I wonder if an experiment among the lines "let's sell the last few G4 PowerMacs with a margin of 10%" would do any good as far as powermac sales go. I mean 4 billion - geez, with that kind of pocket change there is definately some room for toying around.
<strong>I wonder if an experiment among the lines "let's sell the last few G4 PowerMacs with a margin of 10%" would do any good as far as powermac sales go. </strong><hr></blockquote>
With all the rebates Apple offers, and the mild price drops that periodically come out, Apple has all that data. They probably don't have actual data for "What if we sold at a loss on the XYZ, how many units would we sell?" but by changing the price a couple hundred dollars they get data on how bigger price cuts would probably affect sales.
More cryptic BS...Not trying to be a troll, but I'm suprised Apples stock is still above $14.00 with such a cloudy direction of the future of the hardware platform.</strong><hr></blockquote>
To the folks working on such things at Apple, the future of the hardware platform isn't cloudy at all. It's quite exciting, really.
<strong>I wonder if an experiment among the lines "let's sell the last few G4 PowerMacs with a margin of 10%" would do any good as far as powermac sales go. I mean 4 billion - geez, with that kind of pocket change there is definately some room for toying around. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I disagree. What they need to do is beef up the specs so much that people will drool over the machines and while in a hypnotic trance they will pull out their wallets and pay the MSRP.
second thing, a quick look at the 1984 line would indicate that the mac share represents 6% of the market that year.
now, arithmetic 101 taught me that 1372 is not 6% of 6322. it's more like, ermm, let me see, 21 percent... unless, of course, the mac share thing indicates, well, something else than the mac share that year...
pentium floating point bug maybe ?
on a related note, it'd be nice to have a cute little graph of this...
not so sure..... iBook sales like quadrupled in that time... recession or weak products?
powermac sales, recession or not, should never have reached this low.</strong>[/QUOTE]
People still buy in a recession, however not as many and they don't spend as much. pMac sales have slowed because of the recession as well, the recession of speedy chips
[quote] I wish it was. Unfortunatly, total PC sales have continued to grow <hr></blockquote>
The only PC company, other then Apple, that has made any money is Dell. Gateway just closed 3 MORE stores and is moments away from join Acer & EMachines.
never saw that before. now since im somewhat new to macs and dont know too much about the history, can any mac vetrans tell me what caused the huge jump in mac numbers between 1990-1991 ?
what i remember about that time period is there being parity in the number of software titles then on the walls at electronic boutique betwen the "ibm" section, and the "apple" section you had an even choice then. was it marketing? did apple release some hot new machine that caused their marketshare to double??
and what pray tell happened just 5 years later in 1995-1996 that caused apple to loose half their marketshare??? was it the windows 95 rollout? that drop is just amazing!
on second look it seems to me not so much as apple loosing marketshare in 1996 but of windows pc's doubling their marketshare so it almost had to be the rollout of windows 95 ??
[quote] So Apple is a dirt cheap bargain. <hr></blockquote>
I agree that their cash holdings are staggerring (especially considering their condition as recently as 98 when they needed that infusion from M$) but I honestly don't think you will hear many analysts wowing the stock at a 80.170 P/E forward looking ratio. A bad number might be around 25, so 80 completely sucks.
Also, the cash burn rate of technology companies can be significant, especially for one that has such high R&D demands as Apple (ie creating all of your own OS and major apps). But I will admit that they are/have been a great company with great potential.
A significant cash hoard can also be a sign of a company that is too conservative with their money. The question is, what kind of a rainy day are they saving that money for?
They've dropped the crazy 'sell only 16 meg Ati Rage card' Mantra. (Damn things stuck like alien sucker faces to that top end 'power'Mac...)
Choice is now offered. Nvidia. Decent cards with 'power'Macs. Could do better in their 'high end' (come on, for £2500 ish, I'd expect at least a Geforce 4 Ti...) 9700, which is a smashing card: pending in a month or so according to a few Mac gaming sites.
Open Gl. Come on, you've got to give Apple this one, since the panty Quickdraw 3D days, Apple has moved mountains on this. Notice the flood of games on Mac now? And the Lightwave 3D support has improved since earlier versions. Due to GL, 'X' and competition amongst graphics cards.
High graphics cards? Quadro? Wildcat? Hmmm. I'd argue, with the next round of Geforce FX and Ati 9700 cards, offering terrific bang for buck, why would you want to spend a grand on such 'Wildcat' cards?
CPU. Well. You can't say Apple haven't tried. They've doubled them up. But I feel they could have compensated further by offering better graphics cards as standard on top two 'power'Mac models.
Over long renders, the latest Athlons and Pentium 4s stuff the 'top end' G4 with a thick rhubarb. Still, 'we'll' have our day in the sun.
970 willing. In duals. In quads. In octos. In 'X-Serves'...on 10.3.
Then you take my Athlon and drop kick it down the stairs...
Lemon Bon Bon
And as Amorph said, we got Shake and Maya too. (Come on. If I'd have said to you a few years back, 'We'll have Maya and it will cost you less than £2,000 inc Vat!', you'd have had me certified...)
But if Maya and Lightwave drop the mac becuase its hardware is too cr*p to make people switch enough to warrant the development costs it would do far more harm to the idea of 3D on a mac than the announcement of Maya on the mac did it good.
If Alias wavefront ever stopped development of Maya on the Mac it would send a clear signal that the mac just can't cut it - we'd never see the mac in 3D again.
I sold my stock a while ago. Apple just doesn't get it. Their software is ready to take on Microsoft and the world but their hardware is just pathetic. Overpriced, quality is down, underpowered, you name it. ................................
Comments
<strong>I wonder if an experiment among the lines "let's sell the last few G4 PowerMacs with a margin of 10%" would do any good as far as powermac sales go. </strong><hr></blockquote>
With all the rebates Apple offers, and the mild price drops that periodically come out, Apple has all that data. They probably don't have actual data for "What if we sold at a loss on the XYZ, how many units would we sell?"
<strong>
More cryptic BS...Not trying to be a troll, but I'm suprised Apples stock is still above $14.00 with such a cloudy direction of the future of the hardware platform.</strong><hr></blockquote>
To the folks working on such things at Apple, the future of the hardware platform isn't cloudy at all. It's quite exciting, really.
<strong>I wonder if an experiment among the lines "let's sell the last few G4 PowerMacs with a margin of 10%" would do any good as far as powermac sales go. I mean 4 billion - geez, with that kind of pocket change there is definately some room for toying around.
I disagree. What they need to do is beef up the specs so much that people will drool over the machines and while in a hypnotic trance they will pull out their wallets and pay the MSRP.
<strong>
Yea, that's the affect of 3 years of recession.
I wish it was. Unfortunatly, total PC sales have continued to grow.
<strong>
I wish it was. Unfortunatly, total PC sales have continued to grow.
Perhaps we should bring this in here too:
<strong>Perhaps we should bring this in here too:</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow, I always tought Apple at one point had more than "just" 12% of the market. Interesting.
there are a couple of questions, though...
what is the unit ? thousands of boxes sold ?
second thing, a quick look at the 1984 line would indicate that the mac share represents 6% of the market that year.
now, arithmetic 101 taught me that 1372 is not 6% of 6322. it's more like, ermm, let me see, 21 percent... unless, of course, the mac share thing indicates, well, something else than the mac share that year...
pentium floating point bug maybe ?
on a related note, it'd be nice to have a cute little graph of this...
<strong>
not so sure..... iBook sales like quadrupled in that time... recession or weak products?
powermac sales, recession or not, should never have reached this low.</strong>[/QUOTE]
People still buy in a recession, however not as many and they don't spend as much. pMac sales have slowed because of the recession as well, the recession of speedy chips
[quote] I wish it was. Unfortunatly, total PC sales have continued to grow <hr></blockquote>
The only PC company, other then Apple, that has made any money is Dell. Gateway just closed 3 MORE stores and is moments away from join Acer & EMachines.
<strong>Gateway just closed 3 MORE stores and is moments away from join Acer & EMachines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Er, to the "Ugly PC Makers Club"? Why isn't Dell allowed to join?
<strong>
Perhaps we should bring this in here too:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you get these numbers? Why are you rounding?
<strong>
Er, to the "Ugly PC Makers Club"? Why isn't Dell allowed to join?
Hell, I wish Dell woul headline
Imagine what would happen if IBM clone-PC makers ceased to operate? Steve Jobs would cum himself.
never saw that before. now since im somewhat new to macs and dont know too much about the history, can any mac vetrans tell me what caused the huge jump in mac numbers between 1990-1991 ?
what i remember about that time period is there being parity in the number of software titles then on the walls at electronic boutique betwen the "ibm" section, and the "apple" section you had an even choice then. was it marketing? did apple release some hot new machine that caused their marketshare to double??
and what pray tell happened just 5 years later in 1995-1996 that caused apple to loose half their marketshare??? was it the windows 95 rollout? that drop is just amazing!
[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: futuremac ]</p>
I agree that their cash holdings are staggerring (especially considering their condition as recently as 98 when they needed that infusion from M$) but I honestly don't think you will hear many analysts wowing the stock at a 80.170 P/E forward looking ratio. A bad number might be around 25, so 80 completely sucks.
Also, the cash burn rate of technology companies can be significant, especially for one that has such high R&D demands as Apple (ie creating all of your own OS and major apps). But I will admit that they are/have been a great company with great potential.
A significant cash hoard can also be a sign of a company that is too conservative with their money. The question is, what kind of a rainy day are they saving that money for?
Does this mean interest rates will go down, or does it mean that they are going to do some big spending?
<strong>Apple is not going anywhere.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's exactly the problem.
<strong>Apple has come a long way for 3D.
They've dropped the crazy 'sell only 16 meg Ati Rage card' Mantra. (Damn things stuck like alien sucker faces to that top end 'power'Mac...)
Choice is now offered. Nvidia. Decent cards with 'power'Macs. Could do better in their 'high end' (come on, for £2500 ish, I'd expect at least a Geforce 4 Ti...) 9700, which is a smashing card: pending in a month or so according to a few Mac gaming sites.
Open Gl. Come on, you've got to give Apple this one, since the panty Quickdraw 3D days, Apple has moved mountains on this. Notice the flood of games on Mac now? And the Lightwave 3D support has improved since earlier versions. Due to GL, 'X' and competition amongst graphics cards.
High graphics cards? Quadro? Wildcat? Hmmm. I'd argue, with the next round of Geforce FX and Ati 9700 cards, offering terrific bang for buck, why would you want to spend a grand on such 'Wildcat' cards?
CPU. Well. You can't say Apple haven't tried. They've doubled them up. But I feel they could have compensated further by offering better graphics cards as standard on top two 'power'Mac models.
Over long renders, the latest Athlons and Pentium 4s stuff the 'top end' G4 with a thick rhubarb. Still, 'we'll' have our day in the sun.
970 willing. In duals. In quads. In octos. In 'X-Serves'...on 10.3.
Then you take my Athlon and drop kick it down the stairs...
Lemon Bon Bon
And as Amorph said, we got Shake and Maya too. (Come on. If I'd have said to you a few years back, 'We'll have Maya and it will cost you less than £2,000 inc Vat!', you'd have had me certified...)
[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
But if Maya and Lightwave drop the mac becuase its hardware is too cr*p to make people switch enough to warrant the development costs it would do far more harm to the idea of 3D on a mac than the announcement of Maya on the mac did it good.
If Alias wavefront ever stopped development of Maya on the Mac it would send a clear signal that the mac just can't cut it - we'd never see the mac in 3D again.
<strong>Fred Anderson said that their income from interest will drop significantly in the third quarter of 2003.
Does this mean interest rates will go down, or does it mean that they are going to do some big spending?</strong><hr></blockquote>
It means interest rates are going down.
Apple is already spending almost all of their income per quarter, including the previously quoted $500 million on R&D.
[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>