clarker99

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

clarker99 said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

StrangeDays said:

ericthehalfbee said:

avon b7 said:

radarthekat said:

avon b7 said:

We are basically 'post iPhone' now (in company-wide terms) and after three years of flat growth, unit numbers possibly don't look too good going forward (in growth terms). 

Apple has never had the kind of high-end premiun competition (at least on the current scale) as it has now and is (and has been) trying to open new revenue streams.

Services is growing, (TV) content creation will probably go live next year and the car project will follow. Plus all the other areas.

However, flat unit sales are not nice and any dip in handset sales would just make things worse from a stock perspective because iPhone sales have been the most important indicator for years. Giving a running commentary on unit sales (each earnings  call) and reporting things staying the same - or possibly getting worse is something to be avoided. 

While iPhone X may have been the 'most popular' model this year, and in spite of all the joy with Q1 numbers, the reality is that sales are still more or less flat, again. Little has changed.

We know people are being asked to pay more for the newer phones and at some point they won't want to (or won't be able to) and that point might be close. This year's refresh was not really that spectacular. To the point that many considered the Apple Watch to be the real star of the 2018 refresh.

In a 'post iPhone' Apple world, it shouldn't be surprising to see a decision like this. Just look at the guidance for the next quarter. There will be another Q1 blow out but the revenue mix will be far more spread out, and as the year passes, iPhone unit sales might show signs of fatigue.

By not giving unit sales, Apple gets some breathing space until the next refresh, which will need to be stronger than this year, but won't carry same importance as in previous years because other areas will have been strengthened by then and the content library will probably be rolling out.

iPhone sales could take off of course, but I think Apple really doesn't expect that to happen and they are prefering to err on the side of caution.

Apple obviously (and understandably) wants to play the decision down and say unit sales are less relevant. In a post iPhone Apple world it is true, but those numbers are still very much relevant nonetheless.

While some of what you say is certainly the case (yes, Apple is obviously diversifying revenue streams) your take on it seems to suggest you believe that iPhone sales are bound to flatten out and Apple is reacting to
that by attempting to charge higher prices.  But Apple is a huge data mining operation.  The company certainly has all the sales and marketing data it needs to dial the iPhone unit sales number where they want it, growing unit sales 20% year over year if they so wish; it would simply be a matter of producing iPhone models targeting certain market demographics at appropriate prices.  Because there’s demand all up and down the market, even here in the Philippines where most can’t afford one but nevertheless aspire to get their hands on one.  If Apple truly wanted to play the unit sales game against all comers, do you really think they couldn’t succeed?  

Apple is in a different game.  The company has looked at price elasticity and decided it can maintain current unit numbers, even modestly growing them, while netting significantly more in ASP, by continuing up market away from those who have been attempting to follow Apple into the premium space.  That’s why you’re seeing A-series performance numbers that are running away from the competition, Face ID coming to the iPad, and other unmatched technology advances.  Did you even read Above Avalon’s recent article (under his free Weekly Articles section) regarding the grey market for iPhones and what that means?  I guess not.  You spout a lot about Apple’s supposed competition, championing one vendor in particular, but you show a remarkable, perhaps deliberately obtuse, lack of insight into the smartphone business.  

But hey, thanks for playing.  

I think you are at odds with yourself.

Apple has never seen competition on its high end turf like it has now. To the point that this year's innovation in the handset market didn't come from Apple. If you want bleeding edge technology (lots do) you wouldn't buy this year's iPhone. That has been the reality of 2018. And you know that Apple has been sheltered from a large chunk of that competition on its home turf, which just happens to be the world's second largest smartphone market.

Oh. That 'one vendor'. People are asking why its latest phone hasn't appeared on the D0X Mark listing yet. Rumours claim the results would be too far ahead of the pack as to be detrimental to itself. As the iPhone X Max didn't top the current board leader - which is already six months old - and the current leader is made by that 'one vendor', it is rumoured that the Mate 20 Pro won't get a listing until something from the competition tops the P20 Pro. You will counter that the listing is worthless and mostly serves for marketing but marketing is one of the cogs that moves this industry.

It's not that Apple can't play the 'unit sales game and succeed'. It can, but at what price (no pun intended)?

It's been flat on unit sales for three years now - in spite of attempts to open up its spread (both on models and pricing). So that is flat sales in spite of those actions. Care to imagine how things would have looked if they hadn't taken that action?

Given the situation, one of the possible options is to compete with itself and produce new phones (not old phones) for the mid tier and try to differentiate them enough to shore up premium sales. It hasn't chosen that option - yet.

But 2019 is served and the iPhones - for all their marketing - haven't really turned heads and now won't do so until the end of 2019. That is a lot of quarters and Samsung  (S10) is going to hit hard as soon as the gates open on  the New Year. Huawei (P30 Pro) will follow soon after and right around Apple the time Apple has its 2019 refresh, both vendors will launch the latest Note and Mates. 

So Apple has an expensive phone (made more expensive by sales tax and currency realities in certain regions) that doesn't really offer the bells and whistles that the price warrants.

It looks like Apple doesn't plan for larger unit shipments and may in fact be preparing for some contraction.

Apple has the ultimate card to know the state of its current market: Apple ID.

It knows absolutely everything it needs to know about the state of play. Active accounts and if users are bringing in extra revenues, how many devices are linked to each account, which devices go off radar, the family sphere of users.

I have speculated in the past that the so called 'super cycle' might have actually happened, but simply didn't register in terms of far higher unit sales. Apple always knew exactly what happened of course and will never make that data public.

Given the possible state of play, this decision not to provide unit sales makes sense for the company. Analysts will continue to speculate, it's their job after all, and the stock will twitch on occasion but that is no different to today and has no bearing on anything.

In a post iPhone Apple world, the focus will move to other areas, iPhone included of course, but with less weight. Just like the Mac today. Important but not the be all and end all.

More bullshit from the Huawei troll/shill.

Newsflash: There have been countless "iPhone killers" over the last 7-8 years that were supposed to knock the iPhone off its perch at the high end. To date, not one of them has succeeded. The CLOSEST anyone got was the Galaxy S4 back in 2014, which managed to sell 10 million units in its first month. Since then it's all been downhill and nobody has ever come close since. What makes you think (besides being delusional) that Huawei is going to steal sales from Apple where everyone else has failed? Nobody cross shops the superior iPhone to the inferior Huawei flagships.

So you come up with ridiculous theories (poor Huawei isn't allowed to sell in the US) to imply that if they playing field were equal that Huawei would magically outsell the iPhone. The reason Huawei won't outsell the iPhone is because they are inferior devices. Plain and simple.

No bleeding edge technology from Apple? Only to someone who doesn't understand technology. Your precious Kirin 980 didn't turn out to be nearly as good as you predicted, so you had to try and redefine what makes a processor advanced (like thinking including a cellular modem in the chip somehow makes it better).

Indeed. For a hilarious look at his preferred knockoff brand’s “innovation”, check this out:


...they even stole the pairing screen! Copying Apple is all these chinese knockoffs know to do. That their ripoff is called “Honor” is a hoot. 

Avon B7 is a funny guy. 

Always talking about premium Chinese smartphones, especially Huawei's P20 products, which he will never purchase due to price. just like most of the Android OS buyers. It's a halo device, not destined for even moderate sales, but look at those specs!

Funny thing.

Avon B7 isn't even close to being correct about Apple services.

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/9/2/the-apple-services-myth

Yeah, the author of that stated just a few days ago that he wouldn't change a thing in that article from two years ago

From the link;

"The Actual Story

Apple's original services narrative has been taken completely out of context. Management's goal in pointing out service revenue was to emphasize the value found within the iOS ecosystem, not to explain an upcoming pivot away from hardware.

Here's Tim Cook on Apple's 1Q16 earnings call explaining Apple's services business: 

"[A] growing portion of our revenue is directly driven by our existing install base. Because our customers are very satisfied and engaged, they spend a lot of time on their devices and purchase apps, content, and other services. 

They also are very likely to buy other Apple products or replace the one they own. And because of the enduring value of the device, their replacing is likely higher to be given or sold to someone who will also love and use it often. 

So, as a result, our install base has been growing very fast and has recently reached a major milestone, crossing 1 billion active devices for the first time. This is an unbelievable asset for us. Because our install base has grown quickly, we have also seen an acceleration in the growth of our services business, another large and important source of recurring revenues."

Cook is making the case that Apple's service business is seeing strong growth because of the growth in the install base driven by hardware sales. Nowhere did Cook discuss a new Apple directive aimed at increasing services revenue. Specifically, Cook is taking the information found in Exhibit 1 and flipping it on its head."

Avon B7 has no concept of the value of an ecosystem and a growing installed base, hence why his argument of choice always comes down to device hardware spec comparisons and price.

For the record, EMUI sucks sweaty balls, and I can't imagine any iPhone user putting up with it.

You realise that when someone on the outside says 'I wouldn't change a word in what I wrote two years ago', it is synonymous of a simple opinion?

I have my opinion too and it hasn't changed either. And?

You need to understand what is happening. Apple smartphone unit sales have stalled. Flat for over three years. That is the Apple smartphone reality - sans distortion field.

I definitely didn't even whisper the idea of a 'pivot away from hardware'. I don't know if anyone did.

Tim Cook speaks of growing the installed base through hand me downs etc because there is simply not much to speak of in real unit terms. He would be overjoyed if there was real unit growth - but there isn't.

And install base is only part of the story anyway. What is of far more importance is how many unique and active Apple IDs there are. Note how Tim Cook, in spite of having those numbers too, doesn't provide them!

You are obsessed with ASP (which has no value whatsoever for consumers) and ecosystem.

One of the things that you also need to understand is that ecosystems are not the holy grail for users. They are simply platforms.

As for halo effects, you are wrong there too.

Halo effects exist on many levels. One of them is brand recognition. Huawei announced today that pre orders for the Mate 20 Pro were are 40% higher than for the P20 Pro. That is the halo effect of the P20 Pro.

Huawei has also held onto the number two spot in smartphone sales for Q3. Every single newspiece with that information also adds that Apple has dropped. That is also halo effect.

All of this propagates down the range. I don't need a P20 Pro. My Honor 10 is amazing. When I bought it it had the latest HiSilicon SoC, excellent build quality and just months after the stunning night mode rolled out on the P20 Pro, it was pushed out to the Honor 10 too. More halo effect.

Honor just launched the Magic 2 and it already has the Kirin 980!

What don't you like about EMUI? It definitely doesn't suck sweaty balls. LOL.

Lol... Android vendors biggest competition are other Android vendors. Huawei  is not gonna do anything to take on Apple. Huawei may eat into Samsung sales but will not impact Apple at all. The p20 and Mate are just another Android vessel. 

Next year a new Android vendor will be the flavour of the week. Samsung, Xaomi and Hauwei offer nothing in terms of ecosystem and sticky-ness. They are reliant on unit sales to make money. Apple is not reliant on unit sales to the same degree. The iOS ecosystem is a money making machine. What is Huawei offering? A spec arms race? Apple copy cat hardware? LG, HTC and Motorola say hi. 

The flexibility of Android means that people can switch to other Android vendors relatively easily. That is an advantage for the consumer, not a disadvantage, though.

Huawei's migration app includes iPhones. People switch from iOS to Android too. Some people want to have us believe that that never happens. It does.

Stickiness is often cited but isn't nearly as sticky as you might think. If you want to switch, you do. The real question is if you want to switch. Clearly there hasn't been a massive switch to iOS so let's conclude that if stickiness is a factor, Android is just as sticky as iOS and within Android, stickiness must also exist as lots of users are upgrading to the same Android brand.

At the low end where people upgrade more frequently, the loyalty factor goes down simply because a frequent upgrade philosophy encourages experimentation. Great for consumers again although with the big players people do often upgrade to another model within the same brand.

Apple is a money making machine that's for sure but that grates on many users (myself included) as it means nothing to consumers and doesn't even get them more bang for buck. Paying more to make a company even richer and see most of the money sit offshore (tax free!) for literally YEARS and not improve hardware (take a long hard look at your 5W charger and refresh your memory on how much Apple has horded away) does nothing for the consumer.

Huawei is not copy catting Apple hardware. Many designs are used by many manufacturers - Apple included.

In fact Huawei has a lot of hardware that isn't even available on any iPhone!

So while Huawei (lower ASP, less cash horded, more direct competition etc) was able to put out the P20 Pro and completely overshadow the iPhone X for less money and break sales records for the company, and then follow it up just six months later with the Mate 20 series with still more tech advances, Apple just took a couple of hours off from designing the Apple Park Christmas tree and pushed out an incremental upgrade (s cycle) for the 2018 refresh. 

If you want to buy into that I have no issue. It's your call after all but from reading comments here I see a lot of long time Apple users speaking out against Apple's pricing upgrades. They are automatically labelled 'whiners' but only by the people who seem to think that ASP, earning the most profit etc is actually good for consumers. That is weird in itself.

The next time you struggle to get a decent hand held night shot, can't go to 3x (or 5x hybrid) zoom when you really need it, run out of juice and end up waste time charging on your 5W charger, want a macro shot but can't focus, want to take a portrait shot but the camera app won't even let you press the shutter button due to low light, need an ultra wide angle to get everything in frame, bemoan the strength of your cellular or wifi reception etc, remember Apple's ASP and smile!

I find it funny that you are advocating for Huawei to go all out to win the unit war, in a mature market. It doesn't make sense to me, given that Huawei is just rushing into its own stagnated market sooner than later.

What exactly will Huawei win, and at what cost?

Huawei isn't going to displace Apple, who will still sell far more, by units, premium iPhones than Huawei will ever sell of its own premium phones. Samsung is certainly not laying down, and will return with even more feature rich S10 models, and will expand new models into the midrange. Sure looks like Huawei will find itself in an arms race. Xiaomi certainly wants to be the low cost fast follower of Huawei, and will be happy to pick up the scraps.

While all of that is happening, Apple continues to develop both its broad hardware and software offerings, and reap the service benefits of its increasing user base, now at 1.3B.

So you really think that Huawei will make inroads on Apple with FlyPods, an absolute carbon copy of AirPod's industrial design?

Apple is basically alerting the world that there is a rough ride ahead for the world's economies. You might want to note that, because whatever happens to Apple, they still sit on a pile of cash that they will use to pick up even more of those small innovators, but at firesale prices. Given that Apple could, at any time, market lower price models, should it need to increase units sales, I'm seeing a whole lot more risk to Chinese OEM's than I am to Apple.

And you say I'm a funny guy! LOL

Yes Apple could buy up more innovators but they already have quite a few bought up and on board and not much has shown for it this year! 

There is very little in the industrial design of the Air Pods.  There are hundreds of ear buds on the market - but with wires attached. In fact you could simply cut the wires off many of those and you would be hard pressed to distinguish between them and Air Pods! The design isn't original at all but that's forgivable for the same reasons phones are rectangular.

At least Honor is offering them in different colours and trying a new secure biometric option with BoneID. Not to mention being able to reverse charge them wirelessly on the Mate Pro. Did you mention Innovation?

That's not to take anything away from Air Pods though, it's just adding some balance to your claim.

And if Apple is alerting the world to a rough ride ahead, raising prices doesn't really paint that picture. It more like saying, 'as we might sell less, you have to pay more to keep our ASP afloat'!

No, you are correct in saying Samsung won't lay down. Finally, they are reacting but Huawei will react too! Competition! Hooray!

Of course, the result could lead to Apple eating the dust in the tech trail those two will leave behind so Apple better have something compelling lined up for 2019.

As for Xiaomi, the more competition the better!

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

StrangeDays said:

ericthehalfbee said:

avon b7 said:

radarthekat said:

avon b7 said:

We are basically 'post iPhone' now (in company-wide terms) and after three years of flat growth, unit numbers possibly don't look too good going forward (in growth terms). 

Apple has never had the kind of high-end premiun competition (at least on the current scale) as it has now and is (and has been) trying to open new revenue streams.

Services is growing, (TV) content creation will probably go live next year and the car project will follow. Plus all the other areas.

However, flat unit sales are not nice and any dip in handset sales would just make things worse from a stock perspective because iPhone sales have been the most important indicator for years. Giving a running commentary on unit sales (each earnings  call) and reporting things staying the same - or possibly getting worse is something to be avoided. 

While iPhone X may have been the 'most popular' model this year, and in spite of all the joy with Q1 numbers, the reality is that sales are still more or less flat, again. Little has changed.

We know people are being asked to pay more for the newer phones and at some point they won't want to (or won't be able to) and that point might be close. This year's refresh was not really that spectacular. To the point that many considered the Apple Watch to be the real star of the 2018 refresh.

In a 'post iPhone' Apple world, it shouldn't be surprising to see a decision like this. Just look at the guidance for the next quarter. There will be another Q1 blow out but the revenue mix will be far more spread out, and as the year passes, iPhone unit sales might show signs of fatigue.

By not giving unit sales, Apple gets some breathing space until the next refresh, which will need to be stronger than this year, but won't carry same importance as in previous years because other areas will have been strengthened by then and the content library will probably be rolling out.

iPhone sales could take off of course, but I think Apple really doesn't expect that to happen and they are prefering to err on the side of caution.

Apple obviously (and understandably) wants to play the decision down and say unit sales are less relevant. In a post iPhone Apple world it is true, but those numbers are still very much relevant nonetheless.

While some of what you say is certainly the case (yes, Apple is obviously diversifying revenue streams) your take on it seems to suggest you believe that iPhone sales are bound to flatten out and Apple is reacting to
that by attempting to charge higher prices.  But Apple is a huge data mining operation.  The company certainly has all the sales and marketing data it needs to dial the iPhone unit sales number where they want it, growing unit sales 20% year over year if they so wish; it would simply be a matter of producing iPhone models targeting certain market demographics at appropriate prices.  Because there’s demand all up and down the market, even here in the Philippines where most can’t afford one but nevertheless aspire to get their hands on one.  If Apple truly wanted to play the unit sales game against all comers, do you really think they couldn’t succeed?  

Apple is in a different game.  The company has looked at price elasticity and decided it can maintain current unit numbers, even modestly growing them, while netting significantly more in ASP, by continuing up market away from those who have been attempting to follow Apple into the premium space.  That’s why you’re seeing A-series performance numbers that are running away from the competition, Face ID coming to the iPad, and other unmatched technology advances.  Did you even read Above Avalon’s recent article (under his free Weekly Articles section) regarding the grey market for iPhones and what that means?  I guess not.  You spout a lot about Apple’s supposed competition, championing one vendor in particular, but you show a remarkable, perhaps deliberately obtuse, lack of insight into the smartphone business.  

But hey, thanks for playing.  

I think you are at odds with yourself.

Apple has never seen competition on its high end turf like it has now. To the point that this year's innovation in the handset market didn't come from Apple. If you want bleeding edge technology (lots do) you wouldn't buy this year's iPhone. That has been the reality of 2018. And you know that Apple has been sheltered from a large chunk of that competition on its home turf, which just happens to be the world's second largest smartphone market.

Oh. That 'one vendor'. People are asking why its latest phone hasn't appeared on the D0X Mark listing yet. Rumours claim the results would be too far ahead of the pack as to be detrimental to itself. As the iPhone X Max didn't top the current board leader - which is already six months old - and the current leader is made by that 'one vendor', it is rumoured that the Mate 20 Pro won't get a listing until something from the competition tops the P20 Pro. You will counter that the listing is worthless and mostly serves for marketing but marketing is one of the cogs that moves this industry.

It's not that Apple can't play the 'unit sales game and succeed'. It can, but at what price (no pun intended)?

It's been flat on unit sales for three years now - in spite of attempts to open up its spread (both on models and pricing). So that is flat sales in spite of those actions. Care to imagine how things would have looked if they hadn't taken that action?

Given the situation, one of the possible options is to compete with itself and produce new phones (not old phones) for the mid tier and try to differentiate them enough to shore up premium sales. It hasn't chosen that option - yet.

But 2019 is served and the iPhones - for all their marketing - haven't really turned heads and now won't do so until the end of 2019. That is a lot of quarters and Samsung  (S10) is going to hit hard as soon as the gates open on  the New Year. Huawei (P30 Pro) will follow soon after and right around Apple the time Apple has its 2019 refresh, both vendors will launch the latest Note and Mates. 

So Apple has an expensive phone (made more expensive by sales tax and currency realities in certain regions) that doesn't really offer the bells and whistles that the price warrants.

It looks like Apple doesn't plan for larger unit shipments and may in fact be preparing for some contraction.

Apple has the ultimate card to know the state of its current market: Apple ID.

It knows absolutely everything it needs to know about the state of play. Active accounts and if users are bringing in extra revenues, how many devices are linked to each account, which devices go off radar, the family sphere of users.

I have speculated in the past that the so called 'super cycle' might have actually happened, but simply didn't register in terms of far higher unit sales. Apple always knew exactly what happened of course and will never make that data public.

Given the possible state of play, this decision not to provide unit sales makes sense for the company. Analysts will continue to speculate, it's their job after all, and the stock will twitch on occasion but that is no different to today and has no bearing on anything.

In a post iPhone Apple world, the focus will move to other areas, iPhone included of course, but with less weight. Just like the Mac today. Important but not the be all and end all.

More bullshit from the Huawei troll/shill.

Newsflash: There have been countless "iPhone killers" over the last 7-8 years that were supposed to knock the iPhone off its perch at the high end. To date, not one of them has succeeded. The CLOSEST anyone got was the Galaxy S4 back in 2014, which managed to sell 10 million units in its first month. Since then it's all been downhill and nobody has ever come close since. What makes you think (besides being delusional) that Huawei is going to steal sales from Apple where everyone else has failed? Nobody cross shops the superior iPhone to the inferior Huawei flagships.

So you come up with ridiculous theories (poor Huawei isn't allowed to sell in the US) to imply that if they playing field were equal that Huawei would magically outsell the iPhone. The reason Huawei won't outsell the iPhone is because they are inferior devices. Plain and simple.

No bleeding edge technology from Apple? Only to someone who doesn't understand technology. Your precious Kirin 980 didn't turn out to be nearly as good as you predicted, so you had to try and redefine what makes a processor advanced (like thinking including a cellular modem in the chip somehow makes it better).

Indeed. For a hilarious look at his preferred knockoff brand’s “innovation”, check this out:


...they even stole the pairing screen! Copying Apple is all these chinese knockoffs know to do. That their ripoff is called “Honor” is a hoot. 

Avon B7 is a funny guy. 

Always talking about premium Chinese smartphones, especially Huawei's P20 products, which he will never purchase due to price. just like most of the Android OS buyers. It's a halo device, not destined for even moderate sales, but look at those specs!

Funny thing.

Avon B7 isn't even close to being correct about Apple services.

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/9/2/the-apple-services-myth

Yeah, the author of that stated just a few days ago that he wouldn't change a thing in that article from two years ago

From the link;

"The Actual Story

Apple's original services narrative has been taken completely out of context. Management's goal in pointing out service revenue was to emphasize the value found within the iOS ecosystem, not to explain an upcoming pivot away from hardware.

Here's Tim Cook on Apple's 1Q16 earnings call explaining Apple's services business: 

"[A] growing portion of our revenue is directly driven by our existing install base. Because our customers are very satisfied and engaged, they spend a lot of time on their devices and purchase apps, content, and other services. 

They also are very likely to buy other Apple products or replace the one they own. And because of the enduring value of the device, their replacing is likely higher to be given or sold to someone who will also love and use it often. 

So, as a result, our install base has been growing very fast and has recently reached a major milestone, crossing 1 billion active devices for the first time. This is an unbelievable asset for us. Because our install base has grown quickly, we have also seen an acceleration in the growth of our services business, another large and important source of recurring revenues."

Cook is making the case that Apple's service business is seeing strong growth because of the growth in the install base driven by hardware sales. Nowhere did Cook discuss a new Apple directive aimed at increasing services revenue. Specifically, Cook is taking the information found in Exhibit 1 and flipping it on its head."

Avon B7 has no concept of the value of an ecosystem and a growing installed base, hence why his argument of choice always comes down to device hardware spec comparisons and price.

For the record, EMUI sucks sweaty balls, and I can't imagine any iPhone user putting up with it.

You realise that when someone on the outside says 'I wouldn't change a word in what I wrote two years ago', it is synonymous of a simple opinion?

I have my opinion too and it hasn't changed either. And?

You need to understand what is happening. Apple smartphone unit sales have stalled. Flat for over three years. That is the Apple smartphone reality - sans distortion field.

I definitely didn't even whisper the idea of a 'pivot away from hardware'. I don't know if anyone did.

Tim Cook speaks of growing the installed base through hand me downs etc because there is simply not much to speak of in real unit terms. He would be overjoyed if there was real unit growth - but there isn't.

And install base is only part of the story anyway. What is of far more importance is how many unique and active Apple IDs there are. Note how Tim Cook, in spite of having those numbers too, doesn't provide them!

You are obsessed with ASP (which has no value whatsoever for consumers) and ecosystem.

One of the things that you also need to understand is that ecosystems are not the holy grail for users. They are simply platforms.

As for halo effects, you are wrong there too.

Halo effects exist on many levels. One of them is brand recognition. Huawei announced today that pre orders for the Mate 20 Pro were are 40% higher than for the P20 Pro. That is the halo effect of the P20 Pro.

Huawei has also held onto the number two spot in smartphone sales for Q3. Every single newspiece with that information also adds that Apple has dropped. That is also halo effect.

All of this propagates down the range. I don't need a P20 Pro. My Honor 10 is amazing. When I bought it it had the latest HiSilicon SoC, excellent build quality and just months after the stunning night mode rolled out on the P20 Pro, it was pushed out to the Honor 10 too. More halo effect.

Honor just launched the Magic 2 and it already has the Kirin 980!

What don't you like about EMUI? It definitely doesn't suck sweaty balls. LOL.

seankill said:

MacPro said:

AAPL -$14 in after hours.  I have to wonder if Tim was pulling a Steve and playing down the next quarter's expectations.  Great buying opportunity of Apple and everyone else!

I think the market dislikes Apple hiding iPhone sales numbers. I don’t blame it. 

seankill said:

clarker99 said:

chasm said:

Oh look, the "miss" of consensus revenue by analysts is off by the exact amount of currency headwinds, which they never really take into account.

Also worth noting for this "soft" forecast: last year's fiscal Q1 was $78.4 billion (a billion over analyst estimates, btw), so any number Apple hits within or above its guidance will be at least $11B more, and will be an all-time record. Yeah, wow so "soft"!

This is it. I mean we are seeing growth and record quarters and the stock is gonna be a sub-20 P/E at open tomorrow. This stock continues to be undervalued. 

I’d argue it’s properly valued in the 20 range. Everything else is overvalued.