or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › iPad sales reach 25M milestone, Apple on track for 8M+ this quarter
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPad sales reach 25M milestone, Apple on track for 8M+ this quarter

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
Apple this week revealed that iPad sales have reached 25 million in just 14 months, a sum that also suggests the company is on pace to exceed sales of 8 million touchscreen tablets this quarter.

Apple announced the milestone of 25 million iPad sales on Monday in its Worldwide Developers Conference keynote. The data point was picked up on by Wall Street analysts.

Brian White with Ticonderoga Securities noted that by the end of the March quarter, Apple had sold a total of 19.48 million iPads. The announcement of 25 million sold means that Apple has sold at least 5.52 million iPads in the first two months of the June quarter.

If sales were to continue at that pace, that would put Apple on track to sell 8.28 million iPads in the June quarter. That's a number well ahead of the 4.69 million iPads sold in the March quarter, suggesting Apple has managed to address its inventory issues with the hot-selling iPad 2.

Analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray put the numbers even more in perspective, determining that Apple is selling about 87,000 iPads per day in the June quarter, based on Apple's numbers. He expects Apple to sell around 8 million in the quarter, a number higher than the 7 million he had previously predicted.

Chris Whitmore with Deutsche Bank said investors on Wall Street have been looking for Apple to report sales of 7.5 million iPads in the current quarter, which concludes at the end of June. If Apple were to report sales higher than 8 million, it would exceed expectations.

Mark Moskowitz of J.P. Morgan Research took a slightly different view from his peers, suggesting that the implied sales of 5.5 million iPads so far in the quarter could create "controversy." He suggested the sales pace could mean Apple could fall short of "bullish investor expectations" of 7.5 million units or more.

While Moskowitz's offers a different take on the numbers, he also said he is not worried about the iPad data point provided by Apple on Monday, as "there is plenty of time in the quarter." J.P. Morgan has predicted sales of 6.75 million iPads in the June quarter.



The iPad first went on sale in the U.S. in early April of 2010. It took 28 days for the device to reach its first million sales, and the device's popularity has only accelerated as availability has improved and Apple has expanded to more markets.

The launch of the iPad 2 in March was even more successful, but Apple struggled to keep up with demand for the second-generation device. Apple Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook characterized his company's situation as "the mother of all backlogs" during his company's quarterly earnings conference call in April.
post #2 of 41
It is truly a runaway winner! Good for Apple. I don't see it's competitors coming close anytime soon. IOS 5 looks wonderful.

I really recommend watching the Keynote. It was fascinating to watch.

I for one will be making the iPad 2 my only computer. Along with my iPhone 4, I'm good to go!
post #3 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

I really recommend watching the Keynote. It was fascinating to watch.

I watched it last night and I agree with you.
post #4 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray put the numbers even more in perspective, determining that Apple is selling about 87,000 iPads per day.

That's 1 iPad per second!
post #5 of 41
It's times like this when I think back to the myriad of nay-sayers who droned on and on about how iPad wouldn't amount to much. Now every tablet out there is trying to emulate Apple's success.
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
iPad News, App Reviews, and More: iPadNewsUpdates.com
Reply
post #6 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElmCityWeb View Post

It's times like this when I think back to the myriad of nay-sayers who droned on and on about how iPad wouldn't amount to much. Now every tablet out there is trying to emulate Apple's success.

Somehow, I feel that they had a strong market research team and they (Jobs, etc.) knew it's going to be a success.
post #7 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStud View Post

That's 1 iPad per second!

We must be nerds, that is the same thought that popped into my head.
post #8 of 41
...and the new OS and cloud make a good argument for an iPad as your only computer. I know we couldn't do that in my household, but it is very close.

If Apple would have announced the iPad just a bit earlier I wouldn't have bought my MacBook, i know that. A mini acting as a server and doing the rare heavy lift job and iPads for each member of the family and we would be golden. Wouldn't cost much more than what we spent on our current setup, and both kids would have an iPad. Would have been much better.
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #9 of 41
There's still a 1-2 week wait in the online Apple store for the iPad 2, so even if the 8 million number is right, it's still well short of actual demand. Hopefully Apple and friends can ramp up production in time to meet holiday demand later in the year.
post #10 of 41
Apple urgently needs to split its share 1/10.
The Apple shares are today undervalued. Apple has a P/E about 16. But with the 50 billion they have in the bank, the P/E is just 9. If Apple matches its economical goal, they will have a P/E about 5-6 in September.

ARM for example have a P/E of 100.

Apple should have around 20-22 P/E. The shares should on simple economic fundamentals be 3-4 times higher then today.

(I really hope Apple starts to use its money. Build a couple of factories for manufacturing. Outsourcing is not good. How fun is it that Samsung produces A5/memory/NAND memory. One of the biggest competitors have blueprint of Apple stuff to copy it. Same with FoxConn. In the morning they produce Apple stuff. In the afternoon same fabric lines make pirate copies and competitors devices)

Buy ARM (10 billion) (for future CPU and today low end chips)
Buy AMD (7-8 billion) (for high end CPU/graphic chips)

start to licence Ios light to different telephone companies.
start to licence OSx light to Dell/HP.
post #11 of 41
Splitting shares doesn't change the P/E. (And Apple has a bit over $80 billion in the "bank")
post #12 of 41
As long as Apple can hit 7 million to 9 million iPads a quarter, that's good for now. Of course, Apple could easily be doing 5 million iPads a MONTH. But production is still ramping up.
post #13 of 41
That said, iOS 5 being untethered and so on, is going to just keep on driving iPhone and iPad adoption. iOS 5, iPad 2 and iPhone 4S will bring us strongly into 2012.

I just can't get the image of the emaciated Steve Jobs out of my mind though. iCloud is great, and they've finally made it free, alongside iOS 5 untethered. What more could we possibly WANT from Steve... Get well soon!
post #14 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

As long as Apple can hit 7 million to 9 million iPads a quarter, that's good for now. Of course, Apple could easily be doing 5 million iPads a MONTH. But production is still ramping up.

With iOS 5 and iPad 3 Apple will have to ramp up to 5 million a month... that's my guess.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #15 of 41
Hello haters! Remember all that crap you were talking back in 2009? Huh! Yeah now suck on them numbers.
I'll be getting my ipad 2 16 gig wifi only in a few months.
Hell yeah!!!!
post #16 of 41
You could look at this another way.

Nintendo have sole 147 million DS handhelds up till March 2011 (all models combined). Thats since its release in November 2004.

Apple have sold 200 million iOS devices, thats iphones, ipod touch and ipad models since June 2007.
post #17 of 41
go apple
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Apple urgently needs to split its share 1/10.
The Apple shares are today undervalued. Apple has a P/E about 16. But with the 50 billion they have in the bank, the P/E is just 9. If Apple matches its economical goal, they will have a P/E about 5-6 in September.

ARM for example have a P/E of 100.

Apple should have around 20-22 P/E. The shares should on simple economic fundamentals be 3-4 times higher then today.

.

I like the fact that the stock is undervalue, it makes it safe. I would rather have it move up on good quarterly results instead of moving up on "expected" growth. Apple is NOT a speculation bubble, so its safe to invest in.
post #19 of 41
I think iPad sales could eventually surpass iPhone sales just because they don't have the carrier bottleneck. Perhaps it'll happen in the holiday quarter (a Fall release for the iPhone 5, and a subsequent boost in sales, might make that difficult though).
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jj.yuan View Post

Somehow, I feel that they had a strong market research team and they (Jobs, etc.) knew it's going to be a success.

Apple rarely uses market research or focus groups.

They don't design by committee or sift through market research to find what will be popular.
post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElmCityWeb View Post

It's times like this when I think back to the myriad of nay-sayers who droned on and on about how iPad wouldn't amount to much. Now every tablet out there is trying to emulate Apple's success.

You would think that the nay-sayers have learned by now. They have too much egg on their faces to see the truth it appears.

1. The iPod would fail because it didn't support Ogg Vorbis.

2. The iPhone was to be an embarrassing mega failure that would drive Apple out of the market and into oblivion. I mean John Dvorak implored Apple to sell the iPhone to someone else before they were humiliated.

3. The iPad was just a big iPhone without the phone and nobody in their right mind would buy one.

What really makes the nay-sayers look incredibly stupid is that their only retort these days is that only stupid people and "sheeple" buy Apple products.
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I like the fact that the stock is undervalue, it makes it safe. I would rather have it move up on good quarterly results instead of moving up on "expected" growth. Apple is NOT a speculation bubble, so its safe to invest in.

No stock is ever "undervalued." It is valued every day by the markets (that being the entire purpose of the markets). And a compression of PE is not a good thing, it's a collective decision by investors to discount a company's future earnings, in essence to predict that the earnings growth rate will decline. This process can continue indefinitely. By no means does it make a stock more "safe."
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #23 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Apple urgently needs to split its share 1/10.
The Apple shares are today undervalued. Apple has a P/E about 16. But with the 50 billion they have in the bank, the P/E is just 9. If Apple matches its economical goal, they will have a P/E about 5-6 in September.

ARM for example have a P/E of 100.

Apple should have around 20-22 P/E. The shares should on simple economic fundamentals be 3-4 times higher then today.

(I really hope Apple starts to use its money. Build a couple of factories for manufacturing. Outsourcing is not good. How fun is it that Samsung produces A5/memory/NAND memory. One of the biggest competitors have blueprint of Apple stuff to copy it. Same with FoxConn. In the morning they produce Apple stuff. In the afternoon same fabric lines make pirate copies and competitors devices)

Buy ARM (10 billion) (for future CPU and today low end chips)
Buy AMD (7-8 billion) (for high end CPU/graphic chips)

start to licence Ios light to different telephone companies.
start to licence OSx light to Dell/HP.

Totally agree that APPL is wayyy under valued. But licensing OS X? No.

I agree on the manufacturing side of things as long as they don't get too ahead of themselves as Levis once did. It nearly killed them.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more rumors of a stock split. Historically (doubt it counts for much) there about due for one.

Any investors know what is holding the stock up? The floating around 330 is driving me nuts. ha
post #24 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by chabig View Post

Splitting shares doesn't change the P/E. (And Apple has a bit over $80 billion in the "bank")

The only difference it would make is psychological - many more people would want to buy Apple at $34 than at $340, even though the P/E would be the same.

The result of more buying interest could be that the stock goes up, thus raising the price and the P/E. Again, it's mostly psychological, but looking at the numbers and the trends, Apple stock price should be higher. The price hasn't kept up with Apple's growth rate.
post #25 of 41
Splits are snake oil. They cure nothing because they do nothing. A dividend would be far more meaningful.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

The only difference it would make is psychological - many more people would want to buy Apple at $34 than at $340, even though the P/E would be the same.

The result of more buying interest could be that the stock goes up, thus raising the price and the P/E. Again, it's mostly psychological, but looking at the numbers and the trends, Apple stock price should be higher. The price hasn't kept up with Apple's growth rate.

Nope.

AAPL has never been widely held by retail investors, even when it was cheap. Most of the outstanding shares are held by institutional investors.

The reason to split is to increase trade volume and volatility, which encourages institutions to trade more, whether it's fund managers (Vanguard, Fidelity, Legg Mason, whoever) or automated program trading.

That's a primary reason why Warren Buffett encouraged a 50-to-1 split of Berkshire-Hathaway's Class B shares (the other reason was to distribute ownership to Burlington Northern shareholders). With the BRK-B split, there was enough volume where Berkshire-Hathaway was finally invited to the S&P 500.

A stock split of AAPL isn't going to encourage your Aunt Millie to invest. It's all about the institutions.
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

The only difference it would make is psychological - many more people would want to buy Apple at $34 than at $340, even though the P/E would be the same.

The result of more buying interest could be that the stock goes up, thus raising the price and the P/E. Again, it's mostly psychological, but looking at the numbers and the trends, Apple stock price should be higher. The price hasn't kept up with Apple's growth rate.

More small time investors might purchase the stock but then you are headed into even heavier fluctuations. I don't mind a bit that AAPL appears out of the range of the retail crowd...
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

A stock split of AAPL isn't going to encourage your Aunt Millie to invest. It's all about the institutions.

I agree totally. Institutional investors drive trading and they don't care about splits.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

The only difference it would make is psychological - many more people would want to buy Apple at $34 than at $340, even though the P/E would be the same.

The result of more buying interest could be that the stock goes up, thus raising the price and the P/E. Again, it's mostly psychological, but looking at the numbers and the trends, Apple stock price should be higher. The price hasn't kept up with Apple's growth rate.

Exactly.

And when somebody says a stock is "undervalued," they mean that they believe it is worth more than its current price in the market. With respect to Apple's current pricing, I agree.

Of course it's all relative and it's all psychological, but compared to most other companies, the market seems to be judging it unfairly. Many (most?) investors are pretty dumb and/or uninformed, which is why so many of us on this site were able to make money on Apple stock. I bought when it was at $18 (and it later split), and I bought more when they announced the iPhone and many people were saying that Apple could never make a good phone. As it turns out, Apple was able to make a pretty good phone, and eventually people realized this and the stock went up. Until the truth is obvious to even the dumbest investors, their opinions will be factored into the share price. If the bulls are right and the bears are wrong, the stock is undervalued. If the bears are right and the bulls are wrong, the stock is overvalued. A stock split would probably make a psychological difference for some people, tipping the balance toward the bulls.

Maybe the institutional investors really don't care about share price--they don't seem to care about profits or growth, so I guess share price wouldn't interest them either.

A few months ago, I was looking at LVLT stock, and I mentioned it to a fellow investor who said to me, "It's only trading at $1/share, why don't you just buy some?" To me, the share price doesn't make a difference, so I didn't look at it that way, but it has more than doubled in the last few months, now I wish I had! I'm sure if I had told the same person that it was trading at $2,000 a share, they would not have been so enthusiastic.

There have also been a lot of articles about how Apple can't keep going up despite their continued aggressive revenue growth, because its valuation is so high already. It's kind of the same mentality. If Apple were raking in a trillion dollar per quarter, how much would it be worth?
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrogusto View Post

Exactly.

And when somebody says a stock is "undervalued," they mean that they believe it is worth more than its current price in the market. With respect to Apple's current pricing, I agree.

Of course it's all relative and it's all psychological, but compared to most other companies, the market seems to be judging it unfairly. Many (most?) investors are pretty dumb and/or uninformed, which is why so many of us on this site were able to make money on Apple stock. I bought when it was at $18 (and it later split), and I bought more when they announced the iPhone and many people were saying that Apple could never make a good phone. As it turns out, Apple was able to make a pretty good phone, and eventually people realized this and the stock went up. Until the truth is obvious to even the dumbest investors, their opinions will be factored into the share price. If the bulls are right and the bears are wrong, the stock is overvalued. If the bears are right and the bulls are wrong, the stock is overvalued. A stock split would probably make a psychological difference for some people, tipping the balance toward the bulls.

A few months ago, I was looking at LVLT stock, and I mentioned it to a fellow investor who said to me, "It's only trading at $1/share, why don't you just buy some?" To me, the share price doesn't make a difference, so I didn't look at it that way, but it has more than doubled in the last few months, now I wish I had! I'm sure if I had told the same person that it was trading at $2,000 a share, they would not have been so enthusiastic.

There have also been a lot of articles about how Apple can't keep going up despite their continued aggressive revenue growth, because its valuation is so high already. It's kind of the same mentality. If Apple were raking in a trillion dollar per quarter, how much would it be worth?

AAPL's valuation isn't high, it's very low.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #31 of 41
...what the figures would be if Apple could clear out the backorders at their resellers.
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

You would think that the nay-sayers have learned by now. They have too much egg on their faces to see the truth it appears.

1. The iPod would fail because it didn't support Ogg Vorbis.

2. The iPhone was to be an embarrassing mega failure that would drive Apple out of the market and into oblivion. I mean John Dvorak implored Apple to sell the iPhone to someone else before they were humiliated.

3. The iPad was just a big iPhone without the phone and nobody in their right mind would buy one.

What really makes the nay-sayers look incredibly stupid is that their only retort these days is that only stupid people and "sheeple" buy Apple products.

The best way to make the nay-sayers deflate is to ignore them. I am ecstatic about Apple's good fortunes, but don't need to rub others about it. Facts, quality products and revenue speak for themselves, and by gloating over Apple's recent successes you only play the nay-sayers' own game. only my 2 cents ofc.
post #33 of 41
In other news Blackberry Playbook is on track to sell 10 unit..9 have been already returned..

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylove22 View Post

In other news Blackberry Playbook is on track to sell 10 unit..9 have been already returned..

You know things are likely grim in Playbook land when the ad they're running is literally shouting "FLASH!" over and over (ala Queen's theme for the old Flash Gordon movie). And that's pretty much all it is, so after a while it starts to seem vaguely insane. It goes on long enough to give you plenty of time to think "OK, and what else. No really, anything else. OK this is actually getting kind of annoying. HOLY SHIT SHUT UP!"

They even manage to make you think of the iPad by saying "we've got FLASH, unlike some people we could name", which reduces the entire spot to something between a school yard taunt and a desperate cry for help.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrogusto View Post

Exactly.

A few months ago, I was looking at LVLT stock, and I mentioned it to a fellow investor who said to me, "It's only trading at $1/share, why don't you just buy some?" To me, the share price doesn't make a difference, so I didn't look at it that way, but it has more than doubled in the last few months, now I wish I had! I'm sure if I had told the same person that it was trading at $2,000 a share, they would not have been so enthusiastic.

As a happy purchaser of LVLT at 0.96, I would say the opposite was true for me. Penny stocks are generally too scary, but that was too hard to pass up. At $200 per share (constant market cap), or $2,000, the strategy would just shift to deep-in-the-money calls.

AAPL is at the same point for me; I like managing blocks of 1-2% of my portfolio so I have a little more sense of liquidity. That forces me into options as 100 shares is $34k now. Most investors don't go that high...
post #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

They even manage to make you think of the iPad by saying "we've got FLASH, unlike some people we could name", which reduces the entire spot to something between a school yard taunt and a desperate cry for help.

You got it half right. There isn't a taunt in there...
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I like the fact that the stock is undervalue, it makes it safe. I would rather have it move up on good quarterly results instead of moving up on "expected" growth. Apple is NOT a speculation bubble, so its safe to invest in.

aapl could it 445 a share and still be cheap
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

No stock is ever "undervalued." It is valued every day by the markets (that being the entire purpose of the markets). And a compression of PE is not a good thing, it's a collective decision by investors to discount a company's future earnings, in essence to predict that the earnings growth rate will decline. This process can continue indefinitely. By no means does it make a stock more "safe."

True enough Doc. But despite what you say, the markets very often get the valuation wrong. As Bernard Baruch said, "I made my money by selling too soon." He could also say he made it by buying too soon. In the first case it's fair to say the stock was overvalued by the market, and in the second that it was undervalued. But it's all a matter of perspective.
post #39 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

True enough Doc. But despite what you say, the markets very often get the valuation wrong. As Bernard Baruch said, "I made my money by selling too soon." He could also say he made it by buying too soon. In the first case it's fair to say the stock was overvalued by the market, and in the second that it was undervalued. But it's all a matter of perspective.

They get it differently from what we may think valuations should be, which isn't the same thing as wrong. Baruch is only saying that you can guess what the market is going to do rightly or wrongly.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Apple urgently needs to split its share 1/10.
(I really hope Apple starts to use its money. Build a couple of factories for manufacturing. Outsourcing is not good. How fun is it that Samsung produces A5/memory/NAND memory. One of the biggest competitors have blueprint of Apple stuff to copy it. Same with FoxConn. In the morning they produce Apple stuff. In the afternoon same fabric lines make pirate copies and competitors devices)

Wrong on so many levels. There is no point Apple trying to manufacture commodity products like Flash, or RAM or LCD panels, the margins are lower than on their business and the required volumes to make a profit are huge. As for Foxconn, the facilities that are used to build iStuff are dedicated to Apple. Samsung might have a production line at the same campus, but it would be in separate facilities and they two would be kept very isolated. Partners like Foxconn are a big part of what has allowed Apple to produce so many amazing products in such a short space of time.

Quote:
Buy ARM (10 billion) (for future CPU and today low end chips)
Buy AMD (7-8 billion) (for high end CPU/graphic chips)

Again terrible ideas. Vertical integration doesn't work, DEC kinda proved that. Suppose Apple bought ARM and AMD, and then Intel produced the best chip in 2014. Either Apple would run down its own chip business or it would put out substandard products. Instead Apple is licensing the ARM core and adding value to it. If Intel or AMD or MIPS or another firm produced a chip far and away better, Apple could switch to licensing that core instead.

Quote:
start to licence Ios light to different telephone companies.

Because what the world needs is more phones designed by carriers.

Quote:
start to licence OSx light to Dell/HP.

Because what Apple really needs to do is cannibalize its own (fantastic) margins without notably increasing market penetration? They did this once and it nearly killed the company - it will happen again over Jobs' dead body.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • iPad sales reach 25M milestone, Apple on track for 8M+ this quarter
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › iPad sales reach 25M milestone, Apple on track for 8M+ this quarter