Report: iPhone grabs 32% of global handset profits in 2009

1468910

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 182
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Could you pls cite an exact source (page number, etc) - I am unable to see that in the June 27, 2009 10Q.



    My guess is that, in claiming $5B+ in iPhone revenue, the analyst is adjusting for the revenue recognition issue, i.e., the fact that iPhone revenues are being recognized over a 24-month period.



    I don't have the 10Q handy, but using Apple's quarterly financial press release, and its data summary (pdf) file, here are the numbers, and they do rely on adjusting for revenue recognition:



    iPhone revenue (Q2 Jan-Mar) = 1.521B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q2) = 0.893B

    iPhone revenue (Q3 Apr-Jun) = 1.689B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q3) = 1.405B

    For a total of $5.508B.



    Making an adjustment for AppleTV (and possibly 3rd party accessories revenue) leads to the $5.094B iPhone revenue number.



    Separately, iPhone margins were estimated based on calculations done by Turley Muller using the differences between Apple's reported current and non-current deferred revenue and costs. His estimates are higher than those being provided by Sacconaghi.
  • Reply 102 of 182
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post


    I don't have the 10Q handy, but using Apple's quarterly financial press release, and its data summary (pdf) file, here are the numbers, and they do rely on adjusting for revenue recognition:



    iPhone revenue (Q2 Jan-Mar) = 1.521B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q2) = 0.893B

    iPhone revenue (Q3 Apr-Jun) = 1.689B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q3) = 1.405B

    For a total of $5.508B.



    Making an adjustment for AppleTV (and possibly 3rd party accessories revenue) leads to the $5.094B iPhone revenue number.



    Yes, but you can't assume that.
  • Reply 103 of 182
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Well, first, there's being a dick, and then there's aggravated dickery.



    Great term.



    Was iPhone1984 the same guy as SeahawkFan? They sounded quite alike.
  • Reply 104 of 182
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Yes, but you can't assume that.



    Mark2005 is correct (of course I was the first one in this forum to come up with the calculation) and the only assumption he made was the percentage of the "hobby" appletv revenue.



    Apple's SEC filings EXPLICITLY spell out what exactly is behind those non-GAAP adjustments.
  • Reply 105 of 182
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samab View Post


    Mark2005 is correct (of course I was the first one in this forum to come up with the calculation) and the only assumption he made was the percentage of the "hobby" appletv revenue.



    Apple's SEC filings EXPLICITLY spell out what exactly is behind those non-GAAP adjustments.



    However, re the figures I reported earlier, the following statement is included, "iPhone net sales include the portion of handset revenue recognized in accordance with subscription accounting over the product's 24-month estimated economic life…"
  • Reply 106 of 182
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    However, re the figures I reported earlier, the following statement is included, "iPhone net sales include the portion of handset revenue recognized in accordance with subscription accounting over the product's 24-month estimated economic life?"



    If you actually read Apple's SEC filings --- you will know that their non-GAAP adjustments REVERSE all their 24 month revenue recognition accounting.
  • Reply 107 of 182
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Yes, but you can't assume that.



    Not sure what you mean by that. Assume what?



    I can't think of any way to get to $5B in 2009 iPhone revenues except by immediately recognizing the quarter's iPhone sales revenue.
  • Reply 108 of 182
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post


    I don't have the 10Q handy, but using Apple's quarterly financial press release, and its data summary (pdf) file, here are the numbers, and they do rely on adjusting for revenue recognition:



    iPhone revenue (Q2 Jan-Mar) = 1.521B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q2) = 0.893B

    iPhone revenue (Q3 Apr-Jun) = 1.689B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q3) = 1.405B

    For a total of $5.508B.



    Making an adjustment for AppleTV (and possibly 3rd party accessories revenue) leads to the $5.094B iPhone revenue number.



    Separately, iPhone margins were estimated based on calculations done by Turley Muller using the differences between Apple's reported current and non-current deferred revenue and costs. His estimates are higher than those being provided by Sacconaghi.



    Thanks! Good stuff.
  • Reply 109 of 182
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Yes, but you can't assume that.



    Well, fwiw, I too agree with mark2005 whose analysis is spot on (and samab) on this.
  • Reply 110 of 182
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post




    In any event, my position is simply that nobody can conclude that Apple is over charging based on this analysis.



    I have no quarrel with that!



    Moreover, if someone (willingly) bought (and then kept) the iPhone, it is, by definition, because they were getting Value > Price (i.e., consumer surplus) and hence it couldn't be 'overcharging' anyway, regardless what Apple charged for it.
  • Reply 111 of 182
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post


    If other mfrs were providing the value of an iPhone at a much lower price (due to lower margins), then you'd have an argument.



    The fact of the matter is that Apple has been driving smartphone prices lower relative to value - when the iPhone 3G went down to $199, it was providing a much better experience (for most) relative to other phones costing $199 and up (and requiring a data plan).



    The iPhone doesn't cost $199, never has, never will
  • Reply 112 of 182
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by drewbyh View Post


    Apple will get what the market will bare and apparently it will bare a lot. Simple economics.



    What do you mean by this? Of the categories they compete in the iPod is on the only one that has a large international market share.
  • Reply 113 of 182
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    The iPhone doesn't cost $199, never has, never will



    I guess you figure this for a telling point, since it's one you've repeated, but in that no $199 phone of the iPhone's caliber actually costs $199 before subsidy, and given that the data plans for the iPhone are generally in line with industry norms, it's a little unclear what you're getting at.
  • Reply 114 of 182
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post


    Sure, that is one definition but by that definition there are a huge number of products where you are overcharged. Take oil, in some countries the production costs of a gallon of crude oil might be only about $5/gallon, yet it sells for $60. In other countries (oil sands, Canada), production costs might be $55/gallon. Are you being overcharged by Saudi Arabia or do they simply have a competitive advantage.



    Should Apple have sell its smartphones for less than Palm, just because they have lower production costs (due to economies of scale)?



    Petrol prices are a bad example, as you are getting ripped off, especially by the likes of BP, Shell, and Mobil
  • Reply 115 of 182
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post


    Not sure what you mean by that. Assume what?



    I can't think of any way to get to $5B in 2009 iPhone revenues except by immediately recognizing the quarter's iPhone sales revenue.



    Even if we recognize that the analysts used the GAAP adjustment, there is no way that they can accurately forecast operating expenses directly related to any specific product.



    But without a declaration of the protocol used in the report we can only assume.
  • Reply 116 of 182
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I guess you figure this for a telling point, since it's one you've repeated, but in that no $199 phone of the iPhone's caliber actually costs $199 before subsidy, and given that the data plans for the iPhone are generally in line with industry norms, it's a little unclear what you're getting at.



    Just because the data plans are in industry norms doesn't mean you are not getting ripped off there as well.



    And I guess you are referring to the USA, the smallest cellphone market of them all, there are other markets that sell data for a lot less than the US, and the iPhone take off is much smaller than the US.



    Where I live the iPhone is overpriced, the data plans are very overpriced. This is not limited to the iPhone, as other brands are selling for a similar price. Will I buy one, no, they would have to half in price (unsubsidised) before I would look at that. Will I get a dataplan, no, they would have to half in price before I would look at that.



    It is a consumers right to refuse to buy something, this argument is not limited to Apple, there are many an industry in the same position with excessive pricing.
  • Reply 117 of 182
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    If this were AppleOutsider, I would agree with you.



    As for iPhone1982, I see he is gone.



    Thank you, Melgross.



    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.



    You're welcome, except I didn't do it.
  • Reply 118 of 182
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post


    I don't have the 10Q handy, but using Apple's quarterly financial press release, and its data summary (pdf) file, here are the numbers, and they do rely on adjusting for revenue recognition:



    iPhone revenue (Q2 Jan-Mar) = 1.521B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q2) = 0.893B

    iPhone revenue (Q3 Apr-Jun) = 1.689B

    iPhone/AppleTV GAAP adjustment (Q3) = 1.405B

    For a total of $5.508B.



    Making an adjustment for AppleTV (and possibly 3rd party accessories revenue) leads to the $5.094B iPhone revenue number.



    Separately, iPhone margins were estimated based on calculations done by Turley Muller using the differences between Apple's reported current and non-current deferred revenue and costs. His estimates are higher than those being provided by Sacconaghi.



    Mark, how did you calculate the GAAP adjustments? To be accurate you would have to know the actually individual units for each of the 2 iPhones.



    As well, could you peruse the RIM CSO relative to this report? http://press.rim.com/release.jsp?id=2248
  • Reply 119 of 182
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    Just because the data plans are in industry norms doesn't mean you are not getting ripped off there as well.



    And I guess you are referring to the USA, the smallest cellphone market of them all, there are other markets that sell data for a lot less than the US, and the iPhone take off is much smaller than the US.



    Where I live the iPhone is overpriced, the data plans are very overpriced. This is not limited to the iPhone, as other brands are selling for a similar price. Will I buy one, no, they would have to half in price (unsubsidised) before I would look at that. Will I get a dataplan, no, they would have to half in price before I would look at that.



    It is a consumers right to refuse to buy something, this argument is not limited to Apple, there are many an industry in the same position with excessive pricing.



    And where do you get the idea from that the USA is the"smallest cellphone market of them all"? Even the EU isn't one cell market, with the differing laws and such.
  • Reply 120 of 182
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    You're welcome, except I didn't do it.



    But you know the way things go around here. You are going to be blamed one way or another.
Sign In or Register to comment.