RS9 was apparently suggesting that Apple stock was criminally manipulated in the US. Usually, the way it works is you try to influence other investors to either buy or sell then you take an opposite position to either pump and dump or trash talk and short, but it might be a situation where Samsung just wanted to cause harm to Apple without actually taking a position in AAPL.
Thanks! Now his post makes sense. Nice to have folks like you step in to translate for some of us once in awhile :embarrass
With that out of the way could the SEC or some other government agency penalize Samsung if they really were attempting to manipulate Apple stock? I know nothing about it.
I already knew this was happening all along. Glad to see it's finally being brought to light in the courtroom how slimy Scamsung actually is! Hope their investors smarten up and A) dump their stock and initiate a class-action against them for fraud.
Maybe, maybe not. I do agree that Amazon has a stronger ecosystem than Samsung which makes Amazon a sort of a competitor for Apple. However, Apple and Amazon are still very different companies and Apple may realize that there is room for both, a content company (Amazon - books/products/sales medium/music/movies) and a hardware company (Apple). Interestingly and quite ironically, I think that Amazon is more a competitor of Samsung.
Your analysis is counter to mine.
Apple and Amazon are much closer than Samsung in terms of business model. Different companies, but playing the same end game. and I think Apple sees quite plainly there isn't room for Apple as an ecosystem in Amazon's model. Amazon quite simply want's all sales receipts to come through them.
And I think in the end, you're looking at 2 different approaches coming from two different markets to the same end
- Amazon almost gives away good HW to get people to align with their GREAT consumables marketplace
- started with hard goods, now is driving to digital content, and same day deliveries
- Apple sells GREAT HW to get people to align with their good consumables marketplace.
- started with digital content, now driving to be Point of Sale for physical purchases.
In the end, both want the same thing... if you use technology to buy something, they want their 3-30% of the transaction. Apple makes more on the initial transaction... Amazon makes it up on volumen.
Also in the end, phones and tablets become commodities. The margins will drop from 30% to <10%, where Amazon is now. When that day comes, profits will be on consumer retention and satisfaction, or on mass sales. (Nordstrom vs Walmart).
Samsung... wants to sell you their stuff. They are more like MS (well the old MS), and classics like Sony, Mitsubishi etc... where Samsung doesn't see the end consumer their customer, but retail chains, carriers, device manufacturers instead.
Amazon and Apple feel they must disintermediate these middle men for the good of the consumer.
In today's trial news there was a "gotcha" moment.
Apparently Samsung's attorneys got one of Apple's two expert witnesses on damages to admit his calculations relied on. . get this. . . the other expert witnesses damage calculations. :err: He admitted on the stand that if the other expert was wrong then he would be too. Doh!
Well said. I don't disagree with you except for this:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
Also in the end, phones and tablets become commodities. The margins will drop from 30% to <10%, where Amazon is now. When that day comes, profits will be on consumer retention and satisfaction, or on mass sales. (Nordstrom vs Walmart).
Margins for Apple will drop, but not to <10%...maybe to more like 25%.
Don't forget that computing devices continue to evolve, and with it, the need for higher margin/higher quality devices.
In today's trial news there was a "gotcha" moment.
Apparently Samsung's attorneys got one of Apple's two expert witnesses on damages to admit his calculations relied on. . get this. . . the other expert witnesses damage calculations. :err: He admitted on the stand that if the other expert was wrong then he would be too. Doh!
And these 'experts' charge how much? I can be just as incompetent for much less.
Margins for Apple will drop, but not to <10%...maybe to more like 25%.
Don't forget that computing devices continue to evolve, and with it, the need for higher margin/higher quality devices.
Apple will never get down to the <10% GM level.
You're arguing a nit of the argument. my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can. and Apple will respond, because they can. And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.
Since you are incapable of having a discussion without making accusations and insults, I have determined that you are unworthy of dialogue of any sort. Goodbye and have a nice life.
An admission that your argument had no merit! Complete capitulation—good for you, mensmovement! Now we're getting somewhere…
Samsung and Android know people are sheep. IF people think Android is 80% of the market they believe that the sheep trait in humans will have them follow the same path. IT is somewhat true and the reason they implement this strategy. It is apple's fault for not going Jobs like thermonuclear on the false claims and numbers when the shenanigans started.
They should have either defended their numbers or discounted the competitions. Hire their own "research firms' to put out press releases with the numbers apple believes to be accurate and true.
The sad truth is these perceptions did help sales of apple's competitors products. To what extent we don't know exactly but it was significant. It didn't have to be that way had Cook done what Jobs or Musk would have done.
You're arguing a nit of the argument. my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can. and Apple will respond, because they can. And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.
Refactor for that and recompute.
Thank the DOJ for Amazon's monopoly and predatory pricing.
If this the truth, and Samsung fudged the figures to its shareholders, then there is greater at stake. Firstly the stockmarket would collapse the shares, indictments may commence against those who lied and manipulated the figures and shareholders generallly wont be too pleased so a general cleaning of house of upper management would occur. the company would be turned upside down and the stockmarket would take a while to trust the company again. This doesnt really seem to happening so the truth and veracity of all this of it may never be known.
Your naivete is charming.
Samsung grew from a family business that the mafia probably compares favorably to. The thing is, it amounts to roughly 20% of the entire GDP of South Korea. The _CEO_ of Samsung was convicted of bribing high officials, including the _President of that country_ . He was later pardoned by a subsequent "pro-business" president, and took back his post as Samsung's CEO, saying of the bribery "I didn't do it":
As we know, they've rigged (and then denied rigging) benchmarking tests, and recently sued a South Korean newspaper for millions, for suggesting that supplies of the optical sensor for the camera in the S5 may be constrained. They're suing Dyson for suggesting that the design of Samsung's Dyson-knockoff vacuum cleaner might have been borrowed a teensy bit.
I'm not sure why the press is tiptoeing around the issue - maybe because they've been so successful in what they've done, or maybe they're literally afraid of Samsung's wrath, but this company is not like a typical large multinational corporation - it's really more of a family-controlled, corporate rogue state.
You're arguing a nit of the argument. my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can. and Apple will respond, because they can. And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.
Refactor for that and recompute.
Refactor what? Apple may be forced to reduce GM, may go from 35% to 25% someday. Amazon is already at zero profit and can't go much lower. If anything, Amazon will raise margins in the future (e.g. Prime going from $79 to $99). You're waaaay off if you think Apple will go down to <10% GM.
Comments
[INDENT][IMG ALT="Copyright(c) Blingee.comCopyright(c) Blingee.com"]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/41663/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[/INDENT]
If as you say Samsung isn't selling them anyway, they're only dust magnets, where's the loss to Apple or the profit to Samsung they want a piece of?
/s
Yeah, Samsung's smartphone marketshare is even smaller than their tablet marketshare!
/s
This isn't a new story to Apple, Samsung investors, news media or long-time regular readers of AppleInsider.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/11/01/31/samsung_admits_its_ipad_rival_galaxy_tab_sales_were_actually_quite_small
Samsung pays the media too much for advertising, so the story sure bears repeating, doesn't it? Samsung is sleazy. Pass it on!
In Korea of course since they don't have a presence in the US stock market.
Have you blown a neuron?
Thanks! Now his post makes sense. Nice to have folks like you step in to translate for some of us once in awhile :embarrass
With that out of the way could the SEC or some other government agency penalize Samsung if they really were attempting to manipulate Apple stock? I know nothing about it.
I already knew this was happening all along. Glad to see it's finally being brought to light in the courtroom how slimy Scamsung actually is! Hope their investors smarten up and A) dump their stock and
initiate a class-action against them for fraud.
Maybe, maybe not. I do agree that Amazon has a stronger ecosystem than Samsung which makes Amazon a sort of a competitor for Apple. However, Apple and Amazon are still very different companies and Apple may realize that there is room for both, a content company (Amazon - books/products/sales medium/music/movies) and a hardware company (Apple). Interestingly and quite ironically, I think that Amazon is more a competitor of Samsung.
Your analysis is counter to mine.
Apple and Amazon are much closer than Samsung in terms of business model. Different companies, but playing the same end game. and I think Apple sees quite plainly there isn't room for Apple as an ecosystem in Amazon's model. Amazon quite simply want's all sales receipts to come through them.
And I think in the end, you're looking at 2 different approaches coming from two different markets to the same end
- Amazon almost gives away good HW to get people to align with their GREAT consumables marketplace
- started with hard goods, now is driving to digital content, and same day deliveries
- Apple sells GREAT HW to get people to align with their good consumables marketplace.
- started with digital content, now driving to be Point of Sale for physical purchases.
In the end, both want the same thing... if you use technology to buy something, they want their 3-30% of the transaction. Apple makes more on the initial transaction... Amazon makes it up on volumen.
Also in the end, phones and tablets become commodities. The margins will drop from 30% to <10%, where Amazon is now. When that day comes, profits will be on consumer retention and satisfaction, or on mass sales. (Nordstrom vs Walmart).
Samsung... wants to sell you their stuff. They are more like MS (well the old MS), and classics like Sony, Mitsubishi etc... where Samsung doesn't see the end consumer their customer, but retail chains, carriers, device manufacturers instead.
Amazon and Apple feel they must disintermediate these middle men for the good of the consumer.
Apparently Samsung's attorneys got one of Apple's two expert witnesses on damages to admit his calculations relied on. . get this. . . the other expert witnesses damage calculations. :err: He admitted on the stand that if the other expert was wrong then he would be too. Doh!
Well said. I don't disagree with you except for this:
Also in the end, phones and tablets become commodities. The margins will drop from 30% to <10%, where Amazon is now. When that day comes, profits will be on consumer retention and satisfaction, or on mass sales. (Nordstrom vs Walmart).
Margins for Apple will drop, but not to <10%...maybe to more like 25%.
Don't forget that computing devices continue to evolve, and with it, the need for higher margin/higher quality devices.
Apple will never get down to the <10% GM level.
That actually made me laugh... good one!
And these 'experts' charge how much? I can be just as incompetent for much less.
Ah come on! He started it!
Every once in awhile I take it upon myself to point a finger at a troll post in the worst childish way... sorry... I won't do it again.
Margins for Apple will drop, but not to <10%...maybe to more like 25%.
Don't forget that computing devices continue to evolve, and with it, the need for higher margin/higher quality devices.
Apple will never get down to the <10% GM level.
You're arguing a nit of the argument. my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can. and Apple will respond, because they can. And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.
Refactor for that and recompute.
Since you are incapable of having a discussion without making accusations and insults, I have determined that you are unworthy of dialogue of any sort. Goodbye and have a nice life.
An admission that your argument had no merit! Complete capitulation—good for you, mensmovement! Now we're getting somewhere…
They should have either defended their numbers or discounted the competitions. Hire their own "research firms' to put out press releases with the numbers apple believes to be accurate and true.
The sad truth is these perceptions did help sales of apple's competitors products. To what extent we don't know exactly but it was significant. It didn't have to be that way had Cook done what Jobs or Musk would have done.
????????????????????
Thank the DOJ for Amazon's monopoly and predatory pricing.
If this the truth, and Samsung fudged the figures to its shareholders, then there is greater at stake. Firstly the stockmarket would collapse the shares, indictments may commence against those who lied and manipulated the figures and shareholders generallly wont be too pleased so a general cleaning of house of upper management would occur. the company would be turned upside down and the stockmarket would take a while to trust the company again. This doesnt really seem to happening so the truth and veracity of all this of it may never be known.
Your naivete is charming.
Samsung grew from a family business that the mafia probably compares favorably to. The thing is, it amounts to roughly 20% of the entire GDP of South Korea. The _CEO_ of Samsung was convicted of bribing high officials, including the _President of that country_ . He was later pardoned by a subsequent "pro-business" president, and took back his post as Samsung's CEO, saying of the bribery "I didn't do it":
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tax-evasion-bribery-and-pricefixing-how-samsung-became-the-giant-that-ate-korea-8510588.html
As we know, they've rigged (and then denied rigging) benchmarking tests, and recently sued a South Korean newspaper for millions, for suggesting that supplies of the optical sensor for the camera in the S5 may be constrained. They're suing Dyson for suggesting that the design of Samsung's Dyson-knockoff vacuum cleaner might have been borrowed a teensy bit.
I'm not sure why the press is tiptoeing around the issue - maybe because they've been so successful in what they've done, or maybe they're literally afraid of Samsung's wrath, but this company is not like a typical large multinational corporation - it's really more of a family-controlled, corporate rogue state.
????????????????????
Chinese?
You're arguing a nit of the argument. my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can. and Apple will respond, because they can. And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.
Refactor for that and recompute.
Refactor what? Apple may be forced to reduce GM, may go from 35% to 25% someday. Amazon is already at zero profit and can't go much lower. If anything, Amazon will raise margins in the future (e.g. Prime going from $79 to $99). You're waaaay off if you think Apple will go down to <10% GM.