Apple Beats Sales Estimates Amid Reports of Poor Demand For iPhone X (bloomberg.com) 107
Apple today reported revenue and profit that beat analysts' estimates and projected continued sales momentum. The results come amid reports that demand for its flagship iPhone X have fallen. Bloomberg reports: Apple revenue rose 16 percent to $61.1 billion in the fiscal second quarter. That was the fastest growth in more than two years. Profit came in at $2.73 a share, the company said Tuesday in a statement. Analysts expected sales of $60.9 billion and earnings per share of $2.64, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Fiscal third-quarter revenue will be $51.5 billion to $53.5 billion, also ahead of Wall Street forecasts.
Apple sold 52.2 million iPhones in the fiscal second quarter, up 2.9 percent from a year earlier. Analysts had projected of 52.3 million, on average, although some investors expected fewer units. The average selling price was $728, versus analysts' expectations of $740. That suggested the flagship iPhone X didn't perform as well as some anticipated when it launched last year. Earlier this year, Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri said iPhone revenue would grow by at least 10 percent year-over-year in the fiscal second quarter. Apple easily hit that goal, with 14 percent iPhone revenue growth in the period.
Apple sold 52.2 million iPhones in the fiscal second quarter, up 2.9 percent from a year earlier. Analysts had projected of 52.3 million, on average, although some investors expected fewer units. The average selling price was $728, versus analysts' expectations of $740. That suggested the flagship iPhone X didn't perform as well as some anticipated when it launched last year. Earlier this year, Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri said iPhone revenue would grow by at least 10 percent year-over-year in the fiscal second quarter. Apple easily hit that goal, with 14 percent iPhone revenue growth in the period.
Suckers!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Ha ha! You morons fall for trumped-up reports of Apple sales declines like EVERY QUARTER so the short sellers can cash in.
The amusing thing is, the Apple Haters of Slashdot act as a tool of the wealthy elite.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Ha ha! You morons fall for trumped-up reports of Apple sales declines like EVERY QUARTER so the short sellers can cash in.
The amusing thing is, the Apple Haters of Slashdot act as a tool of the wealthy elite.
What torture lurks within a single thought
When grown too constant; and however kind,
However welcome still, the weary mind
Aches with its presence. Dull remembrance taught
Remembers on unceasingly; unsought
The old delight is with us but to find
That all recurring joy is pain refined,
Become a habit, and we struggle, caught.
You lie upon my heart as on a nest,
Folded in peace, for you can never know
How crushed I am with having you at rest
Heavy upon my life. I love you so
You bind my freedom from its rightful quest.
I
TFDR (Score:4, Funny)
Too Flowery, Didn't Read.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Suckers!! (Score:5, Insightful)
They sell the same number of units as last year at a higher price and post a profit? So, how exactly is demand down?
What is says is that people still like their products. The price point was a bit high for many, but it still sold. Go figure.
If they lower their price point on a feature similar model later this year, they will outsell the competitors yet again.
Re: (Score:1)
What it really says is the distortion field is still strong enough for people to line up and spread their cheeks for the unlubed apple cock. Prices up, quality down, extra subscription services piled on top and people still defend them as if not only is their behaviour fine it's als
Re: Suckers!! (Score:2)
Or - as you might expect - they will offer a lower cost but same size device, with an edge to edge screen + a larger edge to edge screen device and that will increase their sales volume while slightly reducing average device profit.
That said, they sell 100 phones every minute of every day so there is going to be an upper bound somewhere.
Re: (Score:1)
with an edge to edge screen + a larger edge to edge screen device
If results are any indication, they need to come out with a model with an even bigger notch. And a negative headphone jack. Meaning, a phone with a protuberance that sticks out of the side of the case a little about the size of a 3.5mm plug and pokes you in the thigh if you have the phone in your pocket. To remind you how brave you were to choose a phone without a headphone jack.
Also, more dongles. Maybe some wireless dongles this time.
Re: (Score:2)
with an edge to edge screen + a larger edge to edge screen device
If results are any indication, they need to come out with a model with an even bigger notch. And a negative headphone jack. Meaning, a phone with a protuberance that sticks out of the side of the case a little about the size of a 3.5mm plug and pokes you in the thigh if you have the phone in your pocket. To remind you how brave you were to choose a phone without a headphone jack.
Also, more dongles. Maybe some wireless dongles this time. A bluetooth home button would be nice.
Why don't you take your tired Meme and go home?
The People are voting with their wallets. Over 60 BEELION Votes, in fact!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the sunk cost fallacy coupled with locked in syndrome will do that.
Riiiiight. Keep telling yourself that.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Also comes in a flavor for taking photos (usually with tripod) to prevent introducing motion shake into the shot.
That's funny. I use an iPhone app for no-shake shooting of my Olympus. It's like a remote for the camera.
Re: (Score:1)
Or - as you might expect - they will offer a lower cost but same size device, with an edge to edge screen + a larger edge to edge screen device and that will increase their sales volume while slightly reducing average device profit.
That won't work for Apple at all, in fact it will just make them perform worse. This is owing to an anomaly of supply and demand. Apple is a producer of what are called Veblen goods. Veblen goods will sell LESS volume if you lower their price. In other words, the high price itself is what gives it its value. If you're looking for function alone, Android has been two years ahead of Apple since 2013. People who buy Apple aren't interested in that, they're interested in status. Think designer clothing; little
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Suckers!! (Score:2)
Re:Suckers!! (Score:5, Interesting)
then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
Apple has a P/E of 18. Nobody is expecting much profit growth.
The average P/E for the S&P 500 is 24.
Amazon has a P/E of over 300, which means investors are expecting Amazon's profits to soar ten-fold.
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon reinvests nearly all its profits into the company, to minimize taxes and maximize growth. It's done pretty well for them so far. Investors probably expect this to end once Bezos is out, just like Apple implemented dividends and stock buybacks after Cook took over.
Re: (Score:2)
...which means investors are expecting Amazon's profits to soar ten-fold.
Three Times Hurrah!!!! ... for unrealistic expectations.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year. Unless you think they can keep increasing the price of their phones or somehow makeup for the loss of unit growth by selling billions in services then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
Ah! Hello, old Meme! So Glad to see ye!
Apple Computer: Proudly Going Out of Business for over FORTY Years!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year. Unless you think they can keep increasing the price of their phones or somehow makeup for the loss of unit growth by selling billions in services then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
Ah! Hello, old Meme! So Glad to see ye!
Apple Computer: Proudly Going Out of Business for over FORTY Years!!!
Ah, only in the head of an apple addict does profit growth nearing end equal going out of business. Strawman much?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year. Unless you think they can keep increasing the price of their phones or somehow makeup for the loss of unit growth by selling billions in services then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
Ah! Hello, old Meme! So Glad to see ye!
Apple Computer: Proudly Going Out of Business for over FORTY Years!!!
Ah, only in the head of an apple addict does profit growth nearing end equal going out of business. Strawman much?
And only in the head of an Apple Hater does the richest (or one of the richest) companies on Earth have a "Profitability" problem.
Ridiculous much?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year.
So did Samsung, LG, and HTC. Yet, for some reason, you don't have the same dire predictions for those brands.
I Wonder why...
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually a good question. Maybe we should see those same dire predictions for those brands, if not more dire. After all, the smartphone industry as a whole is growing, and if a company's sales are flat, that means they're losing market share. The question then becomes who they are losing market share to, and what impact that will have on their long-term business prospects.
For Apple, as long as people who buy iPhones tend to spend more money on apps and in-app purchases than the average Android use
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually a good question. Maybe we should see those same dire predictions for those brands, if not more dire. After all, the smartphone industry as a whole is growing, and if a company's sales are flat, that means they're losing market share. The question then becomes who they are losing market share to, and what impact that will have on their long-term business prospects.
For Apple, as long as people who buy iPhones tend to spend more money on apps and in-app purchases than the average Android user, losing a little market share won't hurt that much. For an Android vendor, losing a little market share could be the first step towards losing a *lot* of market share.
I think the recipient this past year of MOST of the "lost sales" was Oppo. Don't know why; but if their phones are as good as their Optical Disc players, I can understand to some extent.
Of course, they are still that Android horseshit; but for SOME reason, some people actually LIKE that INSECURE crap...
Same old story (Score:1)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year. Unless you think they can keep increasing the price of their phones or somehow makeup for the loss of unit growth
I'm curious where you get from "sold the same number" to "loss of unit growth" HUR DE DUR DUR.
What you also skipped over was that selling the same number of phones Apple increased profits over last yer. Why, it's ALMOST like Apple has multiple product lines that are ALSO growing! HUH!
Meanwhile as profit continues to grow year afte
Re: (Score:2)
Apple sold almost exactly the same number of phones as last year. Unless you think they can keep increasing the price of their phones or somehow makeup for the loss of unit growth by selling billions in services then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
They sold 2.9% more, when the whole market for smartphones was flat or even down. There were several stories on Slashdot that concluded from this "Peak Smartphone" that Apple's sales of iPhones would be down.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples prices have always been within about +\- 10% of their main competitors.
The problem has always been is Apple has a limited number of options.
For the Macs they are priced and speced the same as other prebuilt upper mid quality computers. If you were to spec a competitor to have the same features you will be paying about the same price if not more. But the issue is the device have a lot of features some we don’t care about but it is there and cannot be removed so we are paying for unnecessary fe
Re: (Score:1)
The point of buying Apple is the software. MS's alleged software sucks. And that explains the price differential. You can buy a Dell running MS software and you pay the discounted price because the software is not very good.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple isn't primarily a Software company. It is primarily a hardware company. The software well well designed to work with its hardware, will often fail once people start using Apples devices beyond its prescribed actions. (Back to the lack of options argument) Android/Linux/Windows are more flexible then Apples offers. Hence why you see Apple having failed in the server market, or even as the primary desktop system for big organizations. Smaller companies are fine with Apple products, you can normally s
Re: (Score:2)
Ha ha! You morons fall for trumped-up reports of Apple sales declines like EVERY QUARTER so the short sellers can cash in.
The amusing thing is, the Apple Haters of Slashdot act as a tool of the wealthy elite.
Precisely!
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Apple is lying, they are broke, nobody is buying iPhones. Consumers want a basic phone with replaceable battery and open software stack. A music player that blocks any attempt to listen to pop music would be a nice option as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha ha! You morons fall for trumped-up reports of Apple sales declines like EVERY QUARTER so the short sellers can cash in.
It will be interesting to see if the common usage and meaning of "trumped up" changes after the current presidency.
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to the Android ecosystem you're moving to?
With Apple, you were the customer. With Google, you're going to be the product.
Re: (Score:1)
Stick to keeping the pet food aisle stocked.
Misleading headline (Score:2)
The headline says that Apple "beat sales estimates". I don't have a calculator handy, but I believe 52.2 million is less than the projected 52.3 million.
Re: Misleading headline (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple sold 52.2 million iPhones in the fiscal second quarter, up 2.9 percent from a year earlier. Analysts had projected of 52.3 million, on average
The headline says that Apple "beat sales estimates". I don't have a calculator handy, but I believe 52.2 million is less than the projected 52.3 million.
If the average estimate is 52.3 million, then some estimates were lower than 52.3 million, and Apple beat some of the estimates. Still a bullshit headline, because the implication of such a statement is that one beat all or most of the estimates, which is not the case.
Re: (Score:3)
"Apple revenue rose 16 percent to $61.1 billion in the fiscal second quarter. ... Analysts expected sales of $60.9 billion"
$61.1 billion is larger than $60.9 billion.
Tool of the Wealthy Elite (Score:1)
Where was the supercycle on the promised iphone X on the back of it copying Androids full screen designs? The phone that is the defining phone for the next 3 years. It turns out it is no iPhone 4; Which earned Apple its Premium label, or the iPhone 6; copying other Manufactures bigger and growing Androids screens.
It turns out copying 2011's Googles Nexus one's lackluster feature of facial recognition is still lackluster 7 years on. They should drop it like 3D touch.
Its all a bit MEH; Selling LESS phones for
Apple is a Chinese Manufacture (Score:1)
The one in my pocket is a Xiaomi at 15% of an iPhoneX with an SDCard, IR Blaster, Headphone Jack, FingerPrint Reader, and a Massive Battery that won't half its speed in a years time.
And likely came pre-installed with Chinese spyware and will never see another security update in its lifetime.
Ironically Unlike your Chinese iPhone Xiaomi is expanding its manufacturing to India so is less likely to Spyware. It also has been excellent at updating with devices having five year updates as well as due to the open nature of Android having third party roms.
Re: Tool of the Wealthy Elite (Score:2)
Analysts wrong by less than 1% (Score:2)
That's the impressive part.
Re: (Score:2)
They've finally stopped wildly over- and under-predicting Apple's performance. They used to make estimates that were out-and-out ridiculous, 10-30% higher than Apple's own guidance. Some analysts have been lowballing Apple for a while now, for who-knows-what reason. This time they actually paid some attention, it seems, despite the weird doom-and-gloom stories about the iPhone X this year.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish these news stories would include the companies' guidance from the beginning of the quarter along with the analyst estimates.I have trouble finding the guidance figures after the fact.
Re:iPhone X Fails (Score:5, Insightful)
> the flagship iPhone X didn't perform as well as some anticipated
iPhone X failure - with it's price tag and ridiculous notch is probably what Apple is going to tweak next. Their expected "new" line of *cheaper* phones, support contracts and accessories (like the Airpod) will help Apple continue to fleece their customers. Battery issues will also help drive up sales...
1. Samsung's flagship phone is priced within $50 of the iPhone X.
2. Apple's notch is not "Ridiculous"; because it is there for a purpose. what is TRULY "Ridiculous", however, is all the Android phones that slavishly COPIED Apple (yet again!) and their "Ridiculous" Notch, even though they don't actually NEED it!
3. Say what you will about Apple's battery performance; but at least they never got their battery-operated products banned from airplanes...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It may not be ridiculous, but I was watching that keynote in a room full of Apple fans, and the number of "what the f**k" reactions was telling. The word that kept coming up over and over was "ugly".
What was ridiculous was not the notch so much as the fact that th
Re: (Score:3)
Fingerprint scanning through the screen [theverge.com]. I would have thought that was obvious from the context.
Re: (Score:2)
Fingerprint scanning through the screen [theverge.com]. I would have thought that was obvious from the context.
Yeah, there clearly was a phone rushed to market to meet a deadline (CES) - and you just linked to it.
Re: (Score:3)
The 'fingerprint through the screen' rumor was probably never true.
Tech like FaceID is planned a long way in advance; if Apple were ever going to use fingerprint sensing through the screen, it would've been as a stopgap TO FaceID, not as a superior technology to FaceID. Apple's position is that FaceID is better, and for them, it's the future. You can quibble over that if you like, but the interviews and intentions seem clear to me: as soon as FaceID was ready to ship, they wanted to use it.
No doubt that App
Re:iPhone X Fails (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple often works with multiple companies in parallel, trying various technologies to decide what they're going to ship. I would be shocked if Apple weren't well aware of it and hadn't been using engineering samples to see how it would work in real devices. Whether they decided to go with it based on incorrectly believing FaceID to be better or because of Qualcomm's production delays, I couldn't say, but my money would be on the latter, because I apparently have more faith in the competence of their security engineers than you do.
It is likely that it would have been used exclusively until they could do FaceID without the notch, but I don't think for a minute that FaceID would have replaced TouchID had it not been for production ramping delays from Qualcomm. FaceID might have been eventually added in parallel, once they solved the notch problem, or maybe not, largely depending on how low they could get the BOM cost.
FaceID really is fundamentally inferior in at least two important ways:
Other than a targeted attack by the sort of third party who would find a way to lift your prints and make a latex finger, there's nothing that FaceID handles better than TouchID, and in most of the common use cases, it is significantly worse. And in the case of a targeted attack by such a third party, they're likely to have their hands on hardware that can crack an iPhone externally anyway, making the differences between TouchID and FaceID moot.
So I strongly disagree that TouchID would be a stop-gap until FaceID was ready, because FaceID can never be ready. At a fairly fundamental level, facial biometrics are trash—even more so than fingerprint biometrics. At best, FaceID would have be added as a way to augment security for specific transactions (e.g. to use Apple Pay, you must use a fingerprint *and* a face match), not as a replacement. That really is the *only* way FaceID makes sense at all. As a replacement, it is downright bizarre.
Re: (Score:2)
Correction: Synaptics, not Qualcomm. My bad.
Re: (Score:2)
It may not be ridiculous, but I was watching that keynote in a room full of Apple fans, and the number of "what the f**k" reactions was telling. The word that kept coming up over and over was "ugly".
What was ridiculous was not the notch so much as the fact that the product seemed to have clearly been rushed to market to hit a deadline. They shipped with that ugly notch because they couldn't get the fingerprint-through-the-screen tech in quantities soon enough, and if they had waited just a few months, they could have shipped the product they really wanted to ship, rather than watching as the rest of the industry made it happen a few months later.
And I say that as somebody who has used Apple hardware almost exclusively since the mid-1980s. If S.J. (requiescat in pace) were still alive and running things, I'm absolutely certain that he would have thrown it across the room and said, "This is the ugliest f**king piece of s**t I've ever seen. We're not shipping it until you find a way to get rid of that f**king notch," except that he probably would have used a greater number and variety of swear words.
Just saying.
I agree that Fixed "Release Schedules" are the antithesis of good products. Everyone does it to some extent; but when it becomes the MAIN driving-force in determining when a product is "done", that is almost never a good thing.
Having said that, Apple really had no idea how quickly the "Fingerprint through Display" would get working reliably (wasn't the issue a matter of "yield"?); so at some point (and that "point" is WAY far back in time, when you are talking to a Contract Manufacturer with their own Logis
Re: (Score:3)
The sad truth is... that ALL Android manufacturers AND Apple... are making a mockery and a fool of themselves and their customers...
And for what? To please the absolute dumbest people they can find, because they are trying to appeal to as many people as possible...
Technology has ceased to be a tool and has become fashion instead... to hell with actual usefull functions, what matters are milking customers to the extreme AND to put whatever is HIP right here and now in to the next product ... a sad state of affairs if you ask me...
It makes me sad and frankly a little bit sick...
Another sad truth is that parents buy breakfast cereal for their kids, ruining their health. But that's how it is, companies make what they can sell, not necessarily what's good for humanity. But I think you are being a bit harsh on Apple. TouchID does go a long way to solving a problem: a way to help people keep their phones more secured whilst not relying on passwords. And likewise, FaceID is better than asking people to type in complex pass phrases. And actually, you can, if you look, find a lot of usefu
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why are you lying?
1. The S9+ 64GB model is 888EUR, the iPhone X 64GB is 1056EUR a difference of 168EUR close to $200USD from Vodaphone. The price gap is the same from electronics stores. From the electronics stores the S9+ 256GB model is 1049EUR vs the iPhone X 256GB being 1319EUR, a difference of 270EUR!
But that's just EU. I hear you man! The S9+ 64GB is $799 in the US, the iPhone X 64GB is $999 a difference of $200USD
2. Ridiculous is in the eye of the beholder. What is not is calling it "Apple's Notch". I
Re: (Score:2)
Apple didn't copy the notch. There wasn't enough time to copy the notch, given the stuff Apple was ordering. The orders for those screens go out well in advance, which is also why any rumors you heard of Apple making this decision at the last moment because they couldn't get fingerprint sensing under the screen to work are also wrong.
Essential did beat Apple to market with a notch first. It was a compromise they wanted to make, and Andy Rubin is no dummy; I'm sure he came to the same conclusion that the des
Re: (Score:2)
That's an impressive lack of self-awareness.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an impressive lack of self-awareness.
Not as impressive as your reading comprehension skills. Or do you want to point me to an Android phone on the market that is banned from airplanes?
Re: (Score:2)
Not as impressive as your reading comprehension skills. Or do you want to point me to an Android phone on the market that is banned from airplanes?
So they pulled an Android phone from the market because it was banned from airplanes (among other things) - and that proves the whole thing never happened? Hello, Mr. President.
Re: (Score:2)
So we can add willful obtuseness and pedantry to your lack of self-awareness. No "iPhone on the market" has antenna issues but that wouldn't stop you from whining about "holding it wrong".
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you lying?
1. The S9+ 64GB model is 888EUR, the iPhone X 64GB is 1056EUR a difference of 168EUR close to $200USD from Vodaphone. The price gap is the same from electronics stores. From the electronics stores the S9+ 256GB model is 1049EUR vs the iPhone X 256GB being 1319EUR, a difference of 270EUR!
But that's just EU. I hear you man! The S9+ 64GB is $799 in the US, the iPhone X 64GB is $999 a difference of $200USD
2. Ridiculous is in the eye of the beholder. What is not is calling it "Apple's Notch". It's a "notch" period. It is ridiculous on the iPhone X, and it was ridiculous on the 2 android phones which introduced BEFORE Apple copied it. But it's amazing that Apple "needs" the ridiculous piece of shit while Android doesn't. You just gave props to Android. Bad FakeTimCook, Bad.
3. No Android phone on the market is banned from airplanes. There were phones that were recalled in a panic resulting in users not only being $0 out of pocket, but actually getting a significant discount on a replacement phone. All Apple users get is a middle finger, and they LOVE IT!
1. I'm not lying. I'm talking MSRP. Not some Carrier's LOSS-LEADER or "Special Pricing" Pricing!
2. Can you express that thought in a COHERENT fashion? You flip-flopped the "blame" at LEAST twice! Oh, and BTW, the new "Vivo X21" with INTEGRATED FINGERPRINT SENSOR, ALSO has the "Notch". So now it's at least THREE (and one (Vivo) that REALLY doesn't "need" it!).
3. The "Panic" was pretty damned realistic, when there is VIDEO of a phone CATCHING ON FIRE ON A PLANE!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Oh, and appar
Re: (Score:2)
1. I'm not lying. I'm talking MSRP. Not some Carrier's LOSS-LEADER or "Special Pricing" Pricing!
Epic fail. None of the prices I listed were special, discounted, or loss leading. Sure looking up the S9+ at walmart made it a whole $20 cheaper than the MSRP listed on Samsung's website, but that doesn't fundamentally change that you either were lying or have absolutely zero clue about what you were talking about. Even with your saving grace of saying MSRP you're either doubling down on the lies or doubling down on the ignorance.
2. Can you express that thought in a COHERENT fashion? You flip-flopped the "blame" at LEAST twice!
Okay I'll make it simple for you: Apple copied Android, other Androids copied
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
<p>2. Apple's notch is not "Ridiculous"; because it is there for a purpose. what is TRULY "Ridiculous", however, is all the Android phones that slavishly COPIED Apple (yet again!) and their "Ridiculous" Notch, <i>even though they don't actually NEED it!</i></p></quote>
The first phone with a notch was..... an Android phone: the Essential Phone was announced in May 2017, a few months before the X.
Re: (Score:2)
<quote>
<p>2. Apple's notch is not "Ridiculous"; because it is there for a purpose. what is TRULY "Ridiculous", however, is all the Android phones that slavishly COPIED Apple (yet again!) and their "Ridiculous" Notch, <i>even though they don't actually NEED it!</i></p></quote>
The first phone with a notch was..... an Android phone: the Essential Phone was announced in May 2017, a few months before the X.
So, that just begs the question: Why is the "Notch" ONLY "Ridiculous" when Apple uses it?
Re: iPhone X Fails (Score:2)
Re: iPhone X Fails (Score:1)
And require you to use the Samsung version of android which is a piece of shit. Also you will not get updates after a year. No value there at all.