Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.
And that is why it makes sense to have at least 1 more Model of iPhone. No manufacture on earth could handle the requirement and volume of Apple.
Also bear in mind that the iPhone is only available on a relatively small number of carriers. We've already seen that unless the carrier is prepared to let Apple control the updates and user experience then Cupertino is not interested in dealing with them.
Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.
No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. If you don't like the price of AAPL, you have only get-rich-quick traders, programmed trading, and market movers to blame.
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.
LOL. So... copy Google? That's your great idea? Apple isn't Microsoft: they're not desperate to follow their competitors.
No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. If you don't like the price of AAPL, you have only get-rich-quick traders, programmed trading, and market movers to blame.
LOL. So... copy Google? That's your great idea? Apple isn't Microsoft: they're not desperate to follow their competitors.
Apple should soooo not listen to you.
I don't get why people have so much interest in Apple's stock anyway. I come into contact with hundreds, if not thousands a products day that are made by publicly traded companies and I honestly couldn't tell you what the stock price of any of them.
Good or bad, I think Apple's stock price is mostly troll fodder. All these android trolls will be quick to tell you Apple lost 10 points but couldn't begin to tell you the stock price of Sony, LG, Samsung, or HTC.
Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?
The point is that you're mistaken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
The point is, both numbers mean sold. It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.
For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend. What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.
That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S. To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.
Nice to see an objective and informed opinion. I'd argue that both numbers mean shipped. But that's semantics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec
Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.
Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC
You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.
KDarling didn't doubt what Apple meant by their numbers. He (she) simply tried to help the misguided ones who misunderstand what Apple numbers mean. You'll probably call me an Android fan or what not. But let's see if the following will help you understand:
Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.
Having said this, Apple does provide additional clarity that the likes of Samsung do not (because they can't). Apple often informs analyst the size of channel inventory at (or en route to) Apple Stores. That allows analyst to estimate the real number of iPhones sold to end-users. Apple can do this because they can track sales at their own stores in real-time. But they cannot do this with iPhones shipped to non-Apple retailers. This is why they CANNOT report the number of phones sold until they get reports from retailers, not all of which conform to the same schedule. If I am not mistaken, for accounting purposes, Apple recognizes revenue for iPhones sold to end-users in Apple stores and for those shipped to retailers.
If Galaxy phones are not sold by retailers, they are returned to Samsung which then have to make accounting adjustments (still true if the phones are sold at large discounts after revenue has already been recognized). So, at the risk of being repetitive, until we see write-downs from Samsung, there is no reason to believe there is a large discrepancy between units shipped and units sold to end-users. After all, HP and RIM reported sizeable write-downs after reporting optimistic shipments of Touchpads and Playbooks. Microsoft had to do the same with Zunes. How can Samsung avoid doing the same if they are merely channel-stuffing?
No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do.
Apple management has repeated that their job is focus on developing great products. You disagree with them?
Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics.
Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
The point is, both numbers mean sold. It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.
For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend. What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.
I believe the problem here is that people tend to conclude base on availability, demand and scarcity of supply on every iPhone launch particularly last year's iPhone 5 and compare it with how the Galaxy S4 did:
- Apple had 5 million iPhone 5 shipped/sold in the first three days (in 9 countries).
- Samsung shipped 10 million Galaxy S4 in less than a month (in 60 countries)
- The iPhone 5 doesn't take much time to sit on shelves, most of the time you won't find one even at Apple Store. (for more than 2 months in 31 countries)
- Online ship time for iPhone 5 drops to 1 week (November 29, 2012)
- Galaxy S4 seems to have no availability issues for consumers.
- iPhone suppliers having problem coping with huge demand (for almost the whole 4th quarter of 2012).
- Samsung blamed unexpected high demand for supply chain problems (for the first week)
- The iPhone 5 launched in 9 countries and 22 more after more than a week vs Samsung's vast larger channel to carriers in 60 countries for their Galaxy S4 launch.
Some see the iPhone being mostly out of stock as having most of their shipments sold during post launch. Conclusions made from these may not be accurate but tells a lot. With Samsung's history of deception, one can't blame why some would doubt or question Samsung.
Shipped or sold doesn't really matter, if it's true then good for them. Samsung is a con artist they may be able to play in numbers shipped but they may never fake people flocking to stores, availability/stock issues at retailers and stores, months of supply issues due to demand, and more. I get it when people talk how great their Galaxy S4 are, what I don't get is when people get to Samsung's defence as a company, they are nothing to be proud of as a company, they are unethical, bully, deceitful and corrupt. If Samsung is even confident with their product, why not launch at the same time with Apple, new product just before holiday season make more sense anyway. How I hope a third company could emerge and end this duopoly by Apple and Samsung.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec
Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.
And that is why it makes sense to have at least 1 more Model of iPhone. No manufacture on earth could handle the requirement and volume of Apple.
Also bear in mind that the iPhone is only available on a relatively small number of carriers. We've already seen that unless the carrier is prepared to let Apple control the updates and user experience then Cupertino is not interested in dealing with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.
No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. If you don't like the price of AAPL, you have only get-rich-quick traders, programmed trading, and market movers to blame.
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.
LOL. So... copy Google? That's your great idea? Apple isn't Microsoft: they're not desperate to follow their competitors.
Apple should soooo not listen to you.
I don't get why people have so much interest in Apple's stock anyway. I come into contact with hundreds, if not thousands a products day that are made by publicly traded companies and I honestly couldn't tell you what the stock price of any of them.
Good or bad, I think Apple's stock price is mostly troll fodder. All these android trolls will be quick to tell you Apple lost 10 points but couldn't begin to tell you the stock price of Sony, LG, Samsung, or HTC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacKrazyinKC
Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?
The point is that you're mistaken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
The point is, both numbers mean sold. It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.
For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend. What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.
That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S. To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.
Nice to see an objective and informed opinion. I'd argue that both numbers mean shipped. But that's semantics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec
Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.
Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC
You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.
KDarling didn't doubt what Apple meant by their numbers. He (she) simply tried to help the misguided ones who misunderstand what Apple numbers mean. You'll probably call me an Android fan or what not. But let's see if the following will help you understand:
Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.
Having said this, Apple does provide additional clarity that the likes of Samsung do not (because they can't). Apple often informs analyst the size of channel inventory at (or en route to) Apple Stores. That allows analyst to estimate the real number of iPhones sold to end-users. Apple can do this because they can track sales at their own stores in real-time. But they cannot do this with iPhones shipped to non-Apple retailers. This is why they CANNOT report the number of phones sold until they get reports from retailers, not all of which conform to the same schedule. If I am not mistaken, for accounting purposes, Apple recognizes revenue for iPhones sold to end-users in Apple stores and for those shipped to retailers.
If Galaxy phones are not sold by retailers, they are returned to Samsung which then have to make accounting adjustments (still true if the phones are sold at large discounts after revenue has already been recognized). So, at the risk of being repetitive, until we see write-downs from Samsung, there is no reason to believe there is a large discrepancy between units shipped and units sold to end-users. After all, HP and RIM reported sizeable write-downs after reporting optimistic shipments of Touchpads and Playbooks. Microsoft had to do the same with Zunes. How can Samsung avoid doing the same if they are merely channel-stuffing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz
Ah, Horace Dediu; the only analyst who actually does any analysis.
And some of his analysis is based largely on the analysis of other analysts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do.
Apple management has repeated that their job is focus on developing great products. You disagree with them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics.
Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
The point is, both numbers mean sold. It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.
For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend. What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.
I believe the problem here is that people tend to conclude base on availability, demand and scarcity of supply on every iPhone launch particularly last year's iPhone 5 and compare it with how the Galaxy S4 did:
- Apple had 5 million iPhone 5 shipped/sold in the first three days (in 9 countries).
- Samsung shipped 10 million Galaxy S4 in less than a month (in 60 countries)
- The iPhone 5 doesn't take much time to sit on shelves, most of the time you won't find one even at Apple Store. (for more than 2 months in 31 countries)
- Online ship time for iPhone 5 drops to 1 week (November 29, 2012)
- Galaxy S4 seems to have no availability issues for consumers.
- iPhone suppliers having problem coping with huge demand (for almost the whole 4th quarter of 2012).
- Samsung blamed unexpected high demand for supply chain problems (for the first week)
- The iPhone 5 launched in 9 countries and 22 more after more than a week vs Samsung's vast larger channel to carriers in 60 countries for their Galaxy S4 launch.
Some see the iPhone being mostly out of stock as having most of their shipments sold during post launch. Conclusions made from these may not be accurate but tells a lot. With Samsung's history of deception, one can't blame why some would doubt or question Samsung.
Shipped or sold doesn't really matter, if it's true then good for them. Samsung is a con artist they may be able to play in numbers shipped but they may never fake people flocking to stores, availability/stock issues at retailers and stores, months of supply issues due to demand, and more. I get it when people talk how great their Galaxy S4 are, what I don't get is when people get to Samsung's defence as a company, they are nothing to be proud of as a company, they are unethical, bully, deceitful and corrupt. If Samsung is even confident with their product, why not launch at the same time with Apple, new product just before holiday season make more sense anyway. How I hope a third company could emerge and end this duopoly by Apple and Samsung.