Apple continues to dominate with massive 86% share of handset industry profits

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 61
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,470member

    Apple has added a new paradigm to the old adages. “Sell a lot for a little.” Sell a little for a lot.” And Apple’s new “Sell a Shitload of product for a Shitload of money.” I like that new way of thinking.

  • Reply 42 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Still, Apple and Samsung combined for more than 100 percent of the industry's total profits, because competitors such as Motorola and Microsoft actually lost share. 

    How the F is this even possible? More than 100% profit? 


    No!!!!! Don't even go there.... (Not to be too cryptic, but it's a sincere piece of advice based on a bloody history).

  • Reply 43 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

     

    Yeah, but Android has 83% world-wide smartphone market share and growing.  Now, that's what really matters to Wall Street.  Wall Street can't possibly believe that Android has a massive 83% market share and only a miniscule 13% profit share.  It doesn't compute.  Market success is supposed to be all about volume.  After all, aren't about 5 million Android devices activated by Google on a daily basis.  In five years there will be about three Android smartphones for every man, woman and child on the planet.  Google may even teach gorillas and chimps to use smartphones to boost sales.  They'll pay in bananas.

     

    Wall Street was salivating when it heard about Android One and $75 smartphones being sold to poverty-class BRIC consumers.  That's like a billion more humans holding onto an Android smartphone.  What could possibly be more impressive than that?  Imagine the growth.  Wall Street is always impressed with massive growth whether there's any profits or not to be had.  35%, 50%, 75% growth has investors dancing in the streets.  What will Apple's iPhone growth be?  2%, 5% tops?  Booooring.  Cross off that doomed company with a market cap of $700 billion.  The law of large numbers says it can only go down.  That's the punishment Apple gets for going after profits instead of market share.  A good lesson to be learned.

     

    /s


     

    Well, Wall St is interested in stock price, not in profit. Profits don't help investors unless they drive up the stock price. Don't try to apply much more logic than that to the stock market though. There is software out there driving the market that banks on half-a-penny price changes to make money for investors. I have some friends who used to be geophysicists/software engineers. They wrote some software that did a great job of predicting earthquakes (like 5 seconds in advance), and they decided to point the algorithms at the stock market. Their software does not consider earnings, profits, or anything else. All it does is watches prices and volume and it buys/sells. They are making so much money that they are opening data centers in every city in the world that has a market so they can trade with less latency. They essentially have money printing machines all over the world.

  • Reply 44 of 61
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    fallenjt wrote: »
    How the F is this even possible? More than 100% profit? 


    Industry wide profits include the negative profits(losses). When added (profits and losses) altogether you end up with 100%, but if you just look at profits it adds up to over 100%.
  • Reply 45 of 61
    Waiting for your competition to screw up is exactly Microsoft's default strategy. And it used to work.

    Google changed the game with their five year long Beta programs and has dramatically modified consumer expectations.

    There is always tomorrow for Google proponents.
  • Reply 46 of 61
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,719member
    fallenjt wrote: »
    How the F is this even possible? More than 100% profit? 

    Don't go there. We have this discussion every time articles like this occur. Haha

    Still, I wonder what the acolytes of the church of market share have to say about this.
  • Reply 47 of 61
    adybadyb Posts: 184member
    Seeing as you're new to AI ...

    This genuinely made me laugh out loud!
  • Reply 48 of 61
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member

    Originally Posted by mubaili View Post





    Apple is still doomed. How much can Apple grow from a 86% profit share? I like better if Apple only command a 51% profit share.

     

    I can see it now.  Analysts will be writing these stories just before the bears who pay for their "analysis" short the stock:

     

    "Apple's Profit Trajectory Stalls: Only 14% Remains"

     

    "The End of an Era: iPhone Profits Stuck Below 90% of Mobile"

     

    "Slim Pickings for Apple's Thin iPhone: Only The Crumbs Are Left"

     

    "What's Next, Apple?  iPhone Profit Growth is OVER."

     

    "Apple Trailing Badly in Mobile Profit Race-To-The-Bottom Indicators"

  • Reply 49 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bizzare View Post



    Awesome.... Only 14% left. ????

    Well, strictly speaking, there's 20% left :). Let everyone else share a portion of the losses.

  • Reply 50 of 61
    [quote]Still, Apple and Samsung combined for more than 100 percent of the industry's total profits, because competitors such as Motorola and Microsoft actually lost share. In fact, other than Apple and Samsung, the only other company to have a positive value share in the September quarter was LG with 2 percent, according to Walkley.[/quote]

    I can't wait when Apple's share turns negative.
  • Reply 51 of 61
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,982member

    Damn, 

    I tried to post on Mac Rumors and got this. I was banned because I said "sh.tt". Pathetic forum with no free speech. Sog35 would be banned in there every time...lol. Do I give the shit? NOPE.

     

    You do not have access to the MacRumors Forums

    Your access to the MacRumors Forums has been temporarily or permanently suspended.







    Suspension expiration date and time:

    Nov 5, 2014, 03:00 PM

     

    Reason for suspension:

    Continuing to circumvent the profanity filter, despite previous reminders / warnings, this time ("the sale has been sh.tt") in this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20286572

     

    If a date and time are shown above, the suspension is temporary. If the word Never appears instead then the suspension is permanent.

  • Reply 52 of 61
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     

    Damn, 

    I tried to post on Mac Rumors and got this. I was banned because I said "sh.tt". Pathetic forum with no free speech. Sog35 would be banned in there every time...lol. Do I give the shit? NOPE.

     

    You do not have access to the MacRumors Forums

    Your access to the MacRumors Forums has been temporarily or permanently suspended.







    Suspension expiration date and time:

    Nov 5, 2014, 03:00 PM

     

    Reason for suspension:

    Continuing to circumvent the profanity filter, despite previous reminders / warnings, this time ("the sale has been sh.tt") in this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20286572

     

    If a date and time are shown above, the suspension is temporary. If the word Never appears instead then the suspension is permanent.




    MR and its mods suck, despite having the cleanest rumors site thats the easiest to read and use (easier and cleaner than AI, unfortunately).

     

    some guy was being a sexist jackass and saying females only use Facebook and they banned me for saying he was being a sexist jackass -- despite it not being on their filter system. 

     

    i will give their db admin credit -- they have reports that check all new-account posts against all IPs (current or historic) used by all banned users, and when they get a match they permaban you. i was stunned by that because i created a second account on work machines used by my employer and not tied to my home IP....but because id posted on them historically they were able to link it to the new account. sneaky.

  • Reply 53 of 61
    scineram wrote: »
    I can't wait when Apple's share turns negative.

    Did you mean to say when Samsung's share turns negative or are you just a troll?
  • Reply 54 of 61

    It will be interesting to see what the ASPs for the iPhone are in January. It’s not an easy equation.

     

    This is a unique year for the iPhone, as Apple have introduced two new models. Last year, it is true that Apple introduced the 5s and 5c. However, the 5c was really a rehashed 5 and the 5s was much the most popular model by all accounts. That said, the 5c was outselling the 5s in recent months.

     

    This year, there really are two new flagship models. If one thought that the 6 Plus would have the same success as the 5s last year, then it would be fairly reasonable to assume that the ASP would rise. However, the change in storage capacities adds complexities, as does the size difference. Whereas the 5s was thought to have unsold the 5c by at least 3 to 1, and some said 10 to 1 in the early months, I think it is more likely that the 6 and 6 Plus will have more equal sharing, if not being skewed more to the cheaper model, the 6.

     

    In addition to that is the question of storage capacity. As Apple have doubled the middle iPhone to 64GB, I think that  a lot of people may settle for that model rather than getting 128GB. This applies to both the 6 and the 6 Plus. The top 6 Plus is $100 more than the top 5s last year. But if more opt for the 64GB, this may lessen the increased ASP. What's more, if the 6 is seen as the mainstream iPhone, then that is the same cost structure as the 5s. And if more people migrate to the middle model rather than the top one, that is $100 less, lowering the ASP. On the other hand, it may also reduce the number getting the 16GB model, which would help to increase ASPs.

     

    So, all in all, I think that there is a good chance that Apple will see a nice rise in ASP. There is a possibility, though, that there is only a modest rise, a stagnation, or even a decline. 

     

    Regardless, Apple's profit share shows that Google's seemingly inevitable conquering of the mobile landscape doesn't appear to be built on firm ground. The problem for Google is that they don't own the hardware. As long as they can rely on desktop advertising, they are okay, but that is surely a declining market. Microsoft's services run deeper than Google's.

  • Reply 55 of 61
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,195member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

     

    Yeah, but Android has 83% world-wide smartphone market share and growing.  Now, that's what really matters to Wall Street.  Wall Street can't possibly believe that Android has a massive 83% market share and only a miniscule 13% profit share.  It doesn't compute.  Market success is supposed to be all about volume.  After all, aren't about 5 million Android devices activated by Google on a daily basis.  In five years there will be about three Android smartphones for every man, woman and child on the planet.  Google may even teach gorillas and chimps to use smartphones to boost sales.  They'll pay in bananas.

     

    Wall Street was salivating when it heard about Android One and $75 smartphones being sold to poverty-class BRIC consumers.  That's like a billion more humans holding onto an Android smartphone.  What could possibly be more impressive than that?  Imagine the growth.  Wall Street is always impressed with massive growth whether there's any profits or not to be had.  35%, 50%, 75% growth has investors dancing in the streets.  What will Apple's iPhone growth be?  2%, 5% tops?  Booooring.  Cross off that doomed company with a market cap of $700 billion.  The law of large numbers says it can only go down.  That's the punishment Apple gets for going after profits instead of market share.  A good lesson to be learned.

     

    /s


     

    Oh, shutup. You were calling for Tim Cook's ouster for like a year when the stock was low- even thought you admit that Wallstreet is clueless- so what makes you any better? You've always been a sycophant with no backbone when it comes to stock price and your opinion of Apple, which is always perfectly in tune with Wallstreet's opinion. You're only cheerleading Apple now because the stock has risen, and when it drops you will be screaming bloody murder and blaming Apple- Not Wallstreet- as you always have. 

     

    We're still waiting for you to admit you were epically wrong about Tim "needing to go" to fix Apple's stock price, which you hammered on for a year. You're too much of a coward and a liar to do that though. You have no principles or vision, beyond drooling after the stock price. 

  • Reply 56 of 61
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    Yeah, but activations¡



    Yeah, but what does that do for me as a stockholder?

     

    Hmmm, let me see...do I want activations....or 86% of the profit? ......Hmmm......I'm still thinking.

  • Reply 57 of 61
    ronmgronmg Posts: 163member
    slurpy wrote: »
    Oh, shutup. You were calling for Tim Cook's ouster for like a year when the stock was low- even thought you admit that Wallstreet is clueless- so what makes you any better? You've always been a sycophant with no backbone when it comes to stock price and your opinion of Apple, which is always perfectly in tune with Wallstreet's opinion. You're only cheerleading Apple now because the stock has risen, and when it drops you will be screaming bloody murder and blaming Apple- Not Wallstreet- as you always have. 

    We're still waiting for you to admit you were epically wrong about Tim "needing to go" to fix Apple's stock price, which you hammered on for a year. You're too much of a coward and a liar to do that though. You have no principles or vision, beyond drooling after the stock price. 

    The Constable is a troll and an idiot as well as a coward and a liar. Been that way on Mac Observer site for years. I truly wish I didn't have to see his idiotic comments.
  • Reply 58 of 61
    mnbob1mnbob1 Posts: 264member
    Many computer companies are in the graveyard because they didn't follow a basic principle: market share does not equal profit. Many executives from outside the industry have been brought in to try and save a technology company without understanding that a quality, well-designed product will be where the money is and be chosen over cheap product that fails. This is especially true in the enterprise sector. Consumers reject faulty cheap products with high failure rates too. Some of the occupants of the graveyard: Compaq, Honeywell, Northgate, Sperry/UNIVAC, Tandy, Commodore, Control Data, DEC, Gateway. And many many others. Some brand names were aquired by other companies. Apple was close to failure. Dell was close to failure. HP is at an all time low. Luckily Dell and Apple found leadership to bring things around and regain profit. Get off the market share bandwagon, I'd rather make record profits.
  • Reply 59 of 61
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    Numbers look pretty acurate

     

    Apple reported $11.2B in operating profit.

    Lets say 70% of the profit was iPhone = $7.85B phone profits

     

    Samdung reported $1.75B in operating profit.

    Lets say 80% of the profit was Phones = $1.4B phone profits

     

    LG reported $160M phone profits

     

    Total profits = $9.4B

     

    Apple share = 83.4%

     

    Not factor in the losses from HTC/Microsoft/ect and it jumps to 86%

     

    In other words total and utter domination


     

    LG is actually starting to make money from their phones. $300M I think last quarter. Everyone else is in the dumps though.

  • Reply 60 of 61
    foggyhill wrote: »
    LG is actually starting to make money from their phones. $300M I think last quarter. Everyone else is in the dumps though.

    Ok... so 3 companies are making money in smartphones: Apple, Samsung, and LG

    Sucks for the other 60 companies selling smartphones today:

    Acer, Alcatel, AllWinner, Amazon, Apple, Asus, Blackberry, BLU, Celkon, Coolpad, Cubot, Dell, Evolio, G-Tide, Gigabyte, Gionee, Goophone, Haier, Hike, HP, HTC, Huawei, iBall, Infinix, InnJoo, Intex, iOcean, Jiake, Jiayu, Jivi, Jolla, Karbonn, Kingzone, Kyocera, Lava, Lenovo, LG, Meizu, Micromax, MLais, Motorola, Neken, Nokia, OnePlus, Oppo, Opsson, Panasonic, Samsung, Solo, Sony, Spice, Star, TCL, Tecno, THL, Umi, Vertu, Vivo, Voto, Xiaomi, Xolo, Zopo, ZTE

    I'm baffled... only 3 companies making money? In an industry comprised of 63 companies moving over 300 million units a quarter?

    How is this even possible?

    Or more importantly... how is this sustainable?
Sign In or Register to comment.