Apple's iPhone 5c 'failure flop' outsold Blackberry, Windows Phone and every Android flagship in Q4

145791015

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 299
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,684member
    The data we have is that the mix of 5S and 5C was not what Apple expected. That probably means they were expecting more sales of the 5C, and possibly means they were surprised by the upside in the 5S sales. But the latter is not certain. Either way it was a cockup, not a plan. If the idea - as some say - were to promote upsell to the 5S then the mix would have been in line with expectations. I originally argued on the release of the 5C that it's price was too close to the 5S.

    The 8G 5C makes a very big difference in the markets it is in. Where it is now a medium range phone ( the average cost of a phone including the contract is £400k in the UK). That should make a bigger difference than people think.
  • Reply 122 of 299
    Leave it to Daniel to do actual research BEFORE making claims that Apple doesn't know what its doing.

    I'd like to sit all the naysayers around a very big table, and have them literally eat their words. No condiments allowed.
  • Reply 123 of 299
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frood View Post

     

    People that say 'Analysts set expectations too high for Apple!' are really saying that 'Apple is overvalued!'   It's an equivalent statement since the value is based on the expectations.


    Very wrong. Your statement ignores the very clear double-standard which analysts apply to Apple. Analysts set expectations unreasonably high, so high that no company could possibly achieve them. When Apple fails to reach those standards, Apple is punished even though Apple performs extraordinarily well. The stock valuation is based on Apple's failure to reach an imaginary number, not based on Apple's actual performance or reasonable expectations for Apple's future performance.

     

    In other words: analysts project Apple to have an unattainable level of success, but their valuations of Apple are largely based on failure without any regard to Apple's actual performance.

     

    It's disgusting. If Apple were understood and treated the same way as any other company ... well, there's no use wishing for that at this point. It'll never happen.

  • Reply 124 of 299
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    asdasd wrote: »
    Either way it was a cockup, not a plan.

    If people were buying the 5S over the 5C they are then buying a more expensive unit which likely resulted in more profit per unit even if the profit margin happened to be lower for the 5S over the 5C (which doesn't seem likely to me). With a record busting 9 million units in a weekend I'd think that calling it a cockup wouldn't be an overly harsh way to state an unexpected but likely welcoming result, but I agree that it's certainly wasn't their plan.
  • Reply 125 of 299
    froodfrood Posts: 771member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by docwallaby View Post

     

    Very wrong. Your statement ignores the very clear double-standard which analysts apply to Apple. Analysts set expectations unreasonably high, so high that no company could possibly achieve them. When Apple fails to reach those standards, Apple is punished even though Apple performs extraordinarily well. The stock valuation is based on Apple's failure to reach an imaginary number, not based on Apple's actual performance or reasonable expectations for Apple's future performance.

     

    In other words: analysts project Apple to have an unattainable level of success, but their valuations of Apple are largely based on failure without any regard to Apple's actual performance.

     

    It's disgusting. If Apple were understood and treated the same way as any other company ... well, there's no use wishing for that at this point. It'll never happen.


     

    No.  Their epectations sets their price.  If you feel their expectations are unreasonably high, you are saying Apple is valued unreasonably high.  At its peak it was valued at near the GDP of Switzerland.

     

    Take the passions of phone companies out of it.  You and I both own hot dog stands and sell the same product.  People love my insanely delicious hot dogs, and I sell a ton of them, but I keep everything I do secret.  You sell a pretty mean hot dog too.

     

    Analysts are asked to value our respective hot dog companies.  They predict I'm going to sell 1,000,000 and value me at $1,000,000 (just to keep it simple).  They predict you are going to sell 100,000 and value you at $100,000.   Neither of us has actually sold a hot dog in this quarter yet, but people would be willing to pay much more for my company because I'm expected to sell a lot more than you.

     

    The quarter actually happens and we post our numbers.  You sold 200,000 hot dogs.  I sold 500,000 (a record amount for me!).  Guess what?  People like my product more than yours, I sold way more than twice as many hot dogs as you did, and I am doing better business than you are.

     

    So that means my stock is going to soar, right?  Buzzzzzz.... Wrong.  My stock is going to plummet, and yours is going to soar.   But but but.... record sales!!!!!  Doesn't matter.  Sold WAY more than the competition so obviously my customers love me and will be back!  Doesn't matter.  I was valued at a company that was supposed to sell 1,000,000 hot dogs and I "only" sold 500,000.  I'm not doomed.  I'm not a failure.  People still like my product better than yours because they buy more.  I'm just not worth the $1,000,000 that I would be if I had sold 1,000,000 hot dogs.  You on the other hand, sold way fewer than I did, and your stock is soaring.  It should be.  You were valued at $100,000 based on expectations and you far exceeded them.  I'm still worth a lot more than you are :p  My shareholder are now much poorer though :(

     

    My shareholders and fans can cry a river that my hot dogs are better than anyone else's and that I sell more than anyone else.  They are absolutely right that the analysts had it all wrong.  But when they bought my shares thinking I was worth 1,000,000- the analysts had set that unreasonable expectation and they bought in to it.  I was unable to deliver- I was really only worth $500,000.  They can then cry that 1,000,000 was a totally unreasonable number and blame analysts for setting expectations so high- and they would be absolutely right.  I never should have been valued at $1,000,000 in the first place because that was based on their unrealistic expectations.

     

        Of course you'll also get the ones that say.  He sold record numbers and way more than anyone else, but his stock tanked, and that other guy sold *way* less and his stock is soaring!!! WTF!!!!  Clear sign of market manipulation!!!!!

     

    Would you at least agree that if Apple consistently sells more phones at higher profit margins, they should be worth more than if they sell fewer phones at lower margins?

     

    There are some analysts who do set lower expectations for Apple.  But since they expect Apple to sell less of their products, they also lower their valuation and price targets for Apple.  It's usually the fans that decry analysts for setting unreasonably high targets for Apple that are the same ones calling the analysts that give Apple a lower price target based on more reasonable expectations a bunch of idiots.

     

    The best part is we're now 'done' right?  I sold 500,000... you sold 200,000 so everyone has their answer and we can be 'correctly valued' easily now right?  Its the start of a new quarter and we *know* how many we just sold and what our numbers are on the spot of the moment.  What we don't know is how many we are going to sell this next quarter.   Analysts have to come up with their best guess, again (that guess being more accurately defined as the 'net present value of all future *expected* earnings), and if people value their insights and invest accordingly, the price will again move to levels based on those analysts expectations.   Rinse.  Lather. Repeat.  If you don't believe the analysts high valuation of any company because you think there is no way that company can meet their expected targets... you are saying that the company should have a lower valuation because you believe they are going to sell less product.

  • Reply 126 of 299
    sky kingsky king Posts: 189member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by quamb View Post



    You start to feel like a crazy fanboy trying to defend this stuff.... this non stop hate and hyperbole thrown Apple's way. It's unrelenting. What is going on? Who is behind all this? A simple (albiet very successful) company that makes phones and computers receives so much riducule it's as if they are doing something terribly wrong in the eyes of these editors and hoard of geeks on the forums.



    I guess in some respects, they were the same in the 90's with hating on the Macintosh. Still doesn't explain why though.

    C'mon.  It's all part of journalism.  The Constitution guarantees the right of a free press but is cannot guarantee that the free press will be accurate in it's reporting, balanced in it's viewpoints or that it will maintain a modicum of integrity.  Especially in today/s world where almost 100% of the media is controlled by only five business entities.  The major news companies are interested in only two things.  First they want to make as much money as possible.  That cannot be done by reporting good or positive news about any business.  Second they are interested in establishing major influence as not makers of news but in using the "news" to control events (feel free to read Edward Bernays' book for more information about this).  

     

    No point in getting all worked up and writing to each other about it.  It could be more effective to work with established "indie" bloggers and start making use of the internet as a true source of information.  Not easy to do.  But when you think that the American Revolution was actually won by approximately 2% of the citizenry it's very doable.  It just means that we, as Americans, need to get off our behinds where we only bitch to each other and start a movement that will completely undermine the traditional news sources.  Now THAT would be real journalism.  

  • Reply 127 of 299
    Dan_DilgerDan_Dilger Posts: 1,583member
    [quote name="Frood" url="/t/168871/apples-iphone-5c-failure-flop-outsold-blackberry-windows-phone-and-every-android-flagship-in-q4/120#post_2496140"]
    No.  Their epectations sets their price.  If you feel their explectations are unreasonably high, you are saying Apple is valued unreasonably high.  At its peak it was valued at near the GDP of Switzerland.

    O
  • Reply 128 of 299
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    brlawyer wrote: »
    I have never seen anyone with a 5C - and I can assure you that the 5C will go down in history as one of Apple's major market failures ever; it will be quietly discontinued in the coming months (or, more appropriately, "superseded" by revamped non-5C models). 

    1) How many non-flagship-purchased iPhones do you usually see? I know of several people with Phone 5C's but I don't know a single person that bought a iPhone from Apple after it was deprecated to the second or third tier, but your comment implies that you have seen so many of these purchases that you assumed you'd see 5C's all over the place.

    2) And if Apple doesn't eliminate the colored option for a mid-range iPhone you'll then admit you were wrong or say that Apple is wrong by clearly showing hubris?

    3) Yes, everyone excepts Apple to supersede the 5C with a non-5C model has this is the case with every single iPhone to ever hit the market. The iPhone was superseded by the iPhone 3G was superseded by the iPhone 3GS was superseded by the iPhone 4 was superseded by the iPhone 4S was superseded by the iPhone 5 was superseded by the iPhone 5S.
  • Reply 129 of 299
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    If people were buying the 5S over the 5C they are then buying a more expensive unit which likely resulted in more profit per unit even if the profit margin happened to be lower for the 5S over the 5C (which doesn't seem likely to me).

     

    The main problem with this article and any other assumption about the 5c is that we don't know how many units Apple was expecting to sell. If they were expecting to sell 4 or 5 million less 5s iPhones but an extra 9 million 5c iPhones then Apple has lost revenue and profit.

     

    Without actual figures it's all assumptions... including almost everything in DD's article.

  • Reply 130 of 299
    herbapou wrote: »
    $550 is not mid tier, its still high end. Fact is Apple is doing very poorly in lots of countries because it lacks a mid-range phone.

    It's the same reason the Mac isn't selling in huge quantities either... Apple only does high-end.

    Apple's laptops start at $1000... and that's for an 11" model :wow:

    So yeah... Apple will never win any "unit sales" contests... but they know exactly what they're doing and which customers they are targeting.
  • Reply 131 of 299
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    trolldown4 wrote: »
    You call Dilger's drivel an article

    The only use this "article" of yours has is as an example in high-school writing/English classes on how not to write...

    Irrlevent whether you're a liar or not. Nice try hiding your faults though.

    We see 5c's all day. You have to live in a hole to not see one. Get off the internet cavemen!!
  • Reply 132 of 299
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    It's the same reason the Mac isn't selling in huge quantities either... Apple only does high-end.

    Apple's laptops start at $1000... and that's for an 11" model :wow:

    So yeah... Apple will never win any "unit sales" contests... but they know exactly what they're doing and which customers they are targeting.

    And despite this they dominate the entire "PC" industry profits worldwide at well over 90%. Apparently the race to the bottom wasn't the right move for Compaq, Gateway, Dell, etc. to make.
  • Reply 133 of 299
    solipsismx wrote: »
    And despite this they dominate the entire "PC" industry profits worldwide at well over 90%. Apparently the race to the bottom wasn't the right move for Compaq, Gateway, Dell, etc. to make.

    Of course! I didn't mention profits because the earlier comment wasn't really talking about profits. I was just showing that Apple doesn't do cheap :)

    But yeah... Apple only sells high-margin products... phones, tablets, computers, etc.

    And... they sell more than enough of them to make a tidy profit overall.

    Who cares if the other guys sell more units?
  • Reply 134 of 299
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Of course! I didn't mention profits because the earlier comment wasn't really talking about profits. I was just showing that Apple doesn't do cheap :)

    But yeah... Apple only sells high-margin products... phones, tablets, computers, etc.

    And... they sell more than enough of them to make a tidy profit overall.

    Who cares if the other guys sell more units?

    I know. I was just carrying the topic a little further… which I'll do again in the next paragraph.

    And their Mac profits are so high that there is no way they'd give that up — as some speculate/fear — simply because their iPhone and iPads are doing much better right now. At one point there were "experts" saying Apple should drop the Mac and just focus on the iPod. LOL. The Mac hasn't just gotten better over the years since the iPhone was launched but has increased its lead over their "competition" in terms of pushing the envelope of 'PC' innovation and value.
  • Reply 135 of 299
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member

    Only complete idiots think the iPhone 5c failed at anything.

  • Reply 136 of 299
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I know. I was just carrying the topic a little further… which I'll do again in the next paragraph.

    And their Mac profits are so high that there is no way they'd give that up — as some speculate/fear — simply because their iPhone and iPads are doing much better right now. At one point there were "experts" saying Apple should drop the Mac and just focus on the iPod. LOL. The Mac hasn't just gotten better over the years since the iPhone was launched but has increased its lead over their "competition" in terms of pushing the envelope of 'PC' innovation and value.

    Agreed on all counts :)

    How can we know this... but analysts be so frackin' clueless?
  • Reply 137 of 299
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post

    Notwithstanding AI's great efforts above, the fact is: the 5C is a FLOP, aka the IIvx/IIvi of the iPhone world.



    Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

    GIVE IT UP ALREADY AI!

    Even Tim Cook disputes your erroneous BS supposition.

     

    Please learn how to read the English language.

     

    Originally Posted by cali View Post

    Irrlevent whether you're a liar or not. Nice try hiding your faults though.

     

    It’s ConradJoe: known mental defective and psych ward case. Please report his future iterations of this name on sight.

  • Reply 138 of 299

    1. I think it can be said that most forum members believe that Apple sold more iPhone 5s phones than expected.

     

    2. I think it can also be said that most forum members believe that the 5c has sold up to Apple's expectations (that is if I am to believe what I have read in this thread).

     

    Does this mean then that Apple expected to sell less phones in the 1st fiscal quarter than it did?

     

    Would this not worry an investor if it was seen that Tim Cook just got lucky by selling more 5s models than expected and in doing so was able to show "some" growth in iPhone sales year over year in that quarter?

     

    So what if Apple sold more phones than a competitor if the figures show that Apple has the potential to have zero or negative growth in iPhones sales if luck is not involved.

     

    My guess... Cook / Apple expected to sell more 5c iPhones, by a good margin, than they did in the 1st fiscal quarter... regardless of how many they actually did sell.

     

    This still does not make it a failure... well, not a complete failure.

  • Reply 139 of 299
    To be fair, the specs do suck compared to 5S, are just a little better than 5(-it being plastic), it is a lot better than most androids sold around in all specs.
  • Reply 140 of 299
    When will the IT industry gurus understand that price is not the determining factor driving sales of Apple products. It is product quality, and the quality and depth of the Apple ecosystem experience that drives Apple product sales.

    Far too many so-called 'industry experts' are still completely stuck in the mindset driven by the failing Microsoft era philosophy that says everyone must compete on price. Is it any wonder that so many companies are now failing because they have cut staff and R&D costs to the bone, or even the marrow, to retain market share and keep their ever-greedy shareholders in the manner to which they have become accustomed during the lazy hazy days of the last Century.

    Fortunately, Apple is far too smart to enter the 'race to the bottom' which inevitably leads to a slow and painful corporate death. Smart consumers will always pay a premium price for a product that lasts much longer, and gives them a better 'user experience' than the cheapest product on the market. Whereas dumb consumers will always buy the cheapest product on the market, even if it is the crappiest product on the market and continually gives them frustrating user experiences. These people deserve Samsung and Microsoft products. And they continue to 'hate' Apple because it won't play the stupid 'race to the bottom' game.
Sign In or Register to comment.