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

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 118
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    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.



    What iPhone costs twice as much as an Apple Watch? Even the average iPad is in the neighborhood of the average Apple Watch pricing. And those are primary devices. Apple Watch should always be much less because it's a very expensive iPhone accessory right now.

  • Reply 82 of 118
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    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! image



    Calm down. The iPad Mini is still an iPad just like the Apple Sport is still an Apple Watch. That's how any normal would interpret it.

  • Reply 83 of 118
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    wigby wrote: »

    Calm down. The iPad Mini is still an iPad just like the Apple Sport is still an Apple Watch. That's how any normal would interpret it.

    And the iPad mini was on sale in the same relative timeframe after the product category hit the market? :no: That didn't hit the market until over 2.5 years after the iPad product category launched. If you want to wait 2.5 years I'm sure the 38mm G1 Watch will be had for less than the $329 the iPad mini started at.
  • Reply 84 of 118
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post





    Fair enough. But I don't fully understand the original decision to not reveal either (although sog35's point about not wanting to reveal too much to the competition may stand to reason, especially after the way those lowlifes ripped off the last two major product introductions).



    Because guesses of just under $1 Billion actually seem small when you think Apple. 7 years ago no one would say that was small, not even Apple. It's all about appearances and besides, it hasn't even been selling for a full quarter. Apple doesn't count sales until it shipped which makes end of April and part of May artificially low when you consider the supply constraints too. They knew all of this long ago which is why they announced it long ago. It's either be quiet which Apple usually does about most things anyway or throw down your gauntlet when you know you will not have a full quarter.

  • Reply 85 of 118
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    Wall Street doesn't give a shit about Watch right now. The stock is down because they pumped up iPhone estimates (and Q4 estimates) at the last minute and Apple didn't meet those phony numbers.



    I agree the iPhone was by far the major factor. However we can't have our stock relying on one product. This was suppose to be a major launch, I don't think anyone can deny Apple put a lot of effort trying to market this product. It was suppose to be the first major product release under Tim Cook and right now it looks like it failed. When I say looks like it failed I am talking perception. 

  • Reply 86 of 118
    thx1138thx1138 Posts: 13member

    Or, illiterately. Either way, just stupid. I feel stupider after reading it, and I will never get that fifteen seconds of my life back. Thank you "Ferroferro(sic)"

     

    dmz out

  • Reply 87 of 118
    chiachia Posts: 712member
    Originally Posted by ferraferro View Post

    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



     


     Les avions sont des jouets intéressants mais n'ont aucune utilité militaire

    • Airplanes are interesting toys, but of no military value.



    Ferdinand Foch, 1911

  • Reply 88 of 118
    shardshard Posts: 96member
    Apple decided a few years ago not to play the numbers game because they can't win. Even if they post record profit but miss sales by only 1 unit, the stock will tank and there will be a bunch of doom and gloom posts that will lead to the stock tanking even more for no good reason.

    A perfect example will be amazing profit, more than estimates but because the real number sold missed some idiot's dream scenario, the stock tanked.

    Apple therefore decided to lump all their smaller products into one category and just report dollars, saves them and serious investors a ton of grief.

    If iPhone, iPad and Macs are not such monster categories they will probably not report units sold as well if they can get away with it.
  • Reply 89 of 118
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,362member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by woolie View Post

     



    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...


     

    What a moronic post. On all levels. 

     

    - The Apple Watch starts @ $349. I know all you trolls constantly seem confused and unable to find this hidden, obscure information. 

    -  believe it or not, most people tend to have their phones with them. Your Macbook Air analogy is, to put it mildly, beyond moronic, and embarrassing to you. 

    - So Apple decided to "hide" it's unfavorable Apple Watch numbers 8 months ago? Wow, impressive powers of prediction they have. You're aware that they made this decision last year, right? So you know your statement is a lie, right?

     

    Your post is idiotic no matter how many Apple things you own, believe it or not. Those don't make up for your complete lack of logic.

  • Reply 90 of 118
    Quote:

      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...


     

    Hate quoting trolls, but when I see a post like this, I really miss TS. He used to take them apart really well.

  • Reply 91 of 118
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    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.

    If you owned one, you would not think that. Also, WatchOS2 is turning out very nicely, giving devs much nicer access. This release process reminds me of iPhone.
  • Reply 92 of 118
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    He does have one valid point, though. Why isn't there a central, easy to use health manager tool, instead of several apps in several places? I expect Apple has that in the works for some later version, but... I'd like it now, lol.
    slurpy wrote: »
    What a moronic post. On all levels. 

    - The Apple Watch starts @ $349. I know all you trolls constantly seem confused and unable to find this hidden, obscure information. 
    -  believe it or not, most people tend to have their phones with them. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Your Macbook Air analogy is, to put it mildly, beyond moronic, and embarrassing to you. </span>

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">- So Apple decided to "hide" it's unfavorable Apple Watch numbers 8 months ago? Wow, impressive powers of prediction they have. You're aware that they made this decision last year, right? So you know your statement is a lie, right?</span>


    Your post is idiotic no matter how many Apple things you own, believe it or not. Those don't make up for your complete lack of logic.
  • Reply 93 of 118
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    Hate quoting trolls, but when I see a post like this, I really miss TS. He used to take them apart really well.
    I guess it means you're not able to be critical *and* own Apple kit because that would be impossible, right?

    I read elsewhere some of Tims comments in the earnings call. He said Apple watch is tracking nicely. Meh. Mea culpa. You win some, you lose some.
  • Reply 94 of 118
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    atlapple wrote: »

    I agree the iPhone was by far the major factor. However we can't have our stock relying on one product. This was suppose to be a major launch, I don't think anyone can deny Apple put a lot of effort trying to market this product. It was suppose to be the first major product release under Tim Cook and right now it looks like it failed. When I say looks like it failed I am talking perception. 

    Enough of this idiocy. It's a major launch in a new product category. Again, look at the numbers with the iPad, iPhone at their launched. Even more impressive is this isn't a stand alone product yet.
  • Reply 95 of 118

    I can see emotions are quite high in this thread, seems that there are big fans of the watch and on the other side deep feelings against it.

    I think the future of the apple watch will decide in the next months. Right now sales have been good not too good but still acceptable and most of the 'innovators' have bought themselves a watch. Now they need to make the step so that all the more sceptical people will adopt to the technology.

     

    Out of my circle of friends nobody has yet  bought the watch (i am in my mid-twenties) and if I ask them why almost everybody says that the price is too high. I know that all apple products are usually a bit more expensive but I bought them anyway happily considering their superior quality. Now I can just not see the value that give an apple watch so I would never spend that money on it. But on the other hand I was rather sceptical about the ipad but when I saw people using it and what possibilities it offers you I wanted one myself. 

     

    So I am very unsure whether the watch will be a flop or a success but as of now my scepticism is bigger.

  • Reply 96 of 118
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,368member
    rogifan wrote: »

    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?

    Your post is absurd, and betrays a pathetic misunderstanding of the history of the MP3 player and smartphone market evolution. I am actually rather shocked, especially as you're someone who posts a lot on AI, and presumably (at least until this point) has had a general sense of what goes on.

    Carry on.

    /facepalm
  • Reply 97 of 118
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,280member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post





    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!?

     

    They have revealed just enough information for us to be able to do that, and it looks great for the Apple Watch, and terrible for the other wearables. 

     

    But I'm pretty sure that keeping these numbers closed isn't so much about the other wearable manufacturers — Apple probably doesn't give two turds and a wet fart about them and their artificially inflated "sales" numbers (Samsung gave away thousands of Galaxy Gears with their S5 phones last year to make it look like people were interested — they all ended up on eBay or in "unused tech gadgets" drawers.). It's obvious that Apple is eating their lunch, and none of them need exact numbers to know that. 

    In fact, Apple isn't even really competing with them: the Apple Watch models are all priced pretty much clear out of the existing market. For a pretty arbitrary definition of "existing", that is. 

     

    No, this is about the Swiss watch industry, who currently have no idea how — or whether at all — to meet Apple's onslaught. 

    THAT is where a breakdown of models — Sports/Watch/Edition — would make the difference.

  • Reply 98 of 118
    shenshen Posts: 434member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     

    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?




    We usually leave that to psychologists, though both they and we might point you to "cognitive dissonance" on this. Well, that and confirmation bias. Very closely related.

     

    If person A decides they dislike Apple, or that Apple is an evil company, or that Apple is doomed to fail, they tend to collect evidence that they think supports their hypothesis, mostly because finding evidence that disagrees with the hypothesis suggests that they are wrong. If they are wrong, they are not as good as they thought, and the ego doesn't want to hear that. We need internal consistency, so we throw out the evidence we don't like...

     

    See for example the Stanford University "capitol punishment" study on confirmation bias.

     

    Fun topic. And one of the 5 building blocks of the internet. ;-)

  • Reply 99 of 118
    shenshen Posts: 434member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     



    I agree the iPhone was by far the major factor. However we can't have our stock relying on one product. This was suppose to be a major launch, I don't think anyone can deny Apple put a lot of effort trying to market this product. It was suppose to be the first major product release under Tim Cook and right now it looks like it failed. When I say looks like it failed I am talking perception. 




    I think we need to be honest and say that there is no scenario where the doubters would have accepted the Watch as a successful launch. The only possible numbers for the Watch Apple could release that would be perceived as a success by everyone is if they sold more Watches than iPhones and then explained that clearly many people bought Watches so they could buy an iPhone later.

     

    ...which would clearly be impossible from a manufacturing stand point, a sales stand point, or a delivery stand point.

     

    The Watch is doomed to be perceived as a failure to investors for at least a year. Maybe more. Wall-Street is simply delusional.

  • Reply 100 of 118
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by spheric View Post

     

    No, this is about the Swiss watch industry, who currently have no idea how — or whether at all — to meet Apple's onslaught. 

    THAT is where a breakdown of models — Sports/Watch/Edition — would make the difference.


     

    This needs to be quoted. From arguments in this thread many people here seem miss the point entirely.

Sign In or Register to comment.