I consider > $1 billion in profit for a year "a lot" for any company, even if it's diminished "a lot" or if it's "a lot" less than the compan[y|ies] above them.
True. But a 74% drop is not to be ignored.
We don't know if Samsung knew or not. All we know is that there were no public leaks. Why would Samsung want to announced how much further ahead Apple was the rest of the game. What they likely couldn't know the code Apple had written to leverage the advancement of ARM64.
I do think it is clear that Samsung did not know. It's true there were no leaks, but Samsung's reaction to the announcement indicates that they were blindsided.
I do think it is clear that Samsung did not know. It's true there were no leaks, but Samsung's reaction to the announcement indicates that they were blindsided.
I agree with both your comments, I just don't think we should say Samsung isn't still profitable nor say with any certainty any employee at Samsung was unaware. Perhaps that division of Samsung is actually ethical, as odd as that is to write.
for those who would gloat ... apple will be in the same position one day. not if, but when. just sayin'.
Not sure why you think that. Apple has the ability to innovate and replace their own products. It is not unreasonable to expect a future where the Watch has taken over from the iPhone.
This is only gonna hurt the android App Store further. Sammy's fall from android dominance will create even more fragmentation.
I know a lot of developers were using the galaxy line as the android standard but now things are even more uncertain for poor developers and their apps.
Galaxy standard?
There were 280 million Android phones sold last quarter... but only 78 million of them were made by Samsung (and not all of them were Galaxy)
I see what you're saying... Samsung is the largest and probably the most recognized Android OEM.
But there are far more non-Samsung Android phones out there...
Their profits are dropping because there's a lot of android competition and requires carriers to lower the price and subsidies. Many S4 given for free now and S5 for $99.
I agree with you up to a point. I don't see anyone toppling Apple, but I do see other companies taking more of the pie. There are plenty of companies that have maintained a dominant position for decades, and while they're not as strong as they were once were they're not in danger of being toppled.
Very true. IBM, HP, Sony aren't gone, but are not what they were, for example, despite having once been dominant.
But it wouldn't be hard (if I had the energy) to create a list of extinct corporations or other institutions that once seemed unassailable.
Just a question of how long a view you take. I'm probably not going to see, say, 2034, and I hope I won't see them decline,
much less disappear, in that time frame...but what will our kids see?
Yes...the carriers are subsidizing the Galaxy S4 and S5 and offering them to their wireless customers for "free" or $99 on-contract.
But Samsung should still be getting the full retail price of $500 or $600 per phone. (and thus the full profit per phone)
The subsidy exists between the carrier and the wireless customer... not the carrier and the manufacturer.
No manufacturer will accept $100 for a $600 phone.
So even if you walk out of the carrier store with a "free" Galaxy S4.... you can guarantee Samsung got paid in full for it.
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
Gotcha... thanks.
I'm curious though... how much discount does Samsung give the carriers?
On a $500 phone... are they selling them to the carriers for $250 ?
If so... yeah that would certainly destroy their profit.
One quote: "Samsung doesn't always get full retail price for its phones, frequently offering buy-one-get-one offers to drive volume sales. It has also bundled free tablets with phone sales. Both practices drive down the company's Average Selling Prices and its profits."
I'm not. With a new service like this, Apple tends to be conservative at launch, sticking to one region. And they should, thats the responsible thing to do. Once they can test it with millions, and make sure everything is ironed out and works perfectly, then they can think about that. Just like how Touch ID was only on phones the 1st yr, and limited to Apple's software.
think: obamacare roll out, as demonstration of how not to execute something on a large scale!:D
One quote: "Samsung doesn't always get full retail price for its phones, frequently offering buy-one-get-one offers to drive volume sales. It has also bundled free tablets with phone sales. Both practices drive down the company's Average Selling Prices and its profits."
Ouch...
I guess this proves that people aren't buying Samsung phones like they used to (at least not their high-profit flagship phones)
Now that I think about it... I wondered why Samsung phones were offered two-for-one just moments after launch. I always thought the carriers were taking the hit just to get people into the store.
Now it appears that Samsung themselves are the ones giving deep discounts just to move product.
I was clearly wrong earlier when I said Samsung was getting full retail price for their phones... but my temporary shame is nothing compared to what Samsung must be going through right now...
Thank you for clearing this up!
BTW... hearing all this reminds me of the Hummer dealer on South Park:
"Hey guys. Lookin' to buy a Galaxy S5 today?"
"We're havin' a Rocktober sales event day that's goin' into Rockvember."
"Rockvember sales event, guys! Every Galaxy S5 comes with a free Galaxy Tab!"
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
So true, Samsung will have to share the lower up front cost, the carriers will not bear the full cost of lower demand for Samsung phones.
Of course the usage costs for the lower end Samsung smart phones are the same, so the carriers make a higher usage profit on them.
Not surprising the carriers advertise those low end phones much more than the iPhone.
Apple is certainly capable of being surprised by a "Black Swan" event, but one would have to assume that Apple's ability to adapt, and its robust pipeline of managers versed in the "Apple Way" through Apple University would probably mitigate the worst of the effects.
Of course, natural disaster, financial collapse and epidemics might be the most likely Black Swan events that would effect Apple, but, these events would be positive for very few industries, and most of its competitors would succumb to the same events.
There are of course, technological Black Swan events, but chances of these occurring unannounced are pretty rare; things like RADAR, and Nuclear weapons were known to all the participants of the Second World War, but nonetheless, had major impacts on the participants in both negative and positive ways.
It's my opinion that Apple will likely see ascents and descents in its financials over time, and it is likely that consumer electronics will eventually be too cheap to sell, and will be embedded with services for the customer, but all else being equal, Apple gains an advantage by generating income today, and its advantage over Samsung in mobile grows stronger.
Of course, one cannot predict when and if the likes of a Carl Icahn will arrive and dismember the company, and that is in fact a very real threat over time.
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
So true, Samsung will have to share the lower up front cost, the carriers will not bear the full cost of lower demand for Samsung phones.
Of course the usage costs for the lower end Samsung smart phones are the same, so the carriers make a higher usage profit on them.
Not surprising the carriers advertise those low end phones much more than the iPhone.
Samsung also pays a "spiff" to the sales person too; they are working it backwards and forwards, trying to move those bandaid phones. Do you realize how hard it is to spend $13 billion dollars in one year.? It took the U.S. government 200 years to figure out how to do it right.
Comments
I consider > $1 billion in profit for a year "a lot" for any company, even if it's diminished "a lot" or if it's "a lot" less than the compan[y|ies] above them.
True. But a 74% drop is not to be ignored.
I do think it is clear that Samsung did not know. It's true there were no leaks, but Samsung's reaction to the announcement indicates that they were blindsided.
I agree with both your comments, I just don't think we should say Samsung isn't still profitable nor say with any certainty any employee at Samsung was unaware. Perhaps that division of Samsung is actually ethical, as odd as that is to write.
for those who would gloat ... apple will be in the same position one day. not if, but when. just sayin'.
Not sure why you think that. Apple has the ability to innovate and replace their own products. It is not unreasonable to expect a future where the Watch has taken over from the iPhone.
Poppycock.
Which flavor?
Poppycock.
Which flavor?
All of them.
Galaxy standard?
There were 280 million Android phones sold last quarter... but only 78 million of them were made by Samsung (and not all of them were Galaxy)
I see what you're saying... Samsung is the largest and probably the most recognized Android OEM.
But there are far more non-Samsung Android phones out there...
Yes...the carriers are subsidizing the Galaxy S4 and S5 and offering them to their wireless customers for "free" or $99 on-contract.
But Samsung should still be getting the full retail price of $500 or $600 per phone. (and thus the full profit per phone)
The subsidy exists between the carrier and the wireless customer... not the carrier and the manufacturer.
No manufacturer will accept $100 for a $600 phone.
So even if you walk out of the carrier store with a "free" Galaxy S4.... you can guarantee Samsung got paid in full for it.
I agree with you up to a point. I don't see anyone toppling Apple, but I do see other companies taking more of the pie. There are plenty of companies that have maintained a dominant position for decades, and while they're not as strong as they were once were they're not in danger of being toppled.
Very true. IBM, HP, Sony aren't gone, but are not what they were, for example, despite having once been dominant.
But it wouldn't be hard (if I had the energy) to create a list of extinct corporations or other institutions that once seemed unassailable.
Just a question of how long a view you take. I'm probably not going to see, say, 2034, and I hope I won't see them decline,
much less disappear, in that time frame...but what will our kids see?
Any bets on how long it will be before we see "Samsung Pay" ?
Well...they seem to be paying right now!
Yes...the carriers are subsidizing the Galaxy S4 and S5 and offering them to their wireless customers for "free" or $99 on-contract.
But Samsung should still be getting the full retail price of $500 or $600 per phone. (and thus the full profit per phone)
The subsidy exists between the carrier and the wireless customer... not the carrier and the manufacturer.
No manufacturer will accept $100 for a $600 phone.
So even if you walk out of the carrier store with a "free" Galaxy S4.... you can guarantee Samsung got paid in full for it.
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
Gotcha... thanks.
I'm curious though... how much discount does Samsung give the carriers?
On a $500 phone... are they selling them to the carriers for $250 ?
If so... yeah that would certainly destroy their profit.
Gotcha... thanks.
I'm curious though... how much discount does Samsung give the carriers?
On a $500 phone... are they selling them to the carriers for $250 ?
If so... yeah that would certainly destroy their profit.
I don't know the exact numbers as they can only be deduced from financial data. There are lots of details in this later article
How Apple, Inc. went thermonuclear on Samsung, erasing Android's primary profit center
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/10/30/how-apple-inc-went-thermonuclear-on-samsung-erasing-androids-primary-profit-center-
One quote: "Samsung doesn't always get full retail price for its phones, frequently offering buy-one-get-one offers to drive volume sales. It has also bundled free tablets with phone sales. Both practices drive down the company's Average Selling Prices and its profits."
Ouch...
I guess this proves that people aren't buying Samsung phones like they used to (at least not their high-profit flagship phones)
Now that I think about it... I wondered why Samsung phones were offered two-for-one just moments after launch. I always thought the carriers were taking the hit just to get people into the store.
Now it appears that Samsung themselves are the ones giving deep discounts just to move product.
I was clearly wrong earlier when I said Samsung was getting full retail price for their phones... but my temporary shame is nothing compared to what Samsung must be going through right now...
Thank you for clearing this up!
BTW... hearing all this reminds me of the Hummer dealer on South Park:
"Hey guys. Lookin' to buy a Galaxy S5 today?"
"We're havin' a Rocktober sales event day that's goin' into Rockvember."
"Rockvember sales event, guys! Every Galaxy S5 comes with a free Galaxy Tab!"
There can be only one conclusion from this...
Apple is doomed!
-to more success as all those Samsung lower end customers realize there is more to consider than a low up front cost.
Samsung recent phone models are now moving to $0 or even a $ credit to "please take one". They are joining Blackberry !
Yes Apple's larger screen has been a factor, I know several Samsung customers who need the larger screen because of their poor close vision.
But I'm wondering if Samsung users finally are fed up with Google watching everything they do, on their Google OS phone ?
For me the negative is Apple's iPhone 6 up front cost will probably hold until the next iPhone model is available.
I will bet that Samsung is getting nowhere near "full retail price". The carriers are getting a very substantial discount on these phones - especially since they're not selling very well. Samsung is being paid but not full list. And that part of the reason their profits are down so much.
So true, Samsung will have to share the lower up front cost, the carriers will not bear the full cost of lower demand for Samsung phones.
Of course the usage costs for the lower end Samsung smart phones are the same, so the carriers make a higher usage profit on them.
Not surprising the carriers advertise those low end phones much more than the iPhone.
Apple is certainly capable of being surprised by a "Black Swan" event, but one would have to assume that Apple's ability to adapt, and its robust pipeline of managers versed in the "Apple Way" through Apple University would probably mitigate the worst of the effects.
Of course, natural disaster, financial collapse and epidemics might be the most likely Black Swan events that would effect Apple, but, these events would be positive for very few industries, and most of its competitors would succumb to the same events.
There are of course, technological Black Swan events, but chances of these occurring unannounced are pretty rare; things like RADAR, and Nuclear weapons were known to all the participants of the Second World War, but nonetheless, had major impacts on the participants in both negative and positive ways.
It's my opinion that Apple will likely see ascents and descents in its financials over time, and it is likely that consumer electronics will eventually be too cheap to sell, and will be embedded with services for the customer, but all else being equal, Apple gains an advantage by generating income today, and its advantage over Samsung in mobile grows stronger.
Of course, one cannot predict when and if the likes of a Carl Icahn will arrive and dismember the company, and that is in fact a very real threat over time.
Samsung also pays a "spiff" to the sales person too; they are working it backwards and forwards, trying to move those bandaid phones. Do you realize how hard it is to spend $13 billion dollars in one year.? It took the U.S. government 200 years to figure out how to do it right.