or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung Electronics profits grow 42% on strength of smartphone sales
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung Electronics profits grow 42% on strength of smartphone sales

post #1 of 63
Thread Starter 
Driven by its profitable smartphone division, Samsung saw its net profit grow 42 percent year over year in the just-concluded March quarter, the company reported on Friday.

Sales for the quarter were up 17 percent to 52.9 trillion won, while net profit grew 42 percent to 7.2 trillion won, or $6.5 billion. Nearly three-quarters of Samsung's profits came from its division responsible for smartphones, tablets, personal computers and cameras, according to The New York Times.

Galaxy S4
The Galaxy S4 will go on sale this Saturday. Source: Samsung


Samsung's success marked the sixth consecutive quarter in which the South Korean electronics maker has seen profit growth. The boost also came before the company is set to launch its next-generation flagship smartphone, the Galaxy S4.

Because Samsung does not break out its smartphone sales, it's impossible to compare exactly how many high-end handsets the company shipped in comparison to Apple's iPhone. But newly released data from IDC estimates that Samsung shipped 70.7 million total smartphones in the first quarter of calendar 2013, giving it control of 32.7 percent of the market.

In comparison, Apple revealed during its own quarterly earnings report this week that it sold 37.4 million iPhones during the March quarter. While iPhone sales were up year over year, Apple saw its profits fall for the first time in a decade, easing 18 percent due to lower margins on the iPhone and iPad when compared to 2012.

Samsung is expected to see a sales boost this quarter with the launch of the Galaxy S4, though the company has seen some apparent production issues that led to delayed debuts at U.S. carriers Sprint and T-Mobile. Apple is not expected to introduce its next-generation iPhone until this fall, about a year after the launch of the iPhone 5.
post #2 of 63

Can't really digest the good news for fandroids.

09 - the most interesting puzzle on AppStore

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/09/id854675423?mt=8

Reply

09 - the most interesting puzzle on AppStore

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/09/id854675423?mt=8

Reply
post #3 of 63
Hmm...did I stumble on to SamsungInsider.com? 1oyvey.gif
post #4 of 63
I believe many Chinese brand android driven smartphones profit growth is much more than Samsung . Why ? From 100k to 200k unit . 100% profit growth . that is what the market likes .
post #5 of 63
With all the lying, subterfuge and dirty handed tricks that Samsung has pulled so far, how do we know this news is even true? From what I've been reading, they're a privately held, family-owned company with a vendetta against Apple.

The other thing that annoys me about articles that compare Samsung's market share to Apple, is that they don't mention that Samsung had been making and selling cell phones—including "smart" phones—way longer than Apple. In light of that, Apple's share of the smart phone market should be treated with far more respect!
post #6 of 63
Associated Press is being paid off by Samsung to run sponsored tweets. This story originated with the AP and was picked up by every major and minor news outlet and aggregator. The fact is, it is a by-product of Samsung's campaign to smear Apple!
post #7 of 63
I think in the near future , Shamesung will face the same in 1-2 years due to its profit is too big to grow.
post #8 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengregg View Post

With all the lying, subterfuge and dirty handed tricks that Samsung has pulled so far, how do we know this news is even true? From what I've been reading, they're a privately held, family-owned company with a vendetta against Apple.

The other thing that annoys me about articles that compare Samsung's market share to Apple, is that they don't mention that Samsung had been making and selling cell phones—including "smart" phones—way longer than Apple. In light of that, Apple's share of the smart phone market should be treated with far more respect!

Are they a privately held company?

post #9 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInvestor View Post

Associated Press is being paid off by Samsung to run sponsored tweets. This story originated with the AP and was picked up by every major and minor news outlet and aggregator. The fact is, it is a by-product of Samsung's campaign to smear Apple!

This is a quarterly report, not a sponsored tweet or a "story".

post #10 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Hmm...did I stumble on to SamsungInsider.com? 1oyvey.gif

 

AI posts article mocking Samsung or calling them dirty:

 

Haha, look at those Samsung losers. They're a bunch of lying thieves; let's all gather around the fire and torch them in the comment section

 

AI posts article pointing out good news for Samsung:

 

Did I stumble on to SamsingInsider.com?

post #11 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengregg View Post

With all the lying, subterfuge and dirty handed tricks that Samsung has pulled so far, how do we know this news is even true? From what I've been reading, they're a privately held, family-owned company with a vendetta against Apple.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Are they a privately held company?

 

Samsung Group the conglomerate is private. Many of the subsidiaries are publicly traded companies. The most obvious is Samsung Electronics (being discussed here) which encompasses most of the consumer facing elements of Samsung. Samsung Electronics trades on the Korean exchange as well as ADR in London. There's been chatter about bringing it to the NASDAQ on and off in recent years. Samsung Life (Insurance), Engineering, Techwin, and Heavy Industries are also all public separately.

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #12 of 63
Less stories about Samsung would be an improvement.

They're giving me Boredom Cancer.
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #13 of 63
I like Samsung...they make a nice plasma screen TV and bluray player. As for computer products and phones...I tried them and was not impressed. Their Note tablets felt jerky and the screens fuzzy...the Galaxy phone feels plasticky and cheap.I love my iMac, iTunes, AppleTV, my iPhone 5 and my retina screen iPad and nothing Samsung (or any other Android based product)has done recently has changed my mind on that. Apple will continue to show innovation and quality in future products, while Samsung will continue to try to flood the market with cheaper options. Both companies are extremely good at what they do!
post #14 of 63

Not to hijack this thread, but why hasn't AI put up the story about Microsoft's win over Motorola? This is, by far, the biggest news so far this year. Motorola learned the hard way that you can't abuse SEP's. And it's relevant because Motorola was previously demanding the same extortionist royalties from Apple, so this win by MS is a big win for Apple and all tech companies.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #15 of 63
Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.

The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.

The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.

I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.

There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?
post #16 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessagePad2100 View Post

Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?

Pure Gold!

I love it!
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
If you're going to be original, then you can count on being copied.
Reply
post #17 of 63

Keep in mind there was no iPhone release in China et al this year compared with same quarter last year. That launch, in 1 weekend sold 2 million iPhones in China alone, not to mention the next 2 weeks of stock-outs. 

post #18 of 63
Strangely, the only information about Samsung's financial performance I can actually see on their website is their canned press release. Any other page I have attempted to review has timed out despite my having attempted multiple "tricks."
post #19 of 63

Samsung is doomed.

post #20 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by iObserve View Post

Keep in mind there was no iPhone release in China et al this year compared with same quarter last year. That launch, in 1 weekend sold 2 million iPhones in China alone, not to mention the next 2 weeks of stock-outs. 

Not to mention that the majority of iPhones in China are "stuck" on 2G.


I will state it again for the record. Apple doesn't need an inexpensive iPhone, Apple needs an iPhone that supports China Mobile on 3G (TD-SCDMA) or even 4G (TD-LTE). As soon as Apple releases an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility on China Mobile, sales will skyrocket in China. Then, one year later as the price is dropped and a new iPhone introduced more people will be able to afford an iPhone with TD-LTE compatibility.
post #21 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Hmm...did I stumble on to SamsungInsider.com? 1oyvey.gif

The article is flame bait. Moving on.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #22 of 63

Screw Samsung.

post #23 of 63
Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ
post #24 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessagePad2100 View Post

Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.

The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.

The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.

I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.

There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?

someone on my family plan has one. nice phone, but i'll stick with iphone 5

 

the plastic is more durable than the iphone 5 but the features are gimicky. the widgets rarely work right and i hate the GUI split of 7 home screens and an app drawer 

post #25 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtonrj View Post

Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ

Apple also counts revenue from "shipments into the channel" as several others here have noted. I've no idea how the story about Apple only counting sales as devices sold to an end-user ever got started, but apparently there's a lot of people who mistakenly believe that.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #26 of 63

Conspiracy, I Say!

post #27 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

Strangely, the only information about Samsung's financial performance I can actually see on their website is their canned press release. Any other page I have attempted to review has timed out despite my having attempted multiple "tricks."

I guess it's you and a few other millions trying to access that page.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 63
Oh boy, this thread isn't going to end well.
post #29 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple also counts revenue from "shipments into the channel" as several others here have noted. I've no idea how the story about Apple only counting sales as devices sold to an end-user ever got started, but apparently there's a lot of people who mistakenly believe that.
a
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.
post #30 of 63
Dear Apple, 
 
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
 
Say 1920x1080 resolution.  Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5"  but to be around 4.8" would be nice. 
 
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely. 
 
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of  an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet. 
 
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end)  isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs. 
 
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007. 
post #31 of 63
Originally Posted by dig48109 View Post
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007. 

 

Rules #4 & 5.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #32 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post


a
Not true. Apple acknowleges how many phones are in the channel because inventory factors into their costs and shows availability of supply. On more than one occasion both Cook and Jobs before him explained the difference.

Of course it's true. It's such an old and rehashed discussion it's not even worthy of disagreement anymore. Apple's reported sales each quarter include "channel sales", shipments made to retailers and other resellers but not yet sold to an end-user. That Apple will also estimate the existing channel inventory each quarter doesn't change a thing about how Apple officially counts sales, which include channel shipments. That you would say it's not true speaks directly to my comment about some people erroneously believing Apple's reported sales numbers are only to end-users.

 

Yes it would be interesting to some of us to get channel inventory numbers from other vendors too, as well as returns/refurbs if they really want to be transparent. Apple gets props for reporting estimated channel numbers where others do not.

 

I don't know that anyone reports the number of devices returned do they, nor break out the revenue/numbers from refurbished sales? I think that would give a hint to the return and failure rates, an area where I suspect Apple also shines compared to others but lacking proof to claim it as a fact.


Edited by Gatorguy - 4/26/13 at 11:03am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #33 of 63
Because Samsung does not break out its smartphone sales, it's impossible to compare exactly how many high-end handsets the company shipped in comparison to Apple's iPhone.

 

But soon we'll know exactly how many Apple A7 chips Samsung *didn't* make for Apple.

And how many iPod touch, iPhone, and iPad touchscreen panels Samsung *didn't* make.

Billions cut off to Samsung, billions going to TSMC, Sharp, etc.

 

"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."

- Senator Everett Dirksen

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #34 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessagePad2100 View Post

Has anyone actually used a Galaxy? My friends have them, and like them because they were cheap on contract and it's easy to replace them - because they fail a couple of times during a contract.

The OS is still inconsistent, choppy, kludgy, and basically cheap. There's a lot of the little things I take for granted on iOS are not in Android. Things like how after every web search the page looks like it's done rendering, you press a link, and then the page stutters and finally finishes rendering. Then you end up hitting the wrong link.

The hardware is creaky and cheap too, which is why my friends replace them every 6 - 9 months. Battery life is garbage. Camera sucks if conditions aren't perfect.

I'm not here to just focus on the suckage of Android or anything. I'm just curious how Samsung does so well when their solutions aren't that great. I mean at least Nokia and HTC have decent hardware.

There are a lot of first time buyers entering the market. Maybe it's just a case of Android being training wheels for iOS?

 

This is just such crock!  You may well prefer iPhones, but you can't just make up facts to rubbish competitors! 

 

I have been using the Galaxy line now for close to 3 years.  The original Galaxy S for 2+ years and now the S3 for just under a year.  The Galaxy S phones cost just as much as the iPhone on contract.  They don't keep failing every 6 months.  They are made of plastic, and I have no problem with that since it doesn't break or "creak".  The S3's back is very slippery and for the first time, I had to get a case for an Android phone. 

 

Battery life on the Vibrant was rather poor, but since it's replaceable, it's not a problem.  When I got the S3, I got 3 extra batteries and an external charger for $10 on ebay.  As it turned out, the S3 battery lasts me for the whole day, so I rarely use my extra batteries.  But every once in a while if I don't keep the phone for charging overnight, by next morning, my battery has dropped down to the 20s.  So I simply replace the battery.  BTW, I always have the display at maximum brightness, my GPS enabled, background syncing enabled, 4G enabled etc. There's not much point in having a smartphone if I have to turn everything off and not get Google Now notification for example. 

 

There is nothing wrong with the camera either for what it is - a smartphone camera.  Great for casual photography.  I'm an amateur photographer and don't even use a P&S, let alone a smartphone camera for any serious photography.  I look at smartphone camera photos and they all look awful to me.  Either lacking in detail, highlights clipped, over sharpened in software, purple fringes, too much noise in low light conditions.  And that's fine.  With a small sensor, there's only so much you can do.  It's great for taking casual photos and casual sharing on the phone.  And nothing wrong with that, but let's not get carried over.

post #35 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by dig48109 View Post

Dear Apple, 
 
Can we stop making fun of phablets and seriously consider making profitable high end phones with larger screens?
 
Say 1920x1080 resolution.  Next iPhone screen to be at least 4.5"  but to be around 4.8" would be nice. 
 
A bigger one for those who like phablets at least 5.5", but around 5.8" also same resolution at 1920x1080. Look the Galaxy Note and Note II are very profitable. You're missing that market completely. 
 
As iPhone 5 (as of X'mas 2012) owner traveling to Asia this Jan 2013, I got screen size envy when seeing bigger screens. Love the iTunes App ecosystem, but 4" screen wasn't enough of  an upgrade. Not interested in a low end iPhone, which isn't as profitable. If Apple wants to beat its profit margin and help its stock. Make a bigger screen in addition to a phablet. 
 
Make two (high end) or even three phones (two high end and one low end)  isn't spreading one self too thin (unlike HTC does with too many phones). Offering only one type of upgrade phone per year isn't enough for a company of your size. There is no Goldilocks size phone. Instead the market is the three bears which your competitor seems to be satisfying their needs. 
 
Sincerely iPhone 5 owner (previously iPhone 4 , prior to that iPhone3G owner) . Apple stock holder since 2007. 

 

Dear dig48109,

 

the top selling smartphones have screens the same size as the iPhone 4, 4S and 5, because they ARE the top selling smartphones.

 

Sincerely Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, Ford Falcon, Bosch Refrigerator, Blanco stove, X-Box and approximately 42 rolls of Kirkland bath tissue owner.

A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #36 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtonrj View Post

Remember that as this revenue is reported, Samsung is about to release a new device, GS4. They also claim revenue on SHIPMENT into the channel not sales as APPL does. Front loading the channel is good for revenue reporting. -RJ

 

This is getting old.  It was okay (and perfectly valid) to question shipping numbers vs sold numbers when they first started.  But the products are not exactly going into a bit bucket.  Resellers are not going to keep ordering new stock if they haven't finished moving earlier stock.  Also, it is quite impressive that the quarter before a major release, in which iPhones do poorly due to anticipation of the new model, Samsung has record profits.  I expect this speaks to both the possible presence of ill-informed customers and to the advantage of having a breadth of products that appeal to a wide ranging people.

post #37 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInvestor View Post

Associated Press is being paid off by Samsung to run sponsored tweets. This story originated with the AP and was picked up by every major and minor news outlet and aggregator. The fact is, it is a by-product of Samsung's campaign to smear Apple!


Paranoia - it looks like this.

post #38 of 63
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post
Paranoia - it looks like this.

 

Is your disbelief in AP being paid off or the concept of being paid off?

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #39 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Of course it's true. It's such an old and rehashed discussion it's not even worthy of disagreement anymore. Apple's reported sales each quarter include "channel sales", shipments made to retailers and other resellers but not yet sold to an end-user. That Apple will also estimate the existing channel inventory each quarter doesn't change a thing about how Apple officially counts sales, which include channel shipments. That you would say it's not true speaks directly to my comment about some people erroneously believing Apple's reported sales numbers are only to end-users.

 

Yes it would be interesting to some of us to get channel inventory numbers from other vendors too, as well as returns/refurbs if they really want to be transparent. Apple gets props for reporting estimated channel numbers where others do not.

 

I don't know that anyone reports the number of devices returned do they, nor break out the revenue/numbers from refurbished sales? I think that would give a hint to the return and failure rates, an area where I suspect Apple also shines compared to others but lacking proof to claim it as a fact.

 

I spent 7 years developing software for the enterprise retail market and I have to say I was shocked at how retailers have absolutely no accurate inventory at any given .  All the systems are antiquated and in silos and reports have to be collected across various channels, stores, systems and collated to give a *somewhat* accurate picture of their stock from weeks ago.  And this is a worldwide failing.  I'm not surprised that vendors can't accurately figure out how many units were actually sold.  All they have to go on is how many they shipped and how many were returned to them.  And it's on a sliding scale of time.

post #40 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv View Post

 

I assume that the fact that people being ill-informed has relatively little to do with it -- not so many people buy top of the line phone from any maker, and for the majority who are buying mid- to low-end phones, the fact that a Galaxy S4 is coming out is not so relevant.

 

I don't think that would be the case in the US though.  Apart for folks, for whom $200 is too much, I can't see why anyone would buy a mid to low tier phone with a purchase price difference of at most $200, when you end up spending $2000-$3000 over the life of the contract.  If subsidies end and the phone pricing gets more transparent, I think you'll begin to see more low to mid tier smart-phones coming to the US.  That will really be a challenge for Apple then.  But they have plenty of time to come up with a strategy.  T-Mobile has started down the path, but the service price is still too high (unless you have multiple lines).  They need to drop the service price (substantially) for folks who buy the phone out right (as opposed to $99 down and $20/month supposedly 0% interest for 24 months).  It's still a better option than the $200 with contract price.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung Electronics profits grow 42% on strength of smartphone sales