Apple calls Samsung’s bluff

“What a difference a year has made in the smartphone business,” Richard Waters writes for The Financial Times. “Twelve months ago, Samsung was riding high… Apple, by contrast, was facing a tough reassessment from Wall Street as its growth slowed and gross margins slipped.”

“With the subsequent launch of the iPhone 5s and 5c, it felt like smartphone innovation had come to an end,” Waters writes. “Apart from a design makeover for the software, the annual product rethink was distinguished mainly by the 5c, a case of old hardware dressed up in new plastic.”

MacDailyNews Take: you know, because the world’s first 64-bit smartphone and Touch ID, neither of which Samsung (or any other iPhone knockoff assembler) has matched, is meaningless.

“Things look very different today. A new phase in the smartphone wars is unfolding, and Apple once again has the chance to define the terms of engagement,” Waters writes. “Apple’s decision to keep betting on the most profitable part of the smartphone market is paying off. Its share of total smartphone profits had already bounced back to 65 per cent in the first quarter of 2014.”

Apple Inc. “shares have soared 60 per cent over the past year as profit margins have stabilised and Wall Street has warmed to the new willingness to distribute excess cash flow to shareholders,” Waters writes. “This has added $230bn to its stock market value – considerably more than the entire market value of Samsung, whose shares have languished over the same period.”

Full article (subscription required) here.

MacDailyNews Take: Bu, bu, but… market share! 😉

Related article:
What we mean by ‘Hee Haw demographic’ – November 13, 2013


  1. “Twelve months ago, Samsung was riding high… “. Samsung was never riding high. Samsung merely created the illusion of riding high and these run-of-the-mill analysts fell for it. Most tech writers and wall street analysts simply do not have the intuition or the intelligence to understand that Apple’s MO is to innovate at the -to quote Steve Jobs – “The intersection of technology and liberal arts”

    1. What’s most frustrating is how they still won’t admit they were wrong. Their argument is that things are different now.

      No, you morons. Nothing has changed. Nothing is different. Apple was always wiping the floor with Samsung. It’s just that Samsung is finally losing the ability to fool you clueless idiots into thinking they’re winning.


    1. I doubt Apple will ever collect a dime from Samsung. It’s much cheaper to dream up new appeals to keep the litigation going. Furthermore, when they run out of appeals ideas, how is the court ever going to force them to pay up? The only thing that would get their attention would be an embargo on all Samsung products in the U.S., and the courts would never go that far.

      So, the case is basically just a very expensive PR campaign to expose their business practices.

  2. “With the subsequent launch of the iPhone 5s and 5c, it felt like smartphone innovation had come to an end”

    Only to idiots who want new candy every five minutes — but then don’t even understand it when they see it.

  3. It’s been a year since Samsung has had a new phone to copy from and no watch seen from Apple to base their new watch on. No wonder Samsung is having problems.

  4. It’s so tiring listening to people call the 5c “a plastic phone using old hardware”… gimme a break! Even that “old” hardware is far superior to the vast majority of smartphones in use around the world.

  5. Sites like these are a hoot. Samsung and Apple will be playing the escalator game for a long time and probably quarter to quarter. Ups and downs is part of the space these companies occupy. Samsung could have tabled a 64 bit chip a long time ago, and Apple could have dropped their stubborn stance on larger form factor phones a long time ago as well. The difference right now is that Samsung does not rely on Apple to build their tech but the same cannot be said for Apple…. Yet. Samsung’s foundries from what you read in Asian news can do just fine without Apple as selling to Apple creates nickels getting of the way of dollars for them.

    1. My increasingly reinforced opinion is that Samsung is avoiding a 64-bit chip specifically because:

      A) Samsung sells in the cheap knockoff wannabe smartphone market. Developing and providing 64-bit chips in stupidphones would further blow their profit margin within their low end market.

      B) Google doesn’t give a rat’s about providing the peasants with a 64-bit version of their free Andrhoid operating system. Let them eat 32-bit!

      C) Samsung’s Tizen OS is a total FAIL at this point. The situation provides zero incentive for Samsung to develop a 64-bit version which again no one will want.

      1. The main value to Samsung of Tizen is to help keep Google in line. As Samsung declines their influence over Google wanes. They really want that back to where it was. If they can flood the bottom end with cheap Tizen phones it will hurt Google in its most flaunted stat: “market” share. Google needs to maintain the illusion that Android is dominating, and “never-mind-that-most-of-it-is-bottom-end-crap.”

          1. As far I can tell, many (if not most) buyers of the cheap Samsung smartphones don’t even know that Android is on it. I’ve asked a few times “Is that an Android phone?” and each time the answer has been something like “No, Samsung.”

            1. That’s why I think a functional and reasonably useful Tizen worries Google. Not for the premium market, but for the low-end market that doesn’t care about/has no loyalty to Android, as long as it’s inexpensive and lets them do the basic “smart” phone activities of posting and viewing photos, chats, Facebook, Line, etc.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.