Apple tops worldwide smartphone vendor list in Q4 amid industry contraction, report says

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 73
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Since we have discussed about all other points already, I will just comment on this point alone. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place - In India, not just Apple, but ANY manufacturer can sell refurbished products. Only condition - They original phone should have been sold within India. Need proof? - Go to amazon.in website and see the products being sold over here. You would see plenty of refurbished stuff being available, including iPhones. What is wrong with that? Can you please explain?
  • Reply 62 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Since we have discussed about all other points already, I will just comment on this point alone. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place - In India, not just Apple, but ANY manufacturer can sell refurbished products. Only condition - They original phone should have been sold within India. Need proof? - Go to amazon.in website and see the products being sold over here. You would see plenty of refurbished stuff being available, including iPhones. What is wrong with that? Can you please explain?
    Thank you for that information. I linadvertently left out the part in my post where these used and refurbished iPhones were sourced outside India.

    I apologize for the error.
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 63 of 73
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Since we have discussed about all other points already, I will just comment on this point alone. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place - In India, not just Apple, but ANY manufacturer can sell refurbished products. Only condition - They original phone should have been sold within India. Need proof? - Go to amazon.in website and see the products being sold over here. You would see plenty of refurbished stuff being available, including iPhones. What is wrong with that? Can you please explain?
    Thank you for that information. I linadvertently left out the part in my post where these used and refurbished iPhones were sourced outside India.

    I apologize for the error.
    To be honest, I did not expect any apology from you. There is so much mis-information being spread about Indian government's demand, as if Indian government makes rules against Apple ALONE deliberately. The rules are same for all OEMs, not just Apple. Not that I am a supporter of "this" Indian government. But on this specific topic, I do agree with their stance.
  • Reply 64 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Since we have discussed about all other points already, I will just comment on this point alone. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place - In India, not just Apple, but ANY manufacturer can sell refurbished products. Only condition - They original phone should have been sold within India. Need proof? - Go to amazon.in website and see the products being sold over here. You would see plenty of refurbished stuff being available, including iPhones. What is wrong with that? Can you please explain?
    Thank you for that information. I linadvertently left out the part in my post where these used and refurbished iPhones were sourced outside India.

    I apologize for the error.
    To be honest, I did not expect any apology from you. There is so much mis-information being spread about Indian government's demand, as if Indian government makes rules against Apple ALONE deliberately. The rules are same for all OEMs, not just Apple. Not that I am a supporter of "this" Indian government. But on this specific topic, I do agree with their stance.
    I'm aware of the potential for India's economy to be the "next China". There's a large, and well educated middle class, many if not most of those with very good English, and with the number of Indians in our PhD programs, and major tech companies just in the U.S alone, it wouldn't be difficult to imagine that startups in India are greatly increasing. My brother is retired, but was an immigration lawyer in San Francisco, and often argued to me, an engineer, of the benefits to the U.S. of the H1-B program to bring the highest technology advances to the U.S.

    I apologize as well for my focus on ASP, but that is the hard truth about business; if you are buying marketshare with low prices, you are also at risk of being undercut by the next guy, and that's that "race to the bottom". Apple is in a fortunate position with its business model to create great products with long life cycles that create customer loyalty.

    This is much more difficult for Android OS device makers, due to diffusion of technology, and a common base operating system, and its common to see the latest "growth star" fail within a short time while attempting to lead by only going after marketshare. 

    More to the point, the smartphone war is over; Apple wins most of the premium sales, Android OS devices some of the premium benefits, but diluted by being forced to chase unit sales share at the low end. The result is Apple maintains high ASP, and a large, 75% to 80% of the profit share.
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 65 of 73
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Since we have discussed about all other points already, I will just comment on this point alone. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place - In India, not just Apple, but ANY manufacturer can sell refurbished products. Only condition - They original phone should have been sold within India. Need proof? - Go to amazon.in website and see the products being sold over here. You would see plenty of refurbished stuff being available, including iPhones. What is wrong with that? Can you please explain?
    Thank you for that information. I linadvertently left out the part in my post where these used and refurbished iPhones were sourced outside India.

    I apologize for the error.
    To be honest, I did not expect any apology from you. There is so much mis-information being spread about Indian government's demand, as if Indian government makes rules against Apple ALONE deliberately. The rules are same for all OEMs, not just Apple. Not that I am a supporter of "this" Indian government. But on this specific topic, I do agree with their stance.
    I'm aware of the potential for India's economy to be the "next China". There's a large, and well educated middle class, many if not most of those with very good English, and with the number of Indians in our PhD programs, and major tech companies just in the U.S alone, it wouldn't be difficult to imagine that startups in India are greatly increasing. My brother is retired, but was an immigration lawyer in San Francisco, and often argued to me, an engineer, of the benefits to the U.S. of the H1-B program to bring the highest technology advances to the U.S.

    I apologize as well for my focus on ASP, but that is the hard truth about business; if you are buying marketshare with low prices, you are also at risk of being undercut by the next guy, and that's that "race to the bottom". Apple is in a fortunate position with its business model to create great products with long life cycles that create customer loyalty.

    This is much more difficult for Android OS device makers, due to diffusion of technology, and a common base operating system, and its common to see the latest "growth star" fail within a short time while attempting to lead by only going after marketshare. 

    More to the point, the smartphone war is over; Apple wins most of the premium sales, Android OS devices some of the premium benefits, but diluted by being forced to chase unit sales share at the low end. The result is Apple maintains high ASP, and a large, 75% to 80% of the marketshare.
    the smartphone war is over - I guess it is too early to say this!!! Next few years will provide interesting trends. I expect the position of Samsung/Huawei/Xiaomi/Lenovo to strengthen further and LG/Sony/Asus to go down in the coming years in Android world (that is easier part to guess, based on what they have been doing in the last 2-3 years). I am not so sure about Apple. What would be Apple's strategy for future in a maturing market - I am not so sure about it unlike many others in this forum. It would be an interesting one to watch as far as I am concerned. I think the one point that we both will agree is - Apple will continue to get the lion's share of profits (whether it is 50% or 80% is up for debate) in a market where overall profits will go down in the coming years.
  • Reply 66 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,761member
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

  • Reply 67 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.

    edited February 2018
  • Reply 68 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,761member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.

    Having a bad day?

    You went into wearables. I said I don't have anything to say in that field and mentioned why. No problem.

    You mentioned ASP. I've already spoken on that. Would you prefer I repeated it?

    You mentioned unit growth. I expanded on that with my view. Would you prefer it if I just presented your view?

    You mentioned the 9% fall in Android this quarter. I explained that Android has more options to spread growth out during the year.

    You mentioned services. I agreed.

    I agreed with you (in a way at least) and all you do is throw insults?

    Results are real. Guidance is not. Feel free to imagine how things will play out over the coming months - on iPhones - but understand it won't be real until it is reported. I even supported your speculation on an 8% increase in unit sales. Why not? I even gave my reasoning on why. That said, I put things into perspective as little to no new models will be released until September/October this year while Android will be rolling them out non stop all year.

    This thread is on smartphones. Take a look at the title.

    Note that I haven't insulted you for throwing in wearables, services and the kitchen sink. I accommodated those elements into my reply.

    Maybe you weren't paying attention but I have highlighted the problem of putting too much focus on one quarter, especially when it is the company's biggest. 

    Speculate all you want on this current quarter. That's fine but don't confuse yourself into thinking that speculation is real just yet.

    I hope you have a better day tomorrow.



  • Reply 69 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.

    Having a bad day?

    You went into wearables. I said I don't have anything to say in that field and mentioned why. No problem.

    You mentioned ASP. I've already spoken on that. Would you prefer I repeated it?

    You mentioned unit growth. I expanded on that with my view. Would you prefer it if I just presented your view?

    You mentioned the 9% fall in Android this quarter. I explained that Android has more options to spread growth out during the year.

    You mentioned services. I agreed.

    I agreed with you (in a way at least) and all you do is throw insults?

    Results are real. Guidance is not. Feel free to imagine how things will play out over the coming months - on iPhones - but understand it won't be real until it is reported. I even supported your speculation on an 8% increase in unit sales. Why not? I even gave my reasoning on why. That said, I put things into perspective as little to no new models will be released until September/October this year while Android will be rolling them out non stop all year.

    This thread is on smartphones. Take a look at the title.

    Note that I haven't insulted you for throwing in wearables, services and the kitchen sink. I accommodated those elements into my reply.

    Maybe you weren't paying attention but I have highlighted the problem of putting too much focus on one quarter, especially when it is the company's biggest. 

    Speculate all you want on this current quarter. That's fine but don't confuse yourself into thinking that speculation is real just yet.

    I hope you have a better day tomorrow.



    Bye Felecia
  • Reply 70 of 73
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.


    I went through the link http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/ and did not find anything which suggested 8.3% growth in iPhone units as guidance for Jan-Mar quarter. Can you please let me know which part of the article contains information related to this?
  • Reply 71 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.


    I went through the link http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/ and did not find anything which suggested 8.3% growth in iPhone units as guidance for Jan-Mar quarter. Can you please let me know which part of the article contains information related to this?
    You would also have to reference the conference call:

    https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2018/02/01/apple-inc-appl-q1-2018-earnings-conference-call-tr.aspx

    Essentially, Horace filled in the details using his past data and experience analyzing Apple revenue. Will the numbers of iPhones and revenue meet Horace's guidance? I don't know, but I'd bank on Apple meeting it's guidance, (Apple revenue growth YoY guided $7b-$9b higher. iPhone revenue double digit growth.)

    Horace analyzes data to come to his conclusions. Read the transcripts, see what you come up with. 

    btw Horace normalized the chart for calendar year


  • Reply 72 of 73
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.


    I went through the link http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/ and did not find anything which suggested 8.3% growth in iPhone units as guidance for Jan-Mar quarter. Can you please let me know which part of the article contains information related to this?
    You would also have to reference the conference call:

    https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2018/02/01/apple-inc-appl-q1-2018-earnings-conference-call-tr.aspx

    Essentially, Horace filled in the details using his past data and experience analyzing Apple revenue. Will the numbers of iPhones and revenue meet Horace's guidance? I don't know, but I'd bank on Apple meeting it's guidance, (Apple revenue growth YoY guided $7b-$9b higher. iPhone revenue double digit growth.)

    Horace analyzes data to come to his conclusions. Read the transcripts, see what you come up with. 

    btw Horace normalized the chart for calendar year

    Thank you for the link. Will Apple meet its own guidance? - Absolutely, Yes. Did Horace fill in the details accurately based on past data? I am not so sure. Just need to wait for another 3 months to know the data for this quarter.
  • Reply 73 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,737member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:

    Not seen one single iPhone X in the wild but it's early days. However, Apple got hit hard in my part of the world. Seeing as Tmay hasn't answered my question I will put it to you.

    How many of those iPhones at the bottom end of Apple's price spread do you think were shipped in this last quarter?

    If we take them out of the balance, how would it have affected the results or do you think that buyers of those phones would have just upped to the next available tier anyway?

    And why do we now have the biggest spread of models available in iPhone history and, a major difference to iPhones past, all of them have enough memory to actually do things with?

    What changed at Apple to justify such an unprecedented change?


    "Unprecedented"?

    Apple has sold a varying spread of iPhones and iPods and whatever else since Jobs was in charge. (The iPads seem to get this a lot). As well as offering different products according to budget, this does seem to occur when they're switching from one piece of tech, to something new. In this case, we have the iPhoneX which introduces wireless charging, FaceID, OLED… We always see a shortage of components to build the new kit, so until the supply line gets the hang of it, Apple runs expanded products bands. As it settles down, the bands shrink to cover the new models at three levels. Nothing new at all.

    Increased memory? Since the kit now has to do a lot more than it did five years ago, then it needs more memory. They're doing a lot of onboard processing for AI and graphics for AI.  The reason that Apple has not fitted so much memory is because they didn't need to. Android apps are written in Java and required a JVM to run; Apple apps run closer to the metal. Apple processors are optimised for running iOS; the chips in Android phones are off the shelf. 

    I think the problem you have with making an argument is that you tend to do it in reverse. You look for a position you want to prove, and the scramble around looking for unrelated scraps of evidence to support it.

    Sorry if I have this wrong, but weren't you the chap who read a statement that Tim Cook made about the iPhoneX? You then spent a couple of posts insisting that the iPhoneX was some sort of anniversary model that Apple could/would abandon if it had to, even though Cook had not said anything about it being an anniversary phone in the interview. You were trying to shoehorn the argument that Apple may at some point return to TouchID, even though Cook and others long stated that they view TouchID as legacy technology. 

    A well-formed argument involves looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions; not looking for the answers you want and then reading tea leaves for snippets of information that support it. 

    This is a very common trait amongst Android supporters, especially when they see a piece of tech that is not common on their platform. They convince themselves that things like Touch ID on the back of the phone is the very best solution possible, then they spend a lot of time in Apple forums trying to prove that Apple must go the same way or all is lost. It surprises me how many Android users need to convince Apple users that their choice is the right one. It's almost as if you need Apple fans approval to vindicate your own choice of platform.

    You don't. Just enjoy it.

    Actually, this thread has taken a substantial turn, from my initial post!!! What I mentioned in my first post was fairly simple - Apple's unit sales have NOT increased in last 2.5 years. The revenue/profit increase observed in last 2.5 years is predominantly due to ASP increase, which will hit a wall pretty soon than later. And for "growth", Apple will have to look for increase in unit sales. I also said this is a new challenge, compared to the initial 7 years of iPhones when "unit sales" increased year on year. It is going to take a different strategy than the current one, to spur "growth".

    It's also true that overall, both iPhone users and Android OS users are keeping their devices longer, that Android OS unit sales fell for the quarter 9%, while Apple's were at worst "flat", and that in a mature market, there's no odds in gaining marketshare without maintaining ASP. Significantly, iPhones generated better values at trade in, and there are large and active markets for both refurbished iPhones and used iPhones, a substantial portion of which support 64 bit, necessary to current iOS releases. In India, Apple was foiled in its desire to market refurbished products, and has a nascent manufacturing operation in place. How much growth and how fast that growth will be created is unknown, but, this is an example of attempting to meet market needs.

    What you, and others fail to consider or mention, is that Apple is already leading in wearables, which is the natural follow on to smartphone. Will they be successful in yet another disruption like the iPhone in the future? I don't know, though their track record is pretty good.

    So, I agree that unit growth will be a challenge, but the remedy posed by most of these Monday Morning Quarterbacks, a rush to even lower cost iPhones, is a roadmap to failure.

    Yet another chart from Horace:




    Apple is projecting unit growth for next quarter.

    and another link to Horace:

    http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/

    In that is that same chart I posted earlier, updated for the ASP increase and the high and low tier product.
    Wearables is a little out of my scope. I don't have much experience with them. I don't even wear a regular watch. I tend to stay out of any discussion on them except for things like the design or price. Just as with the model spread, I like the idea of planning outside the 'phone bubble' (services, wearables, TV etc).

    On the other point, it's a little like what I commented on on DED's snippet. Too much focus on one single quarter, especially when its Apple's strongest and there is unlikely to be any new products until year end.

    Android sees flagships role out all year long so not as much rides on any one quarter.

    Yes, the developed world of handsets has matured. It's what I've said all along. Features on phones are also 'good enough' (hence the growth in the middle tiers) and flat high end sales in a broader sense.

    From Apple's perspective, unit growth is a key strategy. It can come from upgraders, Android's current base in the developed world or from developing markets. The change in approach (leaving more models in the mix at many different price points) was the way to go. A wise move.

    It's far too early to evaluate performance, though. The good news is that it didn't cost them much and they still have options. For example, pricing is easy to tweak. They can always increase the amount of truly new models and balance release schedules if necessary.

    Are you fricking comatose? Did you even make an attempt to read that particular post of mine? Are you unable to process the data because it's too complex?

    The statement below the graph that I posted, indirectly from Apple's financial guidance for this current quarter:

    Apple Q1 guidance is for 8.3% growth in iPhone units, 24% iPhone revenues, (also 24% services growth, 25% Other products and Mac/iPad 0-2% growth.) EPS should grow 39%.

    Wasting my time arguing against your religious views.


    I went through the link http://www.asymco.com/2018/02/05/apple-remarks-to-investors-in-fq1-2018-earnings-conference-call-categorized-and-annotated/ and did not find anything which suggested 8.3% growth in iPhone units as guidance for Jan-Mar quarter. Can you please let me know which part of the article contains information related to this?
    You would also have to reference the conference call:

    https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2018/02/01/apple-inc-appl-q1-2018-earnings-conference-call-tr.aspx

    Essentially, Horace filled in the details using his past data and experience analyzing Apple revenue. Will the numbers of iPhones and revenue meet Horace's guidance? I don't know, but I'd bank on Apple meeting it's guidance, (Apple revenue growth YoY guided $7b-$9b higher. iPhone revenue double digit growth.)

    Horace analyzes data to come to his conclusions. Read the transcripts, see what you come up with. 

    btw Horace normalized the chart for calendar year

    Thank you for the link. Will Apple meet its own guidance? - Absolutely, Yes. Did Horace fill in the details accurately based on past data? I am not so sure. Just need to wait for another 3 months to know the data for this quarter.
    You should follow him as well for his posts on mobility; EV e-bikes and data on urban travel times by various modes.
Sign In or Register to comment.