I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Samsung is ratcheting down OLED panel output from its South Chungcheong plant to cover 20 million or fewer iPhone X devices for the quarter ending in March, a drastic decrease from an initial goal of 45 to 50 million units, Nikkei reports without citing sources.
So have I got this right - the flagship iPhone which was too expensive and was going to be a flop was expected to sell 45 to 50 million units in the March quarter (65% of the number of iPhones sold in the holiday quarter) and in a smartphone market that is contracting, this reduction in OLED output is only down to Apple??
Yes, this is what they’re trying to tell us: Apple is the only company making phones with Samsung screens. Not even Samsung is using Samsung screens. ߘt;/div>
Wrong the 5 inch google Pixel2 screen is from Samsung. The 2XL has an LG screen.
Edit: I may not have picked up on the sarcasm above, but I meant any decrease in Samsung orders may be due to decreased orders from Google for the Pixel2. Let's see google release their sales numbers for their phones.
Specifically, Samsung was last Friday said to be in search of new customers after being "saddled with excess production capacity" of OLED panels.
Samsung is in need of new customers after being "saddled with excess production capacity" of OLED panels... but not due to flagging iPhone sales, but due to their OWN Samsung Galaxy phone sales being in the dumper. Yeah, you read it here first, folks, it’s Samsung’s low sales numbers that is behind their excess production capacity... not Apple’s sales being off...
I just had two failed Face ID authentications to log on to this forum and had to type in my passcode. That’s become the new norm. I miss Touch ID. After the hype people realized that the X is not a great phone. It’s good, but it’s not great. Apple charged $250 extra to provide a solution for a problem that didn’t exist.
Bull...
X is not good.. it is not great.. it is beyond.......
It is a Masterpiece
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
This tired old story. Yeah we remember this during the netbook craze and every other time people say “But but but market share!” As we’ve told you a hundred times — profit is the air corporations breathe, not market share or unit sales. Profit. If the profit goes up, they’re fine with it. See Mac. They’re not trying to earn less per unit and “make it up in volume”.
"See Mac". Curious you mention that. The Mac might not exist today without the iPhone being the revenue cow and the halo effect that came with it. Also curious that you mention marketshare and unit sales - again. The Mac gained traction in the first place thanks to software. The decline in pro markets began when key software houses not only began releasing versions for Windows but, on occasion, actively pushed clients to switch. By that time Apple had largely killed off much of its initial software offerings. What the iMac, later the iPhone and crucially, Apple Retail Stores did for Apple was help to increase sales. Yes, both market share and unit sales. Earlier attempts may have failed (depending on your point of view) but they were geared towards pulling in more users. Apple even went on record once as saying they had 5% of the market and were going after the other 95%.
Don't you remember what LC stood for, why the Perfomas and the iMac came to exist? If it weren't for those users Microsoft would never have ploughed on with Office for Mac.
"Tired old story". Nothing tired about it. Still as relevant as day one and Apple is actively moving towards that goal. From the 'low cost' iPad through to the SE and the shift in product offering.
...reports Samsung made a 13.5 trillion won ($12.6 billion) capital investment to prepare for what was expected to be a glut of OLED panel orders from Apple.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues Global: 51% Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The irony of this is huge.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues Global: 51% Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The irony of this is huge.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
The recent moves by the company were to:
create a new iPhone hardware architecture, the X;
add wireless charging;
add OLED (to the X), and;
add FaceID.
No entry level changes in product or pricing happened during Q4 or Q1, and all of the ASP and revenue gains were due to the iPhone 8's and iPhone X.
Next quarter, it is expected that the iPhone X will continue as the most popular model; you only have to wait about 45 days to find that will be true.
All of this together indicates that Apple is focused on revenue and profit in a declining market with longer upgrade cycles, not driving unit sales or marketshare.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
This tired old story. Yeah we remember this during the netbook craze and every other time people say “But but but market share!” As we’ve told you a hundred times — profit is the air corporations breathe, not market share or unit sales. Profit. If the profit goes up, they’re fine with it. See Mac. They’re not trying to earn less per unit and “make it up in volume”.
"See Mac". Curious you mention that. The Mac might not exist today without the iPhone being the revenue cow and the halo effect that came with it. Also curious that you mention marketshare and unit sales - again. The Mac gained traction in the first place thanks to software. The decline in pro markets began when key software houses not only began releasing versions for Windows but, on occasion, actively pushed clients to switch. By that time Apple had largely killed off much of its initial software offerings. What the iMac, later the iPhone and crucially, Apple Retail Stores did for Apple was help to increase sales. Yes, both market share and unit sales. Earlier attempts may have failed (depending on your point of view) but they were geared towards pulling in more users. Apple even went on record once as saying they had 5% of the market and were going after the other 95%.
Don't you remember what LC stood for, why the Perfomas and the iMac came to exist? If it weren't for those users Microsoft would never have ploughed on with Office for Mac.
"Tired old story". Nothing tired about it. Still as relevant as day one and Apple is actively moving towards that goal. From the 'low cost' iPad through to the SE and the shift in product offering.
It's actually a fact that Apple was able to use an instance of IP infringement (of Quicktime codec's) by MS to get MS to continue Office development for the Mac for a period of 5 years. Oh, and there was some tiny investment in Apple by MS as a show of good faith. MS made a good investment, and solid profits off of that.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues Global: 51% Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The irony of this is huge.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
The recent moves by the company were to:
create a new iPhone hardware architecture, the X;
add wireless charging;
add OLED (to the X), and;
add FaceID.
No entry level changes in product or pricing happened during Q4 or Q1, and all of the ASP and revenue gains were due to the iPhone 8's and iPhone X.
Next quarter, it is expected that the iPhone X will continue as the most popular model; you only have to wait about 45 days to find that will be true.
All of this together indicates that Apple is focused on revenue and profit in a declining market with longer upgrade cycles, not driving unit sales or marketshare.
Apple is continuing to sell 2 year old iPhone 6s & iPhone 6s Plus after the launch of iPhone 8/8 Plus & X at a discounted price. In some of the markets (like India, my country), Apple is continuing to sell even iPhone 6 & 6 Plus. Apple ALSO introduced an entry level iPad last year. This was NOT done in previous years. That is the difference in "spread" that Avon is pointing out.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues Global: 51% Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The irony of this is huge.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
The recent moves by the company were to:
create a new iPhone hardware architecture, the X;
add wireless charging;
add OLED (to the X), and;
add FaceID.
No entry level changes in product or pricing happened during Q4 or Q1, and all of the ASP and revenue gains were due to the iPhone 8's and iPhone X.
Next quarter, it is expected that the iPhone X will continue as the most popular model; you only have to wait about 45 days to find that will be true.
All of this together indicates that Apple is focused on revenue and profit in a declining market with longer upgrade cycles, not driving unit sales or marketshare.
Apple is continuing to sell 2 year old iPhone 6s & iPhone 6s Plus after the launch of iPhone 8/8 Plus & X at a discounted price. In some of the markets (like India, my country), Apple is continuing to sell even iPhone 6 & 6 Plus. Apple ALSO introduced an entry level iPad last year. This was NOT done in previous years. That is the difference in "spread" that Avon is pointing out.
The "spread" has been ongoing since the iPhone 4 came out. It's nothing new, has been steadily increasing in models over the years, and as I have stated repeatedly, Apple has always attempted to maintain ASP while doing so.
Avon b7 has been attempting to portray this "spread" as something "new"; it isn't. He also pushes the narrative that Apple should be primarily interested in units sales and marketshare. By definition, Q1 suggests that Apple is primarily interested in revenue and profit. It's likely that Apple will make more inroads in India and elsewhere in the future with low end iPhones to gain more marketshare. I would note that while Apple is not so quietly generating its sales and revenues, smartphones sales overall are flat or falling. Apple has plenty of room, money, and time, to make adjustments, but I'm guessing there will be a lot of suffering, and consolidation, by Android OS device makers before Avon b7 gets to see Apple as a big player in the low end.
iPhone X sales are good, but I expect Apple thought they were going to be out of this world, which they are not, hence the supply correction.
Smart Phones just aren't that interesting these days like they were, so people will end up buying more to their budget, rather than druling over the latest model which has some spec updates.
This is why apple is trying to keep tempting buyers for the more expensive models by allowing people to buy on finance. It's a sad world we live in.
I’m surprised r. Campbell didn’t get the memo the other AI writers seem to have gotten, which is that Nikkei pushes this narrative *every year* at this time, and every year they are wrong.
The iPhone X is the top-selling model of smartphone in the world. FACT.
In a world of alternative facts, facts themselves can be problematic.
All we can do is apply some logic and common sense.
Until this time next year Apple will not have peaked again. That's logical as Apple's historical model - up to this last release - was to release just two new phones a year and at the same time, hence high sales of relatively new models. The fact that Apple's iPhone 'x' is the top seller doesn't paint much of the picture as another vendor overtook Apple globally for at least half of last year but didn't register any top models because it offers a larger spread of models.
Something that Apple is now trying too and probably not because it wanted to but due to market conditions.
Some people are claiming Apple did better than expected because overall industry sales showed the largest slowdown in smartphone history. I think that needs some fleshing out. That reported slowdown was for the last quarter of 2017. Annually, industry sales were actually slightly up.
Apple's were basically flat but ASP was up. I suppose one way of looking at that is that Apple users are simply paying more than ever for the same amount of phones. Not sure if that situation is ideal for iPhone users.
However, with the new, far more varied model spread, at least iPhone users have far more options before them than ever before. Those that paid more iPhones probably convinced themselves that the price was worth it. We'll see how many more feel the same way as the year progresses.
However, we know that the market probably can't sustain record iPhone X sales all year round and that sustained growth was in the middle tiers. That's common sense and seeing that Apple's peak period has just passed, this latest report is stating part of the obvious. Whether things are really as dramatic as the estimates claim is something else.
Apple's biggest problem is also the industry's biggest problem: largely flat sales.
The industry has wiggle room in general as the developing world will be looked to for growth. The iPhone X won't have much say in that but there are rumours of a spring SE style phone. That's good for a few reasons.
It helps break Apple out of the yearly Christmas-focussed release cycle and the subsequent lull where competitors can release an avalanche of new models/features throughout the year, and adds a new stimulus for budget (and possibly size) conscious iPhone users. It also helps Apple even out the manufacturing strain by releasing phones 'out of season'.
Something from Strategy Analytics:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
You seem, yet again, to not understand that unit sales in itself is not the singular metric of success. I get that your favorite, Huawei, is climbing in unit sales, likely benefitting from Chinese consumers shunning South Korean products like Samsung, but since Huawei's product mix is mostly low to mid priced, Huawei's ASP is substantially less than Apple's. That isn't even disputable.
More to the point, Apple has already given guidance for this current quarter, and people that are smarter than you or I have already extrapolated the units and ASP. The bottom line is that the iPhone X, will still likely sell more units that any other iPhone model again this quarter, maintaining a historically high ASP. I doubt that the SE is the big unit seller that you want it to be, that either way, It is always prudent to look at Apple's guidance.
I'm not going to repost all of the info I provided to you the last go round.
Singular? I don't know who said or suggested that. I didn't.
Apple wants unit sales, though. That's my opinion.
So much so that it desperately doesn't want to be reporting a year on year fall, this time next year. Can you imagine the fallout (share price turbulence) after peak iPhone? Warranted or not, do you think it wouldn't happen. Your ASP would do nothing to stem the corrective movement. That would be the headline grabber, not ASP.
Apple has to spin what it has so if sales fall you can bet it will be contextualised into something 'wholly expected'. The point is they don't want to be reporting that next year. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
If you think that pushing ASP will resolve things, fine.
They could be moving to a three phone FaceID wielding lineup come September.
My guess is that long before that, its biggest competitors will have entire product families with equivalents on the market.
I hope the rumoured SE spring/summer update or replacement has FaceID, if Apple has in fact chosen that path. If not, it's going to seem a little odd that a new phone could ship without the tent pole feature going forward.
I believe Apple wants to push unit sales for many reasons. One of them is obviously services revenue. I don't see it as anything singular in terms of success, though. Just a massive piece of the plan :-).
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues Global: 51% Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The irony of this is huge.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
The recent moves by the company were to:
create a new iPhone hardware architecture, the X;
add wireless charging;
add OLED (to the X), and;
add FaceID.
No entry level changes in product or pricing happened during Q4 or Q1, and all of the ASP and revenue gains were due to the iPhone 8's and iPhone X.
Next quarter, it is expected that the iPhone X will continue as the most popular model; you only have to wait about 45 days to find that will be true.
All of this together indicates that Apple is focused on revenue and profit in a declining market with longer upgrade cycles, not driving unit sales or marketshare.
Apple is continuing to sell 2 year old iPhone 6s & iPhone 6s Plus after the launch of iPhone 8/8 Plus & X at a discounted price. In some of the markets (like India, my country), Apple is continuing to sell even iPhone 6 & 6 Plus. Apple ALSO introduced an entry level iPad last year. This was NOT done in previous years. That is the difference in "spread" that Avon is pointing out.
The "spread" has been ongoing since the iPhone 4 came out. It's nothing new, has been steadily increasing in models over the years, and as I have stated repeatedly, Apple has always attempted to maintain ASP while doing so.
Avon b7 has been attempting to portray this "spread" as something "new"; it isn't. He also pushes the narrative that Apple should be primarily interested in units sales and marketshare. By definition, Q1 suggests that Apple is primarily interested in revenue and profit. It's likely that Apple will make more inroads in India and elsewhere in the future with low end iPhones to gain more marketshare. I would note that while Apple is not so quietly generating its sales and revenues, smartphones sales overall are flat or falling. Apple has plenty of room, money, and time, to make adjustments, but I'm guessing there will be a lot of suffering, and consolidation, by Android OS device makers before Avon b7 gets to see Apple as a big player in the low end.
If what you are saying were true, my iPhone 4 wouldn't have been my last, my wife would have a new iPhone now and Apple's sales wouldn't have been consistently flat for the last couple of years.
As for the spread, this is the largest in Apple history and the first time it has released three new phones.
Apple users have never had such a spread to choose from nor the capacity options they currently have. Nor so many price points. You used to have a capacity-crippled entry level option on the new phones then the next capacity up. On the older models that 'next capacity up' option was eliminated. Everything was geared to getting you on the latest and greatest. That is NOT the case now and Apple is making (or going to make) more effort in some huge but largely untapped markets (at least for Apple). Screen size was also an issue. Cheaper meant smaller. People can now choose by size and probably afford the asking price. In fact the Plus models have probably saved Apple's bacon in recent times.
Apple was also selling the 32GB iPhone 6 'under the radar' through select resellers for a time with offers that couldn't be had via web but only through those retailers.
This is a major strategic repositioning by Apple but it is simply too early to evaluate the results. Trying to say that isn't the case or that it lacks importance is fine with me but I don't share that view.
But don't take my word for, I quoted the head of Strategy Analytics. That quote was crystal clear and even touched on your obsession: ASP
What Apple doesn't want to do is be reporting a 20 to 30 million (or whatever) drop in annual unit sales in January next year - no matter how great Q4-18 or ASP are. For me that would in no way represent a disaster but from a market perspective I'm pretty sure Tim would rather play safe. That is what is happening. It doesn't matter how expensive one phone is in your lineup. What counts is the lineup itself and it's performance over the year, not one quarter.
If it were so confident in its business model, it wouldn't have changed it.
Comments
Apple’s share of Q4 2017 smartphone revenues
Global: 51%
Europe: 57%
North America: 76%
Yeah, Apple is playing it wrong... /s
The 2XL has an LG screen.
Edit: I may not have picked up on the sarcasm above, but I meant any decrease in Samsung orders may be due to decreased orders from Google for the Pixel2. Let's see google release their sales numbers for their phones.
Good for you? I find FaceID to be much more reliable than TouchID was... perhaps you're holding it wrong?
Don't you remember what LC stood for, why the Perfomas and the iMac came to exist? If it weren't for those users Microsoft would never have ploughed on with Office for Mac.
"Tired old story". Nothing tired about it. Still as relevant as day one and Apple is actively moving towards that goal. From the 'low cost' iPad through to the SE and the shift in product offering.
I can't believe they fell for that, nice one Tim.
Apple is 'playing it' , on general terms, exactly the way I argued it should.
I have even said, right here in these forums, that recent moves by the company were the right moves IMO and given substantial reasoning to support that view.
I have also said though, that it is premature to see if those moves are paying off. This is the first quarter with results including the new strategic changes. A snapshot but insufficient to gauge how things will play out.
In part, because it relates to Apple's yearly peak quarter (and as such, is already a distortion within the year), for the first time it included a third phone, and that phone itself was also a distorting factor.
So what do you do? You throw a 'guesstimate' into the ring, knowing full well what I have said. Q417 is not enough to sing the praises on. Less so in Apple's case. And that guesstimate originated from the same person I quoted (Neil Mawston) In a previous post right here in this same thread so apart from the 51% guesstimate, let me refresh you on what he said in a wider context:
"Neil Mawston, Executive Director at Strategy Analytics, added, “Apple shipped 77.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q4 2017, slipping 1 percent annually from 78.3 million in Q4 2016. Despite robust iPhone X demand and an iPhone average selling price approaching an incredible US$800, we note global iPhone volumes have actually declined on an annual basis for 5 of the past 8 quarters. If Apple wants to expand shipment volumes in the future, it will need to launch a new wave of cheaper iPhones and start to push down, not up, the pricing curve. Samsung dipped 4 percent annually and shipped 74.4 million smartphones for 19 percent marketshare worldwide in Q4 2017, up slightly from 18 percent share a year ago. Samsung is under pressure from Chinese rivals in some major markets, like China and India, but it remains by far the largest smartphone brand on a global basis, shipping an unmatched 317.5 million units in full-year 2017.”
Can you see that the 51% you are banding around is in no way incompatible with what I have said (the person it originated from has said as much), it has nothing to do with this quarter ( what this thread is about) and the analyst report is simply stating what we all understand as a natural fall off from Apple's habitual performance. The post Christmas quarter sees less sales for seasonal reasons. What the piece does is simply exaggerate the situation, provides no solid sources and should be taken at face value. Nothing more.
create a new iPhone hardware architecture, the X;
add wireless charging;
add OLED (to the X), and;
add FaceID.
No entry level changes in product or pricing happened during Q4 or Q1, and all of the ASP and revenue gains were due to the iPhone 8's and iPhone X.
Next quarter, it is expected that the iPhone X will continue as the most popular model; you only have to wait about 45 days to find that will be true.
All of this together indicates that Apple is focused on revenue and profit in a declining market with longer upgrade cycles, not driving unit sales or marketshare.
Avon b7 has been attempting to portray this "spread" as something "new"; it isn't. He also pushes the narrative that Apple should be primarily interested in units sales and marketshare. By definition, Q1 suggests that Apple is primarily interested in revenue and profit.
It's likely that Apple will make more inroads in India and elsewhere in the future with low end iPhones to gain more marketshare. I would note that while Apple is not so quietly generating its sales and revenues, smartphones sales overall are flat or falling.
Apple has plenty of room, money, and time, to make adjustments, but I'm guessing there will be a lot of suffering, and consolidation, by Android OS device makers before Avon b7 gets to see Apple as a big player in the low end.
Smart Phones just aren't that interesting these days like they were, so people will end up buying more to their budget, rather than druling over the latest model which has some spec updates.
This is why apple is trying to keep tempting buyers for the more expensive models by allowing people to buy on finance. It's a sad world we live in.
As for the spread, this is the largest in Apple history and the first time it has released three new phones.
Apple users have never had such a spread to choose from nor the capacity options they currently have. Nor so many price points. You used to have a capacity-crippled entry level option on the new phones then the next capacity up. On the older models that 'next capacity up' option was eliminated. Everything was geared to getting you on the latest and greatest. That is NOT the case now and Apple is making (or going to make) more effort in some huge but largely untapped markets (at least for Apple). Screen size was also an issue. Cheaper meant smaller. People can now choose by size and probably afford the asking price. In fact the Plus models have probably saved Apple's bacon in recent times.
Apple was also selling the 32GB iPhone 6 'under the radar' through select resellers for a time with offers that couldn't be had via web but only through those retailers.
This is a major strategic repositioning by Apple but it is simply too early to evaluate the results. Trying to say that isn't the case or that it lacks importance is fine with me but I don't share that view.
But don't take my word for, I quoted the head of Strategy Analytics. That quote was crystal clear and even touched on your obsession: ASP
What Apple doesn't want to do is be reporting a 20 to 30 million (or whatever) drop in annual unit sales in January next year - no matter how great Q4-18 or ASP are. For me that would in no way represent a disaster but from a market perspective I'm pretty sure Tim would rather play safe. That is what is happening. It doesn't matter how expensive one phone is in your lineup. What counts is the lineup itself and it's performance over the year, not one quarter.
If it were so confident in its business model, it wouldn't have changed it.