ArchStanton

Beats said:

sbdude said:

gatorguy said:

Rayz2016 said:

mr lizard said:

They've got a gargantuan ton of paying subscribers and yet they still can't turn a profit. Is this a sustainable business model on its own? Sooner or later they'll have to return something to investors. 

I suspect as a standalone P&L, Apple Music doesn't make a profit either. Difference of course is that Apple sells hardware and services like Apple Music make that hardware more attractive, so for them it's just a cost of a much, much bigger business. 

Spotify though? They've got nothing else to fall back on. I can see a future where some huge media empire buys them for a significant sum and folds them into their world. There's obviously tremendous value in Spotify, it's just not clear that that value is as a standalone entity. 

No, it’s not sustainable.  Every subscriber costs more than they bring in. They need to come up with something else to make it worth hiking the fees to cover the streaming payouts. 

FWIW I've not yet seen anything from any music subscription provider, Apple and Google included, indicating that their service is a sustained profit center that would stand on its own. Lots of revenue, but no statements of profitability.  If someone has 'em please post 'em.

Music subscription may well be a loss-leader if spotify is any indication. Surely apple music, if it is a money loser, will drive some to purchase apple hardware. And, if it's a race to the bottom, and no alternative revenue source, spotify will be the biggest loser here.

i don’t see Apple Music being a loss-leader at all. For one Apple doesn’t do loss leaders. If Apple makes more money selling one .99 cent song on iTunes then Apple wouldn’t jump into Apple Music. Another thing is, Apple promotes Apple Music far far far more than iTunes. Why would Apple go all in on Apple Music and ignore iTunes if Apple Music loses money while all iTunes has to do is sell one .99 cent song to make more money than Apple Music in the past 6 years? Apple is pushing Apple Music because it’s making money, more money than iTunes.

Yep, Apple wouldn't hold onto a money loser this long. But Apple has a few advantages. The mechanics  of the delivery itself will be something Apple can do more cheaply due to overall many other services (they can get pricing of being a huge client and/or able to spend on its own DC to ultimately reduce costs over time). Apple also has the ability to take A and get added revenue from B. This is what  Spotify needs to get figured out. Apple Music can generate users to signup for other Apple revenue streams. It's ok to take a loss on A if the resulting B business more than makes up for it. 
Spotify must monetize its user base more than just music. It's currently just not profitable enough. They may be able to eke out small profits but that's unsustainable. Running losses means debt service.  But their stock price suggests there are investment companies who believe they will do it.

CloudTalkin said:

ArchStanton said:

What I don’t like about this article and specifically Apple’s comments is they aren’t plain and straight forward. “ATT” and “third party”. I understand it but the average person is clueless to how significantly this blocks your private data from being collected. 

What I like about this article is how much it drives the paid trolls, trolls and haters into a tizzy to hear this, then have nothing coherent to say in their whirling attempt to defend Google (and Facebook’s) massive private data collection on users. They’ll reply with “they all do it”, there’s Pegasus!, you use the internet so isn’t private! and more. I Love it When the subject comes up and the trolls/haters have to find someway to try and obscure the truth.  

I don't know bud. Your comment kinda makes it pretty clear you don't understand it at all.  You are the average person you're attempting to disparage.  Apple's explanation of ATT is pretty plain and straight forward.  Simply put, App Tracking Transparency blocks 3rd party cross-site tracking.  That's it.  What the average person may be assuming (you included) is ATT blocks tracking... period.  It does not.  It only blocks a specifically defined (by Apple) type of tracking.  This is how Apple defines tracking: Tracking refers to the act of linking user or device data collected from your app with user or device data collected from other companies’ apps, websites, or offline properties for targeted advertising or advertising measurement purposes. Tracking also refers to sharing user or device data with data brokers. - Apple  It also has a list of exceptions to the 3rd party tracking rule. 

App Tracking Transparency doesn't block your data from being collected.  There are other mechanisms in place that do that have done that for a while now.  ATT performs a specific singular function, not the all encompassing role you seem to think it does.  It's also kinda funny to read your "trolls and haters" missive about data collection when it's fairly obvious you really know far less than you think you do.  Now I'm far from an expert, but at least I attempted to learn the facts.  You really should as well.  And yes, they all do it.  And by it, I mean collect massive amounts of data on users.  What they do with that data is where the differences lie.  That's the distinction you're missing.

Well you can go reread my previous comments on the subject, bud. I'm going to guess you don't understand from that comment and reading the entire body of your comment. Great usage of the impression 'it just stops this little thing over here'. Better than the 'they all do it' most of you try to push.
So let me school you first. The average user, if asked about ATT, would say "the wireless company?". You say "third party" to the average user and they would say "I'm not really sure". BTW, the metrics of who understands what on data mining is available from privacy advocates for your perusing. But I'm sure you've read it all as you have demonstrated a real knowledge on it. 
For anyone reading this, except CloudTalking, third party app tracking is HUGE! (or as the average user completely understand ATT Third party -- just wow). This is likely the biggest crux of privacy data mining there is, mining private data via third party app tracking. This allows one App to track you across other apps (i.e. almost everything you are doing on your phone). Now to you that's just this little think, good for you Bud. You're super knowledgable on the subject so you're all set. But hey, since first party tracking of private data is such a knowledge spot for you, try this bud: go request your private data from Google, Facebook, Apple. They all must make it available to you for free. I'm sure you've already done it but what the heck, try it again. You can explain all about how much it is just ATT and, putting ATT aside, gives you a view of first party tracking too.
Look forward to you telling us all about the comparisons in what Data shows up. I've already done it and have advocated previously for doing it here, bud.

Marvin said:

mr lizard said:

The lesson here is don't invest in any in-app purchases for Nintendo games on iOS. That's a nice tidy profit they made, and now the purchasers are left with no way to enjoy what they've paid for. 

The profit Nintendo makes on mobile is relatively small. Their financial report shows mobile and other IP revenue at 3% ($0.5b) of their total revenue ($15b - from Switch) and mobile revenue is primarily driven by Fire Emblem Heroes and Mario Kart Tour:

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2021/annual2103e.pdf

Games like Dr Mario aren't nearly as popular:

https://www.pocketgamer.biz/asia/news/71381/dr-mario-worlds-first-month-revenue-is-nintendos-lowest-on-mobile-to-date/

Any consumer investment in low popularity products is risky because there will inevitably come a time when any for-profit business considers it an unjustified maintenance cost.

This right here. 
A company has only so many programmers and engineers and operation costs it can devote to it.  The big rev makers get the attention, the Small rev makers can hold on for a bit but ultimately as the revenue tarts to ebb they'll axe it. Companies are in the business to make profit.  Gaming is very competitive. As a company you better be spending on that which has profit outlook growth else you'll be sitting on the sideline wondering what you did wrong. 

Analysts don't want to be too high with Apple (and a few other stocks). There's a belief that if you are outside the average and you overstay it, you are a suckup to that company, trying to make money. 
As it stands right now Apple over performs almost every time. That means stock price will factor in higher than average performances. Good info to know...

Huge trading computers controlling huge amounts of money execute the majority of day to day trading. You don’t beat these computers and you shouldn’t even try. The day’s trading is a mish mosh of ups and downs pricing. Forget about that except for noticing it like you’d notice ballgame scores. They’re interesting but aren’t meaningful. What happened to Apple after hours from computer trading, mostly, means nothing unless you are a short term options trader or short swing trader. 
Stocks like Apple are a longer term purchase. Buy it then don’t worry what happened today. A five minute chart tells you nothing about investing in Apple. You need to look at the daily chart over a year coupled with earnings results and growth. That’s the information you need to know. Then you can try to find an optimal entry point but that can also be difficult. The verified best time to purchase Apple is anytime if you’re going to hold it.