Samsung's recent momentum 'begs an answer from Apple,' Barclays says - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmark 


I don't understand your analogy. Apple has never did things that only worked 100% of the time. All the iDevices were panned when they were announced.

Apple cares about making the best products with the most profit. It doesn't play the market share game. It plays the profit share game.

Market share doesn't pay the bills. Look at HP and Dell.

You said, "Apple will never please anyone, so why try?"  I'm explaining to you why they should attempt to reach more customers by expanding into other markets.  

You're right that market share in an of itself doesn't pay bills, but when you have greater market share and good profit margins, your profit is greater than when you have good profit margins and less market share.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta 


Every analyst on the planet.

Next question?

I think you're misjudging their recommendations.  First, they're calling for a larger iPhone.  That larger iPhone would probably be even more expensive than the current iPhone because of a higher resolution screen and a larger battery.  Second, when they call for a less expensive model, they're almost always recommending it for markets outside the US where carrier subsidies are not as common.  I don't understand why you don't want Apple to market their products to a wider audience, either here in the US with a larger iPhone or overseas with a cheaper one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain J 

The issue is not Apple's profits, which are doing quite well. The long term issue is the market size for each ecosystem. If Android eventually takes the vast majority of the market, that will effect Apple in many ways, all of them bad. They cannot just sit on their laurels and hope for the best (not that I think they are).

Apple has never cared about gaining marketshare. If they did, Macs would be $500, iPads would be $200 tops and iPhones would be free

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaneur 


But you're misjudging their legitimacy. Your comment has not been well received because you seem to have accepted the validity of what these "analysts" say. They have no business "calling for" Apple to do anything, especially to follow Samsung's "lead."

If you divorce your point of view from that of these parasites—the poisonous parasites they have shown themselves to be recently—then maybe you could get your point under the door. Giving the "analysts" any respect at all, as a class, is to be on the wrong side of history. They will be marginalized into pariahs, as soon as "journalists" get the idea. They should never appear without "quote marks" here. "Analysts" indeed.

Frankly I don't care if anyone accepts my view or not.  It's typically contrary to the general sentiment here anyway.

That said, these analysts are not the morons so many here think them to be.  They have enormous resources backing their research because their analysis is used by the financial institutions to manage assets in massive portfolios.  These analysts specialize in particular industries and learn as much as they can from any source within the industry to make judgments about likely future performance of industry players.

Originally Posted by jungmark 
Yes but they never admit to being wrong. They say the product must not be ready or it is delayed.

Apple will expand its product line if and only if it can make a damn good product and have oodles of profit. It isn't going to make a cheap or 5" phone because Sammy does. 

Absolutely right. 

There will always be a fabricated hole. If Apple is stupid enough to make a 5" "phone", people will whine there's no 5.2" model.

Originally Posted by jungmark 
As I've said before, if there's a lot of money to be made, Apple will investigate it.

Yep!

If at all. Right on the mark.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta 


It has nothing to do with predicting the future. It is clearly a matter of them simply making something up and pretending it has a basis in reality.

We've been hearing for years that Apple has a TV already in production and will be shipping it in a matter of months. This is supposedly information from their alleged inside sources who claim to know that it's already underway. Or an iPhone mini that is already in production to ship next quarter. Or Apple has already reached a decision to switch to OLED (which supposedly happened years ago but apparently hasn't come true). Or predictions for years that Apple's NEXT MBA will be based on ARM.

If they had said "I don't know what's happening, but based on my knowledge of the market, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple does xyz", no one would be hard on them. Instead, they pretend inside knowledge and make their pronouncements claiming that something is a done deal and already in production - which turns out to be a complete fabrication.

That certainly would be better phrasing.  Perhaps that is the way they phrase their results.  Here on AI, I've never seen an actual report linked in the articles.  The authors seem to pick the most controversial points when they write articles referencing analysis of Apple and paraphrase the original report.

I'm and AAPL shareholder.

I call it another buying opportunity. :-)

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta 


True, but AAPL shareholders care - every time these analysts open their mouths, the stock falls some more. Even when their ramblings are consistently shown to be nonsense later, the damage has already been done. Everyone repeats these "Apple is doomed" stories. No one repeats the "never mind" stories.

There's usually a link to the original article (varies by AI author) if it is not behind a pay wall.

For the rest, Google works well, although it may take a few minutes depending on your skill and luck.

RE: 1. "Industry trends" — that's laughable. The industry trend in this space is what Apple did 3 or 4 years ago. Apple is an innovator, which means they create industry trends. Apple's competitors are "phone manufacturers," which makes them followers.

RE: 2. You are a quibbler of Olympic talent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakefinance 


1. They're not more knowledgeable about Apple's product plans, but may be more in touch with industry trends.
2. The recommendations are what they think financial managers should watch for, which implies they are the best for shareholders. If you subscribe to the belief that what's best for the shareholders the same as what's is best for the bottom line, then yes that's what they think is best for Apple. Is it actually best for Apple? Nobody can know until the results of Apple's decisions are seen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DESuserIGN 

RE: 1. "Industry trends" — that's laughable. The industry trend in this space is what Apple did 3 or 4 years ago. Apple is an innovator, which means they create industry trends. Apple's competitors are "phone manufacturers," which makes them followers.

RE: 2. You are a quibbler of Olympic talent.

RE: RE: 1. Apple hasn't done most of the things that Android phone manufacturers are doing with their phones.  I'm not saying that the iPhone isn't competitive or even that it's worse, but it's evident that Android phones are packing in new technologies and features that Apple hasn't yet touched.

RE: RE: 2. Thank you very much!  That's the compliment of a lifetime considering the quibbling on these forums.

Well, that's indeed true. There's no lack of quibbling talent representing a variety of viewpoints here at AI.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakefinance 

RE: RE: 2. Thank you very much!  That's the compliment of a lifetime considering the quibbling on these forums.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakefinance 

Frankly I don't care if anyone accepts my view or not.  It's typically contrary to the general sentiment here anyway.

 

That said, these analysts are not the morons so many here think them to be.  They have enormous resources backing their research because their analysis is used by the financial institutions to manage assets in massive portfolios.  These analysts specialize in particular industries and learn as much as they can from any source within the industry to make judgments about likely future performance of industry players.

Besides the analysts that you're defending, I can think of one other profession where they can be wrong 75% of the time and not get fired.....and consumers still come back---time and time again---for their advise.

Weather people.

My opinion? Anyone that takes advise from anyone in either profession.....is foolish.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmark 


The upgrades are evolutionary. They weren't going to stick with the original iPhone specs forever. If Apple waited to respond to what customers want, there be no iDevice in the first place. Apple is HW. Unless they license iOS at $300 a pop, they aren't going to do it.

Spec list warning! NFC? Check. Stylus? Check. Can run split screen apps? check, although only 20 are available. Have you ever bought a car based on a spec sheet?

You're getting there.  Why did Apple make these changes?  Were they made out of the goodness of management's hearts?  Were they made on a dare?  Apple made these changes because consumers demanded them.

Call it what you want, features are features, and the iPhone has fewer, so it's not fair to say that Android manufacturers are following Apple's lead.

Originally Posted by wakefinance 
Why did Apple make these changes? Apple made these changes because consumers demanded them.

Wait, what changes?

Mmm… I disagree with this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

Wait, what changes?

 

Mmm… I disagree with this.

The evolutionary changes as he called them.

I think there are ways that Apple has led too.  Don't worry Tallest!

Given the opportunity, people generally value usable capabilities that make sense and fit into their lives. This is the only "feature" they care about.

That's why Apple designs products that provide this sort value offering. They design for an optimum and valuable user experience, not for a list of "features."

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakefinance 

Call it what you want, features are features, and the iPhone has fewer, so it's not fair to say that Android manufacturers are following Apple's lead.

Dito! +5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaneur 


Consumers didn't demand in-plane switching, Retina screens, glass backs, aluminum unibody chassis, thinner and lighter, glass-to-film touch layers, machined phone cases—all these things that "analysts" (and maybe you) fail to see are the driving challenges that cause Apple's engineers and designers to do what they do. The company is motivated by urges for technical excellence that people who sit at desks and think about competition for market share don't understand. Or can't even see when they are pointed out to them.

This is why "analysts" get Apple so wrong so often, and why I personally think they are a doomed parasitic encrustation on the new kind of market system we find ourselves in. Apple is something they have never had to deal with before: a company that succeeds by a self-directed drive to "trip out" their customers with a good experience, to enrich people's lives with great products, in their words. Cynical old-market thinkers can't handle this level of sincerity. They think Apple plays by the old rules of competition and change for change's sake. Clearly Apple does not work this way.

Gruber links today to a discussion on this very point of Samsung's "innovation." Not to be missed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaneur 


Consumers didn't demand in-plane switching, Retina screens, glass backs, aluminum unibody chassis, thinner and lighter, glass-to-film touch layers, machined phone cases—all these things that "analysts" (and maybe you) fail to see are the driving challenges that cause Apple's engineers and designers to do what they do. The company is motivated by urges for technical excellence that people who sit at desks and think about competition for market share don't understand. Or can't even see when they are pointed out to them.

This is why "analysts" get Apple so wrong so often, and why I personally think they are a doomed parasitic encrustation on the new kind of market system we find ourselves in. Apple is something they have never had to deal with before: a company that succeeds by a self-directed drive to "trip out" their customers with a good experience, to enrich people's lives with great products, in their words. Cynical old-market thinkers can't handle this level of sincerity. They think Apple plays by the old rules of competition and change for change's sake. Clearly Apple does not work this way.

Gruber links today to a discussion on this very point of Samsung's "innovation." Not to be missed.

They don't have to demand IPS specifically to be demanding a better screen.  That Apple chose IPS for their Retina display shows that they take pride in their work.   I honestly don't think that Apple is self-motivated to evolve their products.  I think they take enormous pride in what they produce, but the goal has always been and will always be to make money.  If consumers weren't demanding that Apple add features and upgrade their components, then they wouldn't pay for new models.