How does being locked out of one of the world's largest smartphone markets count as a headwind in your book?
Why not try applying that kind of headwind to Apple and then comparing the two to see who comes off better?
Huawei will possibly ship over 200,000,000 handsets and bring in over $100 billion in revenue this year. And handsets aren't even its core business. While Huawei does do consumer electronics just like Apple, its reach into core critical technologies (like 5G) goes far deeper than Apple's.
Take the recently announced Ascend processors as one example of their plans:
The range will span from HPC use cases and scale through varying layers right down to 'nano' chips for use in small devices. All designed in house. I believe the 910 will see densities never before seen at 7nm.
Locked out; sad. Huawei should have thought about that before they were caught spying.
China is an authoritarian government ruled by a President for life, that not only spies on its citizens at every juncture in their lives, they also mete out social scores that determine how you can interact in everyday life. Then of course, there is that fact that they are placing communist party members into the homes of the Uyghur minorities; how fucked up is that to have to house a fucking spy.
"China’s Ambassador to the U.S. has threatened retaliation if Washington sanctions Beijing over human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), drawing condemnation from observers who say officials responsible for the violations must be held to account for their actions.
Beginning in April 2017, Uyghurs accused of harboring “strong religious views” and “politically incorrect” ideas have been jailed or detained in political re-education camps throughout the XUAR, where members of the ethnic group have long complained of pervasive discrimination, religious repression, and cultural suppression under Chinese rule."
Huawei isn't doing anything close to $500 ASP on phones, so no, not anywhere close to $100B revenue either.
Apple at 200 million phones and an ASP over $700 would be at least $140B in revenue in a year, and of course, that's only 60% of their revenue.
Nice try though.
Caught spying? No. In fact they have denied everything thrown at them and are still waiting to see actual evidence of the accusations.
On the other hand, the US has been caught spying, many times, and on its, erm, allies! I wonder how Merkel feels when the US urges her to not allow Huawei to bid for 5G tenders, knowing that she herself was a victim of US spying. And thanks to Snowden, we also know Huawei was also in the sights of US spying activities.
You consistently equate China to Huawei. Huawei is a Chinese company, not China.
You covered it! The only things forgot to mention is that China is a leader in human rights, is going to free Tibet, give up their claim to Taiwan and that President Xi is a leader in making it a more democratic and open country. /s
How does being locked out of one of the world's largest smartphone markets count as a headwind in your book?
Why not try applying that kind of headwind to Apple and then comparing the two to see who comes off better?
Huawei will possibly ship over 200,000,000 handsets and bring in over $100 billion in revenue this year. And handsets aren't even its core business. While Huawei does do consumer electronics just like Apple, its reach into core critical technologies (like 5G) goes far deeper than Apple's.
Take the recently announced Ascend processors as one example of their plans:
The range will span from HPC use cases and scale through varying layers right down to 'nano' chips for use in small devices. All designed in house. I believe the 910 will see densities never before seen at 7nm.
Locked out; sad. Huawei should have thought about that before they were caught spying.
China is an authoritarian government ruled by a President for life, that not only spies on its citizens at every juncture in their lives, they also mete out social scores that determine how you can interact in everyday life. Then of course, there is that fact that they are placing communist party members into the homes of the Uyghur minorities; how fucked up is that to have to house a fucking spy.
"China’s Ambassador to the U.S. has threatened retaliation if Washington sanctions Beijing over human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), drawing condemnation from observers who say officials responsible for the violations must be held to account for their actions.
Beginning in April 2017, Uyghurs accused of harboring “strong religious views” and “politically incorrect” ideas have been jailed or detained in political re-education camps throughout the XUAR, where members of the ethnic group have long complained of pervasive discrimination, religious repression, and cultural suppression under Chinese rule."
Huawei isn't doing anything close to $500 ASP on phones, so no, not anywhere close to $100B revenue either.
Apple at 200 million phones and an ASP over $700 would be at least $140B in revenue in a year, and of course, that's only 60% of their revenue.
Nice try though.
Caught spying? No. In fact they have denied everything thrown at them and are still waiting to see actual evidence of the accusations.
On the other hand, the US has been caught spying, many times, and on its, erm, allies! I wonder how Merkel feels when the US urges her to not allow Huawei to bid for 5G tenders, knowing that she herself was a victim of US spying. And thanks to Snowden, we also know Huawei was also in the sights of US spying activities.
You consistently equate China to Huawei. Huawei is a Chinese company, not China.
You covered it! The only things forgot to mention is that China is a leader in human rights, is going to free Tibet, give up their claim to Taiwan and that President Xi is a leader in making it a more democratic and open country. /s
But, as I said, Huawei isn't China.
Now look up Operation Shotgiant and tell me who has more reason to feel agrieved.
FIrst - i find it amazing how much this bothers people.
Second, our small business switched to Office 365 earlier this year and all I can say is what a gawd-awful mess. If that’s the future of MS they wont’ have the lead for long.
FIrst - i find it amazing how much this bothers people.
I don't think some arbitrary valuation is what bothers people. It's all the idiots/hypocrites posting. When Apple passed $1 trillion market cap there were a lot of people trying to downplay it and claiming it doesn't matter. Now that Microsoft has passed Apple suddenly market cap matters? Hypocrites.
The only thing consistent is a bunch of losers looking for another way to bash Apple.
Second, our small business switched to Office 365 earlier this year and all I can say is what a gawd-awful mess. If that’s the future of MS they wont’ have the lead for long.
I've been using Office 365 for a couple years at home/work and find it works great. Curious what problems you're having.
And the price? It's like paying regular price for cloud storage from Google or Dropbox and getting a full version of Office thrown in for free. It's a bargain.
Whether this market cap thing is temporary or not, Microsoft as a company continues to remain valued much higher than Apple, by Wall Street standards, because of its cloud business. Apple was so stupid to pass up on acquiring a cloud business considering all the money Apple had in the bank. Cloud businesses are always claimed to have unlimited growth but Apple keeps sticking only with its iPhone business which has hit a solid wall of no-growth. Apple probably could afford to acquire a cloud business if it really wanted to.
I can only imagine Microsoft shareholders are laughing hard at how stupid Apple shareholders are for believing in the company. It's still difficult for me to believe Apple shed so much market cap value in just a couple of weeks due to barely missing iPhone sales expectations. The result looks as though Apple is on its way out of business. As soon as Nadella took over Microsoft he was able to turn it around almost instantly and Wall Street accepted it without any doubts. He was able to correct the problems and double the company's value in a couple of years and Microsoft is now worth more than Apple. Apple's trillion-dollar market cap practically disappeared overnight. Apple had enough money to build its value on a foundation of titanium. Apple apparently built its value on a foundation of cotton.
Apple is simply too volatile and not a very trustworthy company for big investors. It seems as though nothing Apple does or has can stop the stock from totally crashing on unsubstantiated rumors. It's really crazy from my point of view. Why is it so difficult for Apple to make it's business more solid like other tech companies are able to manage? It seems as though there must be something wrong with its business model or management techniques that aren't quite reliable enough for investors.
I'm not really complaining, but I'm very puzzled about this. A month ago, Apple looked relatively solid and then poof!, a huge loss of value. Apple should learn how to diversify its revenue streams. I thought Apple had some hooks into the enterprise but I must have been mistaken. How can any investor really put any faith in Apple if this sort of loss is going to occur every few years? I can only hope they have the ability to recover but the iPhone can't be depended upon anymore. Apple has had years to outdistance Microsoft in value but basically threw its chances away by sitting back and relying on one product. What's done is done and I can only hope Apple has learned some sort of lesson.
One commenter said that if the iPhone sneezes the entire company catches a cold. Ain't that the truth. An ugly, freaking truth. Apple has actually caught a bad case of pneumonia.
Meanwhilr Apple has a very healthy and stable PC business.
Then it has a psychotically great and stable phone business.
Then it has has an amazing wearables business.
Then it has an pustsnding services business.
It also boasys a second second to none retail business where it not only profits off its own products, but third party offerings as well.
The iBooks, iTunes, and App Store business are the stuff Microsoft can only dream of.
The idea that MS is even mentioned in the same sentence as Apple is laughable.
If office tanks, all of Microsoft goes with it. Windows as well.
Apple would be fine for a very long time if any number of its businesses went through through a severe famine - and that’s not due to its savings. THats due to cash flow. Apples business is heavily diversified and healthy on all points. Not the same for ms, which bleeds money on pet projects to project the illusion of diversification and relevance.
Its hilarious to see how the the stock market is manipulated. One moment, it makes sense and logic rules the day. The next, it’s 2+2=-22.
I give this s week before people realize there is no actual money in this error.
Its similar to google when people were giving google free money for no reason. It was a terrible investment. A company good at selling online ads. Then blew money like toilet paper on everything else. They would have tanked had an ignorant public not been so naive as to throw money at them.
Tjrn you hsve apple. They could go private and still hand the free money people a big blow. But they’re public and it’s like people don’t know what’s actually available to them.
In reality, Apple is worth over twice what it was a couple months ago.
No no other company has ever created and sustained their type of growth with their type of reliability and trust factor with how they handle business - never going in blind. Never taking stupid risks, but calculated ones. And having it pay off.
Whether this market cap thing is temporary or not, Microsoft as a company continues to remain valued much higher than Apple, by Wall Street standards, because of its cloud business. Apple was so stupid to pass up on acquiring a cloud business considering all the money Apple had in the bank. Cloud businesses are always claimed to have unlimited growth but Apple keeps sticking only with its iPhone business which has hit a solid wall of no-growth. Apple probably could afford to acquire a cloud business if it really wanted to.
I can only imagine Microsoft shareholders are laughing hard at how stupid Apple shareholders are for believing in the company. It's still difficult for me to believe Apple shed so much market cap value in just a couple of weeks due to barely missing iPhone sales expectations. The result looks as though Apple is on its way out of business. As soon as Nadella took over Microsoft he was able to turn it around almost instantly and Wall Street accepted it without any doubts. He was able to correct the problems and double the company's value in a couple of years and Microsoft is now worth more than Apple. Apple's trillion-dollar market cap practically disappeared overnight. Apple had enough money to build its value on a foundation of titanium. Apple apparently built its value on a foundation of cotton.
Apple is simply too volatile and not a very trustworthy company for big investors. It seems as though nothing Apple does or has can stop the stock from totally crashing on unsubstantiated rumors. It's really crazy from my point of view. Why is it so difficult for Apple to make it's business more solid like other tech companies are able to manage? It seems as though there must be something wrong with its business model or management techniques that aren't quite reliable enough for investors.
I'm not really complaining, but I'm very puzzled about this. A month ago, Apple looked relatively solid and then poof!, a huge loss of value. Apple should learn how to diversify its revenue streams. I thought Apple had some hooks into the enterprise but I must have been mistaken. How can any investor really put any faith in Apple if this sort of loss is going to occur every few years? I can only hope they have the ability to recover but the iPhone can't be depended upon anymore. Apple has had years to outdistance Microsoft in value but basically threw its chances away by sitting back and relying on one product. What's done is done and I can only hope Apple has learned some sort of lesson.
One commenter said that if the iPhone sneezes the entire company catches a cold. Ain't that the truth. An ugly, freaking truth. Apple has actually caught a bad case of pneumonia.
Because Microsoft has reached to many part of the world where apple hasn't reached yet. The first and foremost choice in the developing countries for the computer system is Microsoft. In developing countries, you can buy almost 3 desktop computers (that has microsoft system or is microsoft product) with the price of just 1 iPhone. The user-friendly UI of Microsoft, availability, economical devices have definitely been the first choice for most of the people. The market that Microsoft has penetrated, Apple hasn't bothered looking at it. I'm not saying that Apple hasn't done anything or doesn't have market but what I'm saying, Apple should focus to middle level income generating groups in developing countries as well.
Because Microsoft has reached to many part of the world where apple hasn't reached yet. The first and foremost choice in the developing countries for the computer system is Microsoft. In developing countries, you can buy almost 3 desktop computers (that has microsoft system or is microsoft product) with the price of just 1 iPhone. The user-friendly UI of Microsoft, availability, economical devices have definitely been the first choice for most of the people. The market that Microsoft has penetrated, Apple hasn't bothered looking at it. I'm not saying that Apple hasn't done anything or doesn't have market but what I'm saying, Apple should focus to middle level income generating groups in developing countries as well.
FIrst - i find it amazing how much this bothers people.
I don't think some arbitrary valuation is what bothers people. It's all the idiots/hypocrites posting. When Apple passed $1 trillion market cap there were a lot of people trying to downplay it and claiming it doesn't matter. Now that Microsoft has passed Apple suddenly market cap matters? Hypocrites.
The only thing consistent is a bunch of losers looking for another way to bash Apple.
Second, our small business switched to Office 365 earlier this year and all I can say is what a gawd-awful mess. If that’s the future of MS they wont’ have the lead for long.
I've been using Office 365 for a couple years at home/work and find it works great. Curious what problems you're having.
And the price? It's like paying regular price for cloud storage from Google or Dropbox and getting a full version of Office thrown in for free. It's a bargain.
I agree with you. Say what you will about the mess that is Windows, but Office 365 is real value for money. The number of machines you can install it on, plus the compatibility advantage (when a large percentage of people are using Word and Excel) makes it one of the only non-Apple subscriptions I have.
Microsoft is ahead of Apple again in market value with Amazon not far behind! Shortly Apple will be the world’s number 3 in market capitalization. With the others more robust forms of income (not still dependent on one hardware product catagory) Apple’s capitalization is going to continue to hemorrhage for a while to come unfortunately.
How does being locked out of one of the world's largest smartphone markets count as a headwind in your book?
Why not try applying that kind of headwind to Apple and then comparing the two to see who comes off better?
Huawei will possibly ship over 200,000,000 handsets and bring in over $100 billion in revenue this year. And handsets aren't even its core business. While Huawei does do consumer electronics just like Apple, its reach into core critical technologies (like 5G) goes far deeper than Apple's.
Take the recently announced Ascend processors as one example of their plans:
The range will span from HPC use cases and scale through varying layers right down to 'nano' chips for use in small devices. All designed in house. I believe the 910 will see densities never before seen at 7nm.
Huawei isn't doing anything close to $500 ASP on phones, so no, not anywhere close to $100B revenue either.
Apple at 200 million phones and an ASP over $700 would be at least $140B in revenue in a year, and of course, that's only 60% of their revenue.
Nice try though.
That's right. Huawei's ASP for smartphones is something like $200. We can't calculate it with precision because Huawei doesn't report revenue for smartphones separately; it's included as part of Huawei's Consumer Business revenue. But assuming that the vast majority of Huawei's Consumer Business revenue is from smartphones, the ASP is around $200. Even if we attributed all of that segments' revenue to smartphones, the ASP for 2017 would be about $225. Huawei just isn't selling a lot of high-end smartphones yet, not anything approaching the unit numbers for Apple.
How does being locked out of one of the world's largest smartphone markets count as a headwind in your book?
Why not try applying that kind of headwind to Apple and then comparing the two to see who comes off better?
Huawei will possibly ship over 200,000,000 handsets and bring in over $100 billion in revenue this year. And handsets aren't even its core business. While Huawei does do consumer electronics just like Apple, its reach into core critical technologies (like 5G) goes far deeper than Apple's.
Take the recently announced Ascend processors as one example of their plans:
The range will span from HPC use cases and scale through varying layers right down to 'nano' chips for use in small devices. All designed in house. I believe the 910 will see densities never before seen at 7nm.
Locked out; sad. Huawei should have thought about that before they were caught spying.
China is an authoritarian government ruled by a President for life, that not only spies on its citizens at every juncture in their lives, they also mete out social scores that determine how you can interact in everyday life. Then of course, there is that fact that they are placing communist party members into the homes of the Uyghur minorities; how fucked up is that to have to house a fucking spy.
"China’s Ambassador to the U.S. has threatened retaliation if Washington sanctions Beijing over human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), drawing condemnation from observers who say officials responsible for the violations must be held to account for their actions.
Beginning in April 2017, Uyghurs accused of harboring “strong religious views” and “politically incorrect” ideas have been jailed or detained in political re-education camps throughout the XUAR, where members of the ethnic group have long complained of pervasive discrimination, religious repression, and cultural suppression under Chinese rule."
Huawei isn't doing anything close to $500 ASP on phones, so no, not anywhere close to $100B revenue either.
Apple at 200 million phones and an ASP over $700 would be at least $140B in revenue in a year, and of course, that's only 60% of their revenue.
Nice try though.
Caught spying? No. In fact they have denied everything thrown at them and are still waiting to see actual evidence of the accusations.
On the other hand, the US has been caught spying, many times, and on its, erm, allies! I wonder how Merkel feels when the US urges her to not allow Huawei to bid for 5G tenders, knowing that she herself was a victim of US spying. And thanks to Snowden, we also know Huawei was also in the sights of US spying activities.
You consistently equate China to Huawei. Huawei is a Chinese company, not China.
Tmay probably interpreted your previous comments as suggesting that Huawei would do $100 billion in revenue from smartphones this year. You weren't clear on that point.
Huawei may ship 200 million smartphones and likely will do $100 billion in revenue in 2018, but the latter won't be from the former. Its revenue from smartphones will be more like $40 billion, assuming it saw strong growth again.
How does being locked out of one of the world's largest smartphone markets count as a headwind in your book?
Why not try applying that kind of headwind to Apple and then comparing the two to see who comes off better?
Huawei will possibly ship over 200,000,000 handsets and bring in over $100 billion in revenue this year. And handsets aren't even its core business. While Huawei does do consumer electronics just like Apple, its reach into core critical technologies (like 5G) goes far deeper than Apple's.
Take the recently announced Ascend processors as one example of their plans:
The range will span from HPC use cases and scale through varying layers right down to 'nano' chips for use in small devices. All designed in house. I believe the 910 will see densities never before seen at 7nm.
Locked out; sad. Huawei should have thought about that before they were caught spying.
China is an authoritarian government ruled by a President for life, that not only spies on its citizens at every juncture in their lives, they also mete out social scores that determine how you can interact in everyday life. Then of course, there is that fact that they are placing communist party members into the homes of the Uyghur minorities; how fucked up is that to have to house a fucking spy.
"China’s Ambassador to the U.S. has threatened retaliation if Washington sanctions Beijing over human rights abuses in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), drawing condemnation from observers who say officials responsible for the violations must be held to account for their actions.
Beginning in April 2017, Uyghurs accused of harboring “strong religious views” and “politically incorrect” ideas have been jailed or detained in political re-education camps throughout the XUAR, where members of the ethnic group have long complained of pervasive discrimination, religious repression, and cultural suppression under Chinese rule."
Huawei isn't doing anything close to $500 ASP on phones, so no, not anywhere close to $100B revenue either.
Apple at 200 million phones and an ASP over $700 would be at least $140B in revenue in a year, and of course, that's only 60% of their revenue.
Nice try though.
Caught spying? No. In fact they have denied everything thrown at them and are still waiting to see actual evidence of the accusations.
On the other hand, the US has been caught spying, many times, and on its, erm, allies! I wonder how Merkel feels when the US urges her to not allow Huawei to bid for 5G tenders, knowing that she herself was a victim of US spying. And thanks to Snowden, we also know Huawei was also in the sights of US spying activities.
You consistently equate China to Huawei. Huawei is a Chinese company, not China.
Tmay probably interpreted your previous comments as suggesting that Huawei would do $100 billion in revenue from smartphones this year. You weren't clear on that point.
Huawei may ship 200 million smartphones and likely will do $100 billion in revenue in 2018, but the latter won't be from the former. Its revenue from smartphones will be more like $40 billion, assuming it saw strong growth again.
Yes. $100 billion in global revenue. Up from $92 billion (IIRC) from last year.
ASP is irrelevant for consumers. What counts is profits (as opposed to the most profit), the quality of products, the technology in them and having enough to invest in R&D going forward. That is not limited to the consumer branch of course, as things like services also play a part. Big Data, Servers, AI, silicon, storage, infrastructure (undersea cabling, towers, data centers, cloud, towers, rail services, renewable energies etc).
5G will see IoT really take off. Literally! Huawei has plans for 'flying cars' (drone taxis) and has already presented its Digital Sky initiative as a means to use its infrastructures to manage flying objects up to 300m.
The move to 5G could open up many use cases. It might take a while to reach everyone but big cities should see early gains as we move into 2020.
Huawei began work on 5G in 2009. While flying taxis might sound like science fiction, the work has to begin at some point and, as with 5G, Huawei is about two years in already on that particular front..
Microsoft’s services revenue is only going to grow at a rate Apple could only dream of.
This will likely be the last release of Server 2019 Essentials, the competitive server OS for small businesses, and many businesses are now moving to 365 Business, and moving their AD to the cloud with Azure. It makes perfect sense for most small businesses around the world, let alone the medium and big businesses.
Apples hardware is the best, as is their support through the stores. I still prefer MacOS to Win10. But Office, Teams, SharePoint, AzureAD and all of the cloud based services they offer have reached a maturity which makes them compelling.
There’s room for both, and the more they work together the better it is for most users.
And just as quickly as it “retook” the crown Microsoft loses it back to Apple today. Any news reports of this? Nope. All we have are two day old articles about Microsoft surpassing Apple in market cap.
And just as quickly as it “retook” the crown Microsoft loses it back to Apple today. Any news reports of this? Nope. All we have are two day old articles about Microsoft surpassing Apple in market cap.
gmgravytrain said: It seems as though nothing Apple does or has can stop the stock from totally crashing on unsubstantiated rumors.
Umm, doesn't that say more about the so-called 'investors' and financial-related media? Apple's value didn't change over the last month... so what changed? Yep.
bestkeptsecret said: ... plus the compatibility advantage (when a large percentage of people are using Word and Excel) makes it one of the only non-Apple subscriptions I have.
I have one too, for the compatibility. I just don't use it that much, as I find the UI and workflows to be junk. Aside from Excel, there are simply better alternatives for productivity and end result unless you have to depend on something specific to Office. I cringe every time I have to try and use Word. Keynote destroys Powerpoint. And, I'd rather use a real email client.
And just as quickly as it “retook” the crown Microsoft loses it back to Apple today. Any news reports of this? Nope. All we have are two day old articles about Microsoft surpassing Apple in market cap.
Just depends on the tea leaves any particular day.
Microsoft has a P/E ratio of 45 and Apple has a P/E ratio of 15.
Apple and Microsoft have similar margins and Apple had better growth in 2018. Apple makes 2.5x more revenue and 3x more profits. So, why are Microsoft shares valued at 3x Apple’s? Because investors are morons.
In reality Microsoft is worth ⅓ the value of Apple.
Because Microsoft is diversified with recurring revenue streams which Wall Street loves. With Apple if iPhone sneezes the entire company gets a cold.
So when did the iPhone sneeze? I must have missed that. The only thing I’ve heard are the predictions of analysts based on supply chain reports which Tim Cook has consistently advised against using to provide meaningful data about Apple. So remind me, when did the iPhone sneeze and give the entire company a cold? In your wet dreams?
Reality doesn't matter. It's about perception. The iPhone is approximately 66% of Apple's gross revenue. And Apple announcing that they're no longer going to break out iPhone units sales is sending the message, correct or not, that they expect declines in unit sales. Wall Street doesn't like a lack of transparency and in that regard, I don't blame them. Combine that with the insanity of believing supplier chain complaints and that's a recipe for killing the stock and that's if the stock is not being manipulated.
Declines in iPhone sales wouldn't surprise me one bit. At least in the U.S., the market is mature, phones are no longer subsidized and Apple keeps raising the prices. Does Apple really think that their users are going to buy a new phone every two years for $1000 or more per pop?
On the Mac side, Apple's price hikes combined with the inability to replace the battery, memory and storage as well as the fact that so many people don't really need a computer anymore is going to continue to affect sales, but the Mac is only about 10% of Apple now anyway. Apple probably thought they could replace Mac sales with iPad sales, but that's only about 8% of Apple. While I realize that Apple has never wanted to be the low-end, low-margin provider, I think the high salaries paid to Apple managers and executives has completely warped their perception of what most people are willing and able to spend, especially for a machine that can't be upgraded after purchase. A 15" MBP now starts at $2400 and tops out at $6700. That's ludicrous. The MBA starts at $1000 at tops out at $2600. The Mini tops out at $4300. $5K for the 27" 5K Retina iMac (topping out at $13,200)? IMO, this is either desperation to keep revenue high or unbelievable arrogance.
There is of course, the third option: you have the details wrong.
Let's begin with the most obvious stumble (the real drop off the cliff is that Apple actually sells phones at a range of prices, but that's so obvious it doesn't really need covering):
Declines in iPhone sales wouldn't surprise me one bit. At least in the U.S., the market is mature, phones are no longer subsidized and Apple keeps raising the prices. Does Apple really think that their users are going to buy a new phone every two years for $1000 or more per pop?
Er, no. Apple doesn't expect that because no one has ever done that. What happens is that on each new release, Apple gets picks up customers from other platforms, but also gets a massive boost from people with folk with much iPhones much older than two years. I have just replaced my iPhone 6s, which means I missed out on the 7 and the X. The assumption that Apple thinks folk update their phone every two years is laughable. Which brings me to your other point:
Yes, the price. And here again, the problem is narrow thinking. Saying that no one would buy a $1000 phone is a bit like saying no one would buy a house for $300,000 or a $30,000 car. Clearly they will, because I've seen houses and cars that cost several times that amount. So how do they do it? Well, I'm going to clue you in, but you have to keep it under your hat because I'm thinking of taking out a patent on the whole idea.
Ready?
This is going to amaze you, but people don't hand over the whole amount for houses and cars all at once. They pay it off in chunks. Buying a $1000 iPhone (which, by the way, is not the most expensive smart phone on the market) is best done on the Apple payment scheme: they throw in AppleCare and you can change the phone after a year if you want. Oh, and it's interest free, so if you're paying the whole cost up front then you're doing it wrong.
But that's kind of an aside. The point is that folk have been saying Apple gear is insanely expensive for as long as I can remember, and for as long as I can remember, they've been shifting it. So that leads me to believe that Apple understands basic economic theory better than anyone here who comments on it. All this braying about Apple pricing always misses one vital piece of information: Apple's demand curve.
This little bit of paper sitting on Tim Cook's desk will show you is that the demand for Apple kit is comparatively inelastic: movements in price have fairly negligible effects on demand. If they increase the price, the sales will not drop significantly.
But far more importantly, dropping the price will not actually produce a significant increase in sales, and this increase may not be enough to cover the price drop.
So why is Apple's demand inelastic? Simply because the combination of hardware and software is perceived as unique in a very crowded market.
“So while Apple takes a breather on innovation and brings the A12 and little else to the table while still including a 5W charger in the box, others are innovating on everything and showing no signs of slowing down. That means 'new' tech is flowing down the lines into the middle ground at an incredible pace...”
What do you consider innovation?
Apple was the first to bring Face ID to market. Every Android manufacturer copied it almost exactly. Android devices in 2018 looked like iPhone X knockoffs. Apple removed the crappy 3.5mm headphone jack. Every Android manufacturer followed suit. Apple released a $1000 flagship smartphone. The large Android manufacturers released $1000 flagships.
Apple SoCs have outpaced Qualcomm’s and they’ll sustain it for awhile. Apple releases new iPhones and iPads with A12 and A12x while some flagship Android devices are still releasing product with the Snapdragon 835. Yeah, it looks bad that Apple is still including 5W Chargers with the iPhone, (the iPhone users that care will buy a replacement like I did with my iPad Pro (spent $50 on the 29W adapter and Lightening to USB C adapter which has been useful for several things actually), but way the heck did Samsung put an 835 in the Tab S4? And then they killed off SoundCamp. The innovation in iOS music app development is truly stunning. The music and image editing development alone will guarantee that iOS, iPad Pros in particular, will continue to grow the platform for the foreseeable future, (similar to how desktop publishing saved and made the Mac in the 80s). The music industry has installed a lot of iPads in important roles in recording studios, orchestras, and education. So much so that they’ve replaced long established workflows. I’m actually surprised that Apple penetrated these markets as much as they have because Apple didn’t do much with the first couple of generations of iPads. Most of the software and workflow development was done by 3rd parties who figured out the raison d’etre of the iPad, IMO. See AudioBus for example.
And really, as someone who’s business and tech workflow is quite invested in Apple’s “walled garden” eco-system, that eco-system is, to many the best thing that could have possibly happened. What other platform offers the rich integration between smartphones, tablets, laptops, and desktops? Those that right it off without ever trying have no idea the incredible workflow possibilities the ecosystem opens up. For instance, in my recording studio I have two Mac Pros, two iPad Pros, and three iPhones which are all interconnected over WiFi, Bluetooth and USB (depending on the application). The 12.9” iPads have replaced all of my hardware controllers with custom touch interfaces that control all aspects of my macOS workflow. At the same time I have synths and other music programs that MIDI sync with my Macs and the iPhones. I use the iPhones as video cameras which are all controlled by an iPad in real-time (exactly as broadcasters do). I can stream any audio or video from any of the devices over AirPlay to the two Apple TVs I have set up for clients to hear the scores I’m working on for their productions. My iPads also work as Wacom type handwriting input devices for macOS and double as extra displays when necessary. And the Files app, when augmented with some great third party apps has become a pretty good file system manager while not compromising the security of iOS.
Anyway, sorry for the verbose reply. But I don’t see Apple standing still on innovation at this point. It’s seems like the Pro Workflow Team is actually doing a lot of good in redirecting Apple’s stance in the pro market. I’d like to see Apple treat small developers better though. There are still a few large macOS developers staying away from iOS due to the cost of developing and committing to the platform when many users are still unwilling to pay reasonable prices for iOS apps. Apple needs to find a way to show the user base why paying $100 - $150 for an iOS app isn’t an outrageous notion. The 2018 iPad Pro is a hardware beast. Apple needs to promote the idea that it’s not just a media consumption device. Either way the iPad is embedded in so many industries now that it will be in the public’s conscience soon. There’s already been several sightings of news reports who are sponsored by Microsoft, hiding their iPads behind Surface tablets that aren’t even plugged in. The NFL is sponsored by the Microsoft Surface but you see players and staff walking around with iPads. Funny, actually.
Comments
Now look up Operation Shotgiant and tell me who has more reason to feel agrieved.
Second, our small business switched to Office 365 earlier this year and all I can say is what a gawd-awful mess. If that’s the future of MS they wont’ have the lead for long.
I don't think some arbitrary valuation is what bothers people. It's all the idiots/hypocrites posting. When Apple passed $1 trillion market cap there were a lot of people trying to downplay it and claiming it doesn't matter. Now that Microsoft has passed Apple suddenly market cap matters? Hypocrites.
The only thing consistent is a bunch of losers looking for another way to bash Apple.
I've been using Office 365 for a couple years at home/work and find it works great. Curious what problems you're having.
And the price? It's like paying regular price for cloud storage from Google or Dropbox and getting a full version of Office thrown in for free. It's a bargain.
I can only imagine Microsoft shareholders are laughing hard at how stupid Apple shareholders are for believing in the company. It's still difficult for me to believe Apple shed so much market cap value in just a couple of weeks due to barely missing iPhone sales expectations. The result looks as though Apple is on its way out of business. As soon as Nadella took over Microsoft he was able to turn it around almost instantly and Wall Street accepted it without any doubts. He was able to correct the problems and double the company's value in a couple of years and Microsoft is now worth more than Apple. Apple's trillion-dollar market cap practically disappeared overnight. Apple had enough money to build its value on a foundation of titanium. Apple apparently built its value on a foundation of cotton.
Apple is simply too volatile and not a very trustworthy company for big investors. It seems as though nothing Apple does or has can stop the stock from totally crashing on unsubstantiated rumors. It's really crazy from my point of view. Why is it so difficult for Apple to make it's business more solid like other tech companies are able to manage? It seems as though there must be something wrong with its business model or management techniques that aren't quite reliable enough for investors.
I'm not really complaining, but I'm very puzzled about this. A month ago, Apple looked relatively solid and then poof!, a huge loss of value. Apple should learn how to diversify its revenue streams. I thought Apple had some hooks into the enterprise but I must have been mistaken. How can any investor really put any faith in Apple if this sort of loss is going to occur every few years? I can only hope they have the ability to recover but the iPhone can't be depended upon anymore. Apple has had years to outdistance Microsoft in value but basically threw its chances away by sitting back and relying on one product. What's done is done and I can only hope Apple has learned some sort of lesson.
One commenter said that if the iPhone sneezes the entire company catches a cold. Ain't that the truth. An ugly, freaking truth. Apple has actually caught a bad case of pneumonia.
I agree with you. Say what you will about the mess that is Windows, but Office 365 is real value for money. The number of machines you can install it on, plus the compatibility advantage (when a large percentage of people are using Word and Excel) makes it one of the only non-Apple subscriptions I have.
Huawei may ship 200 million smartphones and likely will do $100 billion in revenue in 2018, but the latter won't be from the former. Its revenue from smartphones will be more like $40 billion, assuming it saw strong growth again.
ASP is irrelevant for consumers. What counts is profits (as opposed to the most profit), the quality of products, the technology in them and having enough to invest in R&D going forward. That is not limited to the consumer branch of course, as things like services also play a part. Big Data, Servers, AI, silicon, storage, infrastructure (undersea cabling, towers, data centers, cloud, towers, rail services, renewable energies etc).
5G will see IoT really take off. Literally! Huawei has plans for 'flying cars' (drone taxis) and has already presented its Digital Sky initiative as a means to use its infrastructures to manage flying objects up to 300m.
The move to 5G could open up many use cases. It might take a while to reach everyone but big cities should see early gains as we move into 2020.
Huawei began work on 5G in 2009. While flying taxis might sound like science fiction, the work has to begin at some point and, as with 5G, Huawei is about two years in already on that particular front..
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/03/amazon-apple-and-microsoft-compete-to-be-most-valuable-company.html
The five or so most valuable companies in the world are US tech companies with the next contenders worth around half of the top US company.
I don't see that changing very soon and honestly I don't really care who takes the top slot among them since it means that US is still dominant.
Apple's value didn't change over the last month... so what changed? Yep.
LOL, ROFL, going to pee my pants, help, LOL.
I have one too, for the compatibility. I just don't use it that much, as I find the UI and workflows to be junk. Aside from Excel, there are simply better alternatives for productivity and end result unless you have to depend on something specific to Office. I cringe every time I have to try and use Word. Keynote destroys Powerpoint. And, I'd rather use a real email client.
Just depends on the tea leaves any particular day.