Realism: Apple had a lousy quarter.
Following Macs for a while, you start to see that Apple fans are eternal optimists. It's always wait 'til next quarter or the next product comes out. After a while I gave up my optimism for realism. So I'm going to tell you how Apple is REALLY doing. I am also going to post a thread What Apple Must Do To Grow. I am not trolling. To grow Apple must be daring and take on Windows head on.
But for this thread I am going to give you a real perspective of how Apple's fortunes are looking. It may not be what you want to hear but the truth is what matters. We live in a society that can't think past two months ago. Instead we analyze things in terms of the latest news events rather than a progression of events through months and years.
Let's start off with PowerMac G4 sales. Apple sold 212,000 last quarter and that's horrible compared to the 350,000 to 400,000 they were selling two years ago. This is due to the megahertz gap ONLY. First you might argue that the whole computer industry is selling less units as a whole. But this is because more people have a computer now and there is less reason to upgrade. THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO CUSTOMERS OF APPLE'S POWERMAC LINE. The creative professionals who pay more for the high end PowerMacs do so because they need as much speed as they can get. They always have and always will. If I'm not mistaken, at the beginning of this year the PowerMac was at 500MHZ but was upped to 733 and then 867. So there is plenty of reason for customers to replace their slower machines since 867 is almost double 500. But they are buying less because Wintels are faster and much cheaper. This is reality. You can say there was a slow economy. But this might reduce sales by 10 or 15 per cent, not 45%. If you think sales slow by that much in a slow economy you must also be frightened every time they hype the next big winter storm coming. These things are exaggerated to sell papers. And finally, you can also say that customers are waiting for Photoshop for OS X to come out to upgrade. But this is nonsense. If they are running Photoshop on OS 9 right now they can use the faster machine right now. I think Photoshop even uses dual processors in OS 9. There's no reason to wait for OS X because speed is speed and Photoshop on OS 9 is faster on an 867 than on a 500. I know it's not directly Apple's fault that the PowerPC isn't keeping up with the Pentium. It's just economics. The x86 market is 20 times larger and making fast processors is all about volume and billions of dollars to design them and make the factories to produce them. Motorola can't keep up with the economies of scale and PowerMac sales will NEVER return to previous levels. We have nothing but rumors now and it just doesn't make sense in terms of basic economics for Motorola to be able to keep up.
For Apple to get the PowerMac numbers back they must go to x86, but that's another thread.
Now let's look at iMac sales because here is another huge probelm. You might be saying that Apple says demand is big for the new iMac. I'm sure there will be some initial buyers who fall in love with it. But here's reality. No matter how cool or a great value the new iMac is, there simply is virtually no room for growth at the $1299 level. PCs sell for way less and customers don't expect to pay that much.
The iMac was a really strong seller when it was competitive specwise with PCs. But people got tired of 15 inch monitors and sales tanked. THE iMac WAS ONLY SUCCESSFUL IN IT'S TIME WHEN IT WAS A GOOD VALUE COMPARED TO MIDRANGE PCs. When prices fell and its specs were lousy it sold less and less, and only the sub $1000 models sold at all. WHAT APPLE NEEDED TO DO WAS MAKE THE MAC COMPETITIVE AGAIN IN THE SUB $1,000 MARKET. Let me repeat this again. WHAT APPLE NEEDED TO DO WAS MAKE THE MAC COMPETITIVE AGAIN IN THE SUB $1,000 MARKET. This is the only place to really grow. Apple is already an outsider and a niche, and $1299 PCs are not in the range people expect to pay. A Mac with 17 inch CRT for $999 or less would have been what Apple needed to make the iMac exactly as appealing as it was before.
$1299 is the high end for a computer. The new iMac is a fantastic value when you consider the LCD, BUT ONLY 15% OF MONITORS SOLD ARE LCDS. So Macs are a niche and LCDs are restricted to the high end. I hope the new iMac does well but I can't see much growth possibilities in that price range. The place to take customers is $700-$1100 and the old iMac is still anemic competition.
You can analyze things in terms of the headlines you read yeaterday about iMac have strong initial demand, but the plan for the iMac HAS ALWAYS BEEN to be competitive with the midrange of the PC pricewise. This is no longer happening. $1299 is more than most expect to pay and most don't plan to buy an LCD.
Now you may be saying that the Apple retail stores will help the new iMac. Here's more bad news. First of all, the iMac is a little too out there design wise to sell well in a crappy setting like CompUSA, but it's possible. But there are only 27 Apple stores and they LOST $8 million last quarter. I don't buy this stuff about sales picking up strongly. There are many more shoppers in the mall during Christmas quarter than in other quarters. January through March is a slow quarter. Once you've seen the Apple store how many more times do you need to see it? Don't get me wrong. The Apple stores may soon break even or make a profit. BUT 27 STORES IS HARDLY ANYTHING, and a loss of $8 million shows there is much risk. If they had lost $1 million I would say "Great, that's almost nothing so open up another 200 stores right now.". But an $8 million loss, though certainly not telling of the future, says one thing for certain. Apple CAN lose a lot of money on these stores in bad times and has to move slowly in opening them. But to really grow marketshare, and to really show the general public a buying experience deserving of the Mac, APPLE NEEDS 200 TO 500 STORES. If one store converts 2,000 Wintel customers a year, that would be great, but that would only be 78,000 customers for Apple's current 27 plus 12 currently planned. 78,000 customers is less than 0.1% of the market. Growing marketshare from these stores is possible, but it's going to be a high wire act to achieve.
Now how about iPod sales. Apple might make a measly $150,000,000 in profits this year. This might sound like a lot but it means Apple is simply treading water to stay in place. To make a real mark on the marketplace, APLE NEEDS A NEW BEYOND THE BOX PRODUCT EACH MONTH. A new reason for the customers to buy the Mac or to visit the Apple store again needs to be given EACH MONTH. Apple can do this but it's all about having the resources to design, ramp up initial production, produce, and market the product. If Apple made $800 million this year, they could through an extra $300 million to R&D and spend it all on Beyond The Box.
But Apple will only make $150 million this year if things stay about the same. BUT IF THEY RELEASED iPod FOR WINDOWS THEY COULD DOUBLE THEIR PROFITS. Analysts have said that they could sell 4 TIMES AS MANY iPods if they released it for Windows. If you figure $75 profit
per iPod and figure they will sell 1/2 million this year, then that's 1.5 million more if they release it for Windows. That's more than $100 million dollars profits. Right now by keeping it Mac only, they will get a small handful more new Mac users. BY RELEASING IT FOR WINDOWS, THEY BUILD A NEW IMAGE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND HAVE 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE WALKING AROUND LOVING THEIR APPLE PRODUCT AND SHOWING IT TO FRIENDS. This makes those 1.5 million people much more likely to stop by that Apple Store again and eventually by that Mac. This strategy of keeping everything on the Mac island and expecting customers to swim over just isn't going to work. It's much wiser to get Apple products into people's homes and have them talking about these products by putting SOME Mac advantages on windows.
I just don't see where growth will come from. Apple sold only about 60% as many Macs last quarter as they did in the December of 99 quarter when they sold 1.377 million WHEN THE iMac WAS COMPETITIVE WITH MIDRANGE PCS. They aren't really growing until they've reached that level again.
And finally, let's look at the absolute worst news. Microsoft is building a cage for the entire industry with .NET. Soon they will be selling the HomeStation, a digital hub for the home. This is the kind of thing Apple would excel at, BUT THEY WON"T EVEN BE ABLE TO ENTER THE MARKET. The industry won't support two infrastructures for device networking. And Apple doesn't even have the software to compete. .NET IS OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE that should come from Apple but won't. Apple will have to accept whatever support Microsoft offers. In other words. part of the basic functionality of what MacOS does WILL BE PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT AS THEY SEE FIT. .NET is basic operating system functionality as much Quicktime or OpenGL is. Microsoft is getting new people signing on everyday. They are making software for Windows XP, that CAN'T BE WRITTEN FOR THE MAC, unless Microsoft allows it to be and M$ will give itself advantages over everyone else. People WILL be using .NET services, AND WILL COME TO NEED THEM. I don't know what Apple will be able to do to differentiate itself. Apple made a measly $38 million last quarter, while Microsoft is pulling in a billion or so each month. Imagine all the programmers you can hire or the intellectual property or companies you can buy with $1 BILLION. Microsoft will have the future of computers to themselves because no one will have the capital to match their projects.
[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: spindler ]</p>
But for this thread I am going to give you a real perspective of how Apple's fortunes are looking. It may not be what you want to hear but the truth is what matters. We live in a society that can't think past two months ago. Instead we analyze things in terms of the latest news events rather than a progression of events through months and years.
Let's start off with PowerMac G4 sales. Apple sold 212,000 last quarter and that's horrible compared to the 350,000 to 400,000 they were selling two years ago. This is due to the megahertz gap ONLY. First you might argue that the whole computer industry is selling less units as a whole. But this is because more people have a computer now and there is less reason to upgrade. THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO CUSTOMERS OF APPLE'S POWERMAC LINE. The creative professionals who pay more for the high end PowerMacs do so because they need as much speed as they can get. They always have and always will. If I'm not mistaken, at the beginning of this year the PowerMac was at 500MHZ but was upped to 733 and then 867. So there is plenty of reason for customers to replace their slower machines since 867 is almost double 500. But they are buying less because Wintels are faster and much cheaper. This is reality. You can say there was a slow economy. But this might reduce sales by 10 or 15 per cent, not 45%. If you think sales slow by that much in a slow economy you must also be frightened every time they hype the next big winter storm coming. These things are exaggerated to sell papers. And finally, you can also say that customers are waiting for Photoshop for OS X to come out to upgrade. But this is nonsense. If they are running Photoshop on OS 9 right now they can use the faster machine right now. I think Photoshop even uses dual processors in OS 9. There's no reason to wait for OS X because speed is speed and Photoshop on OS 9 is faster on an 867 than on a 500. I know it's not directly Apple's fault that the PowerPC isn't keeping up with the Pentium. It's just economics. The x86 market is 20 times larger and making fast processors is all about volume and billions of dollars to design them and make the factories to produce them. Motorola can't keep up with the economies of scale and PowerMac sales will NEVER return to previous levels. We have nothing but rumors now and it just doesn't make sense in terms of basic economics for Motorola to be able to keep up.
For Apple to get the PowerMac numbers back they must go to x86, but that's another thread.
Now let's look at iMac sales because here is another huge probelm. You might be saying that Apple says demand is big for the new iMac. I'm sure there will be some initial buyers who fall in love with it. But here's reality. No matter how cool or a great value the new iMac is, there simply is virtually no room for growth at the $1299 level. PCs sell for way less and customers don't expect to pay that much.
The iMac was a really strong seller when it was competitive specwise with PCs. But people got tired of 15 inch monitors and sales tanked. THE iMac WAS ONLY SUCCESSFUL IN IT'S TIME WHEN IT WAS A GOOD VALUE COMPARED TO MIDRANGE PCs. When prices fell and its specs were lousy it sold less and less, and only the sub $1000 models sold at all. WHAT APPLE NEEDED TO DO WAS MAKE THE MAC COMPETITIVE AGAIN IN THE SUB $1,000 MARKET. Let me repeat this again. WHAT APPLE NEEDED TO DO WAS MAKE THE MAC COMPETITIVE AGAIN IN THE SUB $1,000 MARKET. This is the only place to really grow. Apple is already an outsider and a niche, and $1299 PCs are not in the range people expect to pay. A Mac with 17 inch CRT for $999 or less would have been what Apple needed to make the iMac exactly as appealing as it was before.
$1299 is the high end for a computer. The new iMac is a fantastic value when you consider the LCD, BUT ONLY 15% OF MONITORS SOLD ARE LCDS. So Macs are a niche and LCDs are restricted to the high end. I hope the new iMac does well but I can't see much growth possibilities in that price range. The place to take customers is $700-$1100 and the old iMac is still anemic competition.
You can analyze things in terms of the headlines you read yeaterday about iMac have strong initial demand, but the plan for the iMac HAS ALWAYS BEEN to be competitive with the midrange of the PC pricewise. This is no longer happening. $1299 is more than most expect to pay and most don't plan to buy an LCD.
Now you may be saying that the Apple retail stores will help the new iMac. Here's more bad news. First of all, the iMac is a little too out there design wise to sell well in a crappy setting like CompUSA, but it's possible. But there are only 27 Apple stores and they LOST $8 million last quarter. I don't buy this stuff about sales picking up strongly. There are many more shoppers in the mall during Christmas quarter than in other quarters. January through March is a slow quarter. Once you've seen the Apple store how many more times do you need to see it? Don't get me wrong. The Apple stores may soon break even or make a profit. BUT 27 STORES IS HARDLY ANYTHING, and a loss of $8 million shows there is much risk. If they had lost $1 million I would say "Great, that's almost nothing so open up another 200 stores right now.". But an $8 million loss, though certainly not telling of the future, says one thing for certain. Apple CAN lose a lot of money on these stores in bad times and has to move slowly in opening them. But to really grow marketshare, and to really show the general public a buying experience deserving of the Mac, APPLE NEEDS 200 TO 500 STORES. If one store converts 2,000 Wintel customers a year, that would be great, but that would only be 78,000 customers for Apple's current 27 plus 12 currently planned. 78,000 customers is less than 0.1% of the market. Growing marketshare from these stores is possible, but it's going to be a high wire act to achieve.
Now how about iPod sales. Apple might make a measly $150,000,000 in profits this year. This might sound like a lot but it means Apple is simply treading water to stay in place. To make a real mark on the marketplace, APLE NEEDS A NEW BEYOND THE BOX PRODUCT EACH MONTH. A new reason for the customers to buy the Mac or to visit the Apple store again needs to be given EACH MONTH. Apple can do this but it's all about having the resources to design, ramp up initial production, produce, and market the product. If Apple made $800 million this year, they could through an extra $300 million to R&D and spend it all on Beyond The Box.
But Apple will only make $150 million this year if things stay about the same. BUT IF THEY RELEASED iPod FOR WINDOWS THEY COULD DOUBLE THEIR PROFITS. Analysts have said that they could sell 4 TIMES AS MANY iPods if they released it for Windows. If you figure $75 profit
per iPod and figure they will sell 1/2 million this year, then that's 1.5 million more if they release it for Windows. That's more than $100 million dollars profits. Right now by keeping it Mac only, they will get a small handful more new Mac users. BY RELEASING IT FOR WINDOWS, THEY BUILD A NEW IMAGE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND HAVE 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE WALKING AROUND LOVING THEIR APPLE PRODUCT AND SHOWING IT TO FRIENDS. This makes those 1.5 million people much more likely to stop by that Apple Store again and eventually by that Mac. This strategy of keeping everything on the Mac island and expecting customers to swim over just isn't going to work. It's much wiser to get Apple products into people's homes and have them talking about these products by putting SOME Mac advantages on windows.
I just don't see where growth will come from. Apple sold only about 60% as many Macs last quarter as they did in the December of 99 quarter when they sold 1.377 million WHEN THE iMac WAS COMPETITIVE WITH MIDRANGE PCS. They aren't really growing until they've reached that level again.
And finally, let's look at the absolute worst news. Microsoft is building a cage for the entire industry with .NET. Soon they will be selling the HomeStation, a digital hub for the home. This is the kind of thing Apple would excel at, BUT THEY WON"T EVEN BE ABLE TO ENTER THE MARKET. The industry won't support two infrastructures for device networking. And Apple doesn't even have the software to compete. .NET IS OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE that should come from Apple but won't. Apple will have to accept whatever support Microsoft offers. In other words. part of the basic functionality of what MacOS does WILL BE PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT AS THEY SEE FIT. .NET is basic operating system functionality as much Quicktime or OpenGL is. Microsoft is getting new people signing on everyday. They are making software for Windows XP, that CAN'T BE WRITTEN FOR THE MAC, unless Microsoft allows it to be and M$ will give itself advantages over everyone else. People WILL be using .NET services, AND WILL COME TO NEED THEM. I don't know what Apple will be able to do to differentiate itself. Apple made a measly $38 million last quarter, while Microsoft is pulling in a billion or so each month. Imagine all the programmers you can hire or the intellectual property or companies you can buy with $1 BILLION. Microsoft will have the future of computers to themselves because no one will have the capital to match their projects.
[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: spindler ]</p>
Comments
[side note, MS announced lower than expected earnings, as did several OEM PC makers, and many announced losses, check excite news for the whole list]
I will soon post a thread called What Apple Needs To Do To Grow. The first thing is to move to x86 processors to eliminate the MHZ gap and instantly increase Mac sales by 20%. Move to x86, offer Windows and OS X, but make absolutely sure there is no way to run MacOS on anything but Apple made machines.
Microsoft is pulling in billions from Office and it costs much more on the Mac than it does when you buy it preloaded on a Dell PC. Why should Microshaft be making those billions? Why can't Apple make a version of Office and put it on every Mac or free, thus greatly lowering the cost of a Mac with Office software. Offer it for $99 for Windows, too and take away some of Microsofts revenue.
Windows and Office compatibility is where the real world is at. This is a market tha makes M$ billions for providing essentially nothing to the customer. Few people really need more Office features or XPs crappy new interface.
The future is looking bleak for Apple and they are not helpless. They could be the centerpiece of the indusry in fighting Microsoft. Everything Microsoft owns can be commoditized and their power and revenues taken away from them.
I'm talking about Apple's current possibilities for growth and they are very slim. But by going where the action is, giving people what they want in Windows strengths PLUS Apple's advantages, Apple really COULD change the industry.
But if they don't commoditize what Microsoft has to offer, the only heroes I see left are StarOffice and Lindows. Apple could lead a revolution because they have some power and resources but they stay an island to themselves. And most Mac fans argue this is the best way to do things. It is nothing but a dead end.
<strong>What is the point to this thread?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
ditto
Is there anything you or I can do about that? Nope. I just felt like announcing it.
iMac G4 1299, 1499, 1799---apple has a mid priced pc
low end competes pricewise very well with pcs
mid priced competes very well with pcs with lcd and similar specs....
ever price a pc?? cheap crappy ones are cheap crappy ones...start adding the stuff you want and the price starts jumping...
everyone had a crappy quarter and still apple made a profit....did gateway?? did Ford or Enron!!! always hearing doom and gloom, yet apple has been around for how many years making computers?? heck, HP may even stop making computers, yet apple's future looks secure to me...especially if they can get the G5 out or at least announced my summer....
iPod rocks and is best MP3 player
iBook rocks and is best notebook for price
iMac LCD looks like it will rock and is very reasonable for price and specs...amazing for form and function
PowerBook is lovely and powerful
only thing lagging is PowerMacs and i'm sure that will be addressed soon...g
The sub-$1000 iMacs have always been Apple's most anemic sellers, and it looks like, if anything, that will become <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-817620.html?legacy=cnet&tag=tp_pr"; target="_blank">more true</a>, not less.
<strong>
The sub-$1000 iMacs have always been Apple's most anemic sellers, and it looks like, if anything, that will become <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-817620.html?legacy=cnet&tag=tp_pr"; target="_blank">more true</a>, not less.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's true. Also PC prices are so unnatural. Do you really think the PC box makers want to sell sub $1,000 computers? No. The only reason they are doing it is to destroy each other. Consumers benefit for sure but it's destroying the industry. If HP and Gateway go out of the biz do you really think who's ever left will keep those low prices? Yes Apple has problems but I'd rather be in Apple's position than Gateway or HP.
Paragraph after paragraph of fantasy, guesswork, and doomcrying, unsupported by any kind of real experience or evidence. I hope you at least had fun writing it.
<strong>The global economy is in recession, Osama bin Laden is still on the lam, Enron workers are getting shafted, and George Bush has the IQ of a peanut shell.
Is there anything you or I can do about that? Nope. I just felt like announcing it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
George Bush has a higher IQ than you, apparently.
<strong>Now you may be saying that the Apple retail stores will help the new iMac. Here's more bad news. First of all, the iMac is a little too out there design wise to sell well in a crappy setting like CompUSA, but it's possible. But there are only 27 Apple stores and they LOST $8 million last quarter.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
oh F**K... So every Apple Store, no matter how cool they are, could lose about $1 million/year?
[QB]Following Macs for a while, you start to see that Apple fans are eternal optimists......
(edited so I don't repost this whole ridiculous post....)
Wow. Spindler, I disagree with almost EVERYTHING you have said. Your facts are wrong, your conclusions are highly questionable and your ideas are insane.
Fact: Apple is one of the only computer makers making money in a poor economy.
Fact: Their sales plummeted along with everyone else's in Q4 2000
Fact: The iMac IS priced competitively. Go buld a Dell or Gateway with the SAME SPECS and you will see that the Mac is often less.
Fact: People DO want flat panels. You are just wrong about this.
Fact: Apple WANTS to be a niche market. Maybe a bigger niche, but still a speciality brand.
Fact: Apple dominates Education...and their lead is growing. I know. I am a teacher.
Fact: Apple won't be able to build enough of the new iMacs. They are that popular.
Fact: Apple doesn't want to be in sub $1000 market too much. But, they are appeasing some, like you, anyway. They are offering the old iMac. This machine IS comparable to PC's in actual performance. I know, I am using one and have used PC's too. Yes, there is no monitor choice on this model...but it is an all-in-one basic machine that is built better, is more stable, and is more attractive than any other sub-$1000 PC out there.
Fact: The iPod is kicking ass, even at $399 in a poor economy. They may offer it for Windows, but that might eat into computer sales. Either way, 125,000 iPods in 60 days is HUGE.
Fact: I agree with you about the PowerMac. But I'm sure that update is coming. This is the one place in their lineup they need a big change. They're not dumb...it will work out.
Fact: your idea for the Retail Stores is the DUMBEST ****ing idea I have EVER heard. You don't just open up 200-500 stores without doing test research and opening test stores FIRST. You would have them do what Gateway did? RIGHT.....that worked out great!!!!!! Apple is seeing which markets fare best, which locations, etc. They are doing it the right way....slow steady expansion.
Fact: You early comment about the PowerMac sales being down ONLY due to the MHZ Gap is totally stupid. TOTALLY ****ING STUPID!!!! How about the poor economy? How about the other specs? How about a worldwide computer recession? Nah, that doesn't have SHIT to do with it!!!!
Final Fact: Apple had a decent, profitable quarter in a poor economy. Oh, and also....you are DUMB.
[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
As for the 2000 converts a year, that doesn't make sense either. They just said that the stores have seen 800,000 people 40% of which were first time Mac buyers. So thats about what, 320,000? Thats a little more than 2000.
<strong>
Fact: Apple is one of the only computer makers making money in a poor economy.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, news for you machead: Compaq and Dell is making money..
<a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20020118/tc/tech_dell_outlook_dc_2.html"; target="_blank">http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20020118/tc/tech_dell_outlook_dc_2.html</a>;
<a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20020117/tc/15839_1.html"; target="_blank">http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20020117/tc/15839_1.html</a>;
<strong>
Well, news for you machead: Compaq and Dell is making money..
<a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20020118/tc/tech_dell_outlook_dc_2.html"; target="_blank">http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20020118/tc/tech_dell_outlook_d c_2.html</a>
<a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20020117/tc/15839_1.html"; target="_blank">http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20020117/tc/15839_1.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
The guy said ONE OF the only computer makers making money, not THE ONLY.
Well, news for you loser: Compaq and Dell are making money off of servers, not workstations.
Idiot.
<strong>
Microsoft is pulling in billions from Office and it costs much more on the Mac than it does when you buy it preloaded on a Dell PC. Why should Microshaft be making those billions? Why can't Apple make a version of Office and put it on every Mac or free, thus greatly lowering the cost of a Mac with Office software. Offer it for $99 for Windows, too and take away some of Microsofts revenue.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hate to tell you, but Office for Windows costs more when you buy it alone than when you bundle it with a Dell PC. The price of the Mac version of Office is in line with the price of the Windows version.
Apple does not benefit by "taking away" money that goes to Microsoft, especially if doing so adds cost to each Mac sold.
Bundling Office with EVERY Mac sold would add a substantial amount to the price of EVERY Mac, even though not ever user wants Office. I personally would rather NOT have a computer manufacturer guessing at a bunch of software that I MIGHT need if it means adding to the price of the computer. Sure, I ended up buying Office, but many people won't.
<strong>
As for the 2000 converts a year, that doesn't make sense either. They just said that the stores have seen 800,000 people 40% of which were first time Mac buyers. So thats about what, 320,000? Thats a little more than 2000.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple sold 16 K units at their stores over the last 6 month. 14 K in the last Q.
<a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020116/sfw110_1.html"; target="_blank">http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020116/sfw110_1.html</a>;
I guess the rest bought iPods..
Assuming they had 10 stores at the beginning of the Q ( or on average ), that would be about 1.4k units/store last Q, or about 5.6K units every year.. So how much is 40 % of 5.6K units?
<strong>As for the 2000 converts a year, that doesn't make sense either. They just said that the stores have seen 800,000 people 40% of which were first time Mac buyers. So thats about what, 320,000? Thats a little more than 2000.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Seb, I think you're mixing up statistics. The Apple stores had 800,000 customers, but not all of them bought Macs.
Of the people who did buy Macs, 40% were first time Mac buyers.
So there's an 800,000 in there somewhere, and there's a 40% in there somewhere, but the 40% is not 40% of 800,000.
Sure
Your name is Spindler, hmmm, was that that CEO that tried to sell Apple to almost every computer company on the face of the earth?
Oh yeah, the original iMac was also called "out there".
Apple starts this quarter with 27 open and paid for, and (apparently) with plans to open another dozen or so over some undetermined period of time. They should break into profitability this quarter. 27 x 1.4K sales/quarter is about 38K sales/quarter. If the 40% holds, that's over 15K sales per quarter, or 60K per year, to PC users.
And that's assuming: that no more stores open; that the initiative to improve sales that Fred Anderson mentioned has no effect; that the new iMac and iBooks and iApps have no effect; and that the economy doesn't rebound. I wouldn't be surprised to see the number top 100K per year.
On the other hand, 100K new users per year is not exactly going to double Apple's market share in any hurry. The stores will have to really take off to make any headway into the "other 95."
[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>