or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Electronics has not dethroned Apple, Inc. in mobile profits
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung Electronics has not dethroned Apple, Inc. in mobile profits - Page 4

post #121 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

As a journalist it normally an unwritten rule that you don't attack other journalists because of misguided reporting. Anyone with any decency would have contacted them individually out of courtesy to explain the mistake, if there even was one. Total bitter move by Daniel Dilger who is not the greatest reporter by any stretch of the imagination.

He didn't attack the journalist, he just argued against the information presented, which was wrong and had been very widely disseminated!

post #122 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

Which Apple numbers are audited?

All of them.

post #123 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammy100 View Post

The primary problem with using market share as a measure of business health is it provides no insight into the profitability of the product being sold.
John Kirk recently ran an article in which he asked and answered this simple question:
“Question: Company A has 25% market share and 75% profit share. Company Z has 75% market share and 25% profit share. Which company is doing better?
Answer: If you said anything other than company A, then you are dumber than a doorknob. Any intelligent person would take company A’s profit share over that of company Z’s market share.”

In theory Company A is the obvious choice but in real life Company Z is the best choice. People don't want to know how profitable a product is they want to know if that product will sell well for the next 25, 50, 100 years. So while I'll be a dumb doorknob with a nice retirement fund you'll be a super genius homeless man.
"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 #124 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

In theory Company A is the obvious choice but in real life Company Z is the best choice. People don't want to know how profitable a product is they want to know if that product will sell well for the next 25, 50, 100 years. So while I'll be a dumb doorknob with a nice retirement fund you'll be a super genius homeless man.

People dont care about either. They only care what works for them. BB had dominant market share prior to the iPhone.
post #125 of 137

WTF?!!! More press release: 1confused.gif

 

http://www.strategyanalytics.com/default.aspx?mod=pressreleaseviewer&a0=5403

 

Do these guys get paid by Samsung / Google?!!

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply
post #126 of 137
Samsung and Google don't give a rat's ass about Apple's stock price; however Wall Street speculators do, who make money on any big move with the proper option strategy.
So these are the guys who have an interest in chasing Apple up and down, putting margin squeezes on weaker investors, etc.

That's where you have to look for pay offs, not at Google or Samsung.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disturbia View Post

WTF?!!! More press release: 1confused.gif

http://www.strategyanalytics.com/default.aspx?mod=pressreleaseviewer&a0=5403

Do these guys get paid by Samsung / Google?!!
post #127 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Yes, last year Motorola "only" lost $100 million in the quarter.

Recently Motorola has been investing heavily into their Fort Worth factory, where they plan to build the first US assembled smartphone, the Moto X.    
It's reportedly creating 2,000 new jobs.


Even so, they still have $3.2 billion in cash reserves, so if they had to, they could continue for up to several years burning through that.   Hopefully they won't have to.

2,000 new jobs sounds great, but Google cut 5,383 jobs at Motorola in the June quarter, after 1,200 jobs were lost in the March quarter. So after 6,583 were lost, reportedly planning to add 2,000 is sort of less than impressive.
Edited by Corrections - 7/29/13 at 11:42pm
post #128 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

I did read the article but I don't think you grasped my comment.

If Samsung's numbers are just guesswork then it's impossible to say who makes the larger profit. Therefore, it's just as idiotic of DED to say that Apple makes the most profits as it is for these analysts to say that Samsung makes the most profits

No it is not. Because Samsung does report total profits.

If you'd given the article even a cursory glance, even at a third grade reading level you'd be able to participate in the conversation about it without looking like a fool.
post #129 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Let's not go overboard.  Obviously the numbers are not "pure guesswork" out of nowhere.  They all involve at least some analysis derived from known factors.

Some researchers have established numbers checks at import offices and warehouses, which can give very accurate shipment numbers where that's being done.  Some poll store managers.  Some use exit surveys at stores to determine end user sales.  Some have the equivalent of "Nielson families" to draw upon.  Some use phone surveys.


In other words, their numbers can't just be summarily dismissed.  They're least good enough for rough comparisons. Plus, if we ignored all analysis numbers, we'd have nothing to talk about 1smile.gif

 
--

Yes, Apple tells a little more than most.  At the same time, Apple holds back the really important info that would aid competitors.  For example, what are the sales for each individual model type?   What are the sales to carriers vs. sales to other retailers vs. direct store sales?   We only "know" these from analyses.

Apple holds back such info for the same reason that their competitors do.  To keep from giving info that others might take advantage of.
 
So perhaps the big question should not be why does everyone else keep sales close to their vest, but rather why does Apple give out sales/shipment totals?  Pride?  Sales often drop after a debut and that's not happy info to give out.  Is it because their entire business is based on comparatively few products, and thus easier to figure out anyway?  Is it because they feel like sales guesses would hurt them more than other companies?   Any ideas?

Everything you said makes zero sense. SA's analysis doesn't come from auditing factory shipments. It simply compares most of Samsung's revenue against half of Apple's, the entire point of which was to create a catchy headline designed to get free publicity for the company's larger report, which says very close to nothing.
post #130 of 137

While Apple may or may not make more profits than Samsung - I think they do, but that's going to come to an end soon - we can say this:

 

- Apple makes shitloads of money

- Samsung makes shitloads of money

- Both are going to make less in the future - Apple will reduce margins with new low end products, and also simply by being able to keep up with demand. And Samsung will probably face stiff competition in all low end categories from a large number of competitors: (to a lesser extent) Apple; ZTE; Huawei; and a number of other chinese manufacturers.

 

At the moment I think Samsung's Apple contracts are safe - you may hate the company for cheating and lying in sales as much as they are, using dirty tricks and whatnot. But Samsung also outperforms any other company when it comes to high tech manufacturing. Samsung's retina MBP displays are significantly better than LGs - and others don't even try to make these. So say what you will manufacturing is Samsung's strong suit and they are basing all their other successes on that.

 

One of the most important things about Apple vs Samsung is that they have totally different business models. I don't think Apple should try to compete with Samsung at all - Samsung doesn't matter. Maybe they keep up what they're doing, or maybe some Chinese firms will steal their low end (and subsequently high end). Doesn't make a difference to Apple. Apple competes with Google in the mobile phone business - that's it. Also different business models but that is where the long battle is fought.


Edited by orthorim - 7/30/13 at 5:22am
post #131 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

2,000 new jobs sounds great, but Google cut 5,383 jobs at Motorola in the June quarter, after 1,200 jobs were lost in the March quarter. So after 6,583 were lost, reportedly planning to add 2,000 is sort of less than impressive.

 

Most of those jobs were not lost in the US.  They were transfers of foreign factory workers to a new factory owner.

 

According to Motorola, the bulk of those job reductions last quarter were because of the sale of manufacturing facilities in Taiwan and Brazil to Flextronics.

 

In other words, most of them were foreign employees who were switched from working for Motorola, to working for Flextronics... still in their own country, at the same factories.

 

It's not much different than when Apple moves manufacturing back to the US.  American workers will replace overseas workers, but the foreign workers will likely still be used for other manufacturing.  The only difference here is that Motorola had owned the foreign factories that made their products, whereas Apple did not.


Edited by KDarling - 7/30/13 at 9:27am
post #132 of 137
Thank you Dan. It's great to have you back on the beat in good health and good order. There aren't many people in tech journalism who could have written this article. Bravo.
post #133 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

2,000 new jobs sounds great, but Google cut 5,383 jobs at Motorola in the June quarter, after 1,200 jobs were lost in the March quarter. So after 6,583 were lost, reportedly planning to add 2,000 is sort of less than impressive.

I wanted to say: "oh my, that's a big layoff!" but KD responded already with where these people went. So I guess my point is moot.
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
"See her this weekend. You hit it off, come Turkey Day, maybe you can stuff her."
- Roger Sterling
Reply
post #134 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

Given the mystery around some of Apple and Samsung's reporting, shipping and sales figures, Strategic Analytics used the available information that was out there.

Based on the available information, apparently not.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

In essence, it was a best attempt at understanding the two companies with regard to the cell phone market.

No, it was an sensationalist attempt to generate enough interest to entice people to pay for the full report from SA.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

Daniel Dilger has presented all the information in a clear and careful rebuke of the original articles that have gone out, but he is a bit of a hypocrite because on many occasions he and people at AI have reported using information with shaky methodology. The difference here is, APPLE INSIDER writes glowing reports on everything APPLE.

Even if DED is a paid Apple shill, it doesn't change the fact that he showed his work and supported his analysis. If you disagree with a point or see an error, then show your supporting evidence - like DED did.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

Analysts make guesses all the time based on incomplete information with regard to the stock market and almost all political types of reporting. 

And they're doing a bang-up job with all that guessing, aren't they?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

The Apple insider reporter, Daniel Eran Dilger reported that it was not true, when what he should have reported is, it was not proven otherwise, because as he stated, we just don't have all the facts available. I don't see what i wrong with trying to make educated guesses using experts in the field.

If you want truth, enroll in a philosophy class. Educated guessing (or better yet, qualified estimating) is one thing, but basing a supposed analysis on factually incorrect data and unsupportable assertions is a whole separate entity.

 

Quote:

And lets be honest, i wonder that his agenda is working at APPLEINSIDER. If anyone can prove beyond all reasonable doubt, i'd be interested in hearing it.

The motivation is irrelevant if the data is accurate and the analysis is supportable. Be careful you don't trip on that straw man on your way out.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

As a journalist it normally an unwritten rule that you don't attack other journalists because of misguided reporting.
Too bad the analyst didn't engage in journalism (unless you include yellow journalism).
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

Anyone with any decency would have contacted them individually out of courtesy to explain the mistake, if there even was one. Total bitter move by Daniel Dilger who is not the greatest reporter by any stretch of the imagination.
Did you contact DED privately and confirm whether he'd contacted the analyst 'individually' first? After all that'd be what "anyone with decency" would do before posting a public attack on a person's character and professional merit, right?

 

EDIT: Trimmed excess whitespace.

post #135 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post


Apple and Samsung make pretty much all the profits in mobile devices right now. It's a duopoly. It might actually be a big deal when and if Samsung surpasses Apple since the latter has taken a high-end only strategy while the former sells all things to all people. Apple's historical strategy has been to eschew market share for profits. But if it is possible to have both then Apple might rethink its strategy.

what happens to overall profits if you have a product with low margins that flops and you end up with inventory you can't move?  compare this same thing situation with a product with high margin that flops.  Give it some thought please. 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #136 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by delaneyp View Post

Given the mystery around some of Apple and Samsung's reporting, shipping and sales figures, Strategic Analytics used the available information that was out there. In essence, it was a best attempt at understanding the two companies with regard to the cell phone market. 
[snip]

As a journalist it normally an unwritten rule that you don't attack other journalists because of misguided reporting. Anyone with any decency would have contacted them individually out of courtesy to explain the mistake, if there even was one. Total bitter move by Daniel Dilger who is not the greatest reporter by any stretch of the imagination.

 

first, that's baloney. there was no "best attempt." there was much better info available that SA simply did not dig up or just ignored - for example check the well-known Asymco's work: https://twitter.com/asymco/status/362256388342284292/photo/1. SA was simply incompetent (or intentionally generating propaganda?), and your remarks are simply a flimsy apologia for that.

 

second, what you are saying is that there is a "gentlemen's agreement" among journalists to "look the other way" about each other's mistakes. well if so that in itself is an ethical failure. but regurgitating unverified third party "reports" with no effort to fact check them first (and evaluate the possibility of bias on the part of the source) is itself sloppy work. what DED did is simply call them out for being lazy journalists. the web is chock full of lazy "journalism" these days, and they had it coming.

 

i guess you're just one of the club whose nose is bent out of shape by that.

post #137 of 137

here is an even better - fascinating - Asymco chart, updated yesterday to include the 2nd quarter and presenting results for Google, MS, and even Amazon too all at the same visual scale:

 

http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Screen-Shot-2013-07-30-at-7-30-10.47.14-PM.png

 

from the chart it is obvious that the combined Apple product lines totals (iPhone, iPad, iPod, Mac) that are the equivalent of the Samsung IM product lines group generated substantially more 2Q operating income (pre tax apparently) than Samsung's group did.

 

and then look at Google and Amazon and  - OMG - MS!

 

oh yeah, Apple is so Doomed! the competition is ... well, it just ... is, you know? all the pundits/analysts say so!

 

boy, can i get doomed like this too? where do i have to go?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Electronics has not dethroned Apple, Inc. in mobile profits