Munster said that Tim Cook is a damn liar and that Apple sold only a little more than 6 million and the rest were sitting on the Apple retail store shelves. Munster said that those iPhones may get sold and maybe they won't. Munster is sure Apple is trying to fudge iPhone sales numbers to fool investors but he swore he wasn't going to let Apple get away with it. He says he's knows Apple's sales capabilities far better than Tim Cook and by Munster's exemplary understanding of Apple's distribution methods he surmised that his estimate was much more accurate than Tim Cook's exaggerated numbers.
Gene Munster went on TV to prove he was right and Apple was wrong and he knew Tim Cook couldn't prove him wrong. Munster went on to announce his predictions about Apple almost always turned out 100% correct. If he predicted Apple would sell 6 million iPhones then it wouldn't be possible for Apple to sell millions more. Wall Street believed him and Apple's share price momentum came to an immediate halt. As a result of Munster's "proof" Apple's share price still hasn't be able to get back over $500 and YTD Apple's share price is still in negative territory.
/s
No, Gene Munster just try to explain Apple sales policy to all the idiots who does not understand what sales mean in Apple dictionary. In Apple term, a sales is a shipment to any carrier and retail store like BB/RS etc. and a shipment to retail customer who paid for the mechandize. In the last few quarter, Tim Cook and Oppenheimer has to explain the sales in and sale through concept to all the analyst during the conference call. Toward the end of the end of the conference call Tim Cook jumped in and explained more.. A sales does not mean that the unit is shipped to the customers. It may be sitting on retailer shell waiting for a customer to come in and buy it. Those are the channel inventory that Oppenheimer discussed in this transcript.
As for the details of the quarter, I’d like to begin with iPhone. We sold 31.2 million iPhones compared to 26 million in the year ago quarter, an increase of 5.2 million, or 20%. We had a sequential decrease of about 600,000 iPhones in channel inventory in the June quarter translating to iPhone sell-through of about 31.8 million units. iPhone sales were ahead of our expectations and we were particularly pleased with very strong year-over-year growth in iPhone sales in a number of both developed and emerging markets including the U.S., UK, Japan, Brazil, Russia, India, Thailand and Singapore. iPhone 5 remains by far the most popular iPhone but we were also happy with sales of iPhone 4 and 4s. We exited the quarter with about 11 million units of total iPhones in channel inventory and ended within our target range of 4 to 6 weeks of iPhone channel inventory.
Actually Apple just calls it the iPod touch, iMac, MacBook. If Apple really want to stick to its naming format, the iPhone will be iPhone for all generations. Of course then people would get confused when it continued selling the previous year's version.
Good point.
Considering the current lineup, the 5s is more like the MacBook Pro, the 5c like the MacBook, and the 4s being the somewhat confusing remainder. Though granted appending a number and a letter to the name does not follow convention, either. More likely iPhone Pro, iPhone, and in the case of the 4s, iPhone mini (though that would require some confusing rebranding). I think they missed a perfect opportunity with the 5c to rebrand the line. Haha
But you raise an interesting point, the 5c is no longer similar to the 5s as the 5 would have been, and the 4s looks completely different as well. So if they move forward with this configuration, they well could call them all just "iPhone" clearly differentiated by their physical appearance. Interesting that Apple essentially took the same approach with the iPad, and iPad 2, ostensibly to avoid confusion because they otherwise physically look identical, then stopped with what would have been the iPad 3 and 4.
What if next years free phone is an 8GB 5c in black only? Then the "5sc" in 5 updated colors, and the 6. You could definitely call them all just "iPhone" then.
Considering the current lineup, the 5s is more like the MacBook Pro, the 5c like the MacBook, and the 4s being the somewhat confusing remainder. Though granted appending a number and a letter to the name does not follow convention, either. More likely iPhone Pro, iPhone, and in the case of the 4s, iPhone mini (though that would require some confusing rebranding). I think they missed a perfect opportunity with the 5c to rebrand the line. Haha
But you raise an interesting point, the 5c is no longer similar to the 5s as the 5 would have been, and the 4s looks completely different as well. So if they move forward with this configuration, they well could call them all just "iPhone" clearly differentiated by their physical appearance. Interesting that Apple essentially took the same approach with the iPad, and iPad 2, ostensibly to avoid confusion because they otherwise physically look identical, then stopped with what would have been the iPad 3 and 4.
What if next years free phone is an 8GB 5c in black only? Then the "5sc" in 5 updated colors, and the 6. You could definitely call them all just "iPhone" then.
Oh boy. Perhaps it will call the next flagship the iPhone, the mid range (this year's flagship) the iPhone SC, the "free" one iPhone C, and the 4.5/5" flagship the iPhone +.
Comments
Munster said that Tim Cook is a damn liar and that Apple sold only a little more than 6 million and the rest were sitting on the Apple retail store shelves. Munster said that those iPhones may get sold and maybe they won't. Munster is sure Apple is trying to fudge iPhone sales numbers to fool investors but he swore he wasn't going to let Apple get away with it. He says he's knows Apple's sales capabilities far better than Tim Cook and by Munster's exemplary understanding of Apple's distribution methods he surmised that his estimate was much more accurate than Tim Cook's exaggerated numbers.
Gene Munster went on TV to prove he was right and Apple was wrong and he knew Tim Cook couldn't prove him wrong. Munster went on to announce his predictions about Apple almost always turned out 100% correct. If he predicted Apple would sell 6 million iPhones then it wouldn't be possible for Apple to sell millions more. Wall Street believed him and Apple's share price momentum came to an immediate halt. As a result of Munster's "proof" Apple's share price still hasn't be able to get back over $500 and YTD Apple's share price is still in negative territory.
/s
No, Gene Munster just try to explain Apple sales policy to all the idiots who does not understand what sales mean in Apple dictionary. In Apple term, a sales is a shipment to any carrier and retail store like BB/RS etc. and a shipment to retail customer who paid for the mechandize. In the last few quarter, Tim Cook and Oppenheimer has to explain the sales in and sale through concept to all the analyst during the conference call. Toward the end of the end of the conference call Tim Cook jumped in and explained more.. A sales does not mean that the unit is shipped to the customers. It may be sitting on retailer shell waiting for a customer to come in and buy it. Those are the channel inventory that Oppenheimer discussed in this transcript.
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/call-transcript.aspx?StoryId=1566012&Title=apple-inc-aapl-ceo-discusses-f3q-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/call-transcript.aspx?StoryId=1566012&Title=apple-inc-aapl-ceo-discusses-f3q-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript#ixzz2g2zXt0HB
Double post. Oops
Considering the current lineup, the 5s is more like the MacBook Pro, the 5c like the MacBook, and the 4s being the somewhat confusing remainder. Though granted appending a number and a letter to the name does not follow convention, either. More likely iPhone Pro, iPhone, and in the case of the 4s, iPhone mini (though that would require some confusing rebranding). I think they missed a perfect opportunity with the 5c to rebrand the line. Haha
But you raise an interesting point, the 5c is no longer similar to the 5s as the 5 would have been, and the 4s looks completely different as well. So if they move forward with this configuration, they well could call them all just "iPhone" clearly differentiated by their physical appearance. Interesting that Apple essentially took the same approach with the iPad, and iPad 2, ostensibly to avoid confusion because they otherwise physically look identical, then stopped with what would have been the iPad 3 and 4.
What if next years free phone is an 8GB 5c in black only? Then the "5sc" in 5 updated colors, and the 6. You could definitely call them all just "iPhone" then.
Oh boy. Perhaps it will call the next flagship the iPhone, the mid range (this year's flagship) the iPhone SC, the "free" one iPhone C, and the 4.5/5" flagship the iPhone +.