Mac sales don't count for hardly anything as far as Apple's revenue stream is concerned. It's all about iPhone market share and Apple is losing that in huge amounts. Apple shareholders will be lucky if Apple shares stay above $500. Apple is a joke of an investment. Google has a target price of around $1350 while Apple has a target price of around $590. One stock will reach it and the other won't. It's no secret that company with a CEO named Tim Cook is going repeat last year's share price fiasco. There's absolutely no growth left in Apple as long as they try to gain market share against Android. H-P is a wreck of a company but at least they're leading in PC sales. Over the last 52 weeks H-P stock has nearly doubled while Apple went up 2%. That's how poorly Wall Street thinks about Tim Cook's performance as a CEO. Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone six years ago and it's fortunate he's not around to see his company being turned into an industry joke.
So 1.7 million pc's @ $1200 each is not worth having? With 40%margins I make that about $816m profit for Apple. Most companies would love a profit of this size.
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
Mac sales don't count for hardly anything as far as Apple's revenue stream is concerned. It's all about iPhone market share and Apple is losing that in huge amounts. Apple shareholders will be lucky if Apple shares stay above $500. Apple is a joke of an investment. Google has a target price of around $1350 while Apple has a target price of around $590. One stock will reach it and the other won't. It's no secret that company with a CEO named Tim Cook is going repeat last year's share price fiasco. There's absolutely no growth left in Apple as long as they try to gain market share against Android. H-P is a wreck of a company but at least they're leading in PC sales. Over the last 52 weeks H-P stock has nearly doubled while Apple went up 2%. That's how poorly Wall Street thinks about Tim Cook's performance as a CEO. Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone six years ago and it's fortunate he's not around to see his company being turned into an industry joke.
Ya know how they have QFT as "quoted for truth"? Would anyone object if I coin QFL (quoted for laughs) as my own?
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
Apple makes more money from Macs than HP+Dell+Asus+Sony+Samsung, combined, make from PCs (do the math or some research. You know how to browse the web or do some math, right? so don't vomit that 3% again). The Mac business itself is a fortune 500 company. It still is Apple's backbone, and it still growns in revenue.
The installed base is huge, especially in developed countries and you never saw as many macs in the wild as you can see today. Remember, as numerous data shows, the large % of macs being sold is to new users and:
- If you buy a PC and I buy a Mac, and 2 or 3 years later you buy another PC because the previous one is horseshit, market share is 2 to 1, but installed userbase is 1 to 1.
Heck, Google itself loves Macs. Just because Apple is getting ready for a 10 billion + net profit during a quarter, it doesn't mean that the mac business is irrelevant. If Analysts were knowlegedeble, the mac business itself should be bigger than HP + Dell + Asus combined, especially since they can still grow.
I'm sorry but some of you (you, especially) are so ignorant, I wonder how you live during the day. Being so ignorant is your choice, you have everything to learn some facts about tech, so that gives me the right to call someone like you, stupid.
Apple makes more money from Macs than HP+Dell+Asus+Sony+Samsung, combined, make from PCs (do the math or some research. You know how to browse the web or do some math, right? so don't vomit that 3% again). The Mac business itself is a fortune 500 company. It still is Apple's backbone, and it still growns in revenue.
The installed base is huge, especially in developed countries and you never saw as many macs in the wild as you can see today. Remember, as numerous data shows, the large % of macs being sold is to new users and:
- If you buy a PC and I buy a Mac, and 2 or 3 years later you buy another PC because the previous one is horseshit, market share is 2 to 1, but installed userbase is 1 to 1.
Heck, Google itself loves Macs. Just because Apple is getting ready for a 10 billion + net profit during a quarter, it doesn't mean that the mac business is irrelevant. If Analysts were knowlegedeble, the mac business itself should be bigger than HP + Dell + Asus combined, especially since they can still grow.
What were you saying?
Do you think you will convince me by acting like a jerk? Think again, babaca.
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
Apple makes Macs because (as you astutely note), 3% is better than 0%, and also Apple wants to be a "full-spectrum" device supplier (their definition of full-spectrum is different from Dell's, but the same idea) -- clearly their software offerings drive people to the Mac products to some extent, since they tend to work better there, from what I gather (I have never used iTunes on Windows). So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price. In a way, actually, that business might do better if it were partially spun off: clearly the people working on the Mac Pro (say) don't get the same attention of the management as the iPhone group, for perfectly good reasons, and this is why (IMHO) it took so long to get the new machine out. Apple has tried the spinning off scheme before with their software business (and still, with Filemaker), and it seems to have been a mixed success. Since they are doing quite well for the last several years, I am sure a reorganization is not a high priority.
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
As for Amazon, they have a different business, and different goals. This is a red herring, as you well know.
Apple makes Macs because (as you astutely note), 3% is better than 0%, and also Apple wants to be a "full-spectrum" device supplier (their definition of full-spectrum is different from Dell's, but the same idea) -- clearly their software offerings drive people to the Mac products to some extent, since they tend to work better there, from what I gather (I have never used iTunes on Windows). So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price. In a way, actually, that business might do better if it were partially spun off: clearly the people working on the Mac Pro (say) don't get the same attention of the management as the iPhone group, for perfectly good reasons, and this is why (IMHO) it took so long to get the new machine out. Apple has tried the spinning off scheme before with their software business (and still, with Filemaker), and it seems to have been a mixed success. Since they are doing quite well for the last several years, I am sure a reorganization is not a high priority.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
(a) You are putting words in my mouth (b) the comparison with Dell/HP seems bogus, because that IS ALL their business, so you are suggesting they leave the business. You are not alone, but it is understandable they disagree. (c) the historical significance argument is bogus: Should Lamborghini be anchored to their original farm equipment business? But (d) as I had said in my previous post, Macs are a part of Apple's strategy, so I am not suggesting they be dumped, merely (I am getting tired of repeating myself) that the ups and downs in Mac revenue are not really very relevant to the Apple P/L.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
No, his premise is that the Mac is insignificant to Wall St analysis smart or dumb. In that case he's correct. A stellar year in Macs won't do much to move the profit needle for Apple. Neither would any significant decline. This is very clear from his statement:
"So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price."
You're reading things into what he's saying that he isn't saying. The fact that the mac may or may not be strategic is immaterial to most analysts. Given that I don't think much of most analysts that's probably a true statement. If nothing else it fits my biases.
Besides, Mac hasn't been central to Apple's valuation pretty much since they dropped "Computer" from the name of the company back in 2007. Even here on AI nobody really cares anymore. I remember the frenzy caused by even a spec bump around here and the huge anticipation for new models. We had to have a whole temporary forum area for the madness.
Today the Mac Pro gets a mild bit of attention but a new iMac or MBP rev is just ho hum news. And that's from enthusiasts.
No, his premise is that the Mac is insignificant to Wall St analysis smart or dumb. In that case he's correct. A stellar year in Macs won't do much to move the profit needle for Apple. Neither would any significant decline. This is very clear from his statement:
"So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price."
You're reading things into what he's saying that he isn't saying. The fact that the mac may or may not be strategic is immaterial to most analysts. Given that I don't think much of most analysts that's probably a true statement. If nothing else it fits my biases.
If that's the argument the I don't understand why it's argument. Besides Wall Street undervaluing everything Apple does that argument could be made back when Apple had the iPod and Mac operations. There was even talk that Apple should give up on the Mac business to focus solely on the iPod, but where would Apple be if there was no Mac to the AppleTV, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, and whatever se comes from the Mac HW and Mac OS X existing. Even if they netted 0% profit since iDevices first appeared it's still important to the success that Apple has seen since before there were iDevices, so I don't understand why such an argument would be made about how much profit the Mac pulls in today.
Besides, Mac hasn't been central to Apple's valuation pretty much since they dropped "Computer" from the name of the company back in 2007. Even here on AI nobody really cares anymore. I remember the frenzy caused by even a spec bump around here and the huge anticipation for new models. We had to have a whole temporary forum area for the madness.
1) A lot of people said "Apple doesn't care about Mac people" when they dropped from Computer from their name. I don't think it means anything other than Apple branching out into additional markets where "computer" isn't an ideal term in the 21st century. This happened well after the success and supplement deduction of the Mac business by percentage and yet the Mac has never been better and more advanced that their WinPC counterparts.
2) If there was a frenzy how could there be no one that cares? I certainly care and this new Mac Pro seems to indicate people care.
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
I think the real number is considerably closer to 30% than 3%.
If it really were 3%, then I'd probably say that dropping the product line would be the way to go as a business decision, unless there are some other strategic reasons for keeping it.
Edit: It's roughly 12% of revenue based on the filed 10-K for last year, so not nearly as high as I thought it would be.
I think the real number is considerably closer to 30% than 3%.
If it really were 3%, then I'd probably say that dropping the product line would be the way to go as a business decision, unless there are some other strategic reasons for keeping it.
Edit: It's roughly 12% of revenue based on the filed 10-K for last year, so not nearly as high as I thought it would be.
Yes, but I was actually saying 3% of profits. I am not sure if Apple breaks profits out (I don't think so), but I am guessing that the Macs are much less profitable than the iPhone, which would bring the profit number below 10% (though probably still above 3%, it's true).
I think the real number is considerably closer to 30% than 3%.
If it really were 3%, then I'd probably say that dropping the product line would be the way to go as a business decision, unless there are some other strategic reasons for keeping it.
Edit: It's roughly 12% of revenue based on the filed 10-K for last year, so not nearly as high as I thought it would be.
Do we have a good enough idea of their net profit margins from each category listed? I'm pretty sure the iPhone is higher than anything else but I'd think iPad and Mac profit margins would be pretty close to each other.
But all that might be moot if we're looking at 1/8th of their revenue still coming from the Mac. it seems to me you'd be foolish to ignore 1/8th of any business. Wall Street might not care about the Mac but they certainly seem to care bout Apple's iTunes business which is only a part of the "iTunes, software, etc." category at only 9%. And since that 9% is considered to be a just above break-even business should we remove it entirely and recalculate the percentages without it?
Do we have a good enough idea of their net profit margins from each category listed? I'm pretty sure the iPhone is higher than anything else but I'd think iPad and Mac profit margins would be pretty close to each other.
But all that might be moot if we're looking at 1/8th of their revenue still coming from the Mac. it seems to me you'd be foolish to ignore 1/8th of any business. Wall Street might not care about the Mac but they certainly seem to care bout Apple's iTunes business which is only a part of the "iTunes, software, etc." category at only 9%. And since that 9% is considered to be a just above break-even business should we remove it entirely and recalculate the percentages without it?
I am curious, why do you say that the iTunes business is just above break-even? I would assume it would be printing money (since apple just takes a cut of everything passing through the iTunes ecosystem, and the curating expense is fairly modest, especially for the music side).
Yes, but I was actually saying 3% of profits. I am not sure if Apple breaks profits out (I don't think so), but I am guessing that the Macs are much less profitable than the iPhone, which would bring the profit number below 10% (though probably still above 3%, it's true).
If you have any sources for determining data then please post it but all I'm seeing are you making up figures to support your argument. You say the iPhone is higher but does that mean the Mac is so low? And have you not adjusted any of your figures to account potential profit margins of the iPod, iTunes, software and services Apple offers? If you had a valid argument at the start of this discussion I'm just not seeing it (I assume you did only because nht thinks you did).
Comments
So 1.7 million pc's @ $1200 each is not worth having? With 40%margins I make that about $816m profit for Apple. Most companies would love a profit of this size.
Same place as always.
Where are those idiot Wall Street "Analysts" now?
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
Mac sales don't count for hardly anything as far as Apple's revenue stream is concerned. It's all about iPhone market share and Apple is losing that in huge amounts. Apple shareholders will be lucky if Apple shares stay above $500. Apple is a joke of an investment. Google has a target price of around $1350 while Apple has a target price of around $590. One stock will reach it and the other won't. It's no secret that company with a CEO named Tim Cook is going repeat last year's share price fiasco. There's absolutely no growth left in Apple as long as they try to gain market share against Android. H-P is a wreck of a company but at least they're leading in PC sales. Over the last 52 weeks H-P stock has nearly doubled while Apple went up 2%. That's how poorly Wall Street thinks about Tim Cook's performance as a CEO. Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone six years ago and it's fortunate he's not around to see his company being turned into an industry joke.
Ya know how they have QFT as "quoted for truth"? Would anyone object if I coin QFL (quoted for laughs) as my own?
What does this have to do with anything? Mac sales is a small part of apple's revenue and profits (about 3%?) so neither the idiot nor the intelligent analysts care that much.
Apple makes more money from Macs than HP+Dell+Asus+Sony+Samsung, combined, make from PCs (do the math or some research. You know how to browse the web or do some math, right? so don't vomit that 3% again). The Mac business itself is a fortune 500 company. It still is Apple's backbone, and it still growns in revenue.
The installed base is huge, especially in developed countries and you never saw as many macs in the wild as you can see today. Remember, as numerous data shows, the large % of macs being sold is to new users and:
- If you buy a PC and I buy a Mac, and 2 or 3 years later you buy another PC because the previous one is horseshit, market share is 2 to 1, but installed userbase is 1 to 1.
Heck, Google itself loves Macs. Just because Apple is getting ready for a 10 billion + net profit during a quarter, it doesn't mean that the mac business is irrelevant. If Analysts were knowlegedeble, the mac business itself should be bigger than HP + Dell + Asus combined, especially since they can still grow.
What were you saying?
I'm sorry but some of you (you, especially) are so ignorant, I wonder how you live during the day. Being so ignorant is your choice, you have everything to learn some facts about tech, so that gives me the right to call someone like you, stupid.
Apple makes more money from Macs than HP+Dell+Asus+Sony+Samsung, combined, make from PCs (do the math or some research. You know how to browse the web or do some math, right? so don't vomit that 3% again). The Mac business itself is a fortune 500 company. It still is Apple's backbone, and it still growns in revenue.
The installed base is huge, especially in developed countries and you never saw as many macs in the wild as you can see today. Remember, as numerous data shows, the large % of macs being sold is to new users and:
- If you buy a PC and I buy a Mac, and 2 or 3 years later you buy another PC because the previous one is horseshit, market share is 2 to 1, but installed userbase is 1 to 1.
Heck, Google itself loves Macs. Just because Apple is getting ready for a 10 billion + net profit during a quarter, it doesn't mean that the mac business is irrelevant. If Analysts were knowlegedeble, the mac business itself should be bigger than HP + Dell + Asus combined, especially since they can still grow.
What were you saying?
Do you think you will convince me by acting like a jerk? Think again, babaca.
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
Apple makes Macs because (as you astutely note), 3% is better than 0%, and also Apple wants to be a "full-spectrum" device supplier (their definition of full-spectrum is different from Dell's, but the same idea) -- clearly their software offerings drive people to the Mac products to some extent, since they tend to work better there, from what I gather (I have never used iTunes on Windows). So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price. In a way, actually, that business might do better if it were partially spun off: clearly the people working on the Mac Pro (say) don't get the same attention of the management as the iPhone group, for perfectly good reasons, and this is why (IMHO) it took so long to get the new machine out. Apple has tried the spinning off scheme before with their software business (and still, with Filemaker), and it seems to have been a mixed success. Since they are doing quite well for the last several years, I am sure a reorganization is not a high priority.
You need to ask yourself why Apple continues to make Macs if it's such a small percent of their revenue and profits. Would you want 3% of your profits dropped all of a sudden? Do you think it would help Apple if they all of a sudden closed up all Mac development? How many billions are they now losing per year without any Macs? Since the iPod and Apple TV are such small parts of their business should they close up that, too? What about iTunes Store and iCloud services since those make svn less profit than their HW?
So now we have a company that only makes iPhones and iPads which are each very successful even though the company is now a fraction of its previous size and power. Does that help or hurt Apple and their investors? How many iDevice buyers have bought Macs? IOW, are they getting crossover sales from customers having first bought an iPod, iPhone and/or iPad, which are less expensive? The answer is yes!
You're coming at this as if the Mac is just a bunch of excess fat that needs to be removed, and not an important 3%. I consider the Mac to be a very important part of their business. A part that ties into other parts and one that Apple not cares about but is pushing the boundaries in ways that makes it good for all PC buyers out there.
PS: Amazon would be lucky to get 3% profit in a quarter so I guess they whole company should be closed¡
As for Amazon, they have a different business, and different goals. This is a red herring, as you well know.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
(a) You are putting words in my mouth (b) the comparison with Dell/HP seems bogus, because that IS ALL their business, so you are suggesting they leave the business. You are not alone, but it is understandable they disagree. (c) the historical significance argument is bogus: Should Lamborghini be anchored to their original farm equipment business? But (d) as I had said in my previous post, Macs are a part of Apple's strategy, so I am not suggesting they be dumped, merely (I am getting tired of repeating myself) that the ups and downs in Mac revenue are not really very relevant to the Apple P/L.
Your entire premise is flawed. Mac is significant to Apple. It's because of the Mac that the iPod, AppleTV, iPhone and iPad all exist. You can't simply say that because now Mac makes up a small percentage of Apple's profits due to a huge success of the iPad and iPhone that it's worthless. That is like saying Dell and HP don't care about the PC business because Apple takes around 50% of the industry's profits.
It's also foolish to state Apple is losing ground with the iPhone and iPad when they are making more profit every year. Hating on Apple doesn't make you correct.
No, his premise is that the Mac is insignificant to Wall St analysis smart or dumb. In that case he's correct. A stellar year in Macs won't do much to move the profit needle for Apple. Neither would any significant decline. This is very clear from his statement:
"So, I am not suggesting that Apple drop their computer business, merely that its success is of very small significance to the company's market cap/stock price."
You're reading things into what he's saying that he isn't saying. The fact that the mac may or may not be strategic is immaterial to most analysts. Given that I don't think much of most analysts that's probably a true statement. If nothing else it fits my biases.
Besides, Mac hasn't been central to Apple's valuation pretty much since they dropped "Computer" from the name of the company back in 2007. Even here on AI nobody really cares anymore. I remember the frenzy caused by even a spec bump around here and the huge anticipation for new models. We had to have a whole temporary forum area for the madness.
Today the Mac Pro gets a mild bit of attention but a new iMac or MBP rev is just ho hum news. And that's from enthusiasts.
If that's the argument the I don't understand why it's argument. Besides Wall Street undervaluing everything Apple does that argument could be made back when Apple had the iPod and Mac operations. There was even talk that Apple should give up on the Mac business to focus solely on the iPod, but where would Apple be if there was no Mac to the AppleTV, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, and whatever se comes from the Mac HW and Mac OS X existing. Even if they netted 0% profit since iDevices first appeared it's still important to the success that Apple has seen since before there were iDevices, so I don't understand why such an argument would be made about how much profit the Mac pulls in today.
1) A lot of people said "Apple doesn't care about Mac people" when they dropped from Computer from their name. I don't think it means anything other than Apple branching out into additional markets where "computer" isn't an ideal term in the 21st century. This happened well after the success and supplement deduction of the Mac business by percentage and yet the Mac has never been better and more advanced that their WinPC counterparts.
2) If there was a frenzy how could there be no one that cares? I certainly care and this new Mac Pro seems to indicate people care.
I think the real number is considerably closer to 30% than 3%.
If it really were 3%, then I'd probably say that dropping the product line would be the way to go as a business decision, unless there are some other strategic reasons for keeping it.
Edit: It's roughly 12% of revenue based on the filed 10-K for last year, so not nearly as high as I thought it would be.
iPhone: 54%
iPad: 18.6%
Mac: 12.5%
iPod: 2.6%
iTunes, software, etc. 9%
Accessories 3.3%
Page 27:
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/1761120739x0x701402/a406ad58-6bde-4190-96a1-4cc2d0d67986/AAPL_FY13_10K_10.30.13.pdf
I think the real number is considerably closer to 30% than 3%.
If it really were 3%, then I'd probably say that dropping the product line would be the way to go as a business decision, unless there are some other strategic reasons for keeping it.
Edit: It's roughly 12% of revenue based on the filed 10-K for last year, so not nearly as high as I thought it would be.
iPhone: 54%
iPad: 18.6%
Mac: 12.5%
iPod: 2.6%
iTunes, software, etc. 9%
Accessories 3.3%
Page 27:
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/1761120739x0x701402/a406ad58-6bde-4190-96a1-4cc2d0d67986/AAPL_FY13_10K_10.30.13.pdf
Yes, but I was actually saying 3% of profits. I am not sure if Apple breaks profits out (I don't think so), but I am guessing that the Macs are much less profitable than the iPhone, which would bring the profit number below 10% (though probably still above 3%, it's true).
Do we have a good enough idea of their net profit margins from each category listed? I'm pretty sure the iPhone is higher than anything else but I'd think iPad and Mac profit margins would be pretty close to each other.
But all that might be moot if we're looking at 1/8th of their revenue still coming from the Mac. it seems to me you'd be foolish to ignore 1/8th of any business. Wall Street might not care about the Mac but they certainly seem to care bout Apple's iTunes business which is only a part of the "iTunes, software, etc." category at only 9%. And since that 9% is considered to be a just above break-even business should we remove it entirely and recalculate the percentages without it?
Do we have a good enough idea of their net profit margins from each category listed? I'm pretty sure the iPhone is higher than anything else but I'd think iPad and Mac profit margins would be pretty close to each other.
But all that might be moot if we're looking at 1/8th of their revenue still coming from the Mac. it seems to me you'd be foolish to ignore 1/8th of any business. Wall Street might not care about the Mac but they certainly seem to care bout Apple's iTunes business which is only a part of the "iTunes, software, etc." category at only 9%. And since that 9% is considered to be a just above break-even business should we remove it entirely and recalculate the percentages without it?
I am curious, why do you say that the iTunes business is just above break-even? I would assume it would be printing money (since apple just takes a cut of everything passing through the iTunes ecosystem, and the curating expense is fairly modest, especially for the music side).
If you have any sources for determining data then please post it but all I'm seeing are you making up figures to support your argument. You say the iPhone is higher but does that mean the Mac is so low? And have you not adjusted any of your figures to account potential profit margins of the iPod, iTunes, software and services Apple offers? If you had a valid argument at the start of this discussion I'm just not seeing it (I assume you did only because nht thinks you did).