Apple forecast to sell 100M iPhones, 48M iPads in 2011
Predicted to grow by "nearly 100 percent" year-over-year, Apple is planning to produce as many as 48 million iPads and 100 million iPhones next year, according to one analyst.
Analyst Brian Blair of Wedge Partners issued the forecasts Tuesday after checks with Apple's supply chain, financial publication Barron's reports. Blair sees 100 million iPhones sold in 2011 as "a staggering number any way you look at it," and believes Apple is preparing for the "nearly 100% year over year growth for iPhone in 2011" required to make that number possible. Additionally, the iPad supply chain suggests Apple intends to product 45-48 million iPads next year, according to the analyst.
Blair's numbers, which should be taken with a grain of salt, represent a significant jump in analyst predictions. For instance, Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner predicts Apple will sell almost half as much in the 2011 fiscal year as Blair's estimate: 52 million iPhones and 23 million iPads. After fourth-quarter 2010 sales of the iPad were lower than Wall Street expectations, Needham & Company analyst Charlie Wolf predicted Apple will ship just 18 million iPads in 2011, warning that the iPad could miss even that target depending on growth in the tablet market.
According to Apple's recent Form 10-K for fiscal year 2010, the company sold 39.9 million iPhones, a 93 percent increase year-over-year, and 7.4 million iPads.
Undaunted by last quarter's less than expected iPad sales, Blair sees Apple as "incredibly bullish" with its growth predictions. ?We believe Apple remains the best-positioned company in the tech sector as we exit the year and look into 2011,? Blair wrote in the research note. ?With the iPhone and the iPad, the company continues to experience tremendous product momentum across two core areas that we believe are still in the early stages of growth: with global handset units at 1.1 billion/year and the tablet opportunity still nascent."
iPad growth will be driven by the arrival of the iPad 2, which Blair believes will include a front-facing camera and a thinner unibody form factor.
According to the analyst, Macs will see a lift next year as well. "We additionally see meaningful opportunity for Apple in its Mac line, particularly with the company?s new $999 11 inch screen MacBook Air, which our checks show to be selling higher than expected units both online and in Apple Stores,? wrote Blair.
MacBook Air unit momentum will cause Wall Street to raise its expectations for Mac units next quarter, Blair predicts. ?Apple has created something rather spectacular with the new Air, but has done so in almost a stealthy manner," he wrote. "We believe the 11 inch Air will be both [sic] provide solid incremental units to Apple?s December quarter Mac units, but also add meaningful incremental revenues to the company over the next year.?
In 2009, Wedge Partners correctly predicted that Apple would refresh its iMac and MacBook offerings "in the next several weeks." In July 2009, Wedge Partners analyst Matt Mathison predicted a Chinese iPhone launch would arrive before February 2010, but the device launched just a few months later in October 2009.
Analyst Brian Blair of Wedge Partners issued the forecasts Tuesday after checks with Apple's supply chain, financial publication Barron's reports. Blair sees 100 million iPhones sold in 2011 as "a staggering number any way you look at it," and believes Apple is preparing for the "nearly 100% year over year growth for iPhone in 2011" required to make that number possible. Additionally, the iPad supply chain suggests Apple intends to product 45-48 million iPads next year, according to the analyst.
Blair's numbers, which should be taken with a grain of salt, represent a significant jump in analyst predictions. For instance, Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner predicts Apple will sell almost half as much in the 2011 fiscal year as Blair's estimate: 52 million iPhones and 23 million iPads. After fourth-quarter 2010 sales of the iPad were lower than Wall Street expectations, Needham & Company analyst Charlie Wolf predicted Apple will ship just 18 million iPads in 2011, warning that the iPad could miss even that target depending on growth in the tablet market.
According to Apple's recent Form 10-K for fiscal year 2010, the company sold 39.9 million iPhones, a 93 percent increase year-over-year, and 7.4 million iPads.
Undaunted by last quarter's less than expected iPad sales, Blair sees Apple as "incredibly bullish" with its growth predictions. ?We believe Apple remains the best-positioned company in the tech sector as we exit the year and look into 2011,? Blair wrote in the research note. ?With the iPhone and the iPad, the company continues to experience tremendous product momentum across two core areas that we believe are still in the early stages of growth: with global handset units at 1.1 billion/year and the tablet opportunity still nascent."
iPad growth will be driven by the arrival of the iPad 2, which Blair believes will include a front-facing camera and a thinner unibody form factor.
According to the analyst, Macs will see a lift next year as well. "We additionally see meaningful opportunity for Apple in its Mac line, particularly with the company?s new $999 11 inch screen MacBook Air, which our checks show to be selling higher than expected units both online and in Apple Stores,? wrote Blair.
MacBook Air unit momentum will cause Wall Street to raise its expectations for Mac units next quarter, Blair predicts. ?Apple has created something rather spectacular with the new Air, but has done so in almost a stealthy manner," he wrote. "We believe the 11 inch Air will be both [sic] provide solid incremental units to Apple?s December quarter Mac units, but also add meaningful incremental revenues to the company over the next year.?
In 2009, Wedge Partners correctly predicted that Apple would refresh its iMac and MacBook offerings "in the next several weeks." In July 2009, Wedge Partners analyst Matt Mathison predicted a Chinese iPhone launch would arrive before February 2010, but the device launched just a few months later in October 2009.
Comments
Who the freak is Brian Blair and what freak is Wedge Partner? Anyone who can grab a number out of their butt can call themselves analyst now?
I'm a big Apple fan and a long time Apple investor but.... these estimates coming from no name analysts are getting out of control.
Who the freak is Brian Blair and what freak is Wedge Partner? Anyone who can grab a number out of their butt can call themselves analyst now?
What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
- More RAM!
- A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
- More than double the amount a Flash storage!
- Factime support!
- A faster GPU!
Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.RAM is very important for a number of reasons. One is to better support multitasking, that is almost obvious. Another is to get better performance out of current apps and to enable a new generation of apps that really could use more RAM. One app of special concern is Safari, one could cut their data usage dramatically if Safari wasn't constantly reloading pages.
Dual core A9 would also significantly help performance and hopefully would give us performance approaching a G4. This again would enable a new class of apps and hopefully help out those apps that strain the CPU right now (VLC).
Flash storage should be another obvious need. For many uses you can't have the latency of the network nor deal with the availability issues.
Facetime in and of itself could sell a lot of iPads. In fact I'm waiting on that right now. You get a 100 million device out there running Facetime and there will be some synergy that will drive sales even more. This is one reason why I think Apple needs to come out with an Apple TV dedicated to face time usage, all you really need is a small monitor/ camera and a Blutooth headset.
A better performing GPU is just for completeness, the one in there does surprisingly well. However for games and visualization apps you can never have to much GPU. Plus Apple needs to bring OpenCL to the iPad.
In any event enough background, given an iPad 2 that addresses those issues I'm certain Apple could sustain 2 million a month easy. Now that isn't 48 mill but lets just say I see it as a low side number. Now this does not take into account every initiative Apple may have up its sleeve to drive iPad sales, improvements to the OS and whatever they are doing with that data center might very positive factors. I really don't think 48 mill is impossible and they may be trying to scale production to hit that capacity. Plus people have to remember that the roll out isn't even complete yet. Still 3 million a month is an easier target to hit.
Another way to look at this is the old rev A arguement. Many are sitting back and waiting for the next rev due to the expectation it will address the current models shortcomings. I know personally Facetime has put me on hold iPad wise and many others feel the same way. If anything Facetime has stifled iPad sales. On the other hand iPad has been one of Apples best rev A devices ever so maybe the pent up demand isn't that great.
In the end I think 24 million would be the low side figure for a revamped iPad. The high end really depends upon strong acceptance of rev 2.
IPhone sales are another thing and frankly no one knows what demand is because they have yet to meet demand. Only yesterday did they shorten wait time to 24 hours, so we are talking a half a year here of demand outstripping supply.
Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.
What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
- More RAM!
- A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
- More than double the amount a Flash storage!
- Factime support!
- A faster GPU!
Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.I'd put a Retina display as a priority. It's not quite as necessary as on an iPhone but it would make most pdf's readable without having to zoom. Facetime camera is a given but a decent camera on the rear would be excellent for documenting faults or logging visual information for anyone who works on their feet. Oh and tweak the rounded back so it doesn't rock when it's resting on a table.
Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners.
Apple do not publish processor & memory metrics for consumer platforms. They don't sell like this because it isn't effective. The vast majority of iPad customers would not be able to say the amount of RAM or the number of processor cores. For typical consumers these metrics are meaningless.
Consumers care about what it does and how well.
Apple should focus on...
- Facetime
- The benefits of iOS4.2..iOS5.0
- The stand-alone iPad
The stand-alone thing is important. Apple should reduce the necessity to dock to iTunes. If software updates, content management and other functions are all made possible without docking. The iPad becomes more of a platform and less of a satellite.I am sure the iPad 2.0 will see some under-the-hood hardware changes. But these changes will not be presented as user-facing changes.
C.
Apple do not publish processor & memory metrics for consumer platforms. They don't sell like this because it isn't effective. The vast majority of iPad customers would not be able to say the amount of RAM or the number of processor cores. For typical consumers these metrics are meaningless.
Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's. Time to move on. These issues are moot. If the entire widget is fast, the software is tightly integrated, and polished, most consumers could care less what's under the hood.
Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.
What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
I think this post is upside down. Tech geek freaks get jazzed about these specs, but users just want a device that is useful, fun, and easy. My iPad would be better if:
1.I could quickly switch between apps without losing my work and where I am in the app
2. It were easier for me to organize my files on the iPad and move/sync those files to a computer
3. If scrolling through PDFs were faster
So what is needed to achieve these things?
1. Software update to get better multitasking (coming soon)
2. Either more ram OR faster access to flash to support multitasking
3. Software update to improve file management and syncing (hopefully in ios 5, but who knows)
4. Increase in overall processing speed, but I leave it to apple to figure out the best way to get that speed -- I don't care if it's a higher clocked a4, a dual core chip, or a faster gnu -- whatever works
So if the new iPad comes out with a 1 ghz single core CPU, I won't complain IF I can scroll through PDFs faster thanks to a faster gpu. If there isn't any more ram, I won't complain IF it has lightning fast access to flash, making more ram less necessary.
I want results, I don't care how apple gets them. Getting hung up on a spec sheet is silly.
Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's. Time to move on. These issues are moot. If the entire widget is fast, the software is tightly integrated, and polished, most consumers could care less what's under the hood.
The Samsung Galaxy has more RAM and a fast processor.
But scrolling through web-pages seems to be choppy and sluggish.
Consumers don't care about inputs, they care about outcomes.
C.
Apple users may not care as much about specs or how to get performance increases but exactly how do you expect Apple to gain performance improvements on the iPad without more RAM and moving from the A8 to A9? It's not as if there is a 10-20% performance gain in iOS that can be found like on Android and the current A4 seems to me about the best expression of the A8 as reasonably possible. The A9 represents both improved computation and greater potential battery life.
Or are you asking folks not to display any intelligence at all about computers on a geek site and simply state they want better pixie dust in their next iPad?
Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's.
C'mon. Apple differentiates most all of its products based upon exactly that stuff. Look at the laptop lineup. Look at the desktop lineup. Look at the brand-new Mac Minis - they have different models, differentiated by that unimportant 1990's stuff.
The Samsung Galaxy has more RAM and a fast processor.
But scrolling through web-pages seems to be choppy and sluggish.
C.
Did you use one? They are not yet available to consumers. Did you get your hands on a review or a pre-production model?
How long did you use it? How many web pages were like what you experienced? What sort of background stuff did you have running?
Or what?
What do you base your conclusion on if not actually using the Galaxy Tab?
Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.
What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
- More RAM!
- A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
- More than double the amount a Flash storage!
- Factime support!
- A faster GPU!
Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners.What parallel universe do you live in anyway? Did you read the "other" thread on AppleInsider? You know, the one that reports that 90% of iPad users are extremely pleased with their gadget? Current owners want none of the things you think they do. Your wish list is yet another fantasy of the tech spec nerdocracy. Complete baloney.
What parallel universe do you live in anyway? Did you read the "other" thread on AppleInsider? You know, the one that reports that 90% of iPad users are extremely pleased with their gadget? Current owners want none of the things you think they do. Your wish list is yet another fantasy of the tech spec nerdocracy. Complete baloney.
Current owners don't want facetime and better performance and more storage in the next iPad they buy? Talk about baloney. WTF would they buy a replacement iPad if it didn't have more features, better performance and storage?
Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.
What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
- More RAM!
- A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
- More than double the amount a Flash storage!
- Factime support!
- A faster GPU!
Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.RAM is very important for a number of reasons. One is to better support multitasking, that is almost obvious. Another is to get better performance out of current apps and to enable a new generation of apps that really could use more RAM. One app of special concern is Safari, one could cut their data usage dramatically if Safari wasn't constantly reloading pages.
Dual core A9 would also significantly help performance and hopefully would give us performance approaching a G4. This again would enable a new class of apps and hopefully help out those apps that strain the CPU right now (VLC).
Flash storage should be another obvious need. For many uses you can't have the latency of the network nor deal with the availability issues.
Facetime in and of itself could sell a lot of iPads. In fact I'm waiting on that right now. You get a 100 million device out there running Facetime and there will be some synergy that will drive sales even more. This is one reason why I think Apple needs to come out with an Apple TV dedicated to face time usage, all you really need is a small monitor/ camera and a Blutooth headset.
A better performing GPU is just for completeness, the one in there does surprisingly well. However for games and visualization apps you can never have to much GPU. Plus Apple needs to bring OpenCL to the iPad.
In any event enough background, given an iPad 2 that addresses those issues I'm certain Apple could sustain 2 million a month easy. Now that isn't 48 mill but lets just say I see it as a low side number. Now this does not take into account every initiative Apple may have up its sleeve to drive iPad sales, improvements to the OS and whatever they are doing with that data center might very positive factors. I really don't think 48 mill is impossible and they may be trying to scale production to hit that capacity. Plus people have to remember that the roll out isn't even complete yet. Still 3 million a month is an easier target to hit.
Another way to look at this is the old rev A arguement. Many are sitting back and waiting for the next rev due to the expectation it will address the current models shortcomings. I know personally Facetime has put me on hold iPad wise and many others feel the same way. If anything Facetime has stifled iPad sales. On the other hand iPad has been one of Apples best rev A devices ever so maybe the pent up demand isn't that great.
In the end I think 24 million would be the low side figure for a revamped iPad. The high end really depends upon strong acceptance of rev 2.
IPhone sales are another thing and frankly no one knows what demand is because they have yet to meet demand. Only yesterday did they shorten wait time to 24 hours, so we are talking a half a year here of demand outstripping supply.
"Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners"
I disagree (mostly). I'm not sure any of these things is particularly important. And all would probably lead to a hotter device, with less battery life. Oh, and a much higher price tag. The iPad is not supposed to be a desktop/laptop replacement. I think you'd be happier if iOS features were brought to MacOS X.
I think this post is upside down. Tech geek freaks get jazzed about these specs, but users just want a device that is useful, fun, and easy. My iPad would be better if:
1.I could quickly switch between apps without losing my work and where I am in the app
2. It were easier for me to organize my files on the iPad and move/sync those files to a computer
3. If scrolling through PDFs were faster
So what is needed to achieve these things?
1. Software update to get better multitasking (coming soon)
2. Either more ram OR faster access to flash to support multitasking
3. Software update to improve file management and syncing (hopefully in ios 5, but who knows)
4. Increase in overall processing speed, but I leave it to apple to figure out the best way to get that speed -- I don't care if it's a higher clocked a4, a dual core chip, or a faster gnu -- whatever works
So if the new iPad comes out with a 1 ghz single core CPU, I won't complain IF I can scroll through PDFs faster thanks to a faster gpu. If there isn't any more ram, I won't complain IF it has lightning fast access to flash, making more ram less necessary.
I want results, I don't care how apple gets them. Getting hung up on a spec sheet is silly.
Maybe I'm a fool, but I don't want multitasking. I don't want to manage background apps. That's a pain in the butt. But since I already know it's coming, I can only wish that Apple will let me turn it off. (oh, and turn off cut-and-paste as well).
Current owners don't want facetime and better performance and more storage in the next iPad they buy? Talk about baloney. WTF would they buy a replacement iPad if it didn't have more features, better performance and storage?
Can you be specific? For what task does performance lag? Granted I don't do too much with mine, but it seems to speed right along for what I do.
And please don't confuse Apple's need to differentiate the product so that they can sell upgrades to existing owners, with people's actual needs.
Maybe I'm a fool, but I don't want multitasking. I don't want to manage background apps.
There is no requirement for users to manage background applications in the Apple implementation.
It's fully automatic, and there is no penalty for it being there.
C.