Personally, I have yet to see someone holding one of these behemoths to their ear and talking on it. I don't get it I guess.
The 6.3" phone mentioned in the article or the 7" iPad Mini LTE mentioned in a comment are more likely to be used with a Bluetooth headset than being held up to the ear.
This could be mostly BS -- just management propaganda designed to motivate employees.
But it would be more interesting to consider the possibility that he's serious, and to guess at what he sees as Samsung's primary problem.
I'll guess that he's worried that Samsung's current boom in mobile profits is about as sustainable as Motorola's or Nokia's in years past. And the reason for that worry is that Samsung does not control a platform -- there is no reason for consumers to consistently prefer a Samsung phone to any other Android phone. If Samsung loses a product cycle to another Android manufacturer (Motorola, backed by Google $$, could be a contender, as could any given Chinese firm backed by the Chinese government, could be another), then Samsung could be in trouble. And of course Samsung is in the process of losing its largest customer for semiconductors -- a business that could have been much more reliable over time than mobile.
But if this is right, what should Samsung do about it?
I see two options:
(1) fork Android and become a platform company, not just an OEM
(2) take the profits they've made in mobile, reinvest in the rest of the business, and return to being a reliable supplier to companies like Apple instead of competing with companies like Apple. With such a reinvestment, Samsung could displace Intel and TSMC as the premier semiconductor firm in the world.
Option 1 is probably the riskiest -- the highest upside and downside potentials.
Option 2 is safer yet still very rewarding.
So, put another way, Samsung's choice is to either become the next Apple or the next Intel.I have no idea what they'll pick, but I think attempting to displace Intel is the smarter choice.
The problem with Option 2 is that the margins suck. Apple, for example, makes much more off their devices than their entire supply chain (probably by a factor of five or so, though I don't know the exact numbers). Samsung IS their own supply chain, so they are doing quite well off the smartphone market too.
I hope Samsung have a 'sense of crisis' over some of the excellent Chinese Android clones of Samsung S4 and Galaxy Note II that have began to appear on the market for two thirds the price of the Samsung models.
Personally, I have yet to see someone holding one of these behemoths to their ear and talking on it. I don't get it I guess.
Perhaps you have and didn't even know it. Many people prefer bluetooth headsets that are so small now that they are barely visible. Other may prefer to use headphones with a mic. I was at the grocery store just yesterday and thought a man was talking to me until I noticed a he was talking on his phone with a barely visible bluetooth headset in his ear. I only knew he had a Galaxy Note II because during the call he took it out of his pocket and I guess looked at a recipe or shopping list and noticed the phone.
I have an iPhone and I prefer my bluetooth headset as well. Years ago the quality wasn't all that great with some static, but it has now improved to the point where using bluetooth is a very viable option and the calls are crystal clear. But like others stated, smartphones are used far more often while looking at the display than are used for taking voice calls for the majority of people. For apps, data, text, etc.. a larger display for that use is advantageous not a hinderance.
This is a classic example of bad translation creating a mountain out of a molehill. The guy actually meant: "We should have a sense of urgency." This is normal corporate talk.
The problem with Option 2 is that the margins suck. Apple, for example, makes much more off their devices than their entire supply chain (probably by a factor of five or so, though I don't know the exact numbers). Samsung IS their own supply chain, so they are doing quite well off the smartphone market too.
Intel has margins of 60% -- much better than Apple's overall margins.
Even if Samsung only gets margins of 40% on SOCs, that still compared very favorably to Apple's margins on everything except the iPhone.
everett, the weed has got to you, Apple has never ever been concerned with cannibalization, the different screen sizes is a non issue.
Saying that "Most phones are used for data consumption & texting & when used for phones used while driving connected to cars blue tooth." well OMG that just about covers the whole gamut, tell us some new please
I feel for you, man. Watching commercials, that is. (Our TV consumption is almost exclusively provided by streaming Netflix and iTunes store rentals, with the occasional over-the-air local broadcast for sports games. We would NEVER go back to cable or satellite.)
Perhaps they're realizing how many billions they're going to lose as a direct result Apple eliminating their massive orders of chips and other hardware from them due to their theft of Apple's work and designs?
Question: if they don't copy Apple when it comes to phones, who will they copy?
I don't know what's worse, posting crap about Google, Samsung etc and justifying it belongs here and on the front page cause they are Apple competition (I say out it backpage or even just in forum for those that really care). Or lumping two to three things in one article.
AppleInsider to you: "Haha! Made you click. And now, more ads from our sponsors! We are a quality web site lol"
Comments
The 6.3" phone mentioned in the article or the 7" iPad Mini LTE mentioned in a comment are more likely to be used with a Bluetooth headset than being held up to the ear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor
This could be mostly BS -- just management propaganda designed to motivate employees.
But it would be more interesting to consider the possibility that he's serious, and to guess at what he sees as Samsung's primary problem.
I'll guess that he's worried that Samsung's current boom in mobile profits is about as sustainable as Motorola's or Nokia's in years past. And the reason for that worry is that Samsung does not control a platform -- there is no reason for consumers to consistently prefer a Samsung phone to any other Android phone. If Samsung loses a product cycle to another Android manufacturer (Motorola, backed by Google $$, could be a contender, as could any given Chinese firm backed by the Chinese government, could be another), then Samsung could be in trouble. And of course Samsung is in the process of losing its largest customer for semiconductors -- a business that could have been much more reliable over time than mobile.
But if this is right, what should Samsung do about it?
I see two options:
(1) fork Android and become a platform company, not just an OEM
(2) take the profits they've made in mobile, reinvest in the rest of the business, and return to being a reliable supplier to companies like Apple instead of competing with companies like Apple. With such a reinvestment, Samsung could displace Intel and TSMC as the premier semiconductor firm in the world.
Option 1 is probably the riskiest -- the highest upside and downside potentials.
Option 2 is safer yet still very rewarding.
So, put another way, Samsung's choice is to either become the next Apple or the next Intel.I have no idea what they'll pick, but I think attempting to displace Intel is the smarter choice.
The problem with Option 2 is that the margins suck. Apple, for example, makes much more off their devices than their entire supply chain (probably by a factor of five or so, though I don't know the exact numbers). Samsung IS their own supply chain, so they are doing quite well off the smartphone market too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
Personally, I have yet to see someone holding one of these behemoths to their ear and talking on it. I don't get it I guess.
Perhaps you have and didn't even know it. Many people prefer bluetooth headsets that are so small now that they are barely visible. Other may prefer to use headphones with a mic. I was at the grocery store just yesterday and thought a man was talking to me until I noticed a he was talking on his phone with a barely visible bluetooth headset in his ear. I only knew he had a Galaxy Note II because during the call he took it out of his pocket and I guess looked at a recipe or shopping list and noticed the phone.
I have an iPhone and I prefer my bluetooth headset as well. Years ago the quality wasn't all that great with some static, but it has now improved to the point where using bluetooth is a very viable option and the calls are crystal clear. But like others stated, smartphones are used far more often while looking at the display than are used for taking voice calls for the majority of people. For apps, data, text, etc.. a larger display for that use is advantageous not a hinderance.
Imminent shelling from the North would do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
The problem with Option 2 is that the margins suck. Apple, for example, makes much more off their devices than their entire supply chain (probably by a factor of five or so, though I don't know the exact numbers). Samsung IS their own supply chain, so they are doing quite well off the smartphone market too.
Intel has margins of 60% -- much better than Apple's overall margins.
Even if Samsung only gets margins of 40% on SOCs, that still compared very favorably to Apple's margins on everything except the iPhone.
Saying that "Most phones are used for data consumption & texting & when used for phones used while driving connected to cars blue tooth." well OMG that just about covers the whole gamut, tell us some new please
I feel for you, man. Watching commercials, that is. (Our TV consumption is almost exclusively provided by streaming Netflix and iTunes store rentals, with the occasional over-the-air local broadcast for sports games. We would NEVER go back to cable or satellite.)
Question: if they don't copy Apple when it comes to phones, who will they copy?
Originally Posted by Don108
Question: if they don't copy Apple when it comes to phones, who will they copy?
They'll copy Apple after the part orders stop.
They'll copy Apple after the lawsuit forces them to pay 1.5 billion.
They'll copy Apple after the second lawsuit for copying Apple.
They will never stop.
North Korea might be able to persuade them, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
The only 'crisis' they should be having is a crisis of conscience.
All else is bogus. Like the 'sabbatical' in Hawaii.
Anyone who shakes up a company after a 3-month long vacation in Hawaii should have a crisis of conscience.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
As part of its anticipated changes, Samsung may also reportedly seek a way to "cut reliance on its mobile business."
Easy. Sell your mobile business to someone who would appreciate it.
I hear HTC is barely breaking even in mobile. And LG is losing money in mobile.
Either one of them would love to have instant market share and profitability.
And they'd be smart enough not to blatantly, slavishly, relentlessly copy Apple.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Lee met with reporters at Gimpo International Airport upon returning from his three-month sabbatical ...
Must be nice. The 3 month sabbatical, that is. But maybe he picked the wrong 3 months.
Maybe it's better to get out of Seoul and move south until China can facilitate US - North Korean negotiations, no?
Kim Jong-Un is apparently continuing his family's extortion business, and the US is apparently willing to pay up.
But you never know, do you? North Korea would never start a full-scale war, because they'd lose and be annexed
by capitalist South Korea. China would hate having Gangnam Style South Koreans (and American troops) right on its
border, not to mention the flood of sick, starving, non-Chinese-speaking refugees limping into their country.
China can and will actively work to prevent full-scale war. They're probably hosting secret US - North Korean talks right now.
On the other hand, the north has recently killed dozens of South Korean military personnel and civilians as part of
its extortion tactics. They might lob a few artillery shells into the suburbs of Seoul if they think it will juice the US and the
south for more money.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
... he said he believes Samsung should "always have a sense of crisis," and strive to "run faster and always study to have insights."
Apple has had a sense of crisis since the mid-1990s.
Theyr'e always trying to stay just ahead of the consumer, but not too far ahead.
They know that every consumer-facing tech company will copy their hardware designs.
Fear of disruption is built into Apple's corporate DNA.
Good luck changing Samsung's corporate culture, Mr. Lee.
AppleInsider to you: "Haha! Made you click. And now, more ads from our sponsors! We are a quality web site lol"
That dog has bark, not teeth.
Here's my translation, "Apple is making it harder for us to copy them and we are in trouble because we can't think of anything on our own."
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
That dog has bark, not teeth.
You just watch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You just watch.
Kim Jong-Un, is that you?
I am. So far, they're still north of the 38th parallel, making noise.