(Unless I missed something) Other than rolled into both the iOS device and iTunes numbers, nowhere during the earnings call was there a discussion on Apple TV -- Apple's 4th leg. The officers and analysts talked about current and future projections and strategies on all other devices and services, but not Apple TV. No mention of current market penetration or of a push to new markets.
They were also no questions on Jobs' LOA. Maybe they told the analysts beforehand that they would not answer any such questions. Still surprising.
I can't wait for the next BIG PRODUCT from Apple. It will be another "must have" device that I don't even realize that I must have it. Yeah, I'll buy it anway.
I didn't write that - I wrote that google pays them, that means money goes from google to carrier or manufacturer, its got nothing to do with ad revenue - if google shares some $ - so be it. I think you are splitting hairs here. the point is that google is paying to install OS either directly or indirectly. So please stop looking down in such a condescending manner at me !
My main point still stands I think which logically states that Google is giving it away and pays hardware makers to use it sometimes . This is not how MS Windows was sold. Windows was always paid for by the PC manufacturers and public alike though not at same rate. So comparing Android to the PC market and thus will finish off Apple in the same way in the 90's is logically erroneous.
I'd rather be safe than sorry. You know how our conversation over this has gone throughout the years. Neither of us would like to see a really big purchase, though they could always make one that "surprises and delights". But they could make a number of smaller, but still large ones that do make sense. And no, I have no idea as to what they're thinking.
I keep trying to envision a sensible large purchase for Apple; the only thing that I can ever come up with is Sony. But, really, Apple likely doesn't want Sony, just Sony Music Entertainment and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Not to mention that such a purchase might create problems dealing with other content providers.
Great growth overall, phenomenal growth in China which will be a very important market for Apple to continue to grow. Wasn?t it the Lenovo CEO who said he was glad Apple wasn?t paying attention to China as a market? He has to be sweating a bit right now.
To me, what's most remarkable about Apple's continued record-breaking success is that almost everything they sell is priced higher than the competition and that they accomplished this in what is still a terrible world-wide economy (in spite of a recovering stock market.)
Imagine what Apple would be accomplishing had there been no recession.
I do think that in the long term, Apple is planning to get involved in totally new businesses. Otherwise, why would they need all that new space in that new campus? And why are they supposedly intending on doubling the size of the server farm?
My bet is that Steve deferred announcing his leave until these numbers could be announced so that there'd be little overall negative impact on the stock price (although I've always gotten the impression that Steve never managed the company to the stock price.)
Actually I think that the recession has helped AAPL, Because people are being more careful about frivolous purchases and realize that Apple products are better value than wasting $ on cheap knockoffs which is why almost every PC company has declining sales
well yeah right! , simply amazing numbers. The Ipod touch too. I think I'm going to get and iPod touch and attach a wi max 4G router to it, then make calls for virtually nothing over skype. Theres plenty of apps to do Texts and SMS. Why people buy iPhones is a mystery to me, yeah I know its harder to receive calls but hey, Is paying over
199+(24mths*85)=> $2239.00
or 199+(24mths*105)=> $2719.00 both are 1 GB per month data
for ONE device , ONE freaking device?
Compared with this: -
Wi-Max (4G) + Ipod touch (month to month contract, unlimited data plan, with up to 5 wifi devices)
($50*24)+ 299 => $1399.00
This is a saving of between $840 - 1320, is imho a really good deal given that I can get the same and more - up to 5 wi-fi devices ie:- run a laptop, iPad, ipod touch and Kindle
Plus I can stop and start the Wi-Max plan as needed to save more
?????????????????????????
This Troll Seems Ashtrayed into " Wrong Place "!
So What Does Your LENGTHY Buying i-Pod touch Plan Has To Do With Apple Dooming?
I do think that in the long term, Apple is planning to get involved in totally new businesses. Otherwise, why would they need all that new space in that new campus? And why are they supposedly intending on doubling the size of the server farm?
Though there will no doubt be room to grow at Apple's new campus, I think this line of thought is overstated. Apple plans to consolidate people currently spread over 54 locations in the area.
Great growth overall, phenomenal growth in China which will be a very important market for Apple to continue to grow. Wasn?t it the Lenovo CEO who said he was glad Apple wasn?t paying attention to China as a market? He has to be sweating a bit right now.
I also expect they will be expanding their efforts in India soon.
They were also no questions on Jobs' LOA. Maybe they told the analysts beforehand that they would not answer any such questions. Still surprising.
In the Macworld Live Blog, someone asked the same question. He was told that Apple never does that. They may not answer a question when asked, but they don't tell people to not ask it.
I assume the aTv was simply overlooked. I also assume that Jobs's health wasn't asked about because it wouldn't be polite.
I'd rather be safe than sorry. You know how our conversation over this has gone throughout the years. Neither of us would like to see a really big purchase, though they could always make one that "surprises and delights". But they could make a number of smaller, but still large ones that do make sense. And no, I have no idea as to what they're thinking.
It now looks that if they make no large purchase this year, they could have, not $70 billion, but $80 billion; maybe even more. I can't see it getting to that point. But it's much more difficult for stockholders to force the issue than it was with Microsoft. There, the stock had not only stagnated, but was down in actual dollars, and much further down when inflation was taken into account. And I'm not talking about the absurd valuation they had before The Fall.
But, they will likely do something. I don't know if it was true about the CFO story, but it makes sense, considering who it was. Maybe not to replace Oppenheimer, but an additional high level position.
Of course, with that failing, assuming it was real, and Steve's new health issue, things could be derailed for a time.
Well, I'm happy they're not letting it ride on roulette wheels at Monte Carlo, or speculating in hog back futures.
The real forces to be reckoned with are the big institutional investors, not individual schmoes like us. If Apple does start pushing $80b plus, which seems almost certain by the end of the calendar year, the issue of dividends will be pushed by the big stockholders, and will be hard to resist, since they have blocks of voting shares that actually count.
I didn't write that - I wrote that google pays them, that means money goes from google to carrier or manufacturer, its got nothing to do with ad revenue - if google shares some $ - so be it. I think you are splitting hairs here. the point is that google is paying to install OS either directly or indirectly. So please stop looking down in such a condescending manner at me !
My main point still stands I think which logically states that Google is giving it away and pays hardware makers to use it sometimes . This is not how MS Windows was sold. Windows was always paid for by the PC manufacturers and public alike though not at same rate. So comparing Android to the PC market and thus will finish off Apple in the same way in the 90's is logically erroneous.
So stop misquoting me please!
You're saying that, but it still isn't true. Even the article linked to didn't say that.
I keep trying to envision a sensible large purchase for Apple; the only thing that I can ever come up with is Sony. But, really, Apple likely doesn't want Sony, just Sony Music Entertainment and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Not to mention that such a purchase might create problems dealing with other content providers.
The problem with most big companies is that they're in businesses Apple doesn't want to be in, or that conflict with their plans and needs, or with that of other companies Apple is partners with. Usually, the bigger the company, the more this will be true.
Great growth overall, phenomenal growth in China which will be a very important market for Apple to continue to grow. Wasn?t it the Lenovo CEO who said he was glad Apple wasn?t paying attention to China as a market? He has to be sweating a bit right now.
That's why Apple's 4 China stores are the busiest, with both the most traffic, and the most sales. It's also why Apple said that they would have 25 stores in China by the end of 2011.
Well, I'm happy they're not letting it ride on roulette wheels at Monte Carlo, or speculating in hog back futures.
The real forces to be reckoned with are the big institutional investors, not individual schmoes like us. If Apple does start pushing $80b plus, which seems almost certain by the end of the calendar year, the issue of dividends will be pushed by the big stockholders, and will be hard to resist, since they have blocks of voting shares that actually count.
Yeah, there's plenty of greed out there. I do think that from a companies point of view, investors views are not in alignment with what's best for the company. It's a delicate situation. I've seen many companies burned over the years who listened to investors and the investment community.
But I do think that unless they act fairly quickly to do something with a good chunk of that money, then they may as well give some of it back. And not through a stock buyback.
If you are a cell phone carrier and you need an OS to compete with the iPhone would you really trust a software company to develop the OS for it. OR would you prefer to develop it yourself?
In an ideal world of course you would prefer to have it in house - you would then not be beholden to the software company. You would have complete control of the software and be able to customize it for you own phones and not be at the mercy of said software company.
It must be rather galling to be forced to use someone else's OS for your phones. And be completely at the mercy of their development timelines and strategic objectives. As long as that OS is kept up to date and adds new fetaures on time and make sense you should be okay but still!
and to top it off that software company is giving the OS away to your nasty rivals too jeez, But again you really should have seen the iOS coming shouldn't you and not have painted yourself in this tight corner in the first place. well thats what come from gettin' complacent! Innovate or die
Comments
(Unless I missed something) Other than rolled into both the iOS device and iTunes numbers, nowhere during the earnings call was there a discussion on Apple TV -- Apple's 4th leg. The officers and analysts talked about current and future projections and strategies on all other devices and services, but not Apple TV. No mention of current market penetration or of a push to new markets.
They were also no questions on Jobs' LOA. Maybe they told the analysts beforehand that they would not answer any such questions. Still surprising.
I can't wait for the next BIG PRODUCT from Apple. It will be another "must have" device that I don't even realize that I must have it. Yeah, I'll buy it anway.
I'm in the same demographic!
Ad revenue sharing is common. It's also possible that they are sharing some of the money MANUFACTURERS ARE PAYING them. See? You got it partly right.
There are a number of articles about this, but this one happens to be handy:
http://theunlockr.com/2009/09/26/the...e-vs-cyanogen/
I didn't write that - I wrote that google pays them, that means money goes from google to carrier or manufacturer, its got nothing to do with ad revenue - if google shares some $ - so be it. I think you are splitting hairs here. the point is that google is paying to install OS either directly or indirectly. So please stop looking down in such a condescending manner at me !
My main point still stands I think which logically states that Google is giving it away and pays hardware makers to use it sometimes . This is not how MS Windows was sold. Windows was always paid for by the PC manufacturers and public alike though not at same rate. So comparing Android to the PC market and thus will finish off Apple in the same way in the 90's is logically erroneous.
So stop misquoting me please!
I'd rather be safe than sorry. You know how our conversation over this has gone throughout the years. Neither of us would like to see a really big purchase, though they could always make one that "surprises and delights". But they could make a number of smaller, but still large ones that do make sense. And no, I have no idea as to what they're thinking.
I keep trying to envision a sensible large purchase for Apple; the only thing that I can ever come up with is Sony. But, really, Apple likely doesn't want Sony, just Sony Music Entertainment and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Not to mention that such a purchase might create problems dealing with other content providers.
To me, what's most remarkable about Apple's continued record-breaking success is that almost everything they sell is priced higher than the competition and that they accomplished this in what is still a terrible world-wide economy (in spite of a recovering stock market.)
Imagine what Apple would be accomplishing had there been no recession.
I do think that in the long term, Apple is planning to get involved in totally new businesses. Otherwise, why would they need all that new space in that new campus? And why are they supposedly intending on doubling the size of the server farm?
My bet is that Steve deferred announcing his leave until these numbers could be announced so that there'd be little overall negative impact on the stock price (although I've always gotten the impression that Steve never managed the company to the stock price.)
Actually I think that the recession has helped AAPL, Because people are being more careful about frivolous purchases and realize that Apple products are better value than wasting $ on cheap knockoffs which is why almost every PC company has declining sales
aapl is doomed...
well yeah right! , simply amazing numbers. The Ipod touch too. I think I'm going to get and iPod touch and attach a wi max 4G router to it, then make calls for virtually nothing over skype. Theres plenty of apps to do Texts and SMS. Why people buy iPhones is a mystery to me, yeah I know its harder to receive calls but hey, Is paying over
199+(24mths*85)=> $2239.00
or 199+(24mths*105)=> $2719.00 both are 1 GB per month data
for ONE device , ONE freaking device?
Compared with this: -
Wi-Max (4G) + Ipod touch (month to month contract, unlimited data plan, with up to 5 wifi devices)
($50*24)+ 299 => $1399.00
This is a saving of between $840 - 1320, is imho a really good deal given that I can get the same and more - up to 5 wi-fi devices ie:- run a laptop, iPad, ipod touch and Kindle
Plus I can stop and start the Wi-Max plan as needed to save more
?????????????????????????
This Troll Seems Ashtrayed into " Wrong Place "!
So What Does Your LENGTHY Buying i-Pod touch Plan Has To Do With Apple Dooming?
I do think that in the long term, Apple is planning to get involved in totally new businesses. Otherwise, why would they need all that new space in that new campus? And why are they supposedly intending on doubling the size of the server farm?
Though there will no doubt be room to grow at Apple's new campus, I think this line of thought is overstated. Apple plans to consolidate people currently spread over 54 locations in the area.
Great growth overall, phenomenal growth in China which will be a very important market for Apple to continue to grow. Wasn?t it the Lenovo CEO who said he was glad Apple wasn?t paying attention to China as a market? He has to be sweating a bit right now.
I also expect they will be expanding their efforts in India soon.
They were also no questions on Jobs' LOA. Maybe they told the analysts beforehand that they would not answer any such questions. Still surprising.
In the Macworld Live Blog, someone asked the same question. He was told that Apple never does that. They may not answer a question when asked, but they don't tell people to not ask it.
I assume the aTv was simply overlooked. I also assume that Jobs's health wasn't asked about because it wouldn't be polite.
At least you've still got it.
A vote on the matter would be a squeaker.
I'd rather be safe than sorry. You know how our conversation over this has gone throughout the years. Neither of us would like to see a really big purchase, though they could always make one that "surprises and delights". But they could make a number of smaller, but still large ones that do make sense. And no, I have no idea as to what they're thinking.
It now looks that if they make no large purchase this year, they could have, not $70 billion, but $80 billion; maybe even more. I can't see it getting to that point. But it's much more difficult for stockholders to force the issue than it was with Microsoft. There, the stock had not only stagnated, but was down in actual dollars, and much further down when inflation was taken into account. And I'm not talking about the absurd valuation they had before The Fall.
But, they will likely do something. I don't know if it was true about the CFO story, but it makes sense, considering who it was. Maybe not to replace Oppenheimer, but an additional high level position.
Of course, with that failing, assuming it was real, and Steve's new health issue, things could be derailed for a time.
Well, I'm happy they're not letting it ride on roulette wheels at Monte Carlo, or speculating in hog back futures.
The real forces to be reckoned with are the big institutional investors, not individual schmoes like us. If Apple does start pushing $80b plus, which seems almost certain by the end of the calendar year, the issue of dividends will be pushed by the big stockholders, and will be hard to resist, since they have blocks of voting shares that actually count.
I didn't write that - I wrote that google pays them, that means money goes from google to carrier or manufacturer, its got nothing to do with ad revenue - if google shares some $ - so be it. I think you are splitting hairs here. the point is that google is paying to install OS either directly or indirectly. So please stop looking down in such a condescending manner at me !
My main point still stands I think which logically states that Google is giving it away and pays hardware makers to use it sometimes . This is not how MS Windows was sold. Windows was always paid for by the PC manufacturers and public alike though not at same rate. So comparing Android to the PC market and thus will finish off Apple in the same way in the 90's is logically erroneous.
So stop misquoting me please!
You're saying that, but it still isn't true. Even the article linked to didn't say that.
I keep trying to envision a sensible large purchase for Apple; the only thing that I can ever come up with is Sony. But, really, Apple likely doesn't want Sony, just Sony Music Entertainment and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Not to mention that such a purchase might create problems dealing with other content providers.
The problem with most big companies is that they're in businesses Apple doesn't want to be in, or that conflict with their plans and needs, or with that of other companies Apple is partners with. Usually, the bigger the company, the more this will be true.
Great growth overall, phenomenal growth in China which will be a very important market for Apple to continue to grow. Wasn?t it the Lenovo CEO who said he was glad Apple wasn?t paying attention to China as a market? He has to be sweating a bit right now.
That's why Apple's 4 China stores are the busiest, with both the most traffic, and the most sales. It's also why Apple said that they would have 25 stores in China by the end of 2011.
A vote on the matter would be a squeaker.
Well, I'm happy they're not letting it ride on roulette wheels at Monte Carlo, or speculating in hog back futures.
The real forces to be reckoned with are the big institutional investors, not individual schmoes like us. If Apple does start pushing $80b plus, which seems almost certain by the end of the calendar year, the issue of dividends will be pushed by the big stockholders, and will be hard to resist, since they have blocks of voting shares that actually count.
Yeah, there's plenty of greed out there. I do think that from a companies point of view, investors views are not in alignment with what's best for the company. It's a delicate situation. I've seen many companies burned over the years who listened to investors and the investment community.
But I do think that unless they act fairly quickly to do something with a good chunk of that money, then they may as well give some of it back. And not through a stock buyback.
No, it's not.
Water vapor is invisible. If you can see it, it has condensed into (liquid) droplets. Think 'cloud'.
Good point but steam is also a transitional phase towards vapour.
I wonder who they are going to buy. Got to be Nokia for all their IP.
They'd be wise to secure the most wide-ranging collection of multi-touch and telephony patents available... Clearly the future is iPhone and iPad.
If you are a cell phone carrier and you need an OS to compete with the iPhone would you really trust a software company to develop the OS for it. OR would you prefer to develop it yourself?
In an ideal world of course you would prefer to have it in house - you would then not be beholden to the software company. You would have complete control of the software and be able to customize it for you own phones and not be at the mercy of said software company.
It must be rather galling to be forced to use someone else's OS for your phones. And be completely at the mercy of their development timelines and strategic objectives. As long as that OS is kept up to date and adds new fetaures on time and make sense you should be okay but still!
and to top it off that software company is giving the OS away to your nasty rivals too jeez, But again you really should have seen the iOS coming shouldn't you and not have painted yourself in this tight corner in the first place. well thats what come from gettin' complacent! Innovate or die
___________________________
This is exactly why Apple dumped Adobe Flash.
Why would a bank pay 3% interest to Apple when they can borrow money from the Federal Reserve at .25%? I'm surprised Apple gets 1%.
If Steve would have signed up for direct deposit of his salary, maybe he would have qualified for a higher rate.