If they manage to sell over 32m iPhone 5s in Q2 2013, that's almost as many as the total iPhones sold in Q2 2012. If the earnings report backs up lower demand ok but if not, it's time to start calling out the sources who report this.
The reason for the drop in orders is simple. iPhone 5 is a huge disappointment. It was crystal clear from the day it came out to many Apple fans including me but not to Tim Cook. And primarily for this reason, I felt for the first time since 2005 that Apple stock is a SELL and stated so here. Like it or not, ignore it all you want, but we have seen nothing yet. AAPL is heading to $300 because Apple's chief cash cow - iPhone - is not the best smartphone anymore. Consumer Reports confirmed the obvious but only recently. For those few who care to read my musings about the underlying reasons for Apple's recent failures just follow the top link by googling: Apple DNA principles.
Standard disclosure: I have no positions in AAPL stock, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Delusional or sarcastic? The iPhone still generates the bulk of the mobile profits. CR couldn't recommend the 4 even though it was rated the highest.
... and all you a-holes who said people like me were panicking for nothing when we said Apple is falling apart ....
That DOES NOT mean we're saying Apple will fail.
What we are saying is that the Jobsian luster is FINISHED & will never, ever, ever come back.
Look at the VP turnover in a year ....
What, did Steve suddenly become stupid & Forstall was a bad hire?
Look at the MAPS fiasco ....
Steve went apeshit crazy over something as incosequential as "MobileMe": do you think that same person would've allowed something like that to happen?!?
Look at the stock crash in such a short amount of time .... If that were any other company, they'd be well into making funeral arrangements by now.
Look at the products ....
They had to wait until the poor guy was cold before they bought out something he expressly forbade: the iPad Mini.
Apple over-order components?!?
With the "Masters O' Marketing & Supply Chain" Phil & Tim at the helm?!?
Ever since Steve's untimely passing, Apple's been riding on fumes, admit it ....
And if that's your source of fuel, you're not gonna go for very long.
Now, in about a year's time, the fumes themselves've dried up.
Unless there's an iBand, or a blowaway TV, or something IN THE EXTREMELY NEAR FUTURE, Apple will decline -- NOT FAIL, but DECLINE!!!! --
into a post-Steve malaise from which it will never recover.
1) All use "assholes" probably wanted you to back up your fear with reasonable data. If you are using this article as proof you clearly didn't.
2) There were bad hires under Jobs. Handpicked by Jobs.
3) Odd you mention MobileMe and that Jobs wouldn't allow something like that to happen because IT DID HAPPEN!
4) Look at the stock crashes under Jobs in such a short amount of time.
5) Jobs forbade the iPad mini? Where is your proof? There is evidence to suggest it was Jobs idea and the fact that it came out a year after Jobs passed away strongly indicates that it was a working product in their labs while Jobs was alive.
6) So now that Tim Cook is CEO you think he's no longer competent at doing what he's known best for? Makes perfect sense¡
7) Let me get this straight: So as soon died the fuel died was gone and they were instantly on fumes for the past year which have now dried up and they are they still functioning? Why don't you leave the metaphors to adults.
8) Now you're saying Apple can save themselves with a new product? Something people are expecting? You just said they have been running on fumes that have dried up. You've claimed they can't do anything right without Jobs so surely, from your PoV, they will **** this up. You might as well end your life now because it will never get better for you. You'll never again be able to suckle the teat of Jobs but I kid, because I have a feeling you were the person that kept saying Apple would fail under Jobs but now that Jobs is gone you've moved your vitriolic goal posts to say Jobs was great but without him Apple is doomed.
9) Why not look at the facts for once? An unstable market and Apple has increased it's stock price by about 25% over the past year. They are by far the largest company in the world and yet they still increased their revenue and profit YoY. Seems pretty impressive to me for such a large company.
While Steve was alive Tim didn't have to worry about one side of the equation.
On top of that, the equation has changed dramatically without Steve there to guide products.
Tim "might" have been ordering products based on the Jobs era but we've moved into a new day.
It wouldn't be the first time that a first rate manager has sunk under new conditions.
I want to see how it goes in 2013 before I pass judgement on Cook's performance.
It's possible but I think the more scenario is that Tim Cook will still excel at the areas he does best at and so far Apple has shown to be growing well under Cook. The iPhone launched in a lot more countries in a short amount of time last year than ever before with the unit sales higher than ever before. On top of that they added an entirely new product to the lineup. The longterm could be different but so far Cook is looking like he's got it under control.
"Cut orders by half" compared to what? And is this being interpreted as "cancelled" orders ("cutting orders" implies that Apple had ordered, say, a million of something then revised and "cut" the order to only half a million)? Or is it simply revising next-quarter purchasing downward?
Reduced FROM holiday quarter component purchasing levels? Sure, possibly%u2026 ramping down for a product refresh (or new model addition) as well? Possibly.
But "weak demand"? My absolute LAST conclusion when Apple makes supply adjustments%u2026
When, at any time in its history has iPhone (or any iDevice for that matter, aside from the VERY slow decline of the iPod) experienced "weak demand"?
I think I know what this is (and it's odd to me that no-one else has mentioned it). It's a craven, almost blatant market manipulation just ahead of Apple's quarterly financial report.
Someone just made - or is about to make - a lot of money from that nonsense "analyst report."
When they want to make a big buy on Apple, just release a "report" that Apple has suddenly cut their sales projections in half due to "weak demand". The stock will surely drop precipitously, creating the perfect buying opportunity!!! But we'll see counterbalancing reports%u2026 some as blatant as "Oops! No, no, everything's fine after all!"
And yet another blowout, record quarter about to be announced, this time, exceeding expectations, and the stock will rally wildly%u2026 whoever bought when the stock dipped briefly below $500 is going to be very happy ten days from now.
Especially the people who are creating these wild mood swings%u2026
The SEC should be watching the stock portfolios attached to these 'analysts'%u2026 I call criminal manipulation on this one...
Could it also be that in Asia everyone is moving to Samsung phones? I see it every day, it's rare to see iPhones in Hong Kong nowdays.
That's kind of a bald faced "fact manipulation" right there… I was in HK recently. iPhones everywhere. Are you being disingenuous here, or just "seeing selectively"?
And HK is not "Asia". It's one city in a vast region known as Asia, each with its own demographic trends, etc… what happens in HK isn't necessarily happening in Tokyo or Singapore or Shanghai...
Huh. Do you work for Samsung by any chance? Your comment fits their general ad campaign strategy pretty well...
If they manage to sell over 32m iPhone 5s in Q2 2013, that's almost as many as the total iPhones sold in Q2 2012. If the earnings report backs up lower demand ok but if not, it's time to start calling out the sources who report this.
Of course, just being equal to last year would be considered a poor showing. Apple is expected to greatly increase sales YOY, just like Samsung.
(PS. Actually, 32 million would be the same amount of iPhones sold to end users in 2FQ 2012. Informed financial followers know that Apple does NOT just report end user sales, as a popular but ignorant internet myth claims. Apple's sales figures also include wholesales to retailers and carriers. For that quarter, Apple reported 35 million sales. However, it turned out later there were almost three million more retailer sell-ins than end user sell-throughs. Retailers had been shipped (sold) too much inventory. Tim Cook admitted this in the next quarter's earnings call. Same thing happened with iPads later on.)
"And so what that did was, it increased sell in over sell through by 2.6 million units" - Tim Cook, 3FQ12 earnings call, explaining much lower than expected 4S sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
5) Jobs forbade the iPad mini? Where is your proof? There is evidence to suggest it was Jobs idea and the fact that it came out a year after Jobs passed away strongly indicates that it was a working product in their labs while Jobs was alive.
You're right, Jobs didn't forbid it, but he didn't think of it either.
We know from documents revealed in court that it was Eddie Cue, then Apple SVP for Internet Experiences, who talked Apple into doing a 7" tablet, after Cue used a small screen Samsung Tab for a while and found out that it was nowhere near as bad as Jobs had claimed:
You're right, Jobs didn't forbid it, but he didn't think of it either.
We know from documents revealed in court that it was Eddie Cue, then Apple SVP for Internet Experiences, who talked Apple into doing a 7" tablet, after Cue used a small screen Samsung Tab for a while and found out that it was nowhere near as bad as Jobs had claimed:
I wouldn't call the iPad mini a 7" tablet. It's closer to 8" than the original iPad is as close to 10" and we don't call it the 9" iPad. The iPad mini's display is about 40% larger than those 7" tablets. That makes it much better for many tasks. The quote we have from Jobs is that the current lot of 7" tablets are DOA. He was right.
I wouldn't call the iPad mini a 7" tablet. It's closer to 8" than the original iPad is as close to 10" and we don't call it the 9" iPad. The iPad mini's display is about 40% larger than those 7" tablets. That makes it much better for many tasks. The quote we have from Jobs is that the current lot of 7" tablets are DOA. He was right.
It certainly is simplistic. By screen area, iPad mini would be equivalent to a larger than 8" Android tablet. Mini doesn't feel cramped like all of the 7" tablets I've tried.
Repeating and fabricating this kind of nonsense combined with the introduction of moderators and the new (ad infested) format makes an end to my visits to this site.
It certainly is simplistic. By screen area, iPad mini would be equivalent to a larger than 8" Android tablet. Mini doesn't feel cramped like all of the 7" tablets I've tried.
indeed. I also think the mini is the best small tablet out there, but you do pay more for it.
It certainly is simplistic. By screen area, iPad mini would be equivalent to a larger than 8" Android tablet. Mini doesn't feel cramped like all of the 7" tablets I've tried.
I feel less cramped on the 6" Kindle Paperwhite (which I love) than I do when playing with 7" Android tablets. I think it's because of the 16:9 aspect ratio which makes it ideal for viewing 16:9 video and hardly anything else. reading text in anything else just feels wrong in either landscape or portrait.
Comments
No reason for that rumour to be ongoing:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/155400/phil-schiller-says-apple-would-never-make-a-cheap-iphone
The reduction seems to stem from them ordering too many:
http://bgr.com/2013/01/14/iphone-5-analysis-component-cuts-291307/
If they manage to sell over 32m iPhone 5s in Q2 2013, that's almost as many as the total iPhones sold in Q2 2012. If the earnings report backs up lower demand ok but if not, it's time to start calling out the sources who report this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_mac_lover
What does it mean " weaker than expected " ? Expected by who ? The toilet cleaner ? Or your grand mum ?
Toilet cleaner. My grand is mum on the subject.
Delusional or sarcastic? The iPhone still generates the bulk of the mobile profits. CR couldn't recommend the 4 even though it was rated the highest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Delusional or sarcastic? The iPhone still generates the bulk of the mobile profits. CR couldn't recommend the 4 even though it was rated the highest.
He's not being sarcastic.
Hope that answers your question.
1) All use "assholes" probably wanted you to back up your fear with reasonable data. If you are using this article as proof you clearly didn't.
2) There were bad hires under Jobs. Handpicked by Jobs.
3) Odd you mention MobileMe and that Jobs wouldn't allow something like that to happen because IT DID HAPPEN!
4) Look at the stock crashes under Jobs in such a short amount of time.
5) Jobs forbade the iPad mini? Where is your proof? There is evidence to suggest it was Jobs idea and the fact that it came out a year after Jobs passed away strongly indicates that it was a working product in their labs while Jobs was alive.
6) So now that Tim Cook is CEO you think he's no longer competent at doing what he's known best for? Makes perfect sense¡
7) Let me get this straight: So as soon died the fuel died was gone and they were instantly on fumes for the past year which have now dried up and they are they still functioning? Why don't you leave the metaphors to adults.
8) Now you're saying Apple can save themselves with a new product? Something people are expecting? You just said they have been running on fumes that have dried up. You've claimed they can't do anything right without Jobs so surely, from your PoV, they will **** this up. You might as well end your life now because it will never get better for you. You'll never again be able to suckle the teat of Jobs but I kid, because I have a feeling you were the person that kept saying Apple would fail under Jobs but now that Jobs is gone you've moved your vitriolic goal posts to say Jobs was great but without him Apple is doomed.
9) Why not look at the facts for once? An unstable market and Apple has increased it's stock price by about 25% over the past year. They are by far the largest company in the world and yet they still increased their revenue and profit YoY. Seems pretty impressive to me for such a large company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
6) So now that Tim Cook is CEO you think he's no longer competent at doing what he's known best for? Makes perfect sense¡
The jury is still out on that one for me.
While Steve was alive Tim didn't have to worry about one side of the equation.
On top of that, the equation has changed dramatically without Steve there to guide products.
Tim "might" have been ordering products based on the Jobs era but we've moved into a new day.
It wouldn't be the first time that a first rate manager has sunk under new conditions.
I want to see how it goes in 2013 before I pass judgement on Cook's performance.
It's possible but I think the more scenario is that Tim Cook will still excel at the areas he does best at and so far Apple has shown to be growing well under Cook. The iPhone launched in a lot more countries in a short amount of time last year than ever before with the unit sales higher than ever before. On top of that they added an entirely new product to the lineup. The longterm could be different but so far Cook is looking like he's got it under control.
Originally Posted by ascii
Market saturation?
You can always always ALWAYS tell a post is absolute crap if MacRulez gives it a +1.
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Still amazes me that people claim there's no manipulation going on with this stock.
And yet they do, violently insulting all who oppose them.
Reduced FROM holiday quarter component purchasing levels? Sure, possibly%u2026 ramping down for a product refresh (or new model addition) as well? Possibly.
But "weak demand"? My absolute LAST conclusion when Apple makes supply adjustments%u2026
When, at any time in its history has iPhone (or any iDevice for that matter, aside from the VERY slow decline of the iPod) experienced "weak demand"?
I think I know what this is (and it's odd to me that no-one else has mentioned it). It's a craven, almost blatant market manipulation just ahead of Apple's quarterly financial report.
Someone just made - or is about to make - a lot of money from that nonsense "analyst report."
When they want to make a big buy on Apple, just release a "report" that Apple has suddenly cut their sales projections in half due to "weak demand". The stock will surely drop precipitously, creating the perfect buying opportunity!!! But we'll see counterbalancing reports%u2026 some as blatant as "Oops! No, no, everything's fine after all!"
And yet another blowout, record quarter about to be announced, this time, exceeding expectations, and the stock will rally wildly%u2026 whoever bought when the stock dipped briefly below $500 is going to be very happy ten days from now.
Especially the people who are creating these wild mood swings%u2026
The SEC should be watching the stock portfolios attached to these 'analysts'%u2026 I call criminal manipulation on this one...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxt
Could it also be that in Asia everyone is moving to Samsung phones? I see it every day, it's rare to see iPhones in Hong Kong nowdays.
That's kind of a bald faced "fact manipulation" right there… I was in HK recently. iPhones everywhere. Are you being disingenuous here, or just "seeing selectively"?
And HK is not "Asia". It's one city in a vast region known as Asia, each with its own demographic trends, etc… what happens in HK isn't necessarily happening in Tokyo or Singapore or Shanghai...
Huh. Do you work for Samsung by any chance? Your comment fits their general ad campaign strategy pretty well...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
If they manage to sell over 32m iPhone 5s in Q2 2013, that's almost as many as the total iPhones sold in Q2 2012. If the earnings report backs up lower demand ok but if not, it's time to start calling out the sources who report this.
Of course, just being equal to last year would be considered a poor showing. Apple is expected to greatly increase sales YOY, just like Samsung.
(PS. Actually, 32 million would be the same amount of iPhones sold to end users in 2FQ 2012. Informed financial followers know that Apple does NOT just report end user sales, as a popular but ignorant internet myth claims. Apple's sales figures also include wholesales to retailers and carriers. For that quarter, Apple reported 35 million sales. However, it turned out later there were almost three million more retailer sell-ins than end user sell-throughs. Retailers had been shipped (sold) too much inventory. Tim Cook admitted this in the next quarter's earnings call. Same thing happened with iPads later on.)
"And so what that did was, it increased sell in over sell through by 2.6 million units" - Tim Cook, 3FQ12 earnings call, explaining much lower than expected 4S sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
5) Jobs forbade the iPad mini? Where is your proof? There is evidence to suggest it was Jobs idea and the fact that it came out a year after Jobs passed away strongly indicates that it was a working product in their labs while Jobs was alive.
You're right, Jobs didn't forbid it, but he didn't think of it either.
We know from documents revealed in court that it was Eddie Cue, then Apple SVP for Internet Experiences, who talked Apple into doing a 7" tablet, after Cue used a small screen Samsung Tab for a while and found out that it was nowhere near as bad as Jobs had claimed:
I wouldn't call the iPad mini a 7" tablet. It's closer to 8" than the original iPad is as close to 10" and we don't call it the 9" iPad. The iPad mini's display is about 40% larger than those 7" tablets. That makes it much better for many tasks. The quote we have from Jobs is that the current lot of 7" tablets are DOA. He was right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I wouldn't call the iPad mini a 7" tablet. It's closer to 8" ...
Agreed. I was repeating what Cue called the form factor when he referenced a "7 inch market."
It certainly is simplistic. By screen area, iPad mini would be equivalent to a larger than 8" Android tablet. Mini doesn't feel cramped like all of the 7" tablets I've tried.
Repeating and fabricating this kind of nonsense combined with the introduction of moderators and the new (ad infested) format makes an end to my visits to this site.
Last post.
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
It certainly is simplistic. By screen area, iPad mini would be equivalent to a larger than 8" Android tablet. Mini doesn't feel cramped like all of the 7" tablets I've tried.
indeed. I also think the mini is the best small tablet out there, but you do pay more for it.
Never mind.
I feel less cramped on the 6" Kindle Paperwhite (which I love) than I do when playing with 7" Android tablets. I think it's because of the 16:9 aspect ratio which makes it ideal for viewing 16:9 video and hardly anything else. reading text in anything else just feels wrong in either landscape or portrait.