Apple earns $46.9B in revenue on sales of 45.5M iPhones, edging market expectations

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    Carpool Karaoke??  How do you even buy such a thing?  I assumed it was part of whatever late night show Corden hosts.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 41
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,085member
    sog35 said:
    The only number that matters:

    revenue guidance for Q1-2017 - $76 billion to $78 billion

    looks like we are back to revenue/profit growth next quarter. Nice.

    We see $150 next year. 
    We should keep in mind that Apple's Q1 2017 will be 14 weeks long rather than 13 weeks long. Apple ends its quarters on Saturdays, so they span 13 weeks rather than 3 months. That, and the fact that a year is a little longer than 52 weeks, means that every 5 or so years they have a quarter with an extra week in it. The current quarter is such a quarter. The last long quarter was Q1 2012.

    So that $76 to $78 billion revenue guidance is for 14 weeks as compared to the 13 weeks of Q1 2016 for which Apple reported $75.9 billion in revenue.
    crowleyjasenj1
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 41
    Still trying to understand how Apple released numbers for 2016 Q4 income. We aren't half way thru...
    Because Apple's business quarters aren't the same as the calendar quarters. It's weird I know, but it has to do with the date of incorporation.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 41
    bluefire1bluefire1 Posts: 1,318member
    So Apple isn't doomed after all? ;) 
      
    edited October 2016
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 41
    This is as expected, no so bad.

    Mac line is really really old with no refreshes, everyone is waiting for the new lineup.

    iPhone 7, well, come on it's an iPhone 6ss, numbers ain't bad at all considering.

    Apple should get a nice boost during the holiday season riding on the new Macbooks and then glide to the finish line that is the monster iPhone 8 next year.


     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 41
    metrixmetrix Posts: 256member
    I have to believe the drop in China is due to so many Apple knockoffs, not just iPhones but iPads too. They are duplicated physically with such accuracy I can not tell the difference however they are always running something other than iOS. I believe they are sold at 1/5 the cost of the real thing. 
    cali
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 41
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    ireland said:

    There is one thing that I am beginning to agree with some of them - Apple does need to get into content. I do think that they are missing out on certain opportunities. 
    I don't know about need, but if I were Tim I'd push for an Netflix acquisition. Apple TV and Apple would do well to own Netflix when it comes to new TV content and streaming. Like I've said already they could offer a Netflix discount on Apple TV and give Netflix more support for new content. This would put Apple TV on the map. And produce a decent first party gaming controller. Gaming and TV content are what the little box need. Netflix have a huge head-start on everyone here in terms of understanding new content, producing it and distributing it. You can't simply replicate that. Apple could help them make better apps and the circle would be complete. Netflix $9.99 per month—$6.99 on Apple TV. And installed by default on every Apple device. No matter the acquisition price they've recoup it over time. And at some juncture rename the service 'Apple TV' and bang an Apple logo at the start of each show they produce. Apple wouldn't just be in the content game, but at the top of it.
    So spend $60+billion on an acquisition for a company with a very high PE ratio (300-400, Amazon territory), with the business objective of discounting their existing service, in order to sell more units of a $149 device which is upgraded by the consumer every 4 years?  So that "Apple", the company with the most brand value on the planet, can get "on the map"?

    Not sure what you are smokin', but it sounds really good...
    tmayhmmnolamacguyjasenj1cali
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 41
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 41
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,366member
    Could it be that we are not at peak iPhone but peak manufacturing capacity.  From the conference call it sounds like they are selling everything they are making, especially with the iPhone 7+.
    cali
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 41
    dklebedev said:
    Only 45.5 million iPhones in a quarter? Disappointement. 
    Apple's first annual revenue drop since 2001. Down 18% FY over FY. What would people here be saying if Microsoft, Amazon or Google posted a drop in annual revenues of 18%? 
    cali
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 41
    And of course AAPL is getting killed this morning. Down 4% at the open.  :s
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 41
    And of course AAPL is getting killed this morning. Down 4% at the open.  :s
    True, but most analysts are taking Apple's side this morning which has brought it back some.  We'll bounce back.  Just one of those days.  Turn the ticker off today and start 'er back up tomorrow.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 41
    jcdinkins said:
    And of course AAPL is getting killed this morning. Down 4% at the open.  s
    True, but most analysts are taking Apple's side this morning which has brought it back some.  We'll bounce back.  Just one of those days.  Turn the ticker off today and start 'er back up tomorrow.
    I'm well aware of how they play this game.

    Take a look at CMG and AMZN this morning... Ouch!
    edited October 2016
    jcdinkins
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 41
    Still trying to understand how Apple released numbers for 2016 Q4 income. We aren't half way thru...
    Because Apple's business quarters aren't the same as the calendar quarters. It's weird I know, but it has to do with the date of incorporation.


    Actually corporations choose their fiscal years, and can, in theory, change them if they so wish.  So, no it typically has nothing to do with the date of incorporation and everything to do with what time of year they want to do their end-of-year accounting.  For example, July 1 is a very popular fiscal year start for educational institutions since it lets them close out the books during the slow summer period.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 41
    Still trying to understand how Apple released numbers for 2016 Q4 income. We aren't half way thru...
    Because Apple's business quarters aren't the same as the calendar quarters. It's weird I know, but it has to do with the date of incorporation.


    Actually corporations choose their fiscal years, and can, in theory, change them if they so wish.  So, no it typically has nothing to do with the date of incorporation and everything to do with what time of year they want to do their end-of-year accounting.  For example, July 1 is a very popular fiscal year start for educational institutions since it lets them close out the books during the slow summer period.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year

    Yes, but since Apple has never bothered to change their fiscal year reporting date, they've kept the one given them based on their initial date of incorporation.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 41
    jcdinkins said:
    And of course AAPL is getting killed this morning. Down 4% at the open.  s
    True, but most analysts are taking Apple's side this morning which has brought it back some.  We'll bounce back.  Just one of those days.  Turn the ticker off today and start 'er back up tomorrow.
    I'm well aware of how they play this game.

    Take a look at CMG and AMZN this morning... Ouch!
    Not sure if CMG will ever come out of the nose dive from the e-coli disaster.  I think they'll have to re-brand to completely do it.  IDK.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 41
    There's a major problem with iPhone 7 sales, which is that the subsidies are disappearing. I went to order the iPhone 7 for $199 from AT&T Wireless, only to find out that's not a thing anymore. 

    So I had a few choices.... I could spread out the payments of a $750 phone over 30 months...

    Or, I could keep my perfectly good iPhone 6, and switch from my completed AT&T contract at $85/month to a an AT&T go-phone contract for $55/month.

    I cannot be the only person figuring this stuff out... 





     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 41
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    joebags said:
    There's a major problem with iPhone 7 sales, which is that the subsidies are disappearing. I went to order the iPhone 7 for $199 from AT&T Wireless, only to find out that's not a thing anymore. 

    So I had a few choices.... I could spread out the payments of a $750 phone over 30 months...

    Or, I could keep my perfectly good iPhone 6, and switch from my completed AT&T contract at $85/month to a an AT&T go-phone contract for $55/month.

    I cannot be the only person figuring this stuff out... 
    This is true, and no doubt one of the primary causes of the lengthening of the upgrade cycle.  Though this lengthening is in terms of months increase on average, not years.  Outside of USA, majority of phones were sold without subsidies in many markets - so this is not new to majority of iPhone buyers around the globe.

    Are you going to buy a cheaper Android phone (not high end Samsung Galaxy or Pixel which is priced at iPhone level), or eventually get a new iPhone?  If you keep buying a new iPhone, but now every 3 years instead of 2, Apple is still happy you remain in the ecosystem, and may purchase more services or other devices.

    Smartphones - especially for those that get the higher end devices - are the most important devices for a large % of the population.  It is their camera, music player (with these great new streaming services), video viewing device, social networking hub, communicator (messaging), GPS, gaming platform, and general computing (just to name a few).  While they are not cheap to purchase, you need to put in context of the importance of the device.  I used to buy a lot more gadgets before I had an iPhone - it is really about shifting the money towards less number, but more important, devices.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 41
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,085member
    Still trying to understand how Apple released numbers for 2016 Q4 income. We aren't half way thru...
    Because Apple's business quarters aren't the same as the calendar quarters. It's weird I know, but it has to do with the date of incorporation.


    Actually corporations choose their fiscal years, and can, in theory, change them if they so wish.  So, no it typically has nothing to do with the date of incorporation and everything to do with what time of year they want to do their end-of-year accounting.  For example, July 1 is a very popular fiscal year start for educational institutions since it lets them close out the books during the slow summer period.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year

    Yes, but since Apple has never bothered to change their fiscal year reporting date, they've kept the one given them based on their initial date of incorporation.
    Apple hasn't substantially moved its fiscal year end date, it's always been in September. You're more or less correct on that point. The actual date has moved a little over the years. Since 1999 Apple's fiscal year has ended on the last Saturday in September, whatever date that comes on. Prior to that it ended on the last Friday in September and in Apple's early years it ended on September 30th regardless of what day of the week that fell on.

    That said, why do you think Apple's fiscal year end was given to it based on its date of incorporation? It was incorporated in January of 1977. As randominternetperson said, corporations choose their fiscal years and any number of things can factor into those decisions - including, perhaps, when they incorporated. But Apple doesn't seem to have based its fiscal year on its date of incorporation, if it had its fiscal year should end in December (or perhaps on January 2nd?).
    edited October 2016
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 41
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.