Samsung pre-announces earnings, profits surge 53% to $7.7 billion

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 67
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    This article is talking about profits, not about the number of units sold or shipped.




    Revenue, not profits. image

  • Reply 22 of 67
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,460member

    ...Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had expected Samsung to see 8.3 trillion won in operating profit and 53 trillion won in sales, as <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/05/technology/mobile/samsung-profit/index.html?source=yahoo_quote">noted by</a> <em>CNNMoney</em>.

    Trillion ?? Well, Samsung only wishes it was in $$$'s.
  • Reply 23 of 67
    jupiteronejupiterone Posts: 1,564member
    How do you pre-announce? Didn't they just announce?
  • Reply 24 of 67
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JupiterOne View Post



    How do you pre-announce? Didn't they just announce?


    I take it these press releases aren't backed up by offical audits.

  • Reply 25 of 67
    I'm PayPaling to who will open an iPhone and tell me the names printed inside. I need some edumakation'.
    .
  • Reply 26 of 67
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

    I take it these press releases aren't backed up by offical audits.


     


    Their actual numbers aren't backed up by official anything, so it's okay.

  • Reply 27 of 67

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post



    I'm PayPaling to who will open an iPhone and tell me the names printed inside. I need some edumakation'.

    .


    Because Samsung makes every single part in their phones?  Riiiiiight.  Open a Samsung phone and you'll see many of the parts are from the same non-Samsung sources as you'll see in an iPhone.

  • Reply 28 of 67
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,419member


    The market is not terribly impressed, apparently: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/markets-korea-stocks-idUSL3N0CR3L620130405?type=companyNews


     


    The buzz is "they spend more on marketing than innovation" (Horrors! I thought only Apple did that!?): http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/us-samsung-spending-marketing-idUSBRE9340C120130405?type=companyNews

  • Reply 29 of 67

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by icoco3 View Post





    Trillion ?? Well, Samsung only wishes it was in $$$'s.


    "Trillion" is correct. The won is valued much less than a dollar or euro.

  • Reply 30 of 67
    just_mejust_me Posts: 590member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by icoco3 View Post





    Trillion ?? Well, Samsung only wishes it was in $$$'s.


    ???'s

  • Reply 31 of 67
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,743member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan View Post


    "Trillion" is correct. The won is valued much less than a dollar or euro.



    Soon, when Samsung's game is up, Korea is going to have no choice but to rename their currency to the lose.

  • Reply 32 of 67
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    This article is talking about profits, not about the number of units sold or shipped.




    Revenue, not profits. image



    8.7 trillion won in operating profit (at least according to the article)


     


    sales of 52 trillion won

  • Reply 33 of 67
    isaidsoisaidso Posts: 750member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by umrk_lab View Post


    Samsung or Samsung electronics ?



     


    Good point, but regardless their phones will be the majority of that.



    Not even close.

  • Reply 34 of 67
    ankleskaterankleskater Posts: 1,287member
    apple ][ wrote: »
    Yeah, the Surface in the article is some huge table.

    However, it's listed in the timeline for 2008, while the iPhone, which came out in 2007 is nowhere to be found on that timeline.

    Reading that article was like reading the history of WWII, written by a skinhead.

    Did you really read it? If you did, then you'd have understood that Apple's products will be featured in the next part.

    Sigh ...
  • Reply 35 of 67
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    The market is not terribly impressed, apparently: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/markets-korea-stocks-idUSL3N0CR3L620130405?type=companyNews


     


    The buzz is "they spend more on marketing than innovation" (Horrors! I thought only Apple did that!?): http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/us-samsung-spending-marketing-idUSBRE9340C120130405?type=companyNews



    From the Reuters article: 


     


     


    "Samsung keeps investing in R&D. They've boosted their smartphone R&D workforce to 25,000 or so from less than 20,000, and I think they have an exciting product lineup ready, probably in the second half, to upend the market," said Lee Do-hoon, an analyst at RBS.


     


    So Samsung has 25,000 employees just working on smartphone R&D?  Somehow I find that hard to believe.


     


    And since the S4 has already been announced I'd be curious to know what this new product lineup is that's going to "upend the market".


     


    it blows my mind how much free PR Samsung gets from the media right now.  I mean on CNBC and elsewhere they're getting credited for reviving the brick and mortar stores.  There's an article over at Forbes about how Samsung is "shaking up" retail and how Microsoft needs to take notice.  Does the media not know the whole store within a store concept isn't new?  There's nothing new or groundbreaking about Samsung having a mini-store inside Best Buy,  Sheesh.

  • Reply 36 of 67
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by isaidso View Post


    Not even close.



    Source?

  • Reply 37 of 67
    umrk_lab wrote: »
    Samsung or Samsung electronics ?

    It doesn't matter.
  • Reply 38 of 67
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    Samsung's recent success is believed to have come from low- and mid-level smartphones.



     


    The Reuters and other articles I read said it came from mid-tier phones.


     


    They also said that the record-breaking earnings growth was "fueled by" high end phones like the Galaxy S and Note series.


     


    I suspect it's a bit of each:  low, mid and high.


     


    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Crime does pay, apparently.


     


    Who cares about a billion dollar fine, when you've made many more billions than that in profit? And it probably won't even be a billion dollar fine. Some judge or other asshat will no doubt lower the fine.



     


    So how do you feel about Apple being hit with a half billion dollar fine (that will probably rise to over $1 B after the next trial) for their Facetime patent violations?


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post


    Didnt know you could profit from shipped items that have to be repurchased backed later on



     


    Apple reports profits the same way: from direct sales and retailer shipments.  Their SEC 10K filing states that returns are accounted for separately.


     


    Btw, I've never read of Samsung having to repurchase a lot of items sold to retailers.   Even when the first US tablet end user sales didn't go as quickly as expected, US retailer buying rebounded a couple of quarters later as they sold their inventory and figured out a more realistic amount to purchase for the future.


     


    (Retailer overbuying was also a difficulty for Apple's sales a couple of quarters last year.)

  • Reply 39 of 67
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 982member
    jdnc123 wrote: »
    Meanwhile, Apple at 52-week low, and may no longer be most valuable tech company in the world by the end of the day or monday.  IBM about to surpass Apple in value despite making far less.  Short-term earnings don't matter this much, the market has lost all faith in this company longer term with current valuation.
    what are you talking about? IBM's market cap is at 233 Billion while Apple's is at 397 Billion. Only Exxon is close at 398. These two have been swapping places for the last few weeks.
  • Reply 40 of 67
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,419member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


    Apple reports profits the same way: from direct sales and retailer shipments.  Their SEC 10K filing states that returns are accounted for separately.


     


    Btw, I've never read of Samsung having to repurchase a lot of items sold to retailers.   Even when the first US tablet end user sales didn't go as quickly as expected, US retailer buying rebounded a couple of quarters later as they sold their inventory and figured out a more realistic amount to purchase for the future.


     


    (Retailer overbuying was also a difficulty for Apple's sales a couple of quarters last year.)



    1) Here's Apple's revenue recognition policy from its 10-K, verbatim: "Net sales consist primarily of revenue from the sale of hardware, software, digital content and applications, peripherals, and service and support contracts. The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable. Product is considered delivered to the customer once it has been shipped and title and risk of loss have been transferred. For most of the Company’s product sales, these criteria are met at the time the product is shipped. For online sales to individuals, for some sales to education customers in the U.S., and for certain other sales, the Company defers revenue until the customer receives the product because the Company retains a portion of the risk of loss on these sales during transit. The Company recognizes revenue from the sale of hardware products, software bundled with hardware that is essential to the functionality of the hardware, and third-party digital content sold on the iTunes Store in accordance with general revenue recognition accounting guidance. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with industry specific software accounting guidance for the following types of sales transactions: (i) standalone sales of software products, (ii) sales of software upgrades and (iii) sales of software bundled with hardware not essential to the functionality of the hardware.


     


    In addition, Apple provides channel inventory data during every quarterly conference call, so that you can fairly precisely estimate actual sales. And it provides number of actual units sold (so that an investor can calculate an average selling price). Does anyone else do that?


     


    2) Here's Samsung's, from its equivalent of the 10-K: "Sales of products and merchandise are recognized upon delivery when the significant risks and rewards of ownership of goods have transferred to the buyer, continuing managerial involvement usually associated with ownership and effective control have ceased, the amount of revenue can be measured reliably, it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the Company and the costs incurred or to be incurred in respect of the transaction can be measured reliably. The Company records reductions to revenue for special pricing arrangements, price protection and other volume based discounts. If product sales are subject to customer acceptance, revenue is not recognized until customer acceptance occurs. 


     


    Do you notice any differences?


     


    3) Even if Samsung were to repurchase a lot of items, just curious, here would you hear about it? What evidence do you have for your claim that "US retailer buying rebounded a couple of quarters later," and that they "figured out a more realistic amount to purchase for the future"?


     


    4) I did not know that "retailer overbuying" was a problem for Apple "a couple of quarters last year." Please tell us more. Where did you see/read/hear about this? How big a problem was it? 0.1% of sales? 1% of sales? 10% of sales? What impact, if any, did it have on Apple's bottom line and/or its profit share?

Sign In or Register to comment.