doesn't tell whole story