The estimates in the article do not include the P20 series phones.
2076 troll posts and counting…
You are saying European Android users mostly can't afford (or want) premium Android phones when this very AI article points to data that says 25% of European iPhone sales were SE, or 6 series phones.
25%
Then, when I present information that directly counters what you are claiming (and from just one manufacturer), your only response is 'troll'?
Okay.
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
The estimates in the article do not include the P20 series phones.
2076 troll posts and counting…
You are saying European Android users mostly can't afford (or want) premium Android phones when this very AI article points to data that says 25% of European iPhone sales were SE, or 6 series phones.
25%
Then, when I present information that directly counters what you are claiming (and from just one manufacturer), your only response is 'troll'?
Okay.
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Once again. ASP or profits (highest and/or the most) is utterly irrelevant here.
I will simplify it for you to the extreme.
Who sells more smartphones? Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG?
We all see the graphs of unit sales. We all see the names. In those graphs, none of the above companies have the largest chunk.
That is taken by 'other'.
Yes, a collection of tiny (or not so tiny) companies that do not even register on the scale of world unit sales but when lumped together, represent a gigantic amount of phones. How can they even be in business so far down at the bottom of the keg?
They are in business because their business model is actually built around being at the bottom of the keg. Can you comprehend what's happening down there? Can you see why Apple's volume or ASP has no relevance for them?
They exist because there is a market to exploit. They exist because they make money.
When the market drops out or losses take the place of profits for too long, they will vanish from the scene but until then, they exist and serve their purpose.
ASP might be an essential factor for some shareholders but it is irrelevant for consumers. Utterly irrelevant.
Now, between the top and the bottom there is room for all kinds of business approaches and when the size of certain companies reaches a certain level, things are not as black and white as when comparing simply the top end with the bottom end of the keg.
Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) outspend Apple on R&D. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) make better phones than Apple. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) compete with Apple on vertical manufacturing. Huawei does all of the above with a lower ASP and, incredibly, without access to one of the largest smartphone markets on the planet.
Forgive me for not giving supreme importance to ASP, because from a consumer perspective, having the highest ASP does nothing for me.
If I talk about Huawei, it's because I know a lot about the company and little about Samsung. Appleinsider is brimming with articles that use Samsung as a comparitive model. No doubt because Samsung is readily available to them and Huawei is not.
How do you know Huawei didn't take share away from Apple?
'worrisome' is the word, yes, but it is comical that you took that word from a short post and completely out of context.
It is worrisome because Apple's decline according to this report was accompanied by gains of Huawei in its core European markets.
It is worrisome because that situation arose in Q2 and we expect Apple not to have new phones to stimulate further demand until the end of the year. It is worrisome because Huawei has launched a monster phone in those markets for more than 200€ less and seems to be selling well AND the numbers in the report do not even include the sales of that phone. It is worrisome because Honor Will release the Honor 10 Next week and inject fresh hardware into the system at lower prices. It is worrisome because before the next Apple refresh, Samsung will release the Note 10 and Huawei will release the Mate 20 around that time. From your ASP stance, it is worrisome because the iPhone X is selling less every quarter and because of Apple's release cycle, a lot of people hold off just prior to the refresh.
And just to top things off, it seems the market as a whole might be seeing some contraction.
That doesn't necessarily mean doom and gloom but right now, it IS worrisome.
As for Xiaomi, I have just as many doubts as you but I'll reserve judgement until I see the future results. On what they've achieved recently, it is very impressive.
And as for your 'fine print' observations you want to spin the carousel again so here we go:
The estimates in the article do not include the P20 series phones.
2076 troll posts and counting…
You are saying European Android users mostly can't afford (or want) premium Android phones when this very AI article points to data that says 25% of European iPhone sales were SE, or 6 series phones.
25%
Then, when I present information that directly counters what you are claiming (and from just one manufacturer), your only response is 'troll'?
Okay.
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Once again. ASP or profits (highest and/or the most) is utterly irrelevant here.
I will simplify it for you to the extreme.
Who sells more smartphones? Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG?
We all see the graphs of unit sales. We all see the names. In those graphs, none of the above companies have the largest chunk.
That is taken by 'other'.
Yes, a collection of tiny (or not so tiny) companies that do not even register on the scale of world unit sales but when lumped together, represent a gigantic amount of phones. How can they even be in business so far down at the bottom of the keg?
They are in business because their business model is actually built around being at the bottom of the keg. Can you comprehend what's happening down there? Can you see why Apple's volume or ASP has no relevance for them?
They exist because there is a market to exploit. They exist because they make money.
When the market drops out or losses take the place of profits for too long, they will vanish from the scene but until then, they exist and serve their purpose.
ASP might be an essential factor for some shareholders but it is irrelevant for consumers. Utterly irrelevant.
Now, between the top and the bottom there is room for all kinds of business approaches and when the size of certain companies reaches a certain level, things are not as black and white as when comparing simply the top end with the bottom end of the keg.
Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) outspend Apple on R&D. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) make better phones than Apple. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) compete with Apple on vertical manufacturing. Huawei does all of the above with a lower ASP and, incredibly, without access to one of the largest smartphone markets on the planet.
Forgive me for not giving supreme importance to ASP, because from a consumer perspective, having the highest ASP does nothing for me.
If I talk about Huawei, it's because I know a lot about the company and little about Samsung. Appleinsider is brimming with articles that use Samsung as a comparitive model. No doubt because Samsung is readily available to them and Huawei is not.
How do you know Huawei didn't take share away from Apple?
'worrisome' is the word, yes, but it is comical that you took that word from a short post and completely out of context.
It is worrisome because Apple's decline according to this report was accompanied by gains of Huawei in its core European markets.
It is worrisome because that situation arose in Q2 and we expect Apple not to have new phones to stimulate further demand until the end of the year. It is worrisome because Huawei has launched a monster phone in those markets for more than 200€ less and seems to be selling well AND the numbers in the report do not even include the sales of that phone. It is worrisome because Honor Will release the Honor 10 Next week and inject fresh hardware into the system at lower prices. It is worrisome because before the next Apple refresh, Samsung will release the Note 10 and Huawei will release the Mate 20 around that time. From your ASP stance, it is worrisome because the iPhone X is selling less every quarter and because of Apple's release cycle, a lot of people hold off just prior to the refresh.
And just to top things off, it seems the market as a whole might be seeing some contraction.
That doesn't necessarily mean doom and gloom but right now, it IS worrisome.
As for Xiaomi, I have just as many doubts as you but I'll reserve judgement until I see the future results. On what they've achieved recently, it is very impressive.
And as for your 'fine print' observations you want to spin the carousel again so here we go:
"Evan Niu: Tim Cook has this famous line that he considers inventory to be "fundamentally evil," just because over time, if you build so much of it, it gets written down, and it's just a mess to deal with. It's very good to have lean inventory, enough to meet demand but not too much on your books, which is why this spike was so weird.
But it's really just actually component purchases. An analyst was able to get some clarity on that. I noticed it, too, initially, when I saw the balance sheet. Basically, CFO Maestri said, "We're basically making these purchasing decisions because of current market conditions." So, they're basically pre-buying all of these different components because the components, most specifically memory, the pricing is supposed to continue going up. I mean, it's been going on for two years, and it's probably going to keep going up, so they're basically just trying to buy as much as they can now to get ahead of continued price increases later this year. As we all know, they release a ton of iPhones in the fall, and they're going to need all those components to put them in the phones.
So, very specifically, the type of inventory that we're talking about is just components. It's not unsold products on shelves, which would be a pretty big concern there, if that were the case. So, it did jump out at me, too, but that's what's going on there."
What companies do with all that pesky profit from their high ASP's...
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
All these personal attacks (accusations of being a Troll back and forth) are sheer waste of time. We can respectfully disagree with the contrasting viewpoints that we have and just state them and move on. On the topic being discussed, I do think that the phone market in planet earth has enough space for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and Xiaomi (and few more companies) to succeed, in their own ways for many more years to come.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
All these personal attacks (accusations of being a Troll back and forth) are sheer waste of time. We can respectfully disagree with the contrasting viewpoints that we have and just state them and move on. On the topic being discussed, I do think that the phone market in planet earth has enough space for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and Xiaomi (and few more companies) to succeed, in their own ways for many more years to come.
I have stated nothing other than that there is plenty of room for competition, but I would note that Avon b7 has a difference opinion than most of the marketplace about what constitutes success for a corporation.
What I specifically object to is the FUD that Avon b7 is and has been spreading. This is the same bullshit that happened to Apple wrt iPhone X sales by the analysts.
More to the point, agree to disagree is fine, but opening a kiosk in AI to push Huawei, which is what Avon b7 is doing, is unacceptable. Certainly there must be a site for Huawei fanboys for Avon b7 to participate.
I would also note that there is, in fact, a reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die. This is easy to both understand and to find supporting evidence on the net.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
All these personal attacks (accusations of being a Troll back and forth) are sheer waste of time. We can respectfully disagree with the contrasting viewpoints that we have and just state them and move on. On the topic being discussed, I do think that the phone market in planet earth has enough space for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and Xiaomi (and few more companies) to succeed, in their own ways for many more years to come.
I have stated nothing other than that there is plenty of room for competition, but I would note that Avon b7 has a difference opinion than most of the marketplace about what constitutes success for a corporation.
What I specifically object to is the FUD that Avon b7 is and has been spreading. This is the same bullshit that happened to Apple wrt iPhone X sales by the analysts.
More to the point, agree to disagree is fine, but opening a kiosk in AI to push Huawei, which is what Avon b7 is doing, is unacceptable. Certainly there must be a site for Huawei fanboys for Avon b7 to participate.
I would also note that there is, in fact, a reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die. This is easy to both understand and to find supporting evidence on the net.
"reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die" - I definitely agree with you on this. There are way too many smartphone makers (hundreds of them), without making ANY profit and without any clue as to how to turn a profit. They are better off shutting shop and focus on some other profitable business, instead of wasting time & money on smartphone business.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
All these personal attacks (accusations of being a Troll back and forth) are sheer waste of time. We can respectfully disagree with the contrasting viewpoints that we have and just state them and move on. On the topic being discussed, I do think that the phone market in planet earth has enough space for Apple, Samsung, Huawei and Xiaomi (and few more companies) to succeed, in their own ways for many more years to come.
I have stated nothing other than that there is plenty of room for competition, but I would note that Avon b7 has a difference opinion than most of the marketplace about what constitutes success for a corporation.
What I specifically object to is the FUD that Avon b7 is and has been spreading. This is the same bullshit that happened to Apple wrt iPhone X sales by the analysts.
More to the point, agree to disagree is fine, but opening a kiosk in AI to push Huawei, which is what Avon b7 is doing, is unacceptable. Certainly there must be a site for Huawei fanboys for Avon b7 to participate.
I would also note that there is, in fact, a reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die. This is easy to both understand and to find supporting evidence on the net.
"reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die" - I definitely agree with you on this. There are way too many smartphone makers (hundreds of them), without making ANY profit and without any clue as to how to turn a profit. They are better off shutting shop and focus on some other profitable business, instead of wasting time & money on smartphone business.
I expect that as the market for smartphones in China matures, that India is a natural place for all of the majors to pursue. Feel free to send me links as you come across them. I do appreciate your insight on the market in India.
I'm still suprised the Moto G5 or similar midrange phone isn't the best selling phone worldwide. In the same way the toyota Corolla is the best selling car.
I guess there is so much choice in the midrange category no one make and model stands out. However as a collective they trounce sales of all apple phones let alone the iPhone X.
The estimates in the article do not include the P20 series phones.
2076 troll posts and counting…
You are saying European Android users mostly can't afford (or want) premium Android phones when this very AI article points to data that says 25% of European iPhone sales were SE, or 6 series phones.
25%
Then, when I present information that directly counters what you are claiming (and from just one manufacturer), your only response is 'troll'?
Okay.
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Once again. ASP or profits (highest and/or the most) is utterly irrelevant here.
I will simplify it for you to the extreme.
Who sells more smartphones? Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG?
We all see the graphs of unit sales. We all see the names. In those graphs, none of the above companies have the largest chunk.
That is taken by 'other'.
Yes, a collection of tiny (or not so tiny) companies that do not even register on the scale of world unit sales but when lumped together, represent a gigantic amount of phones. How can they even be in business so far down at the bottom of the keg?
They are in business because their business model is actually built around being at the bottom of the keg. Can you comprehend what's happening down there? Can you see why Apple's volume or ASP has no relevance for them?
They exist because there is a market to exploit. They exist because they make money.
When the market drops out or losses take the place of profits for too long, they will vanish from the scene but until then, they exist and serve their purpose.
ASP might be an essential factor for some shareholders but it is irrelevant for consumers. Utterly irrelevant.
Now, between the top and the bottom there is room for all kinds of business approaches and when the size of certain companies reaches a certain level, things are not as black and white as when comparing simply the top end with the bottom end of the keg.
Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) outspend Apple on R&D. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) make better phones than Apple. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) compete with Apple on vertical manufacturing. Huawei does all of the above with a lower ASP and, incredibly, without access to one of the largest smartphone markets on the planet.
Forgive me for not giving supreme importance to ASP, because from a consumer perspective, having the highest ASP does nothing for me.
If I talk about Huawei, it's because I know a lot about the company and little about Samsung. Appleinsider is brimming with articles that use Samsung as a comparitive model. No doubt because Samsung is readily available to them and Huawei is not.
How do you know Huawei didn't take share away from Apple?
'worrisome' is the word, yes, but it is comical that you took that word from a short post and completely out of context.
It is worrisome because Apple's decline according to this report was accompanied by gains of Huawei in its core European markets.
It is worrisome because that situation arose in Q2 and we expect Apple not to have new phones to stimulate further demand until the end of the year. It is worrisome because Huawei has launched a monster phone in those markets for more than 200€ less and seems to be selling well AND the numbers in the report do not even include the sales of that phone. It is worrisome because Honor Will release the Honor 10 Next week and inject fresh hardware into the system at lower prices. It is worrisome because before the next Apple refresh, Samsung will release the Note 10 and Huawei will release the Mate 20 around that time. From your ASP stance, it is worrisome because the iPhone X is selling less every quarter and because of Apple's release cycle, a lot of people hold off just prior to the refresh.
And just to top things off, it seems the market as a whole might be seeing some contraction.
That doesn't necessarily mean doom and gloom but right now, it IS worrisome.
As for Xiaomi, I have just as many doubts as you but I'll reserve judgement until I see the future results. On what they've achieved recently, it is very impressive.
And as for your 'fine print' observations you want to spin the carousel again so here we go:
"Evan Niu: Tim Cook has this famous line that he considers inventory to be "fundamentally evil," just because over time, if you build so much of it, it gets written down, and it's just a mess to deal with. It's very good to have lean inventory, enough to meet demand but not too much on your books, which is why this spike was so weird.
But it's really just actually component purchases. An analyst was able to get some clarity on that. I noticed it, too, initially, when I saw the balance sheet. Basically, CFO Maestri said, "We're basically making these purchasing decisions because of current market conditions." So, they're basically pre-buying all of these different components because the components, most specifically memory, the pricing is supposed to continue going up. I mean, it's been going on for two years, and it's probably going to keep going up, so they're basically just trying to buy as much as they can now to get ahead of continued price increases later this year. As we all know, they release a ton of iPhones in the fall, and they're going to need all those components to put them in the phones.
So, very specifically, the type of inventory that we're talking about is just components. It's not unsold products on shelves, which would be a pretty big concern there, if that were the case. So, it did jump out at me, too, but that's what's going on there."
What companies do with all that pesky profit from their high ASP's...
No.
ASP: You were clinging to the highest ASP as if it were the holy grail. Apple's sustained high ASP has filled its coffers, and to the tune of a few hundred billion dollars. The vast majority of which doesn't get 'spent', at least not on what affects me, the consumer. It has simply grown for years.
They could still cover their memory needs (and everything else for that matter) and well in advance - with a far lower ASP. Do you think Huawei doesn't operate in a similar fashion? In spite of its far lower ASP?
If you can pursuade people to buy into that, great, but when sales flatten (as they have) or show signs of fatigue you need to weigh your options up. Apple did that last year and decided to widen its model spread. A very good move IMO, in spite of the possible negatives. I supported that move and still do. I mentioned at the time that one possible 'negative' could be lower end models eating away at higher end models. Now it seems a whopping 25% of one quarter's entire sales went into the lowest band of the new spread. We can only speculate on the impact of that situation. Do you think that that 25% had a negative impact on Apple's ASP? Were they truly sales that took a chunk out of the higher tiers or were they sales that simply wouldn't have been achieved without the bigger spread and lower priced options? Or a mix of both situations?
Before you answer that question, try to explain why sales have been largely flat for the last few years in the first place (this research doesn't change anything right now). After all, with such a small share of the world smartphone market you would think there is plenty of room to grow. Or is ASP so important for Apple that unit growth is simply irrelevant?
There is nothing in Apple's recent actions that suggests the latter and plenty to suggest a push for more unit growth.
Apple added a new (one-off?) product to the mix at a high price while leaving more space at the other end.
So, with its largest product spread ever and offering far more options at varied price points to users, why are sales still flat after these last few years?
There are many reasons but they mostly fall (generally speaking) under the same umbrella: competition. Intense competition. Apple has never seen such competition. Even in regions that on paper have virgin smartphone territory to exploit, the intense competition is ever present and not just from Samsung, of course.
With such a new spread and three years past the peak, shouldn't people be upgrading in droves? Will you even cater to the idea that perhaps many have already upgraded?
With the Mate S, Huawei turned some heads and since then really hasn't put a foot wrong. The P9 turned more heads. By the time Apple could come up with its own dual camera option for example (and on just one phone) Huawei had an entire family in next to no time. Something similar is happening with the notch. Once again Apple has just one phone while Huawei has an entire family and is not alone. This lack of dynamism due to Apple's refresh cycle doesn't help it at all. The notch and colours may be simple 'trends' but they are sometimes the difference between taking the sale or not. Moreso when handsets have largely commoditized features which are available on new hardware at lower price points. The Canalys report mentions this point.
Apple has nothing to match the P20 series' gradient finishes, for example.
You haven't held a Huawei premium phone. You haven't perceived the build quality.
However, read the reviews - any review - and try to find one that thinks design and build quality are failing. Then think about what they are doing on the inside. What do you value? Battery life? Fast charging? AI (NPU)? Camera functions? Speed? Modem? Dual SIM, VoLTE? Software options? OLED?
That's ONE manufacturer. Throw in Samsung, BKK and others and the going gets tough. It's 2018, not 2015. A different world. You live in a bubble so to speak where you only really have two major players. You are losing out as a consumer from lack of choice. Do you doubt this? Next time you are in Europe, try visiting somewhere like a MediaMarkt or any carrier store. You will get an eye popping look at what competition looks like and when you see it, you may understand why ASP is lower but irrelevant to the consumer.
The market is consolidating, yes. Is there any mature industry that hasn't consolidated? I have spoken about it many times. It has been consolidating for a while but even when Apple was at its peak, that 'other' group was there, and still is.
There was one factor that went against Huawei in the past though: Brand recognition. That is no longer the case in most of the world. Through advertising, partnerships and solid products, the Huawei brand is now very well known. So, if having competitive phones from Samsung wasn't already enough of a problem, Huawei is now not only nipping at Apple's heels but overtaking them. More than anything else you should be celebrating the presence of strong competition instead of just ignorantly lambasting the company and people who, while being Apple users, appreciate what competitors can do. Be that competition from Samsung, Google, Oppo etc.
YoY, unit sales for Huawei have been increasing in the millions. People now actively consider a new Huawei phone when renewal comes up after owning one previously.
All that and more, but with a lower ASP than Apple. As a consumer, I celebrate that. Huawei still reported billions in net profit for last year.
The smartphone world has changed immensely since the iPhone 6 surge but in many ways, Apple's handset division is still similar to back then. They are toying with change (and just as well) but if last year competition was intense, this year it will be the same or even more intense.
I am not here to promote Huawei (that is just your desperate, anything goes accusation) but I won't stand by while so much misinformation gets banded about. AI draws comparisons with Samsung. I draw comparisons with Huawei because I have a Huawei handset and am on the lookout for another so I know a fair bit about them. I'm also in the market for an iPhone but that will have wait till the end of the year.
I am perfectly positioned to see what's happening on both sides of the fence and point out when something simply isn't as stated. Some people, a vocal minority, just can't handle it when someone not only points it out, but backs it up with the relevant pointers to clear things up. Hence the attacks, troll labeling and what not.
I have detailed where I think some of Apple's handset business problems lie. This entire article is based on a common, long standing situation: One product release cycle and limited models. Now, if these numbers are the same in Q3 I would be mightily surprised but the reality is that at this time last year, Huawei was already outselling Apple worldwide. This year and for the quarter in question, this report claims Huawei has improved its position while Apple has seen numbers get worse and, worryingly, in some of its core markets.
Huawei now has some of the most expensive phones on the planet and a complete range of premium priced units that seem to be breaking records. Last year it increased prices by around 100€ on many models (even Honor models) and all you do is throw in your 'race to the bottom' mantra! I doubt you yourself even believe it. There is no race to the bottom for Huawei and the evidence is right there staring you in the face. You have indicators right here in this article and I've filled in some of the gaps. All you have to do is open your eyes and see things from a world perspective.
If you didn't insist with this misinformation, in spite of being informed (and with all relevant links), I wouldn't have to set you straight so much. Huawei was just warming its motors in 2015. Now, when someone starts looking for a new premium handset, Apple and Samsung are not the only 'safe' bets. That, by definition means that some potential Apple sales are lost simply by the presence of a third option. A lot of people simply walk into stores with an open mind and check out what's available. They are open to Android or Apple. At that point the sale could go either way. I see this situation regularly.
Not having the same access to this situation as the rest of the world limits your choice. These two opinions are from U.S reviewers that use or have used iPhones:
They almost seem frustrated that Huawei can't get a carrier deal to distribute their phones. Almost as if they feel they are losing out.
And you think that Huawei has no little impact on Apple sales?
There may be a downturn in global sales. We'll have to wait and see.
Does it affect Samsung and Huawei itself too? You bet, but Huawei is still seeing growth while Apple has declined (in Europe at least).
I hope that all this lays to rest your 'highest ASP' claims for a while. Of course, next quarter would normally coincide with an Apple lull, so no doubt you will be staying quiet on the subject anyway. If you have an investor stake in Apple I fully understand your desire for them to add more and more to the treasure chest but from my consumer perspective, it has zero appeal. And seeing others do more in handsets with far less and still make billions, reinforces that belief but all of this is just my opinion, fleshed out, but a mere opinion nevertheless.
Inventory and Component management:
There is nothing new here and the more vertically integrated your business, the better at it you should be. Apple has done very well here but has done for years now. It isn't alone, though.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before.
Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei.
I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
Half of germany is quite poor. Cheap Androids all the way.
They don't prefer Android they have no choice so they buy cheap shit.
It's that attitude, which the last sentence is the sentiment of the apple board too, is why everyone not in the apple camp (the majority), can't wait for apple to fail.
The estimates in the article do not include the P20 series phones.
2076 troll posts and counting…
You are saying European Android users mostly can't afford (or want) premium Android phones when this very AI article points to data that says 25% of European iPhone sales were SE, or 6 series phones.
25%
Then, when I present information that directly counters what you are claiming (and from just one manufacturer), your only response is 'troll'?
Okay.
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Once again. ASP or profits (highest and/or the most) is utterly irrelevant here.
I will simplify it for you to the extreme.
Who sells more smartphones? Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG?
We all see the graphs of unit sales. We all see the names. In those graphs, none of the above companies have the largest chunk.
That is taken by 'other'.
Yes, a collection of tiny (or not so tiny) companies that do not even register on the scale of world unit sales but when lumped together, represent a gigantic amount of phones. How can they even be in business so far down at the bottom of the keg?
They are in business because their business model is actually built around being at the bottom of the keg. Can you comprehend what's happening down there? Can you see why Apple's volume or ASP has no relevance for them?
They exist because there is a market to exploit. They exist because they make money.
When the market drops out or losses take the place of profits for too long, they will vanish from the scene but until then, they exist and serve their purpose.
ASP might be an essential factor for some shareholders but it is irrelevant for consumers. Utterly irrelevant.
Now, between the top and the bottom there is room for all kinds of business approaches and when the size of certain companies reaches a certain level, things are not as black and white as when comparing simply the top end with the bottom end of the keg.
Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) outspend Apple on R&D. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) make better phones than Apple. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) compete with Apple on vertical manufacturing. Huawei does all of the above with a lower ASP and, incredibly, without access to one of the largest smartphone markets on the planet.
Forgive me for not giving supreme importance to ASP, because from a consumer perspective, having the highest ASP does nothing for me.
If I talk about Huawei, it's because I know a lot about the company and little about Samsung. Appleinsider is brimming with articles that use Samsung as a comparitive model. No doubt because Samsung is readily available to them and Huawei is not.
How do you know Huawei didn't take share away from Apple?
'worrisome' is the word, yes, but it is comical that you took that word from a short post and completely out of context.
It is worrisome because Apple's decline according to this report was accompanied by gains of Huawei in its core European markets.
It is worrisome because that situation arose in Q2 and we expect Apple not to have new phones to stimulate further demand until the end of the year. It is worrisome because Huawei has launched a monster phone in those markets for more than 200€ less and seems to be selling well AND the numbers in the report do not even include the sales of that phone. It is worrisome because Honor Will release the Honor 10 Next week and inject fresh hardware into the system at lower prices. It is worrisome because before the next Apple refresh, Samsung will release the Note 10 and Huawei will release the Mate 20 around that time. From your ASP stance, it is worrisome because the iPhone X is selling less every quarter and because of Apple's release cycle, a lot of people hold off just prior to the refresh.
And just to top things off, it seems the market as a whole might be seeing some contraction.
That doesn't necessarily mean doom and gloom but right now, it IS worrisome.
As for Xiaomi, I have just as many doubts as you but I'll reserve judgement until I see the future results. On what they've achieved recently, it is very impressive.
And as for your 'fine print' observations you want to spin the carousel again so here we go:
"Evan Niu: Tim Cook has this famous line that he considers inventory to be "fundamentally evil," just because over time, if you build so much of it, it gets written down, and it's just a mess to deal with. It's very good to have lean inventory, enough to meet demand but not too much on your books, which is why this spike was so weird.
But it's really just actually component purchases. An analyst was able to get some clarity on that. I noticed it, too, initially, when I saw the balance sheet. Basically, CFO Maestri said, "We're basically making these purchasing decisions because of current market conditions." So, they're basically pre-buying all of these different components because the components, most specifically memory, the pricing is supposed to continue going up. I mean, it's been going on for two years, and it's probably going to keep going up, so they're basically just trying to buy as much as they can now to get ahead of continued price increases later this year. As we all know, they release a ton of iPhones in the fall, and they're going to need all those components to put them in the phones.
So, very specifically, the type of inventory that we're talking about is just components. It's not unsold products on shelves, which would be a pretty big concern there, if that were the case. So, it did jump out at me, too, but that's what's going on there."
What companies do with all that pesky profit from their high ASP's...
No.
ASP: You were clinging to the highest ASP as if it were the holy grail. Apple's sustained high ASP has filled its coffers, and to the tune of a few hundred billion dollars. The vast majority of which doesn't get 'spent', at least not on what affects me, the consumer. It has simply grown for years.
They could still cover their memory needs (and everything else for that matter) and well in advance - with a far lower ASP. Do you think Huawei doesn't operate in a similar fashion? In spite of its far lower ASP?
If you can pursuade people to buy into that, great, but when sales flatten (as they have) or show signs of fatigue you need to weigh your options up. Apple did that last year and decided to widen its model spread. A very good move IMO, in spite of the possible negatives. I supported that move and still do. I mentioned at the time that one possible 'negative' could be lower end models eating away at higher end models. Now it seems a whopping 25% of one quarter's entire sales went into the lowest band of the new spread. We can only speculate on the impact of that situation. Do you think that that 25% had a negative impact on Apple's ASP? Were they truly sales that took a chunk out of the higher tiers or were they sales that simply wouldn't have been achieved without the bigger spread and lower priced options? Or a mix of both situations?
Before you answer that question, try to explain why sales have been largely flat for the last few years in the first place (this research doesn't change anything right now). After all, with such a small share of the world smartphone market you would think there is plenty of room to grow. Or is ASP so important for Apple that unit growth is simply irrelevant?
There is nothing in Apple's recent actions that suggests the latter and plenty to suggest a push for more unit growth.
Apple added a new (one-off?) product to the mix at a high price while leaving more space at the other end.
So, with its largest product spread ever and offering far more options at varied price points to users, why are sales still flat after these last few years?
There are many reasons but they mostly fall (generally speaking) under the same umbrella: competition. Intense competition. Apple has never seen such competition. Even in regions that on paper have virgin smartphone territory to exploit, the intense competition is ever present and not just from Samsung, of course.
With such a new spread and three years past the peak, shouldn't people be upgrading in droves? Will you even cater to the idea that perhaps many have already upgraded?
With the Mate S, Huawei turned some heads and since then really hasn't put a foot wrong. The P9 turned more heads. By the time Apple could come up with its own dual camera option for example (and on just one phone) Huawei had an entire family in next to no time. Something similar is happening with the notch. Once again Apple has just one phone while Huawei has an entire family and is not alone. This lack of dynamism due to Apple's refresh cycle doesn't help it at all. The notch and colours may be simple 'trends' but they are sometimes the difference between taking the sale or not. Moreso when handsets have largely commoditized features which are available on new hardware at lower price points. The Canalys report mentions this point.
Apple has nothing to match the P20 series' gradient finishes, for example.
You haven't held a Huawei premium phone. You haven't perceived the build quality.
However, read the reviews - any review - and try to find one that thinks design and build quality are failing. Then think about what they are doing on the inside. What do you value? Battery life? Fast charging? AI (NPU)? Camera functions? Speed? Modem? Dual SIM, VoLTE? Software options? OLED?
That's ONE manufacturer. Throw in Samsung, BKK and others and the going gets tough. It's 2018, not 2015. A different world. You live in a bubble so to speak where you only really have two major players. You are losing out as a consumer from lack of choice. Do you doubt this? Next time you are in Europe, try visiting somewhere like a MediaMarkt or any carrier store. You will get an eye popping look at what competition looks like and when you see it, you may understand why ASP is lower but irrelevant to the consumer.
The market is consolidating, yes. Is there any mature industry that hasn't consolidated? I have spoken about it many times. It has been consolidating for a while but even when Apple was at its peak, that 'other' group was there, and still is.
There was one factor that went against Huawei in the past though: Brand recognition. That is no longer the case in most of the world. Through advertising, partnerships and solid products, the Huawei brand is now very well known. So, if having competitive phones from Samsung wasn't already enough of a problem, Huawei is now not only nipping at Apple's heels but overtaking them. More than anything else you should be celebrating the presence of strong competition instead of just ignorantly lambasting the company and people who, while being Apple users, appreciate what competitors can do. Be that competition from Samsung, Google, Oppo etc.
YoY, unit sales for Huawei have been increasing in the millions. People now actively consider a new Huawei phone when renewal comes up after owning one previously.
All that and more, but with a lower ASP than Apple. As a consumer, I celebrate that. Huawei still reported billions in net profit for last year.
The smartphone world has changed immensely since the iPhone 6 surge but in many ways, Apple's handset division is still similar to back then. They are toying with change (and just as well) but if last year competition was intense, this year it will be the same or even more intense.
I am not here to promote Huawei (that is just your desperate, anything goes accusation) but I won't stand by while so much misinformation gets banded about. AI draws comparisons with Samsung. I draw comparisons with Huawei because I have a Huawei handset and am on the lookout for another so I know a fair bit about them. I'm also in the market for an iPhone but that will have wait till the end of the year.
I am perfectly positioned to see what's happening on both sides of the fence and point out when something simply isn't as stated. Some people, a vocal minority, just can't handle it when someone not only points it out, but backs it up with the relevant pointers to clear things up. Hence the attacks, troll labeling and what not.
I have detailed where I think some of Apple's handset business problems lie. This entire article is based on a common, long standing situation: One product release cycle and limited models. Now, if these numbers are the same in Q3 I would be mightily surprised but the reality is that at this time last year, Huawei was already outselling Apple worldwide. This year and for the quarter in question, this report claims Huawei has improved its position while Apple has seen numbers get worse and, worryingly, in some of its core markets.
Huawei now has some of the most expensive phones on the planet and a complete range of premium priced units that seem to be breaking records. Last year it increased prices by around 100€ on many models (even Honor models) and all you do is throw in your 'race to the bottom' mantra! I doubt you yourself even believe it. There is no race to the bottom for Huawei and the evidence is right there staring you in the face. You have indicators right here in this article and I've filled in some of the gaps. All you have to do is open your eyes and see things from a world perspective.
If you didn't insist with this misinformation, in spite of being informed (and with all relevant links), I wouldn't have to set you straight so much. Huawei was just warming its motors in 2015. Now, when someone starts looking for a new premium handset, Apple and Samsung are not the only 'safe' bets. That, by definition means that some potential Apple sales are lost simply by the presence of a third option. A lot of people simply walk into stores with an open mind and check out what's available. They are open to Android or Apple. At that point the sale could go either way. I see this situation regularly.
Not having the same access to this situation as the rest of the world limits your choice. These two opinions are from U.S reviewers that use or have used iPhones:
They almost seem frustrated that Huawei can't get a carrier deal to distribute their phones. Almost as if they feel they are losing out.
And you think that Huawei has no little impact on Apple sales?
There may be a downturn in global sales. We'll have to wait and see.
Does it affect Samsung and Huawei itself too? You bet, but Huawei is still seeing growth while Apple has declined (in Europe at least).
I hope that all this lays to rest your 'highest ASP' claims for a while. Of course, next quarter would normally coincide with an Apple lull, so no doubt you will be staying quiet on the subject anyway. If you have an investor stake in Apple I fully understand your desire for them to add more and more to the treasure chest but from my consumer perspective, it has zero appeal. And seeing others do more in handsets with far less and still make billions, reinforces that belief but all of this is just my opinion, fleshed out, but a mere opinion nevertheless.
Inventory and Component management:
There is nothing new here and the more vertically integrated your business, the better at it you should be. Apple has done very well here but has done for years now. It isn't alone, though.
38% more sales, 1.7% added revenue.
Winning!
One poster noted that as what we call, "dumping".
I'm not an investor, but here's a pretty accurate guesstimate of this quarters earnings;
Look, you can play the game however you want, but ignoring ASP so that your team looks like a winner is delusion, not intellect.
You made me laugh with this statement;
"I am not here to promote Huawei (that is just your desperate, anything goes accusation) but I won't stand by while so much misinformation gets banded about.
This is the part where people start talking about an intervention for your own safety.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before.
Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei.
I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
That is exactly the kind of comment that needs correcting so here we go yet again:
Apple's business is still dominated by mobile.
It has a yearly release cycle that obviously leads to a yearly spike in performance. People hold off before a refresh, then buy en mass when it happens. Looking at the results from that spike, just one quarter (or the one immediately after it) provides a somewhat distorted view.
Do you agree with that? You should.
It is far more reliable to gauge performance YoY (full years). You should agree with that too.
So here is Huawei's audited results summary direct from the horse's mouth (my bold):
"Shenzhen, China, March 30, 2018] Huawei released its audited financial results for 2017, reporting solid business growth. The company's total annual revenue was CNY603.6 billion (US$92.5 billion based on year-end exchange rates), anincreaseof15.7% over 2016 ."Net profits were CNY47.5 billion (US$7.3 billion), anincreaseof28.1% year-on-year."
Now, the 1.7% figure comes from a research estimate for one quarter in one region and the report made it crystal clear that it doesn't include the P20 Series models. Models that appear to be breaking records.
And from that, you jump in feet first with your 'dumping' claim. You made a mistake. I can live with that but I would like to point out that in a previous post I went out of my way to point out that Huawei increased prices (yes, in Europe too) across many models by around 100€ last year. They have also made a concerted effort to move into the premium segment. 'Dumping' should be the last thing on your mind.
Your comment on 'Huaweiinsider' is also completely incorrect. Appleinsider dedicates far more articles to Samsung and Google than any of my contributions to threads here.
For starters, I do not even participate in the vast majority of threads here. Your argument virtually dies right there but on top of that, there is a lot of pure misinformation that appears in the forums that I just let go.
However, there needs to be some balance in things so readers don't get mislead.
Hence this post that was only necessary because you put 'dumping' into the soup.
I support competition. Apple biting into Samsung, Huawei biting into Apple and Xiaomi biting into Huawei etc.
I don't care if sales, revenues or profits take a hit. I care about what reaches the consumer and having choice. There is a lot of quality out there. Far more than ever before. There is crap too, I don't deny it but has that ever not been the case?
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before.
Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei.
I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
That is exactly the kind of comment that needs correcting so here we go yet again:
Apple's business is still dominated by mobile.
It has a yearly release cycle that obviously leads to a yearly spike in performance. People hold off before a refresh, then buy en mass when it happens. Looking at the results from that spike, just one quarter (or the one immediately after it) provides a somewhat distorted view.
Do you agree with that? You should.
It is far more reliable to gauge performance YoY (full years). You should agree with that too.
So here is Huawei's audited results summary direct from the horse's mouth (my bold):
"Shenzhen, China, March 30, 2018] Huawei released its audited financial results for 2017, reporting solid business growth. The company's total annual revenue was CNY603.6 billion (US$92.5 billion based on year-end exchange rates), anincreaseof15.7% over 2016 ."Net profits were CNY47.5 billion (US$7.3 billion), anincreaseof28.1% year-on-year."
Now, the 1.7% figure comes from a research estimate for one quarter in one region and the report made it crystal clear that it doesn't include the P20 Series models. Models that appear to be breaking records.
And from that, you jump in feet first with your 'dumping' claim. You made a mistake. I can live with that but I would like to point out that in a previous post I went out of my way to point out that Huawei increased prices (yes, iniEurope too) across many models by around 100€ last year. They have also made a concerted effort to move into the premium segment. 'Dumping' should be the last thing on your mind.
Your comment on 'Huaweiinsider' is also completely incorrect. Appleinnsider dedicates far more articles to Samsung and Google than any of my contributions to threads here.
For starters, I do not even participate in the vast majority of threads here. Your argument virtually dies right there but on top of that, there is a lot of pure misinformation that appears in the forums that I just let go.
However, there needs to be some balance in things so readers don't get mislead.
Hence this post that was only necessary because you put 'dumping' into the soup.
I support competition. Apple biting into Samsung, Huawei biting into Apple and Xiaomi biting into Huawei etc.
I don't care if sales, revenues or profits take a hit. I care about what reaches the consumer and having choice. There is a lot of quality out there. Far more than ever before. There is crap too, I don't deny it but has that ever not been the case?
Almost all Android OEMs (including the likes of Xiaomi who are expected to be "cheap") have increased prices across the board in the last 2 years. So I agree with you that the "dumping" comments are ignorant of the ground reality. This increased prices across the board could be the driver behind the slowing down of the smartphone market overall.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before.
Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei.
I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
That is exactly the kind of comment that needs correcting so here we go yet again:
Apple's business is still dominated by mobile.
It has a yearly release cycle that obviously leads to a yearly spike in performance. People hold off before a refresh, then buy en mass when it happens. Looking at the results from that spike, just one quarter (or the one immediately after it) provides a somewhat distorted view.
Do you agree with that? You should.
It is far more reliable to gauge performance YoY (full years). You should agree with that too.
So here is Huawei's audited results summary direct from the horse's mouth (my bold):
"Shenzhen, China, March 30, 2018] Huawei released its audited financial results for 2017, reporting solid business growth. The company's total annual revenue was CNY603.6 billion (US$92.5 billion based on year-end exchange rates), anincreaseof15.7% over 2016 ."Net profits were CNY47.5 billion (US$7.3 billion), anincreaseof28.1% year-on-year."
Now, the 1.7% figure comes from a research estimate for one quarter in one region and the report made it crystal clear that it doesn't include the P20 Series models. Models that appear to be breaking records.
And from that, you jump in feet first with your 'dumping' claim. You made a mistake. I can live with that but I would like to point out that in a previous post I went out of my way to point out that Huawei increased prices (yes, iniEurope too) across many models by around 100€ last year. They have also made a concerted effort to move into the premium segment. 'Dumping' should be the last thing on your mind.
Your comment on 'Huaweiinsider' is also completely incorrect. Appleinnsider dedicates far more articles to Samsung and Google than any of my contributions to threads here.
For starters, I do not even participate in the vast majority of threads here. Your argument virtually dies right there but on top of that, there is a lot of pure misinformation that appears in the forums that I just let go.
However, there needs to be some balance in things so readers don't get mislead.
Hence this post that was only necessary because you put 'dumping' into the soup.
I support competition. Apple biting into Samsung, Huawei biting into Apple and Xiaomi biting into Huawei etc.
I don't care if sales, revenues or profits take a hit. I care about what reaches the consumer and having choice. There is a lot of quality out there. Far more than ever before. There is crap too, I don't deny it but has that ever not been the case?
Almost all Android OEMs (including the likes of Xiaomi who are expected to be "cheap") have increased prices across the board in the last 2 years. So I agree with you that the "dumping" comments are ignorant of the ground reality. This increased prices across the board could be the driver behind the slowing down of the smartphone market overall.
Uhm, the "dumping" comment was with regard to the fact that Huawei increased its sales in the Eurozone 38% with only a 1.7% revenue increase. Now that data may not be true, but it is the case that acquisition or "buying" marketshare would have the same result. So even if individual products increase in price, it wouldn't necessarily align with either a higher ASP, more revenue, or more profits, due to promotions and incentives.
I would acknowledge that Apple's primary revenue generator is iPhone, now at about 60% of revenue. but it is also the case that Avon b7 is fine with adding all of Huawei's revenue and profit for 2017 as if it was entirely smartphones, which it decidedly isn't. I have stated that Apple's average iPhone age is now nearly 4 years, yet the user base has continued to grow, as has subscriptions and the ecosystem. So even if Apple's iPhone sales have "flattened", Apple's ASP has provided increased YOY iPhone revenue, and, as I have posted, will have again at the end of this quarter, with and estimated 15% revenue increase, driven, again, by Apple's current lineup and iPhone's 7 and 7 plus. Very little comparative revenue is generated by the either the iPhone 6 or the SE, which in the Eurozone, account for 25% of unit sales. That's how ASP works.
Avon b7 wants to create the impression that Huawei is very competitive in the smartphone market with Apple, but as I have stated many a time, Android OS devices don't actually compete directly with Apple's iPhone. This is a fundamental flaw in his analysis.
More so, Avon b7's focus on Huawei distorts the actual competition, which is primarily Samsung and other large Chinese device makers like Oppo, Vivo, and Xiaomi. I have never stated that Huawei isn't growing it's units sales, nor that it isn't moving its ASP up. However, it's ASP is much lower than Samsung's, which is about a third of Apple's, so I'm not inclined to give them peer status with Apple. I suspect this is an issue with Avon b7.
The last thing is that Avon b7 is in fact incorrect wrt Apple's product releases. Apple does not need to release other than its yearly schedule. There isn't any evidence that iPhone buyers are craving faster release of features. If anything, the yearly cycle provides a stability to the market and has the effect of maintaining the value of Apple devices in the secondary market of used iPhones. These iPhones, plus Apple refurbished models, are a gateway for many new iOS users, again, note that Apple's user base continues to expand; the last data from Apple was an expansion from a billion users to 1.3 billion in two years.
Apple only has 8 total models in production, with variations for color, storage, and in some cases, for carrier.
Compare and contrast with the number of new devices that Huawei delivers each year, and yet, it appears that Apple's business model is extremely successful in comparison. Perhaps that is due to the fact that iPhone is a market for the most part independent of Android OS devices, and it's multitude of flavors.
Apple's larger spread seems to be finding takers at every entry point. 25% went to SE, iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s. That's a lot of demand for cheaper options as well as the higher options. The larger spread may be paying off.
Huawei up over 30% and without including P20 series phones or next week's Honor 10 launch. They look good for the current quarter.
More worrying are the sharp drops in three of Apple's major European markets.
Yet the iPhone X was "the best-shipping smartphone in the region".
Your concern troll is showing.
Going to have another day of pushing FUD to make Huawei look good?
Oh no, he wasn't 100% overpraising Apple, he must be a troll. Trolling goes both ways, incessant and blind praise of Apple is as much trolling as is constant bashing. By that metric, you're a troll.
I think iPhones are still too expensive. Everyone I've spoken to about the X says it's way too expensive, and people already think the non-flagships are pretty steep. I have plenty Apple-toting friends, and I am a self-confessed fanboy. But even I can see Apple gear really is getting very expensive. Cook's Apple seems to be all about raising prices, I don't know any product that's gone down in price in Cook's reign. The increasing service revenue should be offsetting the phone prices, not adding to them. Unfortunately this is reminiscent of the early 90's Apple; ballooning SKU numbers, not giving people what they want, software and hardware bugs creeping in whilst prices edge up. Apple's obviously in a much better position now, but even so. I don't want history to repeat itself.
You need to follow his comments over time here at AI. He is a shill for Huawei; proven by his many pro Huawei posts. That is a fact.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before.
Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei.
I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
That is exactly the kind of comment that needs correcting so here we go yet again:
Apple's business is still dominated by mobile.
It has a yearly release cycle that obviously leads to a yearly spike in performance. People hold off before a refresh, then buy en mass when it happens. Looking at the results from that spike, just one quarter (or the one immediately after it) provides a somewhat distorted view.
Do you agree with that? You should.
It is far more reliable to gauge performance YoY (full years). You should agree with that too.
So here is Huawei's audited results summary direct from the horse's mouth (my bold):
"Shenzhen, China, March 30, 2018] Huawei released its audited financial results for 2017, reporting solid business growth. The company's total annual revenue was CNY603.6 billion (US$92.5 billion based on year-end exchange rates), anincreaseof15.7% over 2016 ."Net profits were CNY47.5 billion (US$7.3 billion), anincreaseof28.1% year-on-year."
Now, the 1.7% figure comes from a research estimate for one quarter in one region and the report made it crystal clear that it doesn't include the P20 Series models. Models that appear to be breaking records.
And from that, you jump in feet first with your 'dumping' claim. You made a mistake. I can live with that but I would like to point out that in a previous post I went out of my way to point out that Huawei increased prices (yes, iniEurope too) across many models by around 100€ last year. They have also made a concerted effort to move into the premium segment. 'Dumping' should be the last thing on your mind.
Your comment on 'Huaweiinsider' is also completely incorrect. Appleinnsider dedicates far more articles to Samsung and Google than any of my contributions to threads here.
For starters, I do not even participate in the vast majority of threads here. Your argument virtually dies right there but on top of that, there is a lot of pure misinformation that appears in the forums that I just let go.
However, there needs to be some balance in things so readers don't get mislead.
Hence this post that was only necessary because you put 'dumping' into the soup.
I support competition. Apple biting into Samsung, Huawei biting into Apple and Xiaomi biting into Huawei etc.
I don't care if sales, revenues or profits take a hit. I care about what reaches the consumer and having choice. There is a lot of quality out there. Far more than ever before. There is crap too, I don't deny it but has that ever not been the case?
Almost all Android OEMs (including the likes of Xiaomi who are expected to be "cheap") have increased prices across the board in the last 2 years. So I agree with you that the "dumping" comments are ignorant of the ground reality. This increased prices across the board could be the driver behind the slowing down of the smartphone market overall.
Saturation of the current smartphone markets is the slowdown. This isn't in dispute, and is happening in all areas with high proportions of smartphones, including China. It is affecting all device makers. Hence, why regions having small smartphone share, like India, are seen as fertile grown for new sales. It's also why device makers are attempting to ramp their ASP's, in order to maintain revenues, just as Apple has done.
Comments
If for this quarter 25% were SE and 6, and 75% were 7, 7 plus, 8, 8 plus, and X, and X sold the highest number of all models, then what kind of ASP do you think that Apple has comparative to Huawei, which sells the bulk of its phones at less ASP than the SE? I'd guess that Apple's is at least 5x Huawei's and if going by China profits, closet to 10x of Huawei's.
I would also note that Huawei likely took share away from Samsung, not Apple, so I'm not seeing the "worrisome" that you are.
Maybe, just maybe, Apple's release of only a few new products yearly, with sales of many previous models enjoying long, and efficient production runs, with great product reliability, is the proper way to grow revenue and user base, which is, after all, Apple's goal.
Huawei is generating large unit sales, but no talk of the acquisition costs of obtaining those.
I would also note that the "5%" cap business model that you tout for Xiaomi, doesn't yet seem to be working against Huawei, but likely it end up as a race to the bottom for all participants excepting Apple.
Sucks for Apple to have such a strong moat.
EDIT;
Just read the fine print. The value of that 38% YOY increase to Huawei was a boost in revenue of 1.7%.
Of course, great things are expected from the P20... /s
Well, to be fair, avon b7 is a troll.
He spreads FUD about Apple. That is also a fact. He did so today with his first comment, "worrisome" which had no basis in fact. I believe that he does that because his team hasn't reached Apple's success. His metric is unit sales. Please note that Huawei's growth of 38 percent in unit sales has added a mere 1.7% in revenue gains. Is that in any way a quantifiable success? Apple's slight dip in unit sales is likely driven by an increase in ASP. Which is the better business model?
Am I blindly praising Apple, as you have now stated, and am I a troll for responding to Avon b7's bullshit? Perhaps you should be a bit more discerning in what you are reading and posting. My comments stand on their own, and you are free to continue to check my history if you think that I am a troll.
I will simplify it for you to the extreme.
Who sells more smartphones? Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG?
We all see the graphs of unit sales. We all see the names. In those graphs, none of the above companies have the largest chunk.
That is taken by 'other'.
Yes, a collection of tiny (or not so tiny) companies that do not even register on the scale of world unit sales but when lumped together, represent a gigantic amount of phones. How can they even be in business so far down at the bottom of the keg?
They are in business because their business model is actually built around being at the bottom of the keg. Can you comprehend what's happening down there? Can you see
why Apple's volume or ASP has no relevance for them?
They exist because there is a market to exploit. They exist because they make money.
When the market drops out or losses take the place of profits for too long, they will vanish from the scene but until then, they exist and serve their purpose.
ASP might be an essential factor for some shareholders but it is irrelevant for consumers. Utterly irrelevant.
Now, between the top and the bottom there is room for all kinds of business approaches and when the size of certain companies reaches a certain level, things are not as black and white as when comparing simply the top end with the bottom end of the keg.
Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) outspend Apple on R&D. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) make better phones than Apple. Companies with lower ASPs can (and do) compete with Apple on vertical manufacturing. Huawei does all of the above with a lower ASP and, incredibly, without access to one of the largest smartphone markets on the planet.
Forgive me for not giving supreme importance to ASP, because from a consumer perspective, having the highest ASP does nothing for me.
If I talk about Huawei, it's because I know a lot about the company and little about Samsung. Appleinsider is brimming with articles that use Samsung as a comparitive model. No doubt because Samsung is readily available to them and Huawei is not.
How do you know Huawei didn't take share away from Apple?
'worrisome' is the word, yes, but it is comical that you took that word from a short post and completely out of context.
It is worrisome because Apple's decline according to this report was accompanied by gains of Huawei in its core European markets.
It is worrisome because that situation arose in Q2 and we expect Apple not to have new phones to stimulate further demand until the end of the year. It is worrisome because Huawei has launched a monster phone in those markets for more than 200€ less and seems to be selling well AND the numbers in the report do not even include the sales of that phone. It is worrisome because Honor Will release the Honor 10 Next week and inject fresh hardware into the system at lower prices. It is worrisome because before the next Apple refresh, Samsung will release the Note 10 and Huawei will release the Mate 20 around that time. From your ASP stance, it is worrisome because the iPhone X is selling less every quarter and because of Apple's release cycle, a lot of people hold off just prior to the refresh.
And just to top things off, it seems the market as a whole might be seeing some contraction.
That doesn't necessarily mean doom and gloom but right now, it IS worrisome.
As for Xiaomi, I have just as many doubts as you but I'll reserve judgement until I see the future results. On what they've achieved recently, it is very impressive.
And as for your 'fine print' observations you want to spin the carousel again so here we go:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/huawei-profit-2017/
Good luck to you Xiaomi, in your bid to raise you profit cap to 5%!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apos-going-apple-apos-inventory-214800132.html
"Evan Niu: Tim Cook has this famous line that he considers inventory to be "fundamentally evil," just because over time, if you build so much of it, it gets written down, and it's just a mess to deal with. It's very good to have lean inventory, enough to meet demand but not too much on your books, which is why this spike was so weird.
But it's really just actually component purchases. An analyst was able to get some clarity on that. I noticed it, too, initially, when I saw the balance sheet. Basically, CFO Maestri said, "We're basically making these purchasing decisions because of current market conditions." So, they're basically pre-buying all of these different components because the components, most specifically memory, the pricing is supposed to continue going up. I mean, it's been going on for two years, and it's probably going to keep going up, so they're basically just trying to buy as much as they can now to get ahead of continued price increases later this year. As we all know, they release a ton of iPhones in the fall, and they're going to need all those components to put them in the phones.
So, very specifically, the type of inventory that we're talking about is just components. It's not unsold products on shelves, which would be a pretty big concern there, if that were the case. So, it did jump out at me, too, but that's what's going on there."
What companies do with all that pesky profit from their high ASP's...
What I specifically object to is the FUD that Avon b7 is and has been spreading. This is the same bullshit that happened to Apple wrt iPhone X sales by the analysts.
More to the point, agree to disagree is fine, but opening a kiosk in AI to push Huawei, which is what Avon b7 is doing, is unacceptable. Certainly there must be a site for Huawei fanboys for Avon b7 to participate.
I would also note that there is, in fact, a reckoning for smaller phone builders where they will need to consolidate or die. This is easy to both understand and to find supporting evidence on the net.
I guess there is so much choice in the midrange category no one make and model stands out. However as a collective they trounce sales of all apple phones let alone the iPhone X.
ASP: You were clinging to the highest ASP as if it were the holy grail. Apple's sustained high ASP has filled its coffers, and to the tune of a few hundred billion dollars. The vast majority of which doesn't get 'spent', at least not on what affects me, the consumer. It has simply grown for years.
They could still cover their memory needs (and everything else for that matter) and well in advance - with a far lower ASP. Do you think Huawei doesn't operate in a similar fashion? In spite of its far lower ASP?
If you can pursuade people to buy into that, great, but when sales flatten (as they have) or show signs of fatigue you need to weigh your options up. Apple did that last year and decided to widen its model spread. A very good move IMO, in spite of the possible negatives. I supported that move and still do. I mentioned at the time that one possible 'negative' could be lower end models eating away at higher end models. Now it seems a whopping 25% of one quarter's entire sales went into the lowest band of the new spread. We can only speculate on the impact of that situation. Do you think that that 25% had a negative impact on Apple's ASP? Were they truly sales that took a chunk out of the higher tiers or were they sales that simply wouldn't have been achieved without the bigger spread and lower priced options? Or a mix of both situations?
Before you answer that question, try to explain why sales have been largely flat for the last few years in the first place (this research doesn't change anything right now). After all, with such a small share of the world smartphone market you would think there is plenty of room to grow. Or is ASP so important for Apple that unit growth is simply irrelevant?
There is nothing in Apple's recent actions that suggests the latter and plenty to suggest a push for more unit growth.
Apple added a new (one-off?) product to the mix at a high price while leaving more space at the other end.
So, with its largest product spread ever and offering far more options at varied price points to users, why are sales still flat after these last few years?
There are many reasons but they mostly fall (generally speaking) under the same umbrella: competition. Intense competition. Apple has never seen such competition. Even in regions that on paper have virgin smartphone territory to exploit, the intense competition is ever present and not just from Samsung, of course.
With such a new spread and three years past the peak, shouldn't people be upgrading in droves? Will you even cater to the idea that perhaps many have already upgraded?
With the Mate S, Huawei turned some heads and since then really hasn't put a foot wrong. The P9 turned more heads. By the time Apple could come up with its own dual camera option for example (and on just one phone) Huawei had an entire family in next to no time. Something similar is happening with the notch. Once again Apple has just one phone while Huawei has an entire family and is not alone. This lack of dynamism due to Apple's refresh cycle doesn't help it at all. The notch and colours may be simple 'trends' but they are sometimes the difference between taking the sale or not. Moreso when handsets have largely commoditized features which are available on new hardware at lower price points. The Canalys report mentions this point.
Apple has nothing to match the P20 series' gradient finishes, for example.
You haven't held a Huawei premium phone. You haven't perceived the build quality.
However, read the reviews - any review - and try to find one that thinks design and build quality are failing. Then think about what they are doing on the inside. What do you value? Battery life? Fast charging? AI (NPU)? Camera functions? Speed? Modem? Dual SIM, VoLTE? Software options? OLED?
That's ONE manufacturer. Throw in Samsung, BKK and others and the going gets tough. It's 2018, not 2015. A different world. You live in a bubble so to speak where you only really have two major players. You are losing out as a consumer from lack of choice. Do you doubt this? Next time you are in Europe, try visiting somewhere like a MediaMarkt or any carrier store. You will get an eye popping look at what competition looks like and when you see it, you may understand why ASP is lower but irrelevant to the consumer.
The market is consolidating, yes. Is there any mature industry that hasn't consolidated? I have spoken about it many times. It has been consolidating for a while but even when Apple was at its peak, that 'other' group was there, and still is.
There was one factor that went against Huawei in the past though: Brand recognition. That is no longer the case in most of the world. Through advertising, partnerships and solid products, the Huawei brand is now very well known. So, if having competitive phones from Samsung wasn't already enough of a problem, Huawei is now not only nipping at Apple's heels but overtaking them. More than anything else you should be celebrating the presence of strong competition instead of just ignorantly lambasting the company and people who, while being Apple users, appreciate what competitors can do. Be that competition from Samsung, Google, Oppo etc.
YoY, unit sales for Huawei have been increasing in the millions. People now actively consider a new Huawei phone when renewal comes up after owning one previously.
All that and more, but with a lower ASP than Apple. As a consumer, I celebrate that. Huawei still reported billions in net profit for last year.
The smartphone world has changed immensely since the iPhone 6 surge but in many ways, Apple's handset division is still similar to back then. They are toying with change (and just as well) but if last year competition was intense, this year it will be the same or even more intense.
I am not here to promote Huawei (that is just your desperate, anything goes accusation) but I won't stand by while so much misinformation gets banded about. AI draws comparisons with Samsung. I draw comparisons with Huawei because I have a Huawei handset and am on the lookout for another so I know a fair bit about them. I'm also in the market for an iPhone but that will have wait till the end of the year.
I am perfectly positioned to see what's happening on both sides of the fence and point out when something simply isn't as stated. Some people, a vocal minority, just can't handle it when someone not only points it out, but backs it up with the relevant pointers to clear things up. Hence the attacks, troll labeling and what not.
I have detailed where I think some of Apple's handset business problems lie. This entire article is based on a common, long standing situation: One product release cycle and limited models. Now, if these numbers are the same in Q3 I would be mightily surprised but the reality is that at this time last year, Huawei was already outselling Apple worldwide. This year and for the quarter in question, this report claims Huawei has improved its position while Apple has seen numbers get worse and, worryingly, in some of its core markets.
Huawei now has some of the most expensive phones on the planet and a complete range of premium priced units that seem to be breaking records. Last year it increased prices by around 100€ on many models (even Honor models) and all you do is throw in your 'race to the bottom' mantra! I doubt you yourself even believe it. There is no race to the bottom for Huawei and the evidence is right there staring you in the face. You have indicators right here in this article and I've filled in some of the gaps. All you have to do is open your eyes and see things from a world perspective.
If you didn't insist with this misinformation, in spite of being informed (and with all relevant links), I wouldn't have to set you straight so much. Huawei was just warming its motors in 2015. Now, when someone starts looking for a new premium handset, Apple and Samsung are not the only 'safe' bets. That, by definition means that some potential Apple sales are lost simply by the presence of a third option. A lot of people simply walk into stores with an open mind and check out what's available. They are open to Android or Apple. At that point the sale could go either way. I see this situation regularly.
Not having the same access to this situation as the rest of the world limits your choice. These two opinions are from U.S reviewers that use or have used iPhones:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/iphone-killer-ditching-apple-huawei-142913330.html
https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/23/huawei-p20-pro-review/
They almost seem frustrated that Huawei can't get a carrier deal to distribute their phones. Almost as if they feel they are losing out.
And you think that Huawei has no little impact on Apple sales?
There may be a downturn in global sales. We'll have to wait and see.
Does it affect Samsung and Huawei itself too? You bet, but Huawei is still seeing growth while Apple has declined (in Europe at least).
I hope that all this lays to rest your 'highest ASP' claims for a while. Of course, next quarter would normally coincide with an Apple lull, so no doubt you will be staying quiet on the subject anyway. If you have an investor stake in Apple I fully understand your desire for them to add more and more to the treasure chest but from my consumer perspective, it has zero appeal. And seeing others do more in handsets with far less and still make billions, reinforces that belief but all of this is just my opinion, fleshed out, but a mere opinion nevertheless.
Inventory and Component management:
There is nothing new here and the more vertically integrated your business, the better at it you should be. Apple has done very well here but has done for years now. It isn't alone, though.
This is just another sign of dumping by a Chinese company as has been shown many times before. Now I am glad the U.S. kept Huawei. I am so tired of reading this Huawei crap by Avon all the time. Why did Golden State win the 2017? Huawei increased it marketshare. Why did the French Revolution take place - Huawei was not available in France at the time. I feel like I just stuck in HuaweiInsider. Quite opposite of encouraging me to ever look at Huawei if it showed up in the US, I'm quite disposed against it. TrollFail.
Winning!
One poster noted that as what we call, "dumping".
I'm not an investor, but here's a pretty accurate guesstimate of this quarters earnings;
https://twitter.com/asymco?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.asymco.com/
Looks like a 15% revenue gain for Apple YOY.
Look, you can play the game however you want, but ignoring ASP so that your team looks like a winner is delusion, not intellect.
You made me laugh with this statement;
"I am not here to promote Huawei (that is just your desperate, anything goes accusation) but I won't stand by while so much misinformation gets banded about.
This is the part where people start talking about an intervention for your own safety.
Apple's business is still dominated by mobile.
It has a yearly release cycle that obviously leads to a yearly spike in performance. People hold off before a refresh, then buy en mass when it happens. Looking at the results from that spike, just one quarter (or the one immediately after it) provides a somewhat distorted view.
Do you agree with that? You should.
It is far more reliable to gauge performance YoY (full years). You should agree with that too.
So here is Huawei's audited results summary direct from the horse's mouth (my bold):
"Shenzhen, China, March 30, 2018] Huawei released its audited financial results for 2017, reporting solid business growth. The company's total annual revenue was CNY603.6 billion (US$92.5 billion based on year-end exchange rates), an increase of 15.7% over 2016 ."Net profits were CNY47.5 billion (US$7.3 billion), an increase of 28.1% year-on-year."
http://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2018/3/Huawei-2017-Annual-Report
Now, the 1.7% figure comes from a research estimate for one quarter in one region and the report made it crystal clear that it doesn't include the P20 Series models. Models that appear to be breaking records.
And from that, you jump in feet first with your 'dumping' claim. You made a mistake. I can live with that but I would like to point out that in a previous post I went out of my way to point out that Huawei increased prices (yes, in Europe too) across many models by around 100€ last year. They have also made a concerted effort to move into the premium segment. 'Dumping' should be the last thing on your mind.
Your comment on 'Huaweiinsider' is also completely incorrect. Appleinsider dedicates far more articles to Samsung and Google than any of my contributions to threads here.
For starters, I do not even participate in the vast majority of threads here. Your argument virtually dies right there but on top of that, there is a lot of pure misinformation that appears in the forums that I just let go.
However, there needs to be some balance in things so readers don't get mislead.
Hence this post that was only necessary because you put 'dumping' into the soup.
I support competition. Apple biting into Samsung, Huawei biting into Apple and Xiaomi biting into Huawei etc.
I don't care if sales, revenues or profits take a hit. I care about what reaches the consumer and having choice. There is a lot of quality out there. Far more than ever before. There is crap too, I don't deny it but has that ever not been the case?
Almost all Android OEMs (including the likes of Xiaomi who are expected to be "cheap") have increased prices across the board in the last 2 years. So I agree with you that the "dumping" comments are ignorant of the ground reality. This increased prices across the board could be the driver behind the slowing down of the smartphone market overall.
I would acknowledge that Apple's primary revenue generator is iPhone, now at about 60% of revenue. but it is also the case that Avon b7 is fine with adding all of Huawei's revenue and profit for 2017 as if it was entirely smartphones, which it decidedly isn't. I have stated that Apple's average iPhone age is now nearly 4 years, yet the user base has continued to grow, as has subscriptions and the ecosystem. So even if Apple's iPhone sales have "flattened", Apple's ASP has provided increased YOY iPhone revenue, and, as I have posted, will have again at the end of this quarter, with and estimated 15% revenue increase, driven, again, by Apple's current lineup and iPhone's 7 and 7 plus. Very little comparative revenue is generated by the either the iPhone 6 or the SE, which in the Eurozone, account for 25% of unit sales. That's how ASP works.
Avon b7 wants to create the impression that Huawei is very competitive in the smartphone market with Apple, but as I have stated many a time, Android OS devices don't actually compete directly with Apple's iPhone. This is a fundamental flaw in his analysis.
More so, Avon b7's focus on Huawei distorts the actual competition, which is primarily Samsung and other large Chinese device makers like Oppo, Vivo, and Xiaomi. I have never stated that Huawei isn't growing it's units sales, nor that it isn't moving its ASP up. However, it's ASP is much lower than Samsung's, which is about a third of Apple's, so I'm not inclined to give them peer status with Apple. I suspect this is an issue with Avon b7.
The last thing is that Avon b7 is in fact incorrect wrt Apple's product releases. Apple does not need to release other than its yearly schedule. There isn't any evidence that iPhone buyers are craving faster release of features. If anything, the yearly cycle provides a stability to the market and has the effect of maintaining the value of Apple devices in the secondary market of used iPhones. These iPhones, plus Apple refurbished models, are a gateway for many new iOS users, again, note that Apple's user base continues to expand; the last data from Apple was an expansion from a billion users to 1.3 billion in two years.
Apple only has 8 total models in production, with variations for color, storage, and in some cases, for carrier.
Compare and contrast with the number of new devices that Huawei delivers each year, and yet, it appears that Apple's business model is extremely successful in comparison. Perhaps that is due to the fact that iPhone is a market for the most part independent of Android OS devices, and it's multitude of flavors.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/11/17343510/google-android-p-google-io-2018
Pretty much states that iPhone is a single ecosystem; Android OS, not so much.