Samsung's mobile profits plunge 64.2% after Apple's iPhone 6 devastates premium Galaxy sales

135678

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 145

    Just doing a little mental arithmetic here:

     

    Apple has 176 billion in cash.....Samsung has a component chip division that can make and ramp up production on A series chips.....they owe Apple a billion bucks...........

     

    Offer them 3 billion and write off the 1 billion owed, take over the chip division,  produce Apple developed chips AND stop selling other chips to Android OEM manufacturers....

     

    deliciously evil :devil:

     

    Dr Hawk

  • Reply 42 of 145
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,428member
    I'm convinced that DED has a boilerplate for Samsung at the ready. This was reported only within the last half-hour and already there's a 20-paragraph article

    How are the Samsung / Android fan sites interpreting the same information? I don't want to get my Mac dirty but can you paraphrase for me?
  • Reply 43 of 145
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,633member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    What is this, Samsung Insider?¡



    Some still consider Samsung to be the boogeyman but even the iHater crowd has moved away from them. They are trying to find their new Knight in Shining Armor that will slay the Apple dragon. Right now they appear to be looking at Xiaomi for salvation.

  • Reply 44 of 145
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,787member

    It takes a few years but eventually the Android race-to-the-bottom that Google orchestrated is going to grind every Android manufacturer into profitless, tech-laggard dust.  And Google will not reap anything close to the bonanza that Microsoft milked out of Windows because when they could have settled for free but proprietary, they for some inexplicable reason chose to open-source Android.  That's karma to them for stabbing Steve Jobs in the back.

  • Reply 45 of 145
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    How are the Samsung / Android fan sites interpreting the same information? I don't want to get my Mac dirty but can you paraphrase for me?

     

    Why would Lord A. know that info?

  • Reply 46 of 145

    I take delight in their demise after my Galaxy Tab developed a screen fault within warranty. The screen was half dead. 

     

    First, I was asked to send it in for inspection. They took 4 weeks to inspect it, never contacted me, just returned it saying they couldn't find the fault. 

     

    I arranged for them to take it back as they'd clearly made a mistake. Again, they took 4 weeks to inspect it, never contacted me and returned it saying that it was out of warranty and that should I want it fixed, it would cost me £180.

     

    Contrast that to the service I got from Apple when my wife's old iPhone 4S wouldn't turn on 6 months out of warranty. I went to the Apple Store the next day - they inspected it and found it was water damaged. I called my wife to ask her about it and she said she she *may* have dropped it in the bath. I 'fessed up to the guy and apologised for wasting his time, but he offered me a replacement handset for £145. He was fully withing his rights to say there was nothing he could do. 

     

    Do you know what though? Since then, my wife and I have bought had 6 more iPhones between us and I will never buy a Samsung product again. 

     

    So Samsung, your shortsightedness in trying to save a £40 repair bill means I will NEVER buy again from you. I don't care if you file for administration tomorrow. 

     

    And for those who say that competitors help innovation, I think Jailbreak tweaks are providing most of the ideas for Apple to roll into upgrades for iOS at the moment. Competitors used to keep the prices down too, but not anymore.

  • Reply 47 of 145
    elmoofoelmoofo Posts: 100member
    Do you still have to install an app in order to quit apps?
  • Reply 48 of 145
    dabedabe Posts: 99member



    Man steals my property and starts selling it, creating so-called wondrous "competition" in the marketplace, and I should forget that it all began with  theft?

  • Reply 49 of 145
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tiger2 View Post



    I'm not sure why so many people take such great delight in the failures of Apple' s competitors. Competition is good for the consumer in this case.



    I hope Samsung, Microsoft, et al, all keep innovating and making great products. This will force Apple to do the same. And, perhaps lower their prices.

    Man steals my property and starts selling it, creating so-called wondrous "competition" in the marketplace, and I should forget that it all began with  theft?

  • Reply 50 of 145
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tiger2 View Post



    I'm not sure why so many people take such great delight in the failures of Apple' s competitors. Competition is good for the consumer in this case.



    I hope Samsung, Microsoft, et al, all keep innovating and making great products. This will force Apple to do the same. And, perhaps lower their prices.

     

    (Corrected response...)

     

    Man steals my property and starts selling it, creating so-called wondrous "competition" in the marketplace, and I should forget that it all began with  theft, that in fact the man is a thief?

  • Reply 51 of 145
    pfisherpfisher Posts: 758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Future Man View Post

     

    ALL:



    Samsung is not a bad company, in fact, it is a very successful CE company.  They are also friend-enemies of Apple, making some of the key components of the iPhone- a strange relationship I should think.  It may be that both the profits and problems facing Samsung in producing a finished smartphone on which it makes a very marginal profit, is not worth the efforts anymore.  Samsung can very easily withdraw from being a  smartphone finished product provider and instead stay in the game by making many of the item components for Apple's and other's smartphones.  Also, Samsung is gearing up for the upcoming new standard in HDTV, the 4K system, so it has plenty of work to keep itself occupied.




    Technically, I believe, it's a conglomerate. Its a collection of corporation. They are called Chaebols in Korea. Keiretsu in Japan. Sorry to nit pick, but frenenimies in this case may not be technically correct as Apple probably has a good relationship with the display and chip side of Samsung, but adversarial with the leaders at the higher level and the phone side.

     

    Very good point: Samsung could just stop making phones and make components, but they wont. I'm too lazy to look at the numbers, but I assume their phones made some money. And for ego they won't drop phones. And it's great advertising when you have a lot of people carrying your phones and seeing your logo.

     

    Yes, Samsung could refocus on its strengths, but it mostly likely won't do so.

  • Reply 52 of 145
    jungmark wrote: »
    One more thing: cue the articles stating this is bad for Apple.

    Just like "low gas prices are bad" arguments.
  • Reply 53 of 145
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Isn't there some correlation to a massive mobile phone profit surge last year, and people locked into two-year contracts this year?

    While I recognize and suspect the 6+ saw a lot of Android defectors to Apple, it seems to me there's a cyclical consumer aspect here that might account for some of this. Then again, where were the people who's two year contracts were up this year? Probably switching to the iPhone.
  • Reply 54 of 145
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tiger2 View Post



    I'm not sure why so many people take such great delight in the failures of Apple' s competitors. Competition is good for the consumer in this case.



    I hope Samsung, Microsoft, et al, all keep innovating and making great products. This will force Apple to do the same. And, perhaps lower their prices.



    Enough of this "competition is good" crap.

     

    If Samsung, et al, had half a clue what it actually means to compete, they would have started from scratch, somehow would have gotten honest (if anyone of them had half a clue what THAT means), and would have paid their dues by truly innovating their OWN technology and products without stealing from and/or copying Apple.

     

    Apple actually HASN'T HAD and doesn't need competition to have achieved what they have achieved.

  • Reply 55 of 145
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

     

    Apple actually HASN'T HAD and doesn't need competition to have achieved what they have achieved.


     

    I really doubt that.

  • Reply 56 of 145
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    Just to open up the discussion a bit...can anybody shed light on the [I]political[/I] structure in a chaebol?
    I had a conversation with a Korean lady in my Spanish evening class, who was good enough to shed some light. Her deceased father worked for a chaebol and who told his daughter many times over his work years, that he must never be [I]too[/I] successful - just enough to make his superior successful who in turn must follow the same dictum and so on up the ladder.
    How on earth does that work?
  • Reply 57 of 145
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,799member
    Samsung needs to focus on markets where Apple won't compete. Send more R&D money to their refrigerator and washing machine engineers and just realize they lost the phone war.
  • Reply 58 of 145
    frac wrote: »
    Just to open up the discussion a bit...can anybody shed light on the political structure in a chaebol?
    I had a conversation with a Korean lady in my Spanish evening class, who was good enough to shed some light. Her deceased father worked for a chaebol and who told his daughter many times over his work years, that he must never be too successful - just enough to make his superior successful who in turn must follow the same dictum and so on up the ladder.
    How on earth does that work?

    To me, a chaebol appears rather like a tribal arrangement, complete with a ruling family, its certainly corrupt and would definitely be illegal in the US. There is a massive amount of collusion, price fixing and unfair competition wrought by tight relations with the Korean government, which appears to be even worse than the questionable arrangements in the US between the government and Goldman Sachs, GE, the banks, etc.
  • Reply 59 of 145
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,799member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frac View Post



    Just to open up the discussion a bit...can anybody shed light on the political structure in a chaebol?

    I had a conversation with a Korean lady in my Spanish evening class, who was good enough to shed some light. Her deceased father worked for a chaebol and who told his daughter many times over his work years, that he must never be too successful - just enough to make his superior successful who in turn must follow the same dictum and so on up the ladder.

    How on earth does that work?



    You are confusing Chaebol with a Korean and indeed most of Asian cultural norm of saving face and not showing up your boss. Two different things entirely.

     

    Think of a Chaebol like the old Standard Oil and other big monopolies the U.S. used to have before they were broken up by Teddy Roosevelt in 1911. They are massive companies with many divisions and exert tremendous political influence. In Japan they are called Keiretsu and before that Zaibatsu. The Chaebol was a result of the Japanese occupation of Korea in fact. 

     

    It is a large grouping of companies working as one and they even have their own banks, schools, even cities. Toyota, Japan for example is basically a city owned by the Toyota company. 

  • Reply 60 of 145
    gwmac wrote: »

    You are confusing Chaebol with a Korean and indeed most of Asian cultural norm of saving face and not showing up your boss. Two different things entirely.

    Think of a Chaebol like the old Standard Oil and other big monopolies the U.S. used to have before they were broken up by Teddy Roosevelt in 1911. They are massive companies with many divisions and exert tremendous political influence. In Japan they are called Keiretsu and before that Zaibatsu. The Chaebol was a result of the Japanese occupation of Korea in fact. 

    It is a large grouping of companies working as one and they even have their own banks, schools, even cities. Toyota, Japan for example is basically a city owned by the Toyota company. 

    Just a point of clarification... Monopolies existed in the US thanks to the government, not due to a lack of governance. Oil company, telephone and cable monopolies were not created by free market competition, they were all created by laws that protected them from competitors. Check your history. Even AT&T is very blunt about this fact on their own web sites history page.
Sign In or Register to comment.