“Riding a wave of consumer enthusiasm for its hand-held iPhone smartphones, Apple reported strong fiscal fourth-quarter profits that outpaced Wall Street’s expectation,” John Markoff reports for The New York Times.
“Analysts think of Apple as a bellwether of the consumer electronics industry that should be showing early effects of a slowing consumer economy. The company said Tuesday, however, that any slowdown that it detected late in the quarter ended Sept. 30 might just as well have been caused by customers who were choosing to delay purchases for the new Macintosh portables that were introduced last week,” Markoff reports.
“Apple had strong sales in all of its major product lines. It also said that it had sold more iPhones in the quarter than it had since the smartphone was introduced in June of last year,” Markoff reports. Apple is “quickly becoming a dominant force in the cellphone industry, even against cellphone makers, like Research in Motion, that cater to corporations. “Apple outsold R.I.M. last quarter,” [Apple CEO Steve Jobs] said.
“Apple sold about 6.9 million of its iPhone 3G units in its fourth quarter, compared with 6.1 million cellphones for R.I.M., [Jobs] said. Apple has already surpassed its goal of selling 10 million iPhones during 2008,” Markoff reports. “‘This company is on a roll and a very consistent one, where they are gaining market share at two to three times the rate of the PC industry,’ said Charles Wolf, a financial analyst at Needham & Company.”
More in the full article here.
Apple really is amazing. Look who they cross off their list day after day. MSFT, RIMM, Sony Ecicsson, LG, Motorola.
Next up, Samsung. Nokia is a ways off.
Who’s next in Apple’s sights?
The tide is turning. We are reaching critical mass. The tipping point is apon us.
@Real Numbers:
Which is positive since it shows that there is still a lot of potential for Apple to grow.
@Markim
Hang on there cup cake, I ain’t posted anything yet.
Ahhhhh…..smugness never felt so good!
So, does anyone know how many Windows Mobile phones were sold during the last quarter?
If they routinely give conservative guidance, then they’re consistent. That’s a good thing
I’m sure ol’ Baldmer was squirting after these numbers were released…
What does Microsoft have to worry about? Really, Apple will only take so much market share from windows as long as Jobs refuses to go after the masses. The vast majority of people will not pay $1000+ for a laptop when they can get one for $500. They aren’t going to pay twice as much for something that’s different. People don’t like change.
Now if Apple had something that was much closer in price then you could convince more people to try to switch.
Only an idiot would believe the cr@p that Jobs is shoveling when he says that you can’t build a good computer for less. Anyone that knows even a little about computers knows that the problems with cheap computers are in the software and not the hardware. Good previous generation hardware is cheap but still good. Bad drivers for windows cause most of the problems that people have, well besides viruses.
Take previous generation hardware, OSX and good drivers and you can make a dependable computer on the cheap.
I agree with Apple Fan. As long as Jobs insists on keeping prices at $1000+ there will be a glass ceiling that Apple won’t be able to break.
That doesn’t mean that they don’t still have a lot of room for growth but they will only take so much share from Microsoft.
I’d love to see Microsoft crushed but Apple’s present business model can’t accomplish that. However, competition is good.
Apple Fan,
The other main reason Apple hasn’t resorted to offering a $500 computer is because their brand is synonymous with high quality, premium products. A cheap computer built with previous generation components would tarnish that. In addition, the target market they currently go after means margins stay high and the company is financially strong. Have you ever seen Dell’s margins on those $500 machines? It’s pennies compared to what Apple gets.
Here, here, Tony. I completely agree. The Apple brand is not about “cheap”, and I believe that Apple doesn’t want to be comoditized by producing “cheap” products — just like Dell, Gateway, et cetera.
By keeping the Apple brand in a higher echelon, Jobs is in effect creating customer perception that its products are desirable. Once you go cheap, you loose that cache.
Its a combination of marketing and product genius.
Yes, Apple could make a decent computer with old technology that it could sell for a competitive price.
But, it wouldn’t be a Mac, would it?
They should just license a tightly controlled design and the Tiger to someone else. Keep the clone perpetually a year or two behind in OS and hardware.
Apple has never tried to appeal to the masses, nor should it aspire to. Does Rolex make a bargain watch? Does Mercedes sell a subcompact? No. Apple has built a brand identity that is far more valuable than the money to be made selling a marginally profitable low-priced product. Once you start to try to compete on price, the game is over. If the only thing that separates you from the competition is a lower price, you have on your hands a commoditized business. Some other company will always try to undercut your price, forcing you to lower your prices in order to remain competitive. Your profit margin flies out the window. This is what has happened to Dell. It’s a fatal mistake. Apple’s sales might fall off during this downturn, but Jobs pointed out that the co. has 24.5 billion in the bank and would use that money to weather this downturn and also to innovate and to add value to the existing product line. It has always been my contention that Apple’s products are worth the extra price because they are more reliable, the customer service is better, the OS system is less prone to viruses and the user interface is so simple that even a caveman can master it. No, Steve Jobs is waaayy too smart to fall into the trap of competing on price. Now, if the netbook market really takes off thanks to the advent of cloud computing, Jobs said that Apple might choose to compete in that space but right now the netbook market is nothing more than a curiousity. He definitely left himself some wiggle room with regard to netbooks. Let’s also not forget the report that a search engine has registered some hits from an unregistered Apple product that has a screen size somewhere between that of the iPhone and a laptop. Apple is not standing still, I can promise you that
@NCMacMan
How do you do the following excerpt from your message? What is it with using the word loose when you probably mean lose? I see it frequently on this site and others.
…you loose that cache…
I don’t think it would be in Apple’s best interests to have a huge class of people who buy mac clones running the previous generation’s OS. It would slow developer adoption and utilization of new core technologies in Leopard.
@ Apple Fan (NOT!!!)
“What does Microsoft have to worry about? Really, Apple will only take so much market share from windows as long as Jobs refuses to go after the masses. The vast majority of people will not pay $1000+ for a laptop when they can get one for $500. They aren’t going to pay twice as much for something that’s different. People don’t like change.”
Another example of where the $300,000,000 or 15,000 per blog goes.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Please remember that Jobs said, “For Apple to win, …..” Apple is winning. Apple will not go for the cheap computer, it will let a beleagered Dell and HP create them, and put linux on them.
For Microsoft to suffer greatly, HP and Dell just need to clean up linux and put it on vs windows. PERIOD. Apple will own the mid and upper price computer market and HP and Dell will own the cheap computer market.
Microsoft…….. ?? Who did you say????? Weren’t they a maker of some crappy software back in the late 1990’s????? LOL
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Just a (wonderful) thought.
en
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
As long as Apple continues to turn profits like this, while at the same time increasing market share at two to three times that of the PC industry, why on earth would they open up the market to the walmart (for lack of better description) crowd?
The underlying meme of Apple products is about time-savings, productivity, and happiness. Inviting the unwashed masses (again, lack of a better description) would cripple Apple’s infrastructure and degrade the entire Apple experience for us all. Apple itself would never smile again and its workforce would dread coming to work.
Tech support would be over-taxed by idiots. Returns would skyrocket. The cost of doing business would drag on customer service and quality control. Forget about hiring the best this country has to offer because at that point any salesman could run the company.
I’m not saying there isn’t a market for the price-sensitive but companies like Compaq, Packard Bell, and Dell all went after the low-hanging fruit and lost their identity in the process by commoditizing their products. How long did it take to ruin their brand?
I’ve always bought computers from Apple in the twenty-five hundred dollar price range. From the Apple ][ to my current 24-inch iMac and in thirty years though the price-point stayed the same, my computers have improved incrementally, but dramatically, and so too did my time-savings, productivity, and happiness.
Does Rolex sell a forty dollar timepiece? Why would they when Timex and Casio has already cornered the market for cheap disposable watches. On the other hand, how would it make you feel if your father wanted to ceremoniously pass his Timex watch down to you?
“Hang on there cup cake, I ain’t posted anything yet.”
That’s just MDN revisionist history at work.
The amazing vanishing comment was that the worldwide market grew by 10.5 million units and that Apple grew by 400k units, so Apple’s real take of the growth was 4%, much more in line with their worldwide share. Whereas other companies took 15% or more of that growth.
“The tide is turning. We are reaching critical mass. The tipping point is apon us.”
Not really so if you don’t manipulate the statistics to give an overly optimistic picture. 30% growth sounds impressive, but is it really? You have to ask, 30% of what? Certainly not 30% of the US market, or 30% of the growth in the US market, or 30% of the world market or it’s growth. No, the abused statistic refers to 30% of Apple’s own sales.
By way of an example: VendorX sells 10 units. VendorY sells 1000 units. VendorX grows by a 3 units for a total of 30% growth. VendorY grows by 3 units for a total of 0.3% growth. But both grew by exactly the same number of units sold. Assuming equivalent margins (not true for PCs) both vendors increased revenue and profits by the same amount. Yet using the flawed statistic, one only grew by 0.3% and the other grew by 30%.
The US home market a bright spot for Apple. But worldwide the trend is still clear. Of all the market growth last year, Apple got 4% of the extra PCs sold and other vendors got 96% That’s a little win for Apple, given that worldwide they have 3% share, but is still right in line with historical market share percentages.
The numbers are incontrovertible because they are based on Apple’s own reported numbers and Gartner and IDC’s accurate worldwide growth estimates.