or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple on pace to sell record 39M iPhones in June quarter, survey finds
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple on pace to sell record 39M iPhones in June quarter, survey finds

post #1 of 63
Thread Starter 
Continued strong demand for Apple's iPhone has the hot selling handset on pace to set yet another record in the current June quarter, the latest data from Morgan Stanley's AlphaWise survey has found.




Analyst Katy Huberty on Tuesday revealed the results of the latest AlphaWise Smartphone Tracker in a research note to investors, a copy of which was provided to AppleInsider. The data through the end of May suggests that there is demand among consumers for 39 million iPhone units in the June quarter.

Apple's previous June-quarter record came a year ago, when it shipped 31.2 million iPhones in the three-month span. That compared to 26 million units in the June 2012 quarter.

Morgan Stanley's AlphaWise surveys have been a good indicator of how much market demand there is for Apple's iPhone over the last year. The survey has outperformed Wall Street's consensus estimates in four of the last five quarters.

Notably, last quarter the survey signaled stronger than expected demand for the iPhone, driven by international expansion and carrier promotions. While market watchers expected sales of 38 million iPhones, the AlphaWise tracker pegged demand at 40.6 million units, which was closer to Apple's actual shipments of 43.7 million units.




For the current June quarter, Wall Street consensus is at 35 million iPhone units. But the latest data from Morgan Stanley suggests that demand is higher, and Apple could easily exceed those expectations.

Huberty said that iPhone unit upside could add $2.8 billion to the company's revenue for the quarter, an 8 percent bump from her predictions. She noted that supply chain build for the quarter is at 33 million units, but the supply chain tends to lag behind market demand as production ramps down near the end of a product cycle.

"Similar to the March quarter, we believe promotions from Apple, retailers and carriers are driving strong demand," Huberty wrote. She noted that Apple launched an 8-gigabyte iPhone 5c in mid-March, and that it also started promoting a trade-in program at U.S. stores in early May.

And while Apple is soaring, the latest AlphaWise figures suggest rival Samsung may be slumping. It shows that demand for the company's Galaxy handsets is down 1 percent year over year to 41 million units, with the slowdown said to be primarily from lower-priced handsets and not the latest flagship Galaxy S5.

Like most others on Wall Street, Huberty is particularly excited for Apple's next iPhone product cycle, which is expected to kick off this September, a year after the launch of the iPhone 5s. Survey data captured by Morgan Stanley suggests that if Apple were to launch a new iPhone with a larger display, as is expected, that the company would see a strong upgrade cycle from existing iPhone owners.
post #2 of 63
Apple is doomed I tell you
post #3 of 63

If Apple sells 40M iPhones in Q3 this stock will be at $107 ($750)

 

wow.

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #4 of 63
I'm not concerned with record sales. I'm concerned with what the percentage of increase is. Apple needs to at least keep pace with industry sales, and preferably keep ahead of it. It will be good if Apple's sales this quarter sets a record, no doubt. But it's a competitive landscape.

Apple had a very good May, according to reports, better than they've had for several years. I hope this June will be the same.

The thing that set the stock up for such a recent rise wasn't stock buybacks as some would like to have us think, but rather the very good last quarter, and information about Apple's competitiveness since then. The WWDC has added to that with some major announcements that weren't expected, and announcements that were very helpful to the enterprise.

If Apple can have another great quarter again, in which they beat average industry growth, the stock will be on more secure grounds for further growth. And if the new products, that look very good, from what we've been hearing, sell as well as thought, then Apple will be definitely back on track.
post #5 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneath View Post

Apple is doomed I tell you

That should be;

Apple is doomed, doomed, I tell you!
post #6 of 63

doom

post #7 of 63

Quote:

Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not concerned with record sales. I'm concerned with what the percentage of increase is. Apple needs to at least keep pace with industry sales, and preferably keep ahead of it. It will be good if Apple's sales this quarter sets a record, no doubt. But it's a competitive landscape.

Apple had a very good May, according to reports, better than they've had for several years. I hope this June will be the same.

The thing that set the stock up for such a recent rise wasn't stock buybacks as some would like to have us think, but rather the very good last quarter, and information about Apple's competitiveness since then. The WWDC has added to that with some major announcements that weren't expected, and announcements that were very helpful to the enterprise.

If Apple can have another great quarter again, in which they beat average industry growth, the stock will be on more secure grounds for further growth. And if the new products, that look very good, from what we've been hearing, sell as well as thought, then Apple will be definitely back on track.

 

the problem is the definition of "smartphone"...Most of the growth over the last few years is coming from feature phones that are now considered "smartphones". 

post #8 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by clayder View Post

the problem is the definition of "smartphone"...Most of the growth over the last few years is coming from feature phones that are now considered "smartphones". 

A big problem is in the definition of "Android". Most numbers include the AOSP OS phones that are at least, and likely more than half the Android market's sales. Whether that should be true is difficult to say, but I don't think it is.

Nevertheless, it's a perception problem that needs to be addressed.
post #9 of 63

Come on AppleInsider, Apple is doomed. You guys were promoting that for the longest time. This report must be inaccurate. In fact, I only give them a couple months before they run out of money. They already closed the R&D department A LONG TIME AGO...right? Yup, the ship is sinking!

post #10 of 63

It's nice to know.  Usually the analysts claim poor current iPhone sales because consumers are waiting for the next iPhone model to go on sale.  The analysts always seem say that even though they're wrong most of the time.  Many consumers don't even know when the next iPhone is being released.  It's not like the average iPhone user cruises the internet sites hanging onto every little rumor of a release date.  There's probably a lot of impulse iPhone buyers where if they see a sale, they just get it and don't concern themselves about three or four months ahead.

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

I'm not concerned with record sales. I'm concerned with what the percentage of increase is. Apple needs to at least keep pace with industry sales, and preferably keep ahead of it. It will be good if Apple's sales this quarter sets a record, no doubt. But it's a competitive landscape.

 

 

Apple does not need to keep up with industry sales.  The majority of the increase in industry sales is people switching from feature phones to cheap smart phones in developing countries.  Those are $99 phones that Apple is not competing against.  You need to look at Samsung's Galaxy line.  For the past 18 months the Galaxy lines sales have been FLAT while Apple is growing sales 15-20%.  If this estimate of 39M is correct that would represent a 25% YoY.

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #12 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


A big problem is in the definition of "Android". Most numbers include the AOSP OS phones that are at least, and likely more than half the Android market's sales. Whether that should be true is difficult to say, but I don't think it is.

Nevertheless, it's a perception problem that needs to be addressed.

I don't think anyone cares.  They only know if it runs Android it's considered a smartphone because Android OS is a smartphone OS.  Even the simplest Android smartphone falls under the definition of a smartphone.  If it can run general purpose apps, that makes it a smartphone by definition.  Whenever Wall Street says Android is killing iOS in smartphone market share, they're not talking about specific features, cost or quality, they're only talking about those devices running Android OS.  Apparently that's enough for investors to love.

post #13 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

It's nice to know.  Usually the analysts claim poor current iPhone sales because consumers are waiting for the next iPhone model to go on sale.  The analysts always seem say that even though they're wrong most of the time.  Many consumers don't even know when the next iPhone is being released.  It's not like the average iPhone user cruises the internet sites hanging onto every little rumor of a release date.  There's probably a lot of impulse iPhone buyers where if they see a sale, they just get it and don't concern themselves about three or four months ahead.

But, amazingly enough, iPhone sales slip during the year, to fall to a low the last quarter before the new models come out.
post #14 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

Apple does not need to keep up with industry sales.  The majority of the increase in industry sales is people switching from feature phones to cheap smart phones in developing countries.  Those are $99 phones that Apple is not competing against.  You need to look at Samsung's Galaxy line.  For the past 18 months the Galaxy lines sales have been FLAT while Apple is growing sales 15-20%.  If this estimate of 39M is correct that would represent a 25% YoY.

I disagree. While it's somewhat popular to say that when Apple's marketshare is low, the very same people trumpet it when Apple's marketshare is high.
post #15 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not concerned with record sales. I'm concerned with what the percentage of increase is. Apple needs to at least keep pace with industry sales, and preferably keep ahead of it. It will be good if Apple's sales this quarter sets a record, no doubt. But it's a competitive landscape.

Apple had a very good May, according to reports, better than they've had for several years. I hope this June will be the same.

The thing that set the stock up for such a recent rise wasn't stock buybacks as some would like to have us think, but rather the very good last quarter, and information about Apple's competitiveness since then. The WWDC has added to that with some major announcements that weren't expected, and announcements that were very helpful to the enterprise.

If Apple can have another great quarter again, in which they beat average industry growth, the stock will be on more secure grounds for further growth. And if the new products, that look very good, from what we've been hearing, sell as well as thought, then Apple will be definitely back on track.

I'm not understanding your logic. Sure, I'd lover for Apple to match or beat percentage of sales compared to the competitor (i.e. Samsung), but from a investors point of view, I mainly care about the profits over bragging rights. Apple's profits exceed that of all other smartphone sales combined. It seems that Apple can sell half as many phones as Sammy, and make twice as much money due to their margins on the phone. That comparison may not be accurate, but I'm speaking in generalities.

 

Plus, who trusts Sammy's numbers anyways? They only report shipments and who knows how many of those devices are sitting on shelves. Even the Android % numbers are skewed because they combine smartphone and dumb phones as one and compare that to iOS...otherwise the gap is not that dramatic as others paint it.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2013/11/15/android-dominates-market-share-but-apple-makes-all-the-money/

post #16 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

I don't think anyone cares.  They only know if it runs Android it's considered a smartphone because Android OS is a smartphone OS.  Even the simplest Android smartphone falls under the definition of a smartphone.  If it can run general purpose apps, that makes it a smartphone by definition.  Whenever Wall Street says Android is killing iOS in smartphone xmarket share, they're not talking about specific features, cost or quality, they're only talking about those devices running Android OS.  Apparently that's enough for investors to love.

But it's a legitimate question whether it really is Android if it can't run any of Google's services such as Google maps, Google Play store, Google search, calendar,, etc. This is being debated in the industry with a number of people thinking that AOSP phones should be considered as different than Android phones. I agree with that.

I'm not the one who said that they aren't smartphones here, remember that. You can argue that point with clayder, who is saying that.

I did say that it is a perception problem.
post #17 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by clayder View Post
 

the problem is the definition of "smartphone"...Most of the growth over the last few years is coming from feature phones that are now considered "smartphones". 

 

I tend to agree with this statement. For example, the LG840G is a souped-up feature phone with a touch screen, email, and java web browser. It can do some useful things, and has been good for sending txt messages (without Siri) despite not being a true smartphone. But I think a lot of low-end consumers buy it as if it's a smartphone, and probably even call it a smartphone, because in their ignorance of what a true smartphone delivers, the LG840G does more than they expected. And the awkwardness of using the interwebs is something they consider normal, because the interwebs have always been hard for them to use.  Such a device may well be getting included in the numbers as a smartphone by the analysts, who aren't much smarter than the consumers (or their phones).

 

Then again, maybe it's a bit of blindness to say that iOS, BB, and Android qualify as "smart" OS's, while Java doesn't. It can download and use Java apps, and do essentially everything else a common smartphone can do. So if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck.... maybe it really is a smartphone, and only chauvinists say it isn't.  And the one I got was free.


Edited by TeaEarleGreyHot - 6/10/14 at 7:10am
post #18 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazerCT View Post

I'm not understanding your logic. Sure, I'd lover for Apple to match or beat percentage of sales compared to the competitor (i.e. Samsung), but from a investors point of view, I mainly care about the profits over bragging rights. Apple's profits exceed that of all other smartphone sales combined. It seems that Apple can sell half as many phones as Sammy, and make twice as much money due to their margins on the phone. That comparison may not be accurate, but I'm speaking in generalities.

Plus, who trusts Sammy's numbers anyways? They only report shipments and who knows how many of those devices are sitting on shelves. Even the Android % numbers are skewed because they combine smartphone and dumb phones as one and compare that to iOS...otherwise the gap is not that dramatic as others paint it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2013/11/15/android-dominates-market-share-but-apple-makes-all-the-money/

Profits are important. But I doubt you were around in the late 1980's through the early 1990’s, when Apple put profits before marketshare. As their marketshare shrunk, so did software developer love. That's a vicious cycle.

Today, Apple is doing very well indeed. But that's not assurance for the future. With their 15% worldwide smartphone share, at some point, software development will begin to move away from the platform. How low can that marketshare go before the problem becomes obvious to people such as yourself, who will then see it is a problem? People in third world countries won't always stay poor. In the worlds biggest market, China, there is a middle class that's estimated to be between 400 million to 600 million people. People whose incomes are rising much faster than anywhere else.

This isn't a simplistic issue. Everything matters, profits, sales, and marketshare.
post #19 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

I tend to agree with this statement. For example, the LG840G is a souped-up feature phone with a touch screen, email, and java web browser. It can do some useful things, and has been good for sending txt messages (without Siri) despite not being a true smartphone. But I think a lot of low-end consumers buy it as if it's a smartphone, and probably even call it a smartphone, because in their ignorance of what a true smartphone delivers, the LG840G does more than they expected. And the awkwardness of using the interwebs is something they consider normal, because the interwebs have always been hard for them to use.  Such a device may well be getting included in the numbers as a smartphone by the analysts, who aren't much smarter than the consumers (or their phones).

If it runs a third party software, then it's a smartphone. If it doesn't, then it's not a smartphone. It's not that difficult to understand.

"Interwebs"? Seriously?
post #20 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


If it runs a third party software, then it's a smartphone. If it doesn't, then it's not a smartphone. It's not that difficult to understand.

"Interwebs"? Seriously?

 

Yes, I used the term "interwebs" in a mocking sense, when referring to those unsophisticated users who are generally awkward with their computers.  

 

As to what makes a thing a smartphone, I would modify your definition a bit to be "if it is capable of running third-party software" so that it doesn't depend upon the actual availability of such third-party software.   The flaw, of course, is that even Symbion could run 3rd party software, if it was carefully integrated and installed on the phone, right?  Maybe not, I don't know much about Symbian.  Do viruses count as 3rd party software?

post #21 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

Yes, I used the term "interwebs" in a mocking sense, when referring to those unsophisticated users who are generally awkward with their computers.  

As to what makes a thing a smartphone, I would modify your definition a bit to be "if it is capable of running third-party software" so that it doesn't depend upon the actual availability of such third-party software.   The flaw, of course, is that even Symbion could run 3rd party software, if it was carefully integrated and installed on the phone, right?  Maybe not, I don't know much about Symbian.  Do viruses count as 3rd party software?

Symbian phones are/were smartphones. So were Win Mobile phones, as were Palmphones and Blackberry phones. What's the point?

The first iPhone was a featurephone, it wasn't until the second year that it became a smartphone.

You're being very semantic here when saying capable of running third party software rather that just saying that it runs third party software. I know that a number of people run their phones as a featurephone, because they don't download software. But I know iPhone users like that too.

All phones that run AOSP and Android are, to my knowledge, smartphones. If you know differently, then tell me which ones, as I'd be interested to know.

The comment about viruses was irrelevant.
post #22 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

If Apple sells 40M iPhones in Q3 this stock will be at $107 ($750)

 

wow.

 

I think they'll be at $125 by end of Q4. Stock is still massively cheap for what this company is doing and IS going to be capable of.

 

If what we know is coming...then 2 different iPhone sizes AND the iBand/iWatch plus new iPads...it's going to be an absurd quarter.

 

Get in now again while you can.

post #23 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Symbian phones are/were smartphones. So were Win Mobile phones, as were Palmphones and Blackberry phones. What's the point?

The first iPhone was a featurephone, it wasn't until the second year that it became a smartphone.

Right, I was misunderstanding Symbian and confusing it with something else.  Fixed.

Why do you say the first iPhone was a featurephone?

post #24 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

Right, I was misunderstanding Symbian and confusing it with something else.  Fixed.
Why do you say the first iPhone was a featurephone?

Because you couldn't download any apps. You were stuck with what Apple supplied—just like any other featurephone. It was why I waited until the second year to buy an iPhone.

The first model had the potential to be a smartphone, and it did become one once the App Store opened, and iOS 2 came out, though it wasn't called iOS back then. But until that OS upgrade, and the availability of apps, it was a featurephone. Make no mistake about that.
post #25 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


But, amazingly enough, iPhone sales slip during the year, to fall to a low the last quarter before the new models come out.

I think carriers messing with their contract terms have somewhat blurred that cycle. For instance without paying a penalty I'm unwilling to sustain I have to wait six months after an October launch. And before this I hadn't missed a launch since the 3Gs


Edited by jfc1138 - 6/10/14 at 9:07am
post #26 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Profits are important. But I doubt you were around in the late 1980's through the early 1990’s, when Apple put profits before marketshare. As their marketshare shrunk, so did software developer love. That's a vicious cycle.

Today, Apple is doing very well indeed. But that's not assurance for the future. With their 15% worldwide smartphone share, at some point, software development will begin to move away from the platform. How low can that marketshare go before the problem becomes obvious to people such as yourself, who will then see it is a problem? People in third world countries won't always stay poor. In the worlds biggest market, China, there is a middle class that's estimated to be between 400 million to 600 million people. People whose incomes are rising much faster than anywhere else.

This isn't a simplistic issue. Everything matters, profits, sales, and marketshare.

In fact, I was around in the late 80s working on a b&w Mac SE and have worked on macs ever since '88 and know how close Apple came to folding. But the Apple of today is not the same company pre-Jobs' return and it's not being run by the likes of Sculler, Spindler, and Amelio.

 

I've been an investor since 2000 and have learned that Apple is always looking far into the future even though their present strategy may not appear so. I would also guarantee that Apple has looked beyond the smartphone as they're not afraid to cannibalize their own product. I would have sold their stock a long time ago had I not learned to panic from all the naysayers out there spouting the doom-and-gloom of the company. My cost basis per share is $1 and change, so I think I've done pretty well knowing the potential of the company and that Apple doesn't need the largest marketshare to make the most money. They have a loyal customer base that continues to buy/upgrade and they attract new customers by pulling them away from Android and Windows. 

 

I also take the marketshare numbers with a grain of salt...I don't think they truly reflect the who paid for a device and is actually using it compared to how Apple reports sales. Samsung has already been caught lying about their tablet numbers in court and believe that extends to their smartphones as well. And how does the rise in income level in third world countries not play into Apple's favor in increasing marketshare? I have a feeling those 400-600M people with rising incomes would choose Apple over Samsung once they can afford it. 

 

I think attendance at WWDC would contradict the notion that developers are falling out of love in light of marketshare. In 2012, it sold out in 2hrs; in 2013 it took 2 minutes; I have not seen 2014 numbers, but even if it took 4 hours it seems like the interest to develop for Apple would not be falling out of love. In fact, with a simpler programming language (Swift) you may see an increase in new developers.

 

Don't get me wrong...I'd love for Apple to dominate world-wide marketshare because that means more money...as an investor how would I not want that? When investors continue to see Apple print money they'll continue to buy the stock; when customers continue to see Apple improve their devices and branch out into new areas, they'll continue to buy more Apple products; and when developers continue to see record sales and new categories/devices, they'll continue to develop for Apple. This will keep the money machine at Apple running for some time to come...even if they sell 50 units to Samsung's 100.

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

Profits are important. But I doubt you were around in the late 1980's through the early 1990’s, when Apple put profits before marketshare. As their marketshare shrunk, so did software developer love. That's a vicious cycle.

Today, Apple is doing very well indeed. But that's not assurance for the future. With their 15% worldwide smartphone share, at some point, software development will begin to move away from the platform. How low can that marketshare go before the problem becomes obvious to people such as yourself, who will then see it is a problem? People in third world countries won't always stay poor. In the worlds biggest market, China, there is a middle class that's estimated to be between 400 million to 600 million people. People whose incomes are rising much faster than anywhere else.

This isn't a simplistic issue. Everything matters, profits, sales, and marketshare.

This isn't the 80s and 90s. Apple failed then because it tried to go after market share. Its Mac product line lost focus and try the shotgun approach. Apple has never had the majority of smartphone market share.

Exactly about China. That's why Apple will succeed, the middle class in China is growing fast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If it runs a third party software, then it's a smartphone. If it doesn't, then it's not a smartphone. It's not that difficult to understand.

"Interwebs"? Seriously?

I believe my dumb phone back in the day could run apps. It certainly wasn't a smart phone. The definition is arbitrary and none of these reports explain how they define it.

The first iPhone was definitely a smartphone.
post #28 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazerCT View Post

In fact, I was around in the late 80s working on a b&w Mac SE and have worked on macs ever since '88 and know how close Apple came to folding. But the Apple of today is not the same company pre-Jobs' return and it's not being run by the likes of Sculler, Spindler, and Amelio.

I've been an investor since 2000 and have learned that Apple is always looking far into the future even though their present strategy may not appear so. I would also guarantee that Apple has looked beyond the smartphone as they're not afraid to cannibalize their own product. I would have sold their stock a long time ago had I not learned to panic from all the naysayers out there spouting the doom-and-gloom of the company. My cost basis per share is $1 and change, so I think I've done pretty well knowing the potential of the company and that Apple doesn't need the largest marketshare to make the most money. They have a loyal customer base that continues to buy/upgrade and they attract new customers by pulling them away from Android and Windows. 

I also take the marketshare numbers with a grain of salt...I don't think they truly reflect the who paid for a device and is actually using it compared to how Apple reports sales. Samsung has already been caught lying about their tablet numbers in court and believe that extends to their smartphones as well. And how does the rise in income level in third world countries not play into Apple's favor in increasing marketshare? I have a feeling those 400-600M people with rising incomes would choose Apple over Samsung once they can afford it. 

I think attendance at WWDC would contradict the notion that developers are falling out of love in light of marketshare. In 2012, it sold out in 2hrs; in 2013 it took 2 minutes; I have not seen 2014 numbers, but even if it took 4 hours it seems like the interest to develop for Apple would not be falling out of love. In fact, with a simpler programming language (Swift) you may see an increase in new developers.

Don't get me wrong...I'd love for Apple to dominate world-wide marketshare because that means more money...as an investor how would I not want that? When investors continue to see Apple print money they'll continue to buy the stock; when customers continue to see Apple improve their devices and branch out into new areas, they'll continue to buy more Apple products; and when developers continue to see record sales and new categories/devices, they'll continue to develop for Apple. This will keep the money machine at Apple running for some time to come...even if they sell 50 units to Samsung's 100.

You're missing my point, I'm not saying that Apple needs the biggest marketshare. But what is happening worldwide is that we're seeing a shrinking of marketshare. So the valid question looms; at what point does that shrinking marketshare come to be a significant problem? It's 15% now! but was higher in recent years. Is 10% ok? 5%? At some point things will fall off the cliff.

And if you think that Apple doesn't care, then you would be wrong. Jobs himself continually talked marketshare when it was good, or rising. Cook does the same. Both talked about small Mac share as giving them a lot of room to grow.

We would not have seen the iPad Mini if it were not for marketshare considerations, nor the 5C. I'm sure we can look at more products that have been designed to either grow marketshare, or prevent its loss.

I'm a long time investor as well, from the 90's. But my biggest purchase was in mid 2004. I've held on to all of my stock, and am very happy with where it's gone. But that doesn't mean I'm happy with everything Apple has done. But let's not forget the big plunge we had since the $705 high. That was because of the perception that Apple had had it. Marketshare was dropping, profits dropped, margins dropped, and sales were well below expectations. As those numbers look to be reversing, Apple stock has begun to rise again. There is a dramatic correlation between what is perceived and stock price.

As far as Samsung goes, I've said many times here, on other tech sites, and the financial sites I'm on, that I don't trust the guesses analylitic firms make, as there is no way to back any of those numbers up, as Samsung doesn't give any quarterly numbers out for smartphones or tablets, and hasn't done so since first calendar quarter of 2011. But still, there are overall industry numbers out there, accurate or not, that Apple is measured against. When Apple measures well, the stock goes up, when they measure badly, the stock goes down. Really, it's pretty obvious. It isn't too much to ask of Apple that they attempt to match industry growth in an industry they pretty much invented.
post #29 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

This isn't the 80s and 90s. Apple failed then because it tried to go after market share. Its Mac product line lost focus and try the shotgun approach. Apple has never had the majority of smartphone market share.

Exactly about China. That's why Apple will succeed, the middle class in China is growing fast.
I believe my dumb phone back in the day could run apps. It certainly wasn't a smart phone. The definition is arbitrary and none of these reports explain how they define it.

The first iPhone was definitely a smartphone.

The only time in that time period that Apple attempted to go after marketshare was the ill timed attempt by Michael Spindler in Christmas 1995. Back then I was on the board of one of the largest Mac groups. NYMUG had over 5,400 members in the mid 90's. In the fall of 1995, Apple came to our meeting, and announced that they were going to increase marketshare from 12% to 16% with a new machine that would cost "only" $4,000, including keyboard. We were pretty impressed. That was when computers were a major USA export.

But even after the meeting, when the board and Apple's representatives went out to dinner, we couldn't get them to tell us anything about this new line of machines. That was really too bad. It turned out that these machines were based on the Motorola 68040, which was depreciated by Apple already in favor of the PPC. It failed, and thus Apple's long term travails began. But, their other attempt at marketshare, the iPod, and iTunes, went the other way. If it weren't for that dominance, Apple wouldn't be the company it is today.

But otherwise, there were no major problems that could be attributed to Apple that resulted for attempts to grab marketshare.

But as I've said elsewhere, if you think I'm advocating that Apple make another grab at dominance, you're wrong. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that if marketshare drops to much further, it will cause problems. That's very different from saying they have to dominate.

I understand the higher end market Apple is in when compared to the entire market, which includes very inexpensive items. I don't expect Apple to compete there, nor would I want them to,

And no, the first iPhone was definitely not a smartphone. Say what you want to make yourself feel better about it, but having the potential to be something is not being it.
post #30 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


I disagree. While it's somewhat popular to say that when Apple's marketshare is low, the very same people trumpet it when Apple's marketshare is high.

 

Explain to me EXACTLY how Apple can keep up with the broad market that is selling $50 smartphones?

 

That's like expecting Ferrarri to sell as many $250k cars as Toyota sells $20k Corrolla's.

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #31 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


But as I've said elsewhere, if you think I'm advocating that Apple make another grab at dominance, you're wrong. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that if marketshare drops to much further, it will cause problems. That's very different from saying they have to dominate.

 

 

What on EARTH are you spewing?

 

What market are you speaking of?  Are you talking about $500+ smartphone market or $100+?

 

If you are talking high end, Apple is DOMINATING it.  Apple sold about 150M high end phones last year and Samsung (the only other vendor that sells a decent amount of high end phones) could not even crack 90M.  Lets give the other highend vendors 10M sales last year.  That still means Apple sold 60% of high end phones in 2013.

 

In Jan-Mar2014 Apple sold almost 44M million phones.  In other words they sold almost half of the phones Samsung sold in an ENTIRE YEAR in THREE MONTHS.  That was grow of 18% unit sales year over year.  With Apr-Jun quarter being the first full quarter of ChinaMobile sales I expect sales to continue to DESTROY Samsung's high end.  Apple could very well sell 200M phones in 2014 and have 70% of the high end market.

 

Bottom line is Apple does not give a crap about sales of $99 phones.  Such users don't buy Apps, Music, Video's, ect.  And probably are not buying an iPad, Mac, or Apple TV. 

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #32 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'm not concerned with record sales. I'm concerned with what the percentage of increase is. Apple needs to at least keep pace with industry sales, and preferably keep ahead of it. It will be good if Apple's sales this quarter sets a record, no doubt. But it's a competitive landscape.



Apple had a very good May, according to reports, better than they've had for several years. I hope this June will be the same.



The thing that set the stock up for such a recent rise wasn't stock buybacks as some would like to have us think, but rather the very good last quarter, and information about Apple's competitiveness since then. The WWDC has added to that with some major announcements that weren't expected, and announcements that were very helpful to the enterprise.



If Apple can have another great quarter again, in which they beat average industry growth, the stock will be on more secure grounds for further growth. And if the new products, that look very good, from what we've been hearing, sell as well as thought, then Apple will be definitely back on track.

 



since Apple is actually losing market shares, its not keeping up. That being said, the iphone 6 may changed this, especially if the iphone 5c see a major drop in price.

The last quarter ipad sales worries me. This is a sector where Apple is losing big chunks of market shares.
post #33 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

 

Explain to me EXACTLY how Apple can keep up with the broad market that is selling $50 smartphones?

 

That's like expecting Ferrarri to sell as many $250k cars as Toyota sells $20k Corrolla's.

 



Funny how when Apple was gaining market shares nobody was trying to split the smartphone market into sub-categories. Now that Apple is loosing market shares, some people are trying to find a sub-category where it isnt. Too much coolaid if you ask me.
post #34 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post



But as I've said elsewhere, if you think I'm advocating that Apple make another grab at dominance, you're wrong. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that if marketshare drops to much further, it will cause problems. That's very different from saying they have to dominate.

.

 



indeed. how can Apple expect to get into cars, home appliances and health if they only have a tiny market share. Third party will go where the volume is. Too little market shares can also endanger the entire ecosystem.
post #35 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Because you couldn't download any apps. You were stuck with what Apple supplied—just like any other featurephone. It was why I waited until the second year to buy an iPhone.

The first model had the potential to be a smartphone, and it did become one once the App Store opened, and iOS 2 came out, though it wasn't called iOS back then. But until that OS upgrade, and the availability of apps, it was a featurephone. Make no mistake about that.

 

Okay, I stand corrected on Symbian, but I think it's a bit rich of you to say that  I'm playing at semantics in your previous reply to me, where you wrote:

Quote:
You're being very semantic here when saying capable of running third party software rather that just saying that it runs third party software.

 

Because in fact your distinction also relies upon semantics " it did become one once the App Store opened, and iOS 2 came out". I think these semantics are very crux of our disagreement.  You're saying the iPhone 1 was not a smartphone until it had a software upgrade and downloadable apps became available.  I'm saying the device was a smartphone all along, even if the user never went to iOS2 or downloaded any apps.  Since the iPhone 1 had all the hardware and programming necessary to upgrade the OS and download software, it was, in my eyes, a smartphone.  

 

Quote:
I know that a number of people run their phones as a featurephone, because they don't download software. But I know iPhone users like that too.

 

And I'm saying that an iPhone 5s is a smartphone, even if the user doesn't download anything, and keeps it in "airplane mode" (i.e., software is blocked from downloading anything).  And a handgun is a handgun, even if there are no bullets in it, and it's never been fired.

 

And I'm not alone in this assessment, I guess.  Quoting the infamous Wikipedia:

Quote:
The iPhone (retroactively labeled the original iPhone) is a smartphone that was designed and marketed by Apple Inc. 

Furthermore, I suppose the iPod touch was a "smartpod".  

 

And I have now reconsidered my LG840G to be a cheap and inexpensive basic smartphone, because it can download java apps.  Thank you for the civil debate.   :)

post #36 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post
 

 

Explain to me EXACTLY how Apple can keep up with the broad market that is selling $50 smartphones?

 

That's like expecting Ferrarri to sell as many $250k cars as Toyota sells $20k Corrolla's.

 



Funny how when Apple was gaining market shares nobody was trying to split the smartphone market into sub-categories. Now that Apple is loosing market shares, some people are trying to find a sub-category where it isnt. Too much coolaid if you ask me.

 

Market share was ALWAYS in context with the top end.

 

No one here was bragging about market share of the iPhone vs Feature phones in 2008-2012.  Basically the $50 smart phone is taking the place of the feature phone.

 

So are you telling me a $50 phone sale should be treated the same as a $700 phone?

Even though the $50 phone yields $0 profit?

Even though the $50 phone yields $0 profit for app makers?

Even though an iPhone user spends $200+ a year buying Apps/Music/Movies?

Even though an iPhone user had a great chance of buying other Apple products like a Mac?

Hard to take you seriously.

 

It like comparing Louis Vutton luxury bag sales (Apple) to trash bags ($50 android phone).

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #37 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post



But as I've said elsewhere, if you think I'm advocating that Apple make another grab at dominance, you're wrong. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that if marketshare drops to much further, it will cause problems. That's very different from saying they have to dominate.

.

 



indeed. how can Apple expect to get into cars, home appliances and health if they only have a tiny market share. Third party will go where the volume is. Too little market shares can also endanger the entire ecosystem.

 

I don't see how 600,000,000 itunes accounts with credit card numbers is endangering the entire ecosystem. And growing. They are adding 500,000 users a day.

 

1 Apple user > 20 Android users who don't buy anything.

 

I'm sorry I'd rather have 600,000,000 of the riches customers instead of 2 billion customers who can hardly afford a data plan.

Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
Apple Purchases last 12 months - iPhone 5S (two), iPhone 6, iPhone 6+ (two), iPadAir, iPadAir2, iPadMini2, AppleTV (two), MacMini, Airport Extreme, iPod Classic.
Reply
post #38 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

 

Market share was ALWAYS in context with the top end.

 

No one here was bragging about market share of the iPhone vs Feature phones in 2008-2012.  Basically the $50 smart phone is taking the place of the feature phone.

 

So are you telling me a $50 phone sale should be treated the same as a $700 phone?

Even though the $50 phone yields $0 profit?

Even though the $50 phone yields $0 profit for app makers?

Even though an iPhone user spends $200+ a year buying Apps/Music/Movies?

Even though an iPhone user had a great chance of buying other Apple products like a Mac?

Hard to take you seriously.

 

It like comparing Louis Vutton luxury bag sales (Apple) to trash bags ($50 android phone).

 



When a $200 phone can do pretty much the same thing has a $700 iphone it becomes a problem...
post #39 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

 

I don't see how 600,000,000 itunes accounts with credit card numbers is endangering the entire ecosystem. And growing. They are adding 500,000 users a day.

 

1 Apple user > 20 Android users who don't buy anything.

 

I'm sorry I'd rather have 600,000,000 of the riches customers instead of 2 billion customers who can hardly afford a data plan.

 



imo youre problem is this, this is not true anymore.
post #40 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

.

But as I've said elsewhere, if you think I'm advocating that Apple make another grab at dominance, you're wrong. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that if marketshare drops to much further, it will cause problems. That's very different from saying they have to dominate.

And no, the first iPhone was definitely not a smartphone. Say what you want to make yourself feel better about it, but having the potential to be something is not being it.
Wrong. Usage market share is more important than shipment market share. Devs care about who is using smartphones than who has them. If usage drops to single digits, yea Apple will be in trouble. Then again iOS apps can be used on all idevices. Why do people forget that?

The iPhone is most definitely a smartphone. Deny it all you want, but you won't change history.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple on pace to sell record 39M iPhones in June quarter, survey finds