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

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 118
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,017member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post



    Rather amusing to look at the posts on some other forums, particularly MacRumors. One poster who was banned here is still fuming over the Apple Watch and questioning Apple, specifically Tim Cook, over his not revealing specific Watch numbers.



    What else could BF do?  Might as well hang out at the cesspool of Apple trolls that is MacRumors.   He'll fit right in.



    All that wasted energy on criticizing the watch and Tim Cook, and he just can't swallow the notion that he was smackdown-shown how clueless BF really was on everything.  So hey, just sign up at Macrumors, rinse and repeat.

  • Reply 62 of 118
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,368member

    I was really hoping for an answer from someone who knows, not from you. I can't find a link to Tim's quote.

    Ok, one last time. All revenue that is recognized in the CE industry is 'shipments.' Often, the terms 'revenue' and 'sales' are used interchangeably. In fact, the revenue that is recognized is often reported as 'Sales' in the top line of the Income Statement.

    In Appple's case, actual sales have been possible to estimate for a bunch of its products because Apple also provides information on retail channel inventory during conference calls (Apple is the only company to do so in the industry).

    In the case of the Watch, it's all moot since Apple has released no figures anyway.
  • Reply 63 of 118
    bluefire1bluefire1 Posts: 1,243member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    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. F


    Fully agree. Tim also knows how the media will negatively dissect every little morsel of information he shares about the AW. Just look how Wall Street had such over inflated expectations this quarter regarding iPhone sales; I'm already reading reports about how Apple disappointed by not meeting those lofty "expectations". Samsung would drool if it ever achieved even one third those numbers.

  • Reply 64 of 118
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Are you kidding? You would not only compare them to other new product intros by Apple (iPod, iPhone, iPad), but also to other wearables.

    As an aside, if your logic prevails, how is any first-time sales release justified for anything anywhere by anyone anytime!?

    The wearables category is in its infancy. What's the point of comparing it to lackluster Android Wear products or cheap fitness bands? And it's not like we really have sales on those anyway. And comparing it to previous Apple product launches? Of course people are going to expect it to do better as Apple is a much bigger brand now with a much larger customer base. Also it is difficult to compare to iPad since the Watch requires an iPhone. Anybody can buy an iPad.
  • Reply 65 of 118
    wooliewoolie Posts: 34member



    Been in the business world for decades & the rules are simple, if numbers are favorable, you publish...  If numbers aren't you hide...    Words are meaningless & misleading without factual data...  Right now Apple is taking a page from Samsung's oratory, beyond scary...  Only the rich & famous got watches the first 30 days...  I finally got my watch at the end of June...  I returned my watch 2 weeks later...  

     

    The problems were numerous, suffice to say if the iPhone required you always had to carry a MacAir with you for it work, it would have been DOA...  So it is with the Watch, its near total dependance on the iPhone makes it DOA!!!  

     

    To pay $500+ for a gizmo to tell you repeatedly to take your iPhone out of your pocket to get the info you want is ridiculous...  To  go to 5 different apps (3 on the watch & 2 on the iPhone) for fitness data is insanity...  Did they forget to look at Fitbit's ($100 version) sheer simplicity of putting fitness data in 1 app, plus a providing map of where you walked or ran for each exercise...  The heart data recording defies logic on all counts...  Wifi works in your house, but not Starbucks or McDonalds...  

     

    The Watch's published concept is terrific, but the execution is still hiding in Apple's lab...  I have 2 iPhones, 2 iPads, 1 iMac, 1 MacAir, 1 new 12" MacBook, 1 nano, & iPod & consider myself a great Apple fan...  I'm looking forward to Apple releasing the real watch in the future...

  • Reply 66 of 118
    rogifan wrote: »

    The wearables category is in its infancy. What's the point of comparing it to lackluster Android Wear products or cheap fitness bands? And it's not like we really have sales on those anyway. And comparing it to previous Apple product launches? Of course people are going to expect it to do better as Apple is a much bigger brand now with a much larger customer base. Also it is difficult to compare to iPad since the Watch requires an iPhone. Anybody can buy an iPad.

    Given the hundreds of millions of watch-compatible iPhones out there, it's not much of a constraint.

    The fact that a product category is in its infancy does not hold water either. So were the iPods, iPhones, and iPads when Apple literally created those markets (even though, some equally pathetic prior version of each may be argued to have existed prior).
  • Reply 67 of 118
    woolie wrote: »

    Been in the business world for decades & the rules are simple, if numbers are favorable, you publish...  If numbers aren't you hide...    Words are meaningless & misleading without factual data...  Right now Apple is taking a page from Samsung's oratory, beyond scary...  Only the rich & famous got watches the first 30 days...  I finally got my watch at the end of June...  I returned my watch 2 weeks later...  

    The problems were numerous, suffice to say if the iPhone required you always had to carry a MacAir with you for it work, it would have been DOA...  So it is with the Watch, its near total dependance on the iPhone makes it DOA!!!  

    To pay $500+ for a gizmo to tell you repeatedly to take your iPhone out of your pocket to get the info you want is ridiculous...  To  go to 5 different apps (3 on the watch & 2 on the iPhone) for fitness data is insanity...  Did they forget to look at Fitbit's ($100 version) sheer simplicity of putting fitness data in 1 app, plus a providing map of where you walked or ran for each exercise...  The heart data recording defies logic on all counts...  Wifi works in your house, but not Starbucks or McDonalds...  

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The Watch's published concept is terrific, but the execution is still hiding in Apple's lab...  </span>
    I have 2 iPhones, 2 iPads, 1 iMac, 1 MacAir, 1 new 12" MacBook, 1 nano, & iPod & consider myself a great Apple fan...  I'm looking forward to Apple releasing the real watch in the future...

    Oh wow. Your post is so wrong on so many fronts, it's beyond scary.

    I'll wait for someone else to weigh in. I might get banned with what I have in mind to say....
  • Reply 68 of 118
    I interpreted what he said to mean that if sales were stellar, releasing numbers would be a good way to boost the stock a bit, not to mean that the price was down because numbers weren't released.
    woolie wrote: »

    Been in the business world for decades & the rules are simple, if numbers are favorable, you publish...  If numbers aren't you hide...    Words are meaningless & misleading without factual data...  Right now Apple is taking a page from Samsung's oratory, beyond scary...  Only the rich & famous got watches the first 30 days...  I finally got my watch at the end of June...  I returned my watch 2 weeks later...  

    When the Apple Watch was first introduced--months before it went on sale, Apple said they would not be releasing any sales numbers. The only thing you can "interpret" from Apple not releasing any Apple Watch sales numbers is that Apple is doing exactly what they said they would do. They made their decision long before anyone inside Apple (or anywhere else) had any idea of how well the Apple watch might sell, so that long-ago decision has absolutely NOTHING to do with actual Apple Watch sales.

    Edited to respond to similar comment made by woolie as the one made by wakefinance.
  • Reply 69 of 118
    rtdunhamrtdunham Posts: 428member
    slurpy wrote: »
    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.

    He said sales, which are based on shipments. Didn't people have to wait all of the first month to start getting any deliveries? Was June the month they finally caught up with shipments? If so a large percentage of the sales could've been in the first month and shipped in June?
  • Reply 70 of 118
    shahhet2shahhet2 Posts: 149member

    delete

  • Reply 71 of 118
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Given the hundreds of millions of watch-compatible iPhones out there, it's not much of a constraint.

    The fact that a product category is in its infancy does not hold water either. So were the iPods, iPhones, and iPads when Apple literally created those markets (even though, some equally pathetic prior version of each may be argued to have existed prior).

    Don't agree expect maybe for iPad.
  • Reply 72 of 118
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    woolie wrote: »
    To pay $500+ for a gizmo to tell you repeatedly to take your iPhone out of your pocket to get the info you want is ridiculous...

    That's what it does?¡ :rolleyes:
  • Reply 73 of 118
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

     



    What else could BF do?  Might as well hang out at the cesspool of Apple trolls that is MacRumors.   He'll fit right in.



    All that wasted energy on criticizing the watch and Tim Cook, and he just can't swallow the notion that he was smackdown-shown how clueless BF really was on everything.  So hey, just sign up at Macrumors, rinse and repeat.




    Impotent rage against Apple's success. BF couldn't be more nakedly, transparently anti-Apple.

  • Reply 74 of 118
    [VIDEO][/VIDEO]
    rogifan wrote: »
    Given the hundreds of millions of watch-compatible iPhones out there, it's not much of a constraint.

    The fact that a product category is in its infancy does not hold water either. So were the iPods, iPhones, and iPads when Apple literally created those markets (even though, some equally pathetic prior version of each may be argued to have existed prior).

    Don't agree expect maybe for iPad.

    Don't agree? Ok, who had a best-.... no, even a decent-selling smartphone before Apple?

    Similar question for MP3 player.
  • Reply 75 of 118
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Don't agree expect maybe for iPad.

    How can you possibly argue with anything he said? Don't you recall how assholes people that filed a class action against Apple because they felt "obligated" to buy the 4GB iPhone when they really wanted the 8GB because they didn't want to leave empty handed? And do you recall how many units they sold that first weekend (closing the quarter) and the next (full) quarter? A lot less than Apple Watch, that much is certain.

    And yet the iPhone seems to become a pretty good seller with a amazing App Store. Why assume this isn't possible with Watch?
    Also it is difficult to compare to iPad since the Watch requires an iPhone.

    And the iPad required a Mac or WinPC running iTunes.
    Anybody can buy an iPad.

    That's just weird since the iPad starts considerably higher than Watch and their customer-based would already be able to afford an iPhone.
  • Reply 76 of 118
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    How can you possibly argue with anything he said? Don't you recall how assholes people that filed a class action against Apple because they felt "obligated" to buy the 4GB iPhone when they really wanted the 8GB because they didn't want to leave empty handed? And do you recall how many units they sold that first weekend (closing the quarter) and the next (full) quarter? A lot less than Apple Watch, that much is certain.

    And yet the iPhone seems to become a pretty good seller with a amazing App Store. Why assume this isn't possible with Watch?
    And the iPad required a Mac or WinPC running iTunes.
    That's just weird since the iPad starts considerably higher than Watch and their customer-based would already be able to afford an iPhone.

    Up until recently iPad started at $249. Which ?Watch is cheaper than that?
  • Reply 77 of 118
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    [VIDEO][/VIDEO]
    Don't agree? Ok, who had a best-.... no, even a decent-selling smartphone before Apple?

    Similar question for MP3 player.

    I had three different MP3 players befor I ever owned an iPod. I have a hard time believing Android Wear devices are selling more than MP3 players were when iPod launched. As far as iPhone goes how are you defining smartphone? We're Blackberry and Palm devices not smart phones?
  • Reply 78 of 118
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    sranger wrote: »
    Having owned the Apple watch since early June. I am struggling to see the point. So far it is nothing more than a fancy remote for my iPhone....

    I do not fine it particularly useful.

    About the only thing I use it for is an exercise aid. The pulse monitor is about all I use regularly...

    Short of that is seems rather useless....

    The point is the watch may not be for you in the first place. But you aren't every one.
    atlapple wrote: »

    They just lost 50-60 Billion off the market cap. If the Apple Watch was doing well they would have released the numbers. Samsung has tried to steal just about every aspect of the iPhone and Apple released the iPhone 6 numbers within two weeks. In fact I think they had a press release 24 hours after the iPhone 6 was released to report on pre sales. So no that statement about competitive reasons doesn't hold water. 

    I read many of the posts on this forum and I am always amazed how how the human mind can try to rationalize something that isn't rational. 

    I know, like expecting Apple to release numbers when they said in the fall they wouldn't.
    Are you kidding? You would not only compare them to other new product intros by Apple (iPod, iPhone, iPad), but also to other wearables.

    As an aside, if your logic prevails, how is any first-time sales release justified for anything anywhere by anyone anytime!?

    Apple did say it sold more than the original iPhone, iPod, iPad did at their respective release period.
  • Reply 79 of 118
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Up until recently iPad started at $249. Which ?Watch is cheaper than that?

    The iPad started at $499. Apple Watch starts at $349. You know fucking well it's disingenuous to include refurbs and/or generations old builds from an existing product category. Shame on you! :no:
  • Reply 80 of 118
    shahhet2shahhet2 Posts: 149member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    Do you really think not releasing Watch sales is the reason Apple was down 7% after hours? All Wall Street cares about right now is iPhone. They pumped up iPhone estimates right before earnings release. Apple didn't beat the "whisper numbers". Clearly someone wanted the stock to tank after hours.

    I believe from wall street point of view there could be multiple reasons for stock going down.

    1)Weightage   of iPhone revenue in total Apple revenue.

    It seems that Analysts may be saying that 2/3rd of sales coming from  for company with  0.75 trillion dollar market cap is too much dependency on single product for such a big company.

    They may be expecting better diversification for continued long term sustainability of success.

    Not having bumper Watch sales may had little impact of about 1-2%  in today's decline. 

     

    2)Declining sequential growth from 2nd qtr to 3rd qtr from 2015 to 2014.

    For 2015, revenue declined from 2nd qtr to 3rd qtr was 23%

    For 2014, revenue declined from 2nd qtr to 3rd qtr was 17%

     

    Fear of iPhone sales topping out is always fear for every quarter for analyst.

    Particularly all major US carriers are promoting non contract pricing structure.

     

    There is no doubt that iPhone is very good quality phone and it can last way more then 2 years.

    So if you are getting  discount as non-contract plan and your phone is still very usable with almost latest tech, people may feel that they can delay purchasing for another 1-2 years.

    Proof 1:  Think of iPad as best example having six quarters of declines

    Proof 2:  Most of the growth for iPhones came from outside US Market/New Market. If you see US Market growth, it is almost saturated as far as growth is concerned for Apple.

     

    This may have contributed another 2-3% drop in price

     

    3)Everyone knew that people were waiting for larger screen iPhone and that will give exponential growth whenever it happens. 

    That happened now. Now We have large screen iPhone for over 8 months.

     

    Analyst may be saying that even for upcoming year, there will be good growth as people are normally on 2 year cycle, so 1 more year is still left on this growth cycle.

     

    Lets face the fact that now with iPhone 6 and upcoming 6S with higher ram/A9, phone is already ahead in almost all matrics compared to regular PC.

    What is the probability of person going from iPhone4/4s/5/5s to 6 or 6S vs person going from 6/6s to 7/7s

    More closer We approach to this scenario , more negativity will keep coming, unless Apple show some breakthrough in iPhone, which will convince people to upgrade their phone with same rate.

    This may had another 1-2% impact on price decline. 

     

    As said above, analyst sees that this is coming and that is the exact reason they want more diversification in revenue.

     

    Why apple was up 40% last year? Because every one expected that iPhone sales will go through roof once bigger screen phones comes out (In addition to new product Watch and Pay)

    Everyone knows apple is good at innovation and I believe whenever next innovation comes, stock will resume its uptrend.

     

    No need to flame me, I am just putting general analyst opinion from what I read at few good sites.

Sign In or Register to comment.