Huawei surpasses Apple as world's No. 2 smartphone vendor

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 141
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    Junk for a junk market. As usual, with stolen IP. 

    Ugh. 
    Not to mention probably not a lot of profit even if they didn't need any R&D $.
    Not for nothing, they spent more on R&D than Apple did.  
    Are you sure, and did you account for the fact that the majority of Huawei's business is still Telecom?

    https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2018/3/15/an-apple-rd-bonanza

    Looks like both companies will spend about $14 B in 2018.
    Huawei has often spent more on R&D than Apple. This year that looks to be true again. They just announced an increase in R&D spending to between $15B and $20B too.

    https://technode.com/2018/07/27/huawei-rd-5g/

    Huawei has over 80,000 employees dedicated to R&D.

    Perhaps the most recent news on that front was advances made with polar codes. Huawei has put major effort and billions of dollars into Dr. Erdal Erikan's baby:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/07/27/the-key-for-huawei-and-china-in-5g-race-against-the-u-s-is-a-turkish-professor/

    The majority of its business has historically been communications but given the meteoric rise of its consumer business group, there is now almost s 50/50 split between the two. Then you have to add on the enterprise division.

    Funny.

    From your link:

    "Why it’s important: The increase in R&D spending comes as Huawei is experiencing resistance in overseas markets. The US, UK, and Australia have all voiced concerns about the company’s technology on security grounds. Despite this, Huawei hopes to spearhead the development and deployment of 5G infrastructure globally, with its 5G base stations already receiving approval for sale within the EU. The additional R&D spending should help it realize these ambitions."

    All of those countries have voiced concerns yet have Huawei gear in their comms infrastructure.
    Avon B7 and I were in a different thread arguing whether Huawei was hampered for security concerns in the U.S., or as he contends, Huawei is being constrained to reduce competition for Apple.

    You are free to weigh in, but note, the U.S. is planning on legislating the removal of existing Huawei and ZTE telecom equipment in use, so this isn't a theoretical exercise.
    My apologies, I did skim over the US part and was referring to UK and Australia (and mainland Europe). I didn't realise there was any Huawei kit in US networks. 

    As you say, I doubt that the US government keeps Huawei out of the country for the sake of Apple. I've always assumed it was twofold  - A. they know what the NSA is capable of so err on the side of caution, even though in the UK, they have Huawei-funded testing facilities and they are happy that there is nothing untoward going on, and B. if they are keeping Huawei out for competitive reasons, I would guess it's because they believe they've stolen IP from Cisco and don't want to reward them with critical infrastructure contracts. 
  • Reply 62 of 141
    jcs2305 said:
    LOL. Who cares about units shipped? Down that road lies ruin.
    How is shipped vs sold still a persistent thing?  I'm sure you're well aware that Apple's "sold" is the same thing as Huawei's shipped.  Apple has made that clear in their earnings reports.  They consider iPhones sold when they ship to the customer.  That customer is AT&T, Verizon, Best Buy, Walmart, etc.  The only phones that are sold and counted as such are phones sold in Apple stores,  Apple online, and some education sales.  The majority of Apple's phone "sales" occur as shipped.  This is old news.  Not sure how you don't already know this.
    Easy now tiger.. did you happen to see the OP’s post count ?  Folks that have been here a while have been down this market share road before. It was a sillly bragging point for Samsung for years. Units shipped vs sold. I remember reading something saying that said Samsung had units just sitting unsold in a warehouse at one point... hey at least they we’re shipped! Hahaha. I think you missed the point of the post. 
    I didn't miss the point of anything.  The point of the post was to imply that Huawei uses shipped numbers while Apple uses sold numbers, as in sold to end users.  That was pretty clear.  It is an incorrect generalization that has been persistently spouted among a subset of Apple fans.  It shouldn't be.  Especially since a lot of those fans know that Apple has stated their sold occurs at shipment.   Oh, fyi, Samsung's "sold" occurs when the merchandise is received by their customer (Verizon, BB, etc).

    The OP's post count?  Not sure if you're serious.  The post count is not an indicator of anything but time spent on this site.  It has no other relevancy.  It definitely isn't an indicator of some type of knowledge.


  • Reply 63 of 141
    According to the source of this article Apple shipped 41.3 million units.  How many were sold?
  • Reply 64 of 141
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,733member
    elijahg said:
    rob53 said:
    elijahg said:
    What's the ASP of Hwoowuh phones? Less than half the iPhone's no doubt. Last thing I'd want is a phone that's full of Chinese spyware. Possibly even worse than NSA spyware.

    Cook claiming the smartphone market is "very healthy" is probably true, mainly due to people breaking their phones and getting new replacements, and phones getting old and slow, but the number upgrading for features has certainly reduced. That and the saturation of the market means little growth. I have a 6s and it's still fast and perfectly adequate for fairly heavy daily use. I have no real reason to upgrade.
    Glad you’re happy with an older phone but I upgraded to an 8 plus and love it, especially the 2x lens. 
    If the X hadn't been so outrageously priced, I probably would have got one, if anything just for the celebration of 10 years of iPhone! I'd upgraded about every 2 years since the original was released; I had the "2G", 3G, 4, 5s and 6s. I would definitely like to upgrade, but I'm not sure it's worth it yet based on features vs cost. Maybe the 9? 11? will take my fancy!
    It was worth ever $$$. One person's outrageously priced is another's 'you get what you pay for'. That's why you can still get a 7.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 65 of 141
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,246member
    LOL. Who cares about units shipped? Down that road lies ruin.
    How is shipped vs sold still a persistent thing?  I'm sure you're well aware that Apple's "sold" is the same thing as Huawei's shipped.  Apple has made that clear in their earnings reports.  They consider iPhones sold when they ship to the customer.  That customer is AT&T, Verizon, Best Buy, Walmart, etc.  The only phones that are sold and counted as such are phones sold in Apple stores,  Apple online, and some education sales.  The majority of Apple's phone "sales" occur as shipped.  This is old news.  Not sure how you don't already know this.
    If all these vendors are just stuffing the channel and have all these phones returned to them or written off wouldn’t that show up in their financials? Unless the suggesting is the mobile carriers and other retailers are responsible for writing off this inventory?  Same question though, wouldn’t that show up in their financials? And why would a mobile carrier or other 3rd party retailer order product they didn’t think they could sell? 
    I know what you're asking.  I'm just not sure why you're asking.  You're question about writing off inventory doesn't change the shipped vs sold argument.  In this instance shipped and sold mean the same thing.  

    To answer your question directly:
    1.  From time to time, companies do write down channel inventory.  Apple did a write down in 2017 and did another in 2018.  Tim Cook spoke about it in last quarters earnings: "We reduced iPhone channel inventory by 1.8 million units, 600,000 units more than the March quarter reduction last year. We exited the March quarter within our target range of five to seven weeks of iPhone channel inventory."  2.  It does show up on their financials.  It just doesn't really get reported by fan sites.  3.  Some vendors are saddled with minimum purchase requirements.  I think Apple recently got into a stink with Japanese telecoms over those minimums.
    I’m asking because some throw out this theory that only with Apple does shipped = sold which would imply everyone else is stuffing the channel and really has all this unsold inventory.
  • Reply 66 of 141
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,246member
    smalm said:
    Samsung’s operating profit this past quarter was $13.3 billion.
    Apple’s was $12.6 billion. 
    Of course not all of Samsung’s profit comes from smartphones but then neither does Apple's.
    Smartphones contributed <18% to Samsung's operating profit and >55% to Apple's.
    When it comes to profit Samsung is a memory manufacturer also doing some other stuff...
    OK to flip that, Apple is a smartphone manufacturer also doing some other stuff. So what? Memory/storage isn’t going away any time soon.
  • Reply 67 of 141
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,246member
    According to the source of this article Apple shipped 41.3 million units.  How many were sold?
    Why does it matter, unless you’re assuming Apple is shipping things to stores it’s not going to sell?
  • Reply 68 of 141
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,170member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    Junk for a junk market. As usual, with stolen IP. 

    Ugh. 
    Not to mention probably not a lot of profit even if they didn't need any R&D $.
    Not for nothing, they spent more on R&D than Apple did.  
    Are you sure, and did you account for the fact that the majority of Huawei's business is still Telecom?

    https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2018/3/15/an-apple-rd-bonanza

    Looks like both companies will spend about $14 B in 2018.
    Huawei has often spent more on R&D than Apple. This year that looks to be true again. They just announced an increase in R&D spending to between $15B and $20B too.

    https://technode.com/2018/07/27/huawei-rd-5g/

    Huawei has over 80,000 employees dedicated to R&D.

    Perhaps the most recent news on that front was advances made with polar codes. Huawei has put major effort and billions of dollars into Dr. Erdal Erikan's baby:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/07/27/the-key-for-huawei-and-china-in-5g-race-against-the-u-s-is-a-turkish-professor/

    The majority of its business has historically been communications but given the meteoric rise of its consumer business group, there is now almost s 50/50 split between the two. Then you have to add on the enterprise division.

    Funny.

    From your link:

    "Why it’s important: The increase in R&D spending comes as Huawei is experiencing resistance in overseas markets. The US, UK, and Australia have all voiced concerns about the company’s technology on security grounds. Despite this, Huawei hopes to spearhead the development and deployment of 5G infrastructure globally, with its 5G base stations already receiving approval for sale within the EU. The additional R&D spending should help it realize these ambitions."

    All of those countries have voiced concerns yet have Huawei gear in their comms infrastructure.
    Avon B7 and I were in a different thread arguing whether Huawei was hampered for security concerns in the U.S., or as he contends, Huawei is being constrained to reduce competition for Apple.

    You are free to weigh in, but note, the U.S. is planning on legislating the removal of existing Huawei and ZTE telecom equipment in use, so this isn't a theoretical exercise.
    My apologies, I did skim over the US part and was referring to UK and Australia (and mainland Europe). I didn't realise there was any Huawei kit in US networks. 

    As you say, I doubt that the US government keeps Huawei out of the country for the sake of Apple. I've always assumed it was twofold  - A. they know what the NSA is capable of so err on the side of caution, even though in the UK, they have Huawei-funded testing facilities and they are happy that there is nothing untoward going on, and B. if they are keeping Huawei out for competitive reasons, I would guess it's because they believe they've stolen IP from Cisco and don't want to reward them with critical infrastructure contracts.
    No apology necessary, and a good post that you followed up with.

    Seems obvious to me that the U.S., U.K., and Australia, along with Japan and Taiwan, are very concerned about Chinese expansionism in the Western Pacific. It wouldn't make sense to have a countries communication infrastructure beholden to an adversary. 
    edited August 1
  • Reply 69 of 141
    airnerdairnerd Posts: 556member
    And I know Apple doesn't care at all.  market share isn't nearly as important as revenue share.  
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 70 of 141
    LOL. Who cares about units shipped? Down that road lies ruin.
    How is shipped vs sold still a persistent thing?  I'm sure you're well aware that Apple's "sold" is the same thing as Huawei's shipped.  Apple has made that clear in their earnings reports.  They consider iPhones sold when they ship to the customer.  That customer is AT&T, Verizon, Best Buy, Walmart, etc.  The only phones that are sold and counted as such are phones sold in Apple stores,  Apple online, and some education sales.  The majority of Apple's phone "sales" occur as shipped.  This is old news.  Not sure how you don't already know this.
    If all these vendors are just stuffing the channel and have all these phones returned to them or written off wouldn’t that show up in their financials? Unless the suggesting is the mobile carriers and other retailers are responsible for writing off this inventory?  Same question though, wouldn’t that show up in their financials? And why would a mobile carrier or other 3rd party retailer order product they didn’t think they could sell? 
    I know what you're asking.  I'm just not sure why you're asking.  You're question about writing off inventory doesn't change the shipped vs sold argument.  In this instance shipped and sold mean the same thing.  

    To answer your question directly:
    1.  From time to time, companies do write down channel inventory.  Apple did a write down in 2017 and did another in 2018.  Tim Cook spoke about it in last quarters earnings: "We reduced iPhone channel inventory by 1.8 million units, 600,000 units more than the March quarter reduction last year. We exited the March quarter within our target range of five to seven weeks of iPhone channel inventory."  2.  It does show up on their financials.  It just doesn't really get reported by fan sites.  3.  Some vendors are saddled with minimum purchase requirements.  I think Apple recently got into a stink with Japanese telecoms over those minimums.
    I’m asking because some throw out this theory that only with Apple does shipped = sold which would imply everyone else is stuffing the channel and really has all this unsold inventory.
    Wouldn't it be better to ask someone who espouses that theory?  I have no idea why someone would say that.  
  • Reply 71 of 141
    According to the source of this article Apple shipped 41.3 million units.  How many were sold?
    Why does it matter, unless you’re assuming Apple is shipping things to stores it’s not going to sell?
    You assume the same of the Huawei and Samsung?
  • Reply 72 of 141
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,412member
    Threads like this are hilarious. All the trolls come out of the woodwork to explain why Apple is actually failing. The usual shipped vs sold argument is regurgitated every time. After every financial report comes a comment thread like this one. Why can’t you guys accept the fact that Apple is a wildly successful company that makes products people love to buy and use? Enough with the “overpriced” bullshit, enough with the “Jobs is dead” crap, enough with the stagnation, innovation, QA horse manure. Just learn to live with the fact that Apple is a well run, profitable company who’s customer satisfaction statistics are the envy of the business world. There has never been a company like Apple and we should be enjoying it while it lasts. I know I am and if I thought like some of you I would have switched platforms years ago.
    ericthehalfbeeStrangeDaysbrucemc
  • Reply 73 of 141
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,295member
    lkrupp said:
    Threads like this are hilarious. All the trolls come out of the woodwork to explain why Apple is actually failing. The usual shipped vs sold argument is regurgitated every time. After every financial report comes a comment thread like this one. Why can’t you guys accept the fact that Apple is a wildly successful company that makes products people love to buy and use? Enough with the “overpriced” bullshit, enough with the “Jobs is dead” crap, enough with the stagnation, innovation, QA horse manure. Just learn to live with the fact that Apple is a well run, profitable company who’s customer satisfaction statistics are the envy of the business world. There has never been a company like Apple and we should be enjoying it while it lasts. I know I am and if I thought like some of you I would have switched platforms years ago.
    +1.

    My dad can beat up your dad should have gone away with grade school. We're all spoiled by the tech we now have whether it's from Apple (of course) or other. 
    edited August 1
  • Reply 74 of 141
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,727member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    MacPro said:
    Junk for a junk market. As usual, with stolen IP. 

    Ugh. 
    Not to mention probably not a lot of profit even if they didn't need any R&D $.
    Not for nothing, they spent more on R&D than Apple did.  
    Are you sure, and did you account for the fact that the majority of Huawei's business is still Telecom?

    https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2018/3/15/an-apple-rd-bonanza

    Looks like both companies will spend about $14 B in 2018.
    Huawei has often spent more on R&D than Apple. This year that looks to be true again. They just announced an increase in R&D spending to between $15B and $20B too.

    https://technode.com/2018/07/27/huawei-rd-5g/

    Huawei has over 80,000 employees dedicated to R&D.

    Perhaps the most recent news on that front was advances made with polar codes. Huawei has put major effort and billions of dollars into Dr. Erdal Erikan's baby:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/07/27/the-key-for-huawei-and-china-in-5g-race-against-the-u-s-is-a-turkish-professor/

    The majority of its business has historically been communications but given the meteoric rise of its consumer business group, there is now almost s 50/50 split between the two. Then you have to add on the enterprise division.

    Funny.

    From your link:

    "Why it’s important: The increase in R&D spending comes as Huawei is experiencing resistance in overseas markets. The US, UK, and Australia have all voiced concerns about the company’s technology on security grounds. Despite this, Huawei hopes to spearhead the development and deployment of 5G infrastructure globally, with its 5G base stations already receiving approval for sale within the EU. The additional R&D spending should help it realize these ambitions."

    All of those countries have voiced concerns yet have Huawei gear in their comms infrastructure.
    Avon B7 and I were in a different thread arguing whether Huawei was hampered for security concerns in the U.S., or as he contends, Huawei is being constrained to reduce competition for Apple.

    You are free to weigh in, but note, the U.S. is planning on legislating the removal of existing Huawei and ZTE telecom equipment in use, so this isn't a theoretical exercise.
    My apologies, I did skim over the US part and was referring to UK and Australia (and mainland Europe). I didn't realise there was any Huawei kit in US networks. 

    As you say, I doubt that the US government keeps Huawei out of the country for the sake of Apple. I've always assumed it was twofold  - A. they know what the NSA is capable of so err on the side of caution, even though in the UK, they have Huawei-funded testing facilities and they are happy that there is nothing untoward going on, and B. if they are keeping Huawei out for competitive reasons, I would guess it's because they believe they've stolen IP from Cisco and don't want to reward them with critical infrastructure contracts.
    No apology necessary, and a good post that you followed up with.

    Seems obvious to me that the U.S., U.K., and Australia, along with Japan and Taiwan, are very concerned about Chinese expansionism in the Western Pacific. It wouldn't make sense to have a counties communication infrastructure beholden to an adversary. 
    What wouldn't make sense would be for Huawei to literally destroy itself by doing exactly what you imply.

    Governments who want to spy will spy. There is very little infrastructure providers can do about it.

    If China is an adversary then by the same token - and for exactly the same reasons - everybody is an adversary to everybody else. If it's not Huawei will you be better off? Nope.

    Hey, Obama had to deal with getting caught spying on Merkel and the British government and according to Snowden, AT&T fell over itself to be complicit with the goals of the NSA, who even went after Huawei!

    And in spite of Huawei being present in 170 countries, answering everything that has been asked of it and no one ever putting a single shred of evidence on the table, people persist with this line.

    Read this

    https://www.cyberscoop.com/5g-network-huawei-zte-us-telecom/

    and tell me the underlying issue is not commercial dominance. 


    edited August 1
  • Reply 75 of 141
    lkrupp said:
    Threads like this are hilarious. All the trolls come out of the woodwork to explain why Apple is actually failing. The usual shipped vs sold argument is regurgitated every time. After every financial report comes a comment thread like this one. Why can’t you guys accept the fact that Apple is a wildly successful company that makes products people love to buy and use? Enough with the “overpriced” bullshit, enough with the “Jobs is dead” crap, enough with the stagnation, innovation, QA horse manure. Just learn to live with the fact that Apple is a well run, profitable company who’s customer satisfaction statistics are the envy of the business world. There has never been a company like Apple and we should be enjoying it while it lasts. I know I am and if I thought like some of you I would have switched platforms years ago.
    You seem to be confusing disagreement about posted comments with a dislike for Apple.  That's not true in most cases.  In most cases it's a refutation of "facts" presented.  Apple's success is undeniable.  That success however does not give license to certain fans to push false info.  The criticism isn't criticism of Apple.  It's criticism of the content of the comment.  Liking Apple does not give one free reign to just make up stuff.   There are some who hate Apple and see no right, just like there are some who love Apple and see no wrong.  It's up to you to discern genuine criticism from fanboy hate/love.  It's also up to you to recognize the difference between criticism of a comment and criticism of Apple.  They aren't necessarily the same thing.  

    I do agree with you on one thing though.  The sold vs shipped issue was settled a long time ago.  Not sure how people still push that narrative.
    rogifan_newgatorguy
  • Reply 76 of 141
    lkrupp said:
    The usual shipped vs sold argument is regurgitated every time. After every financial report comes a comment thread like this one.
    This is really a shipped vs shipped argument.  The IDC report is for shipments so the numbers are Apple shipped 41.3 million and Huawei 54.2 million.
    edited August 1
  • Reply 77 of 141
    avon b7 said:
    It's also worth noting this from IDC:

    "Huawei's P20/P20 Pro series found strong demand in the $600-$800 price segment"

    Some people swear that Huawei only makes low cost handsets while ignoring the fact that it produces phones double the price of the iPhone X and it is selling more phones in the mid to high price bands than ever. Breaking records in the process.



    Irrelevant that they sold phones in the $600-800 segment. Do you know what their ASP is? Ironically, it's about the same as Samsung (low to mid $200 range). Which means that the vast majority of devices they sell are under $100, and their flagships only make up a small percentage of total sales.

    But go ahead and keep implying that they sell a lot of flagships. They don't.
    StrangeDaystmay
  • Reply 78 of 141
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,246member
    According to the source of this article Apple shipped 41.3 million units.  How many were sold?
    Why does it matter, unless you’re assuming Apple is shipping things to stores it’s not going to sell?
    You assume the same of the Huawei and Samsung?
    Um, I don’t. I’m trying to understand why others do as the theory makes zero sense to me.
  • Reply 79 of 141
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,246member
    lkrupp said:
    The usual shipped vs sold argument is regurgitated every time. After every financial report comes a comment thread like this one.
    This is really a shipped vs shipped argument.  The IDC report is for shipments so the numbers are Apple shipped 41.3 million and Huawei 54.2 million.
    The 41.3 figure comes from Apple’s quarterly press release so its however they define iPhone units (which is the header name they use on their financial summary).
  • Reply 80 of 141
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 5,635member
    avon b7 said:
    It's also worth noting this from IDC:

    "Huawei's P20/P20 Pro series found strong demand in the $600-$800 price segment"

    Some people swear that Huawei only makes low cost handsets while ignoring the fact that it produces phones double the price of the iPhone X and it is selling more phones in the mid to high price bands than ever. Breaking records in the process.



    Irrelevant that they sold phones in the $600-800 segment. Do you know what their ASP is? Ironically, it's about the same as Samsung (low to mid $200 range). Which means that the vast majority of devices they sell are under $100, and their flagships only make up a small percentage of total sales.

    But go ahead and keep implying that they sell a lot of flagships. They don't.
    Yeah exactly. I'd like to see him break down the number of cheap units (they have an entire sub-brand dedicated to barely passable smartphones) vs the number of high-end, cost-as-much-or-more-than-an-iPhone flagships. And then we can get into ASP. Etc...

    Nah. They're just cranking out cheap chinese knockoffs. Not much to see here.
Sign In or Register to comment.