Everybody but you seems to understand that the iPhone 5 will be the iPhone 5.
The naming convention for the series has to do with capabilities. The 4S has slightly more features but from a developers standpoint -- it's relatively the same machine. The 5 will have a higher res display and some other capabilities which need to be targeted. Sure, ultimately it's all marketing, but with Apple, at least the "generations" mean something to developers. A 3G or 3Gs only has minor differences.
So can you stop adding more noise than signal on this? It's silly. Just move on.
what is funny is if you read the whole thread and comprehended it.....you would see that i was saying it was going to be called the iPhone 5. The moderator Tallest Skil was saying was NOT going to be called iPhone 5
There are a lot of devices outside the USA, but also, inside the USA Apple sells half of the smartphones, plus iPod touches and iPads. No doubt Apple should be most popular at an airport in Florida. A lot of evidence around the net suggest about 1/2of Android phones are really used more like feature phones than like app phones. That should further skew wi-fi data to Apple.
Also keep in mind most Android phones are 4G, and a good number of the new models are LTE. Meaning that connecting to WIFI isn't really necessary. I know I don't bother with signing onto secured WIFI networks if I can get a network signal, it's a pain...
Yes, much of the technology Apple uses was invented by others. Yet it was Apple that consolidated existing technology and integrated it into a way to make the world's best selling phone - and the world's most widely copied phone.
Exactly. Apple sold 27 M premium phones. Samsung sold 52 M phones of all types - everything from high end phones to midrange phones to idiot phones and even feature phones.
Ferrari could sell more cars if they sold a subcompact economy car, too. But why should they?
why the constant alignment of Apple iphone to ferrari, porsche or whatever? and android to a 'subcompact'
Ferrari is in the upper echelon of motorvehicle performance and electronics, in a pretty shell.
My iphone 4s offers no real difference in the electronics compared with many other available phones, but it has a far prettier shell.
the iphone 3gs that i can get for 0$ on contract, is this premium, or subcompact?
I can tell you exactly what average price each of the 26.03M iPhones was sold at. It's a pretty impressive number: $624 per handset (p. 26 of 10Q filed with SEC from Tuesday).
I can assure you that if 3GSs were being given away and in large numbers (as you imply), the 4 and 4S must be selling for some astounding average price! But I am quite content with $624 per handset.
The 3gs is given away, in the same way many android, bb and wndows phones are given away.
In my country, 3gs and 4 are available for no cost, and iphone 4s for a small fee.
Apple still makes their price.
Just like free android device manufacterers still receive their price
It is a drug that helps people like anantksundaram not freak out upon hearing the phrase 'Samsung' or any statement that doesn't support 'Apple is God's gift to this planet'...aka...'a chill pill'...
I though that's what heroin and Prozac are for.
OK I know what was wrong with opium, but is Prozac out of the market already or it doesn't work anymore?
The 3gs is given away, in the same way many android, bb and wndows phones are given away.
In my country, 3gs and 4 are available for no cost, and iphone 4s for a small fee.
Apple still makes their price.
Just like free android device manufacterers still receive their price
Sure. There's nothing to disagree with, there. Nor have I ever. But the important point is that the average selling price of -- and hence, profits from -- an Apple phone is likely substantially higher than that of a Samsung phone.
Tell me all about revenue recognition and securities laws and how they affect Apple.
PS: When you Google the answers tonight before getting back to me tomorrow, make sure you don't pick the top articles because that's too easy to trace.
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
Oh, I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but fwiw, I did not have to "Google the answers" last night.
1) First, note that Apple's revenue recognition policies are clearly laid out in its footnotes. Essentially, the actual sales for the quarter can be calculated as (reported sales for the quarter, which are net of returns) plus (channel inventory at the beginning of the quarter) minus (channel inventory at the end of the quarter). All data that Apple presents or makes available for its investors. It comes out pretty close to the reported sales number.
FYI, Apple is the only handset manufacturer that reports both dollar and volume figures. Granted, it includes some services and accessories, but I'll bet that is no more than a small handful of percentage points. (That's my guess, since there's no precise data on that. But it's based on what I've seen in many analyst reports I've read).
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
I do think Apple profit margins cannot be substain. But I dont think is will drop on problems with there component makers or subsidises. The ipad grows more than the iphone so at some point the iphone revenu ratio will reduce while the ipad ratio will increase. Since the ipad margins are much lower than the iphone margins, it will affect the average margin. I also hope that at some point the macs take some PC market share, to help diversified income.
I dont like the fact that 50% of Apple revenu comes from the iphone. This increase the risk for Apple investors because a bad new iphone would send the stocks way down. Hopefully Apple will launch a new product in the next few years to help diversified its product line.
You may need to go back and read what they wrote, they said Apple sold 27m premium phones, the iPhone 3GS is not a premium phone, is it is budget phone. It is in the same class as the cheap Android phones people go on about
I think I really must beg to differ. Price isn't the only measure of "premium".
I still use a 3GS… it isn't any less "premium" than when I bought it. Granted, it isn't the top-of-the-line today, but the fact is, Apple simply doesn't make or sell any phones that really fall below the 'premium' range...
Even their 'two models back' phones are considered premium, even at a discount...
But, to avoid a long and unnecessary argument, let's try to agree on what "premium" means.
I think it's more about whether a phone is "higher end", not just "higher priced"… my 3GS runs iOS 5 … does pretty much everything a 4S does (except Siri and a couple of other new features). It's still a high-end phone (NOT AT ALL like the cheap Android phones others make and sell), and so is still 'premium' in my book...
I wouldn't over worry about it… the iPad is picking up an ever greater share of overall revenue, which balances the load somewhat… Macs are still a healthy segment, and growing, although only incrementally, it's growth in an otherwise down market… I think we'll see more growth there too over time...
Still, if the iPhone continues to be 50% of their income, that can be a bit too dependent… I'd like to see a continued re-balancing take place.
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
Oh, I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but fwiw, I did not have to "Google the answers" last night.
1) First, note that Apple's revenue recognition policies are clearly laid out in its footnotes. Essentially, the actual sales for the quarter can be calculated as (reported sales for the quarter, which are net of returns) plus (channel inventory at the beginning of the quarter) minus (channel inventory at the end of the quarter). All data that Apple presents or makes available for its investors. It comes out pretty close to the reported sales number.
FYI, Apple is the only handset manufacturer that reports both dollar and volume figures. Granted, it includes some services and accessories, but I'll bet that is no more than a small handful of percentage points. (That's my guess, since there's no precise data on that. But it's based on what I've seen in many analyst reports I've read).
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
Hope that helps.
This is the kind of post I enjoy reading. It has substance and no insults! Thank you very much. Now, I want to clarify your point on the revenue recognition a bit as it has been posted in this thread and others that Apple recognizes a sale upon shipment except in the case of online sales, education sales, and "some other sales." You agree with that right?
I think I really must beg to differ. Price isn't the only measure of "premium".
I still use a 3GS… it isn't any less "premium" than when I bought it. Granted, it isn't the top-of-the-line today, but the fact is, Apple simply doesn't make or sell any phones that really fall below the 'premium' range...
Even their 'two models back' phones are considered premium, even at a discount...
But, to avoid a long and unnecessary argument, let's try to agree on what "premium" means.
I think it's more about whether a phone is "higher end", not just "higher priced"… my 3GS runs iOS 5 … does pretty much everything a 4S does (except Siri and a couple of other new features). It's still a high-end phone (NOT AT ALL like the cheap Android phones others make and sell), and so is still 'premium' in my book...
It's not all about materials and build quality or a checklist of features; those obviously do not deteriorate over time (not over 2 years anyway). It's about the user experience and specs relative to current offerings of competitors and even Apple's other products. Right now, the 3GS has a screen, chipset, radio, and camera that are all very much outdated. Furthermore, it is relatively slow to load heavy webpages and is a bit sluggish when moving throughout the UI on iOS 5 (just going by hearsay on the iOS 5 part). At this point the 3GS is truly an entry level smartphone with a high end brand name.
Everybody but you seems to understand that the iPhone 5 will be the iPhone 5.
The naming convention for the series has to do with capabilities. The 4S has slightly more features but from a developers standpoint -- it's relatively the same machine. The 5 will have a higher res display and some other capabilities which need to be targeted. Sure, ultimately it's all marketing, but with Apple, at least the "generations" mean something to developers. A 3G or 3Gs only has minor differences.
So can you stop adding more noise than signal on this? It's silly. Just move on.
The only consistent predictor of when Apple changes numbers on the iPhone is a change in physical appearance. Not capabilities. 3G to 3GS was only minor differences? Absurd! Just because you can't see the differences doesn't mean they weren't large.
Naming went from iPhone (1) to (3G and 3GS), to (4 and 4S). Lack of number, to 3, to 4. Next number could be 6, could be 5, could be another lack of number. There isn't enough history to use it for prediction, and what history there is doesn't linearly lead anywhere. Finally this is not a natural or mathematical phenomenon, this is a branding decision by a company run by different people over the years.
The next iPhone will be the 6th model, that much is certain. It is also certain that it will be named whatever Apple names it. What "everyone" understands has nothing to do with what the future will hold. Everyone used to think the world was flat. Turned out they were wrong. But you'd be busy telling Columbus that it was flat and he was an idiot because popular opinion disagreed.
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
Hope that helps.
What makes you think that the USA is the only country where a company must tell the truth when reporting its financial results?
I think I really must beg to differ. Price isn't the only measure of "premium".
That is your opinion, that is ok. But according to your opinion every model of smartphone that Samsung sells is also premium, because they also match all the logic you have in measuring your 3GS as premium.
By the same logic my Nokia 7650 is still premium, as it still has the premium features that it came with in 2002, the same as my Nokia E65 from 2007
The fact is a 3GS purchased today cannot be classed as premium compared to a iPhone 4, or 4S
The number does NOT represent the generation number, only did on the iPhone4.
So you don't think there's a problem with giving a product a name that has nothing to do with the product? You'd be fine with Apple releasing a purple laptop and calling it the "WinScribe Blue"?
Of course not. If there is going to be a version number in a product, it should relate to the version. If it's a marketing number, it is just that. Meaning Office 2010 coming out in the year 2009, or whatever, is strange. Anyhoo, next iPhone is the 6th gen, that's indisputable. Probably called just iPhone. And yes, people calling it iPhone 5 may lack an eye for detail, don't really care, are stupid... I don't know. But when someone explains it and then still fail to understand the reasoning, I should leave the thread.
Funny enough, I had a colleague once who used to work for a company called Blue Square and their logo was a red circle.
Excellent post! I'd hit the 'Add to reputation' button but can't on an iPad.
Touch it twice.
[/quote]
I did. I do. I try. That only works on the quote and reply buttons, not the Add to Reputation one. Which seems to be of the exact same HTML, strangely enough.
OT: whassup with all the single-digid-IQ-people posting in this thread?
Comments
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
But he needs to be told not to talk to the guests. He bothers them.
Then start a thread in the Feedback subforum.
I'm sure they'll listen to you, Connie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner
Everybody but you seems to understand that the iPhone 5 will be the iPhone 5.
The naming convention for the series has to do with capabilities. The 4S has slightly more features but from a developers standpoint -- it's relatively the same machine. The 5 will have a higher res display and some other capabilities which need to be targeted. Sure, ultimately it's all marketing, but with Apple, at least the "generations" mean something to developers. A 3G or 3Gs only has minor differences.
So can you stop adding more noise than signal on this? It's silly. Just move on.
what is funny is if you read the whole thread and comprehended it.....you would see that i was saying it was going to be called the iPhone 5. The moderator Tallest Skil was saying was NOT going to be called iPhone 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota_Steve
There are a lot of devices outside the USA, but also, inside the USA Apple sells half of the smartphones, plus iPod touches and iPads. No doubt Apple should be most popular at an airport in Florida. A lot of evidence around the net suggest about 1/2of Android phones are really used more like feature phones than like app phones. That should further skew wi-fi data to Apple.
Also keep in mind most Android phones are 4G, and a good number of the new models are LTE. Meaning that connecting to WIFI isn't really necessary. I know I don't bother with signing onto secured WIFI networks if I can get a network signal, it's a pain...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Yes, much of the technology Apple uses was invented by others. Yet it was Apple that consolidated existing technology and integrated it into a way to make the world's best selling phone - and the world's most widely copied phone.
Exactly. Apple sold 27 M premium phones. Samsung sold 52 M phones of all types - everything from high end phones to midrange phones to idiot phones and even feature phones.
Ferrari could sell more cars if they sold a subcompact economy car, too. But why should they?
why the constant alignment of Apple iphone to ferrari, porsche or whatever? and android to a 'subcompact'
Ferrari is in the upper echelon of motorvehicle performance and electronics, in a pretty shell.
My iphone 4s offers no real difference in the electronics compared with many other available phones, but it has a far prettier shell.
the iphone 3gs that i can get for 0$ on contract, is this premium, or subcompact?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I can tell you exactly what average price each of the 26.03M iPhones was sold at. It's a pretty impressive number: $624 per handset (p. 26 of 10Q filed with SEC from Tuesday).
I can assure you that if 3GSs were being given away and in large numbers (as you imply), the 4 and 4S must be selling for some astounding average price! But I am quite content with $624 per handset.
The 3gs is given away, in the same way many android, bb and wndows phones are given away.
In my country, 3gs and 4 are available for no cost, and iphone 4s for a small fee.
Apple still makes their price.
Just like free android device manufacterers still receive their price
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
It is a drug that helps people like anantksundaram not freak out upon hearing the phrase 'Samsung' or any statement that doesn't support 'Apple is God's gift to this planet'...aka...'a chill pill'...
I though that's what heroin and Prozac are for.
OK I know what was wrong with opium, but is Prozac out of the market already or it doesn't work anymore?
Sure. There's nothing to disagree with, there. Nor have I ever. But the important point is that the average selling price of -- and hence, profits from -- an Apple phone is likely substantially higher than that of a Samsung phone.
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
Oh, I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but fwiw, I did not have to "Google the answers" last night.
1) First, note that Apple's revenue recognition policies are clearly laid out in its footnotes. Essentially, the actual sales for the quarter can be calculated as (reported sales for the quarter, which are net of returns) plus (channel inventory at the beginning of the quarter) minus (channel inventory at the end of the quarter). All data that Apple presents or makes available for its investors. It comes out pretty close to the reported sales number.
FYI, Apple is the only handset manufacturer that reports both dollar and volume figures. Granted, it includes some services and accessories, but I'll bet that is no more than a small handful of percentage points. (That's my guess, since there's no precise data on that. But it's based on what I've seen in many analyst reports I've read).
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
Hope that helps.
There is no such a claim in the article you quoted...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs
post about profit margins
I do think Apple profit margins cannot be substain. But I dont think is will drop on problems with there component makers or subsidises. The ipad grows more than the iphone so at some point the iphone revenu ratio will reduce while the ipad ratio will increase. Since the ipad margins are much lower than the iphone margins, it will affect the average margin. I also hope that at some point the macs take some PC market share, to help diversified income.
I dont like the fact that 50% of Apple revenu comes from the iphone. This increase the risk for Apple investors because a bad new iphone would send the stocks way down. Hopefully Apple will launch a new product in the next few years to help diversified its product line.
I totally agree with this.
Samsung : +172% / 32.6%
Apple : +27% / 16.9%
Nokia : -39% / 6.6%
HTC : -24% / 5.7%
ZTE : +300% / 5.2%
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS23624612
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
You may need to go back and read what they wrote, they said Apple sold 27m premium phones, the iPhone 3GS is not a premium phone, is it is budget phone. It is in the same class as the cheap Android phones people go on about
I think I really must beg to differ. Price isn't the only measure of "premium".
I still use a 3GS… it isn't any less "premium" than when I bought it. Granted, it isn't the top-of-the-line today, but the fact is, Apple simply doesn't make or sell any phones that really fall below the 'premium' range...
Even their 'two models back' phones are considered premium, even at a discount...
But, to avoid a long and unnecessary argument, let's try to agree on what "premium" means.
I think it's more about whether a phone is "higher end", not just "higher priced"… my 3GS runs iOS 5 … does pretty much everything a 4S does (except Siri and a couple of other new features). It's still a high-end phone (NOT AT ALL like the cheap Android phones others make and sell), and so is still 'premium' in my book...
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I totally agree with this.
I wouldn't over worry about it… the iPad is picking up an ever greater share of overall revenue, which balances the load somewhat… Macs are still a healthy segment, and growing, although only incrementally, it's growth in an otherwise down market… I think we'll see more growth there too over time...
Still, if the iPhone continues to be 50% of their income, that can be a bit too dependent… I'd like to see a continued re-balancing take place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
Oh, I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but fwiw, I did not have to "Google the answers" last night.
1) First, note that Apple's revenue recognition policies are clearly laid out in its footnotes. Essentially, the actual sales for the quarter can be calculated as (reported sales for the quarter, which are net of returns) plus (channel inventory at the beginning of the quarter) minus (channel inventory at the end of the quarter). All data that Apple presents or makes available for its investors. It comes out pretty close to the reported sales number.
FYI, Apple is the only handset manufacturer that reports both dollar and volume figures. Granted, it includes some services and accessories, but I'll bet that is no more than a small handful of percentage points. (That's my guess, since there's no precise data on that. But it's based on what I've seen in many analyst reports I've read).
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
Hope that helps.
This is the kind of post I enjoy reading. It has substance and no insults! Thank you very much. Now, I want to clarify your point on the revenue recognition a bit as it has been posted in this thread and others that Apple recognizes a sale upon shipment except in the case of online sales, education sales, and "some other sales." You agree with that right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
I think I really must beg to differ. Price isn't the only measure of "premium".
I still use a 3GS… it isn't any less "premium" than when I bought it. Granted, it isn't the top-of-the-line today, but the fact is, Apple simply doesn't make or sell any phones that really fall below the 'premium' range...
Even their 'two models back' phones are considered premium, even at a discount...
But, to avoid a long and unnecessary argument, let's try to agree on what "premium" means.
I think it's more about whether a phone is "higher end", not just "higher priced"… my 3GS runs iOS 5 … does pretty much everything a 4S does (except Siri and a couple of other new features). It's still a high-end phone (NOT AT ALL like the cheap Android phones others make and sell), and so is still 'premium' in my book...
It's not all about materials and build quality or a checklist of features; those obviously do not deteriorate over time (not over 2 years anyway). It's about the user experience and specs relative to current offerings of competitors and even Apple's other products. Right now, the 3GS has a screen, chipset, radio, and camera that are all very much outdated. Furthermore, it is relatively slow to load heavy webpages and is a bit sluggish when moving throughout the UI on iOS 5 (just going by hearsay on the iOS 5 part). At this point the 3GS is truly an entry level smartphone with a high end brand name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner
Everybody but you seems to understand that the iPhone 5 will be the iPhone 5.
The naming convention for the series has to do with capabilities. The 4S has slightly more features but from a developers standpoint -- it's relatively the same machine. The 5 will have a higher res display and some other capabilities which need to be targeted. Sure, ultimately it's all marketing, but with Apple, at least the "generations" mean something to developers. A 3G or 3Gs only has minor differences.
So can you stop adding more noise than signal on this? It's silly. Just move on.
The only consistent predictor of when Apple changes numbers on the iPhone is a change in physical appearance. Not capabilities. 3G to 3GS was only minor differences? Absurd! Just because you can't see the differences doesn't mean they weren't large.
Naming went from iPhone (1) to (3G and 3GS), to (4 and 4S). Lack of number, to 3, to 4. Next number could be 6, could be 5, could be another lack of number. There isn't enough history to use it for prediction, and what history there is doesn't linearly lead anywhere. Finally this is not a natural or mathematical phenomenon, this is a branding decision by a company run by different people over the years.
The next iPhone will be the 6th model, that much is certain. It is also certain that it will be named whatever Apple names it. What "everyone" understands has nothing to do with what the future will hold. Everyone used to think the world was flat. Turned out they were wrong. But you'd be busy telling Columbus that it was flat and he was an idiot because popular opinion disagreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Your questions are quite broad and vague (and my reference to securities law was only in response to cameronj specifically bringing it up), but I'll try.
2) The securities law point was, as I said, in response to cameronj bringing it up. Also, if you read the thread, it was referring to Samsung, not Apple. So I can only answer in that context (since I don't know what your question really means in relation to Apple). He said that Samsung would be in violation of securities laws (presumably US laws) if they did not report (I think it was implied) handset sales. They would not be. The reason? As an ADR (which is how foreign company stocks trade in the US), Samsung has to report using something called Form 20-F, which does not quite rise to the level of a 10-K. Companies from a whole host of countries -- including S Korea -- are exempted from 10-K requirements (especially segment reporting requirements) if the 20-F meets local reporting requirement -- and in the case of non-exempt countries, IFRS -- criteria (you can Google 'IFRS').
Hope that helps.
What makes you think that the USA is the only country where a company must tell the truth when reporting its financial results?
That is your opinion, that is ok. But according to your opinion every model of smartphone that Samsung sells is also premium, because they also match all the logic you have in measuring your 3GS as premium.
By the same logic my Nokia 7650 is still premium, as it still has the premium features that it came with in 2002, the same as my Nokia E65 from 2007
The fact is a 3GS purchased today cannot be classed as premium compared to a iPhone 4, or 4S
Of course not. If there is going to be a version number in a product, it should relate to the version. If it's a marketing number, it is just that. Meaning Office 2010 coming out in the year 2009, or whatever, is strange. Anyhoo, next iPhone is the 6th gen, that's indisputable. Probably called just iPhone. And yes, people calling it iPhone 5 may lack an eye for detail, don't really care, are stupid... I don't know. But when someone explains it and then still fail to understand the reasoning, I should leave the thread.
Funny enough, I had a colleague once who used to work for a company called Blue Square and their logo was a red circle.
Touch it twice.
[/quote]
I did. I do. I try. That only works on the quote and reply buttons, not the Add to Reputation one. Which seems to be of the exact same HTML, strangely enough.
OT: whassup with all the single-digid-IQ-people posting in this thread?