Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yofal--here's what it still looks like for me on both Safari and Camino:
What's with the awkward new product layout on the Apple Store?
The Apple TV and Mac Pro are "wrapping" onto a second line, causing all sorts of off-balance white space??
That's great, but when is iTunes gonna get $0.99 DRM-free versions (or, for that matter, even $1.29 versions from labels other than EMI?)
If Apple does hit 2.35 million Macs for the quarter...
Well, last quarter, overall PC sales increased 12.5% year over year, while Apple increased 32.9%.
http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html
If Apple does hit 2.35 million Macs this quarter, that'd be a 46% increase over last year (1.61 million).
Assuming that overall PC sales this quarter increase by the same 12.5% over last year, that'd be: 52.9 million x 112.5% = 59.5 million total PCs.
If these numbers hold true, that'd give Apple a 3.95% market share for the quarter, or the highest it's been since the height of the fruit flavor iMac/Y2K/pre-dot-com-burst frenzy (Q4 1999).
Jim--yep, that would make a big difference; in my mom's case, she's only moving it twice a year; if you're moving it once a month or so it'd start getting annoying to unplug/plug in everything again.
Jim--well, I guess I was specifically describing *my* mom, really :)
Still, you get my point--the mini is perfect for people who don't like laptops but need to be able to easily move the system once in awhile.
Also, my math was a bit misleading--in her case, the total was actually only about $900, because I got her a refurb G4 mini for $400 instead of the new ones for $600.
I think they were both low-end Acers w/rebates...whatever the entry-level models were, no doubt.
Not the greatest display, but decent, and the overall display size was more important to my mom than brightness/crispness/etc; she just needed big honkin' icons and such :)
There's a huge market for the mini that no one (besides me) has mentioned:
"Snowbird Moms"
Snowbird Moms (or Dads) are retired folks who spend half the year (winter) down in Florida and half the year up north.
Snowbird Mom needs a basic computer for web/email/music/bookkeeping/etc, but needs it to be highly portable (small, light, compact) so she can easily carry it back & forth twice a year.
However, Snowbird Mom doesn't want a laptop because she has poor eyesight, needs a full-size keyboard and isn't comfortable with trackpads anyway.
Snowbird Mom needs a Mac mini, a mouse, 2 basic 17" LCD displays (one for each location) and two keyboards.
There are millions of Snowbird Moms (and Dads) out there. One of them is my mom, who I set up with this way last year, and it's working out beautifully.
Total cost: $600 + $200/ea for 2 LCDs + $30/ea for 2 keyboards + $15 for the mouse = $1,075...or slightly less than the cost of a MacBook!
"The Cupertino, Calif., company is expected to sell 2.35 million iMacs and MacBooks this quarter, TheStreet.com has learned."
Wow! That'd be incredibly impressive, especially since--at least as that line is written--it doesn't include Mac Pros, MacBook Pros or Mac minis!
Or do you think Mr. Moritz is just under the impression that every desktop Mac is an "iMac" and every notebook Mac is a MacBook (that's my guess).
Clearsailing--at the time that sinclap posted, the Zune was actually #1 (of course, for 40% off that's not terribly impressive, but credit where it's due and all...)
Of course, various iPods make up something like 12 of the top 15, so there ya go...
Critical Mass: crit·i·cal mass - noun
The size at which a business or market undergoes a fundamental change in regard to operations.
http://www.411mania.com/movies/columns/58801/The-UBS-Evening-Movie-News-08.23.07.htm
"Ed Burns: Purple Violets is probably the best film that I've ever made...there's absolutely no audience for the film, theatrically, I'm sad to say. We got a couple of half-assed theatrical offers, but the last couple films I've done I've done that and, you know you do all this publicity and then the movie's released in New York and LA, and maybe Chicago and San Francisco, and if you're anywhere outside of those four major cities, your audience can't find it.
So, we're gambling and we're gonna be the first film that is released exclusively through iTunes. It'll be available for four weeks exclusively, and the idea is we'll promote it the same as you would a theatrical release and we'll see what the numbers are. If the attendance, if the downloads, which we expect to be a much higher numbers than the attendance, I think it'll be the way I would go in the future for small movies like this."
And there you have it. Apple is now officially a Film Distributor--not just a retailer, not just "one distribution medium", but a full-blown feature film distributor. They've been taking steps towards this in the music arena for awhile now, but now they're expanding it into video/film as well.
(thanks to Daring Fireball for the heads-up)
A hint of something I'm working on...
You guys know that I've recently updated a detailed look (both graphs & charts) at the past 10 years of Mac sales, in terms of both numbers and global market share:
http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html
I owe much of the research for this information to one of our long-time iHub/AAPLTalk/RB members, who later decided to remain anonymous--but if he's reading this, thanks again!
In any event, due to several requests, I've decided to expand these charts & graphs enormously--to wit: I'm going to attempt to chart/graph Apple's quarterly computer sales SINCE THE COMPANY LAUNCHED in 1976!
I actually already have most of the information compiled via a variety of sources (some more reliable than others, of course). Now it's a matter of filling in the blanks as best as I can and wrestling the data into a usable form.
Here's one fascinating tidbit: Based on my sources and calculations, Apple has sold appx. 71.5 million personal computers worldwide since its' inception (this includes every model--the Apple IIe, the gs, the Lisa, etc as well as every Mac).
Assuming appx. 25-30 million are still being used, that means that about 40% of every computer Apple has EVER sold is still being used by someone, somewhere.
More to come...
Looks like Apple may have already hit as much as 4-5% of the global smartphone market this quarter:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q3.07/B8B762FD-6CFF-4D56-8B92-6F1089A8E917.html
According to RoughlyDrafted, total worldwide smartphone sales were around 22 million in Q1 2007 (there's a typo on the chart, but the graph and accompanying text seems to have the correct numbers). Assuming similar numbers in Q3, and assuming that Apple sells a total of 1 million this quarter (which wouldn't include the initial 270,000 from 6/29-30), that'd give them 4.5% in the first full quarter of sales.
Anyone know why, when developing their own web browser, Apple didn't go with the obvious name: iBrowse?
Was it too cutesy, ya think? Didn't stop them from going with iSight for the webcam...
tarmar--true; however, he also stated that it was "74 days after its introduction".
iPhone introduced on 6/29.
6/30 = 1 day after intro
7/31 = 32 days after intro
8/31 = 63 days after intro
8/10 = 73 days after intro
If I'm doing this correctly, technically speaking, TOMORROW would be 74 days AFTER the introduction--yesterday would only be 72 days, today would be 73.
Semantic quibble, perhaps?
Anway, you're correct that it looks like the millionth iPhone was sold yesterday (Sunday 9/9), so I'll modify the page :)
Shootouts site: iPhone Sales Chart Page Added
Granted, there's not a whole lot there yet...
http://www.systemshootouts.org/iphone_sales.html
...but within a few quarters, it should start looking something like these:
http://www.systemshootouts.org/ipod_sales.html
http://www.systemshootouts.org/itunes_sales.html
http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html
Interesting little footnote: the iPhone was originally announced (at MWSF 2007) exactly 6 years to the day after iTunes 1.0 was announced and released (based on SoundJam, announced at MWSF 2001 on January 9, 2001)!
Make of that what you will.
KCMW--I don't think they're going out of their way to poison the cafeteria food or whatever, but it sure as hell gets rid of any incentive to keep the employees alive, either.
Aside from having a conscience and/or workplace safety laws, the only "financial" incentive that any company really has to want their employees to stay alive is the investment (time, training, etc) that they've put into that employee. Taking a life insurance policy on the employee completely counteracts that portion of it.
Pretty cold, pretty cruel to me, especially if crappy safety conditions end up being the cause of the death.
KCMW--sadly, I'm correct about Wal-Mart buying life insurance on their employees without the employees' knowledge:
http://www.google.com/search?q=wal-mart%20life%20insurance%20policies%20employees
Worse yet, it's not just Wal-Mart who does this:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Insurance/P64954.asp
I can't imagine that this is gonna happen, but they might compromise at $1.49 instead.
KCMW--I can't speak for Annie, but the issues with Wal-Mart aren't so much it existing at all as it is their tactics.
For instance, taking out life insurance policies on their employees without the employees' knowledge--and making the COMPANY the beneficiary. Preventing the employees from unionizing (I'm actually neutral on the subject of unions in general, but I don't think they should be banned). The infamous "predatory pricing" syndrome. And so on.
In addition, Wal-Mart is the largest player in one of the most tragic economic vicious circles we have: outsource your suppliers to China for cheap pricing, putting U.S. employees out of work; charge low prices for the cheaply-made products to U.S. consumers, who can no longer afford anything more expensive, due to their being out of work, due to the outsourcing in the first place. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Obviously it's far more complicated than that, and certainly the U.S. consumer is themselves at least partially responsible, but it certainly doesn't help that Wal-Mart is the largest company participating in this cycle.
On the other hand, Wal-Mart *did* come through with food, first aid and other supplies after Katrina while FEMA was still fumbling about without a clue, so good on WM. This speaks more to the incompetence of those running FEMA than anything, however.
ROFL actually, that's not as much of a joke as you may have intended...a LOT of the whiney comments were along the lines of "I wouldn't have minded a $50 or $100 price drop, but $200 is too much..."
So lessee--basically, they're saying that it'd be better for the consumer if Apple had kept the price HIGHER. Sheesh.
$65 million or so--but it's all in store *credit*, which means that it's really only perhaps 1/3 of that in actual out-of-pocket cost; plus, it ensures a half-million extra visitors to the Apple store, many of whom will end up spending more than the $100 on extra goodies.
Hell, Apple could end up coming out ahead from this move in pure extra revenue even apart from the PR value!
Extra bonus: all of those half-million-plus extra visitors will be going to APPLE stores, *not* to AT&T, which has gotta hurt them, but oh well...
Beautifully played. Only drawback is that this is gonna encourage people to act even whinier any time they feel "screwed over" whether they were or not...
Wow--excellent move, PR-wise (though obviously I don't think they owed anyone anything outside of the normal 10-14 day protection period).
So, lessee--they sold 270,000 opening weekend, plus perhaps another half-million in July and August (assuming they were indeed on track for 1 million by the end of September even before the price drop)...
Let's assume that 100,000 were sold in the 14 days prior to the price drop (and therefore already covered by the full $200 rebate), that leaves about 650,000 or so, times $100 each?
Wow--that's a whopping $65 million P.R. move...except that it's store credit, not an actual cash refund. Smart.
Here's a typical comment (actually from the AI boards):
"I am a loyal loyal apple and mac user. I have bought one of every major release of hardware in the last 6 years. I understand that the price of the iphone needed to be dropped, but i still cant help but feel that i have been stabbed in the back. I bought 2 iphones, 2 cases and 2 car chargers a month and a half ago and spent 1300 dollars. I cannot believe i was stiffed out of 400 bucks. I second the motion for store credit. This is BS."
Jebus friggin' krike on a stick--here's an idea, if you can't afford it, DON'T BUY "EVERY MAJOR RELEASE OF HARDWARE" all the time.
Sheesh.
Sorry, I know I'm a bit obsessed with this today, but I can't get over how over-the-top some of these comments are.
I dunno--maybe they should've only dropped it by $100 now and then by another $100 in early November? Nah, they'd just get twice as many rants...
Hoo-boy, the members of the "iPhone 600 Club" (as some wag calls it) are just fuming:
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/06/jobs-on-iphone-price-drop-thats-technology/
This is an absurd reaction. Yes, we all have a momentary "Ouch!" sting when we hear about a price cut in some gadget that we just bought a little while earlier, but anything beyond that is an overreaction.
Bootz will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he bought a 20" Rev A iMac G5 for $2K, while I waited another couple of months and got better specs and built-in Airport/Bluetooth for $1,800. His response was a quick "D'oh!!" followed by a congrats to me for waiting...and that was it, as it should have been.
Of course, the Rev C w/built-in iSight came out just a few months later, and the Rev D w/Intel processor a few months after that. Gee, who'da thunk it?
The only unusual elements to the iPhone drop are a) it happened 2 months after launch instead of the usual 6-8 months, and b) it dropped by $200 instead of $100 (which is what normally would've happened for a $600 product).
I can't stand coffee in any form--hate the taste, hate the smell.
However, I do occasionally go to Starbucks for a crumb cake or hot chocolate (I'm a kid at heart).
Lango--in addition, don't forget that Apple also said that they're planning on amortizing all iPhone revenue over the 24-month period.
If I understand that correctly, that means that the $600/500/400/300 cost of the iPhone (depending on the model and whether it was purchased prior to yesterday or afterwards) will actually be sliced into 24 chunks, scattered over the next two years; each quarter will only reflect 1/8 of the iPhones actually sold during that period (revenue-wise, anyway).
...all of which sound like excellent and reasonable reasons to me; most likely a combination of several of them.
Lots of early adaptors spazzing out about the price cut...
...really need to calm the heck down, IMHO.
In addition to the many, many reasons that others have noted...
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/TechQ307/Entries/2007/9/6_Apples_iPhone_Price_Cut_Unleashes_Complai...
...there's also one other thing that they need to remember: it's NOT really a 33% price cut, it's actually only a 7-10% price cut, depending on which AT&T package you go with ($60-$100/month x 24 months + iPhone itself).
Yeah, I know, numerous ways have been discovered to "unlock" the iPhone from AT&T, but the 2-year service plans are the only ones officially "blessed", so I'm basing the total cost on that.
Don't get me wrong, if I'd bought one more than 14 days ago I'd be a bit grumbly as well, but there's a big difference between *wishing* for the lower price and threatening some sort of absurd lawsuit (which some people apparently are talking about):
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/09/05/iphone.price.drop.redux/
Some interesting things that Jobs DIDN'T say a peep about (as far as I know):
--not a word about actual Beatles songs being added (lots of teasing, tho!)
--not a word about the iTunes Plus DRM-Free deal (how successful has it been? Have any other labels added themselves to iTunes plus?)
Dilleet--it's a choice now: either get touch/wi-fi with low capacity, or scrollwheel model with massive capacity. smart move.
And he knows this because...???
Not saying it's not true, but since when is Enderle a bastion of reliability?
OT: Just got back from seeing RUSH live at Pine Knob here in Michigan.
35+ years and these guys still put on a hell of a show. Better yet, they seem to still genuinely *enjoy* putting on a hell of a show, as well as working together.
Lango--thanks; actually, as it happens, I just finished importing 3 hours of footage of BD Jr. into iMovie 6 from a Mini-DV camcorder.
Aside from cutting out the obvious junk footage and breaking it up into chapters, I pretty much left it all as is--no fades, no wipes, no music overlay, not titles, just the raw footage of my kid doing baby stuff.
Now, I *did* have a lot of fun with iDVD, mucking around with themes, menus, etc, but the actual burned disks are essentially just footage of him doing his thing, with copies for the grandparents.
This is a perfect example of what the new version of iMovie was designed for--just slapping together raw clips.
Note that I'm not saying it's better than iMovie 6, just intended for different projects.
Tex--whenever IDC or Gartner posts their quarterly numbers, they only include the Top Five worldwide; the only other two companies I ever list are Apple (of course) and, up until now, Gateway, when I've been able to acquire their sales numbers.
In years past, NEC/Packard-Bell and Fujitsu-Siemens have shown up in the charts (along with IBM before the Lenovo buyout, of course), but that's about it. Globally, the WSJ article says that Gateway was 8th in total sales in 2006 (even though all of those sales were US-only), meaning Apple is now apparently #6 or #7, but I've never gotten a clear idea of what the other 3 in the top 10 have been:
http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html
Any ideas on the others?
So, Digital was bought by Compaq, which was bought by HP. eMachines was "bought" (yeah right) by Gateway, which is now being bought by Acer. IBM's computer division was bought by Lenovo. Everyone's buying up market share.*
Interesting bit from the article: "Lenovo disclosed earlier this month that it is in talks to buy a stake in Packard Bell BV, a Netherlands-based PC maker. That deal was aimed at giving the Chinese company a leg up in the European consumer market, where Acer is especially strong.
But in a separate statement issued just before Monday's announcement of the planned merger with Acer, Gateway appeared to throw some cold water on those talks by indicating that Packard Bell would likely become part of the new company. Gateway said it "intends to exercise its right of first refusal" to acquire "all the shares" in PB Holding Company, which Gateway said is the parent company for Packard Bell."
Packard Bell was still in business?? Wow, didn't now that.
*Of course, NeXT was "bought" by Apple (in the same sense that Gateway "bought" eMachines), but I don't think NeXT had any actual "market share" to speak of at the time, did they?
Another point to note--the Gateway name will stick around: "Acer indicated in the statement that it would continue to use the Gateway brand, saying the combined entity would be a "multi-branded PC-company."
Wow--Rove, Gonzales...Gateway (OK, as you noted, that last one was more of a mercy killing, but still...)
Who's next? Cheney? SCO?
Tex--actually, that 3% global share, while the highest it's been since Q4 2000 (1.8%), is actually lower than Apple's 10-year *high* quarterly share (4.2%)...which was one year earlier, in Q4 1999.
That was the "year of the Fruity iMac" if you will.
Tex--Retail. Retail. Retail.
Whenever you see one of these market share reports, be sure to read it carefully--the NPD number only includes *retail* sales, not online sales, which basically means they're ignoring 99% of Dell's sales (dunno how many they sell through their "kiosks").
Of course, this also means it doesn't include Apple's own online sales, which would help, but the point is that the 17% number is meaningless in this context.
The 5.9% overall number from IDC is more significant, but again, that's still in the U.S. only. Apple's worldwide, total market share was about 3.0% last quarter:
http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html
And you thought that Photoshop's Healing Brush was impressive?
This is one of the most impressive--and potentially disturbing--developments in photo manipulation I've ever seen: