Cook denies Apple Watch sales 'collapse,' says shipments peaked in June

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    cash907 wrote: »
    So Cook was cagey and buried actual sale numbers because of competitors? What competitors? I'm sorry but that's a load. If the sales numbers were anything worth bragging about, and Cook wasn't concerned about them being taken negatively by investors, the media, and the market in general, he would have openly published them. Comparing sales to those of the iPhone or iPad, which cost twice as much, isn't good enough.

    ...says a guy who's not launching a brand new product at Apple, the worlds most valuable company. hmm
  • Reply 22 of 118
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,362member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post



    So Cook was cagey and buried actual sale numbers because of competitors? What competitors? I'm sorry but that's a load. If the sales numbers were anything worth bragging about, and Cook wasn't concerned about them being taken negatively by investors, the media, and the market in general, he would have openly published them. Comparing sales to those of the iPhone or iPad, which cost twice as much, isn't good enough.

     

    Enough of your trollish horse-shit. We've known for 6 months that Apple was not going to reveal #s, so stop pretending they just decided to do this because they didn't like the #s

     

    Also, your last point is utterly moronic. So Apple products sell based on their price? In that case, I guess the Apple TV should be absolutely destroying sales of all iOS devices, going by your absurd logic. That's the best you can do, in order to shit on the positive fact that the Apple watch is outselling the corresponding periods of Apple's most successful products, the iPhone/iPad?

     

    Yeah, try again. 

  • Reply 23 of 118
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,368member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post



    Seems pretty damn impressive that June surpassed their launch month, since Apple products obviously have massive launch numbers. This to me is the strongest evidence yet that sales are extremely solid.

    Maybe.

     

    I still find it odd that he had to be so coy about it. What possible reason could there be, especially when your stock just lost somewhere between $50B-$60B in market cap?!

  • Reply 24 of 118
    ecatsecats Posts: 272member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post



    So Cook was cagey and buried actual sale numbers because of competitors? What competitors? I'm sorry but that's a load. If the sales numbers were anything worth bragging about, and Cook wasn't concerned about them being taken negatively by investors, the media, and the market in general, he would have openly published them. Comparing sales to those of the iPhone or iPad, which cost twice as much, isn't good enough.



    There is no logic to your argument since it hinges on the idea that Apple chose to stuff the sales into "other" after a hypothetical poor launch. However Apple announced that the watch will be included in their other category nearly 8 full months before the launch. It's also not even an unreasonable move: all of their smaller items go into this category: AppleTV, Beats hardware, Apple-branded paraphernalia and so on.

     

     

    The idea that sales numbers are disclosed for "bragging" purposes is naive.

  • Reply 25 of 118
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,362member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Maybe.

     

    I still find it odd that he had to be so coy about it. What possible reason could there be, especially when your stock just lost somewhere between $50B-$60B in market cap?!


     

    Because Cook sticks to his guns. He already stated they will not reveal numbers, changing his mind because of pressure would be weak, and probably only beneficial to the very short term, not long term. And Tim is a long term kind of guy. 

  • Reply 26 of 118
    red oak wrote: »
    Get your headline right. Cook did not "deny Apple Watch sales collapse"

    What should the headline say?
  • Reply 27 of 118
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,315member

    It always amazes me how people interpret data based on their personal biases, myself included. Data is objective for the most part, unless it’s ‘cooked’ data. The interpretation of that data is quite subjective. If you’ve already convinced yourself that the ?Watch is a flop you will interpret Tim Cook’s statements in that light. If you want Apple to stay successful you will latch onto Tim’s statements as proof that it is.

     

    I wonder what philosophers think about this sort of thing, the interpretation of reality. Apple is swimming in cash, dominates the profit scene with margins the envy of every tech company out there, yet Apple is doomed. How is that possible? How does a person come to that conclusion?

  • Reply 28 of 118
    I don't really think apple watch will have a major impact as it is now, it is just a toy with so few fucncionality and a lot of marketing that every body understand this time that is an empty expensive stupid product. THe watch is a good idea but won't be a success especcially because the more the advertise and the more is a failure. Apple has searous problem of grediness and they are making unfair and bad choices in all their fields, the only "gadget" working is the iphone even if is slow in getting the available technology. Apple is still strong but is going to fall if their politic will be conservative and lucrative.
  • Reply 29 of 118
    @cash907

    Apple is its own competitor.

    How else did Apple stay alive when Windows was all there was. Not for apple people... for everybody... They learned to be appropriately cagey.

    Its amazing to me that 3 or 3.5 or 5 million units sold of a product that by its very own marketing is "extra" isn't a win. No one needs a watch anymore. Not one person in the whole world. We carry time on the phone, on etc. etc.

    A smartwatch is truly only as smart as the idiot wearing it... and if your rocking a watch to tell time in 2015 you're strugglin dude. Its not responsible, or classy, its extra.

    Like wearing one earring, or getting a tattoo or buying flavored condoms or ethnically accurate dildos... Everyone has a need. Did this ring your bell ? Who cares. What you didn't buy someone else will pay double for...

    The watch serves no compelling global use yet....BUUUUT omg riches will go to the genius who figures out how to convince me that I need a second one... And that is what Apple does. Yes they make very nice things, and Yes they're price doesn't reflect their cost and Yes they're never going to sell iPad iPhone numbers in watches because theres no reason to articulate that.

    They're going to have to claw and fight for this watch. The media truly loves to talk about it and then hate on it esp. press and JUST LIKE THE PHONE the sales figures are gonna blow proportionally until either they articulate a pressing need that buyers resonate with or Jesus sells them.

    Stop shooting down any good news. The sales figures also reflect the demographic thats buying them hand over fist.

    White Single Straight and Gay men. Those with disposable income have no problem dropping 1k on something they want. Enough with this rich vs poor bullshit. Apple vs Android crap ass duality is so empty now. The things they sell are mostly service conduits now obviously... (curious why the apple tv hasn't appeared before its content deals or mainline revenue hasn't been agreed upon?) and the watch currently has no such stream. Its more reflective that useful/creative... but not be limitation.

    When speed and memory are equitable to the use and durability of the 4g iPod forward ... they will sell them like toilet paper and hopefully you will shut up.

    The company could sell you your dirty shirt tomorrow TO YOU... and you wouldn't ever know man.

    Thats what they do... Each product is a greater and more intrusive expression of "Apple knows best."

    And they mostly do.
  • Reply 30 of 118
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,985member
    sog35 wrote: »

    Cook can't lose.  

    If the stock tanks he can authorize buybacks at cheap prices.  This will benefit long term investors.  Apple has already bought back $85 billion in shares at an average price of $86.  That's 30% lower than its current price.  Cook will defend the $120 level.  

    That $60 billion in market cap is a bullshit number.  Same as the $60 billion added to Google.  We see where these two stocks stand in a couple of months.

    Cook knows the long game.  He isn't going to sacrifice the long game to satisfy a few parasite Wall street analysist.  Keeping unit sales and average sales price of the Watch will keep Samsung/Google in the dark about what price to sell their wearables.
    I think you are on the money here.

    Really, daily and weekly swings in Apple's stock price mean squat to Apple--except in the case of being able to buy back stock when it swings low.
    People here and in the tech and investing media like to obsess about it and we always try to "solve" the problem of the market "getting AAPL wrong" but unless you have to liquidate this week, who cares--if you "know" it's undervalued, just wait it out...
  • Reply 31 of 118
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,050member
    blazar wrote: »
    Nice stock price drop, good time to buy with low pe ratio, decent dividend rate, and very little risk at this point with their $200+ billion cash hoard and further pending buybacks.
    i don't have anymore cash, otherwise I would buy more AAPL at this price....500 to 1000 shares will give you $5000-$10000 within 2 months.
  • Reply 32 of 118
    iobserveiobserve Posts: 96member

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post




     

    This was the product that was going to set the fashion industry on fire, make Swiss watch makers shake with fear and take over wearable technology. So Cook is trying to tell us this product is doing just fine and the numbers peaked yet he included them in "other products"

     

    Why would you not report best-ever performance? If the best ever performance was in June I hate to see how bad it was before June. This is fairly simple to figure out, a surge on the day of release, followed by slow sales and then a peak when they hit retail stores. That doesn't equal great sales. 

     

    Anytime Tim Cook speaks about the Apple Watch he sounds like he is stepping all over himself. I would say something else but I would get a vulgar language violation. 




    I see you have over 300 posts. So do you just post and never read any apple news or info? 

     

    Because unless you've got dementia you must remember for months and months Apple repeatedly stating they will not break out the watch numbers for competitive reasons.

  • Reply 33 of 118
    512ke512ke Posts: 782member

    It doesn't matter WHAT Cook says. The snarky doomsday naysaying concerned worried negative bloggers and press will badmouth Apple.

     

    So what if Cook had told the world exactly how many Watches Apple sold?

     

    Look how many iPhones Apple sold -- a record amount. Look how much profit Apple made -- a record amount. And most of the coverage of that is negative, and APPL took a 10 point hit after hours.

     

    Even if Cook had bragged about a high number of Watch sales, the result would have been more badmouthing in the press, and a lower stock price.

     

    And that's okay. Because all that is just temporary. It's like every word that comes out of Businessinsider and CNBC. It will have zero importance or meaning ten minutes from now. It's just a bunch of noise that impacts the world for exactly 24 hours before it's forgotten.

     

    I predict APPL regains those 10 points within 1 week. 7 days max.

  • Reply 34 of 118
    The article title says shipments, but the body says sales. Which is it?
  • Reply 35 of 118
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,315member

    The big difference here is that Tim Cook is legally bound to be factual during official financial reporting or he goes to jail. Analysts and tech bloggers are not bound by such rules and can say anything they want to about watch sales. So who do I believe about whether watch sales have ‘collapsed.” Take a guess.

  • Reply 36 of 118
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,368member
    The article title says shipments, but the body says sales. Which is it?

    You've been here since 2011.

    If you've got to ask such a silly question about an issue that has been discussed ad nauseam, you haven't been paying attention, and it's really not worthy of an answer.
  • Reply 37 of 118
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,050member
    ferraferro wrote: »
    I don't really think apple watch will have a major impact as it is now, it is just a toy with so few fucncionality and a lot of marketing that every body understand this time that is an empty expensive stupid product. THe watch is a good idea but won't be a success especcially because the more the advertise and the more is a failure. Apple has searous problem of grediness and they are making unfair and bad choices in all their fields, the only "gadget" working is the iphone even if is slow in getting the available technology. Apple is still strong but is going to fall if their politic will be conservative and lucrative.
    what you call for regular watches? Toy too? You're so ignorant
  • Reply 38 of 118
    freshmakerfreshmaker Posts: 532member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iObserve View Post

     



    I see you have over 300 posts. So do you just post and never read any apple news or info? 

     

    Because unless you've got dementia you must remember for months and months Apple repeatedly stating they will not break out the watch numbers for competitive reasons.




    Yes, but why?  Apple gives sales volumes for every other major product that they sell.  Why is the Watch any different?  You'd think that if the numbers were impressive they'd be shouting from the rooftops about it.  While I don't doubt that they've far surpassed every other smartwatch out there combined, obviously they aren't so high that they're worth reporting.

  • Reply 39 of 118
    You've been here since 2011.

    If you've got to ask such a silly question about an issue that has been discussed ad nauseam, you haven't been paying attention, and it's really not worthy of an answer.

    I was really hoping for an answer from someone who knows, not from you. I can't find a link to Tim's quote.
  • Reply 40 of 118
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,050member
    freshmaker wrote: »

    Yes, but why?  Apple gives sales volumes for every other major product that they sell.  Why is the Watch any different?  You'd think that if the numbers were impressive they'd be shouting from the rooftops about it.  While I don't doubt that they've far surpassed every other smartwatch out there combined, obviously they aren't so high that they're worth reporting.
    Why? Look at the pie chart and you know. This watch category is so small to report independently just like iPod and Apple TV. You want to put a category in financial sheet while it's only 0.5% of your total revenue? Cook is not dumb. Everyone can figure out that extra $1B in this category belongs to Apple watches and based on average price of $400-$500/unit, that number would be 2-2.5 million units.
Sign In or Register to comment.