Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 

Apple's iPhone sales are good-not-great (updated)

Update: Appleinsider is saying that of the 6.9 million iPhones "sold", two million of them are in channel inventory.  The real sales figure is closer to 4.9 million iPhones.  Don't shoot the messenger!

This week's earnings call was exciting news for Apple's stockholders.  The iPhone had climbed past the Macintosh and iPod as the number one revenue generator across the board.  With almost 40% of all Apple revenues for Q4, the iPhone made Apple the third-largest global handset maker by revenue and pushed Apple past RIM in terms of units.  Steve Jobs even showed up at the earnings call and broke protocol of using non-GAAP accounting measures to illustrate these numbers.  

Pundits were ushering in the new Apple phone company and death of Apple Computer.  Apple would now be a handset maker first and foremost.  Apples' stock was up over 10% in after-hours trading, was responsible for 1/2 of AT&T's conversions, etc etc...

And certainly the iPhone is a phenomenal device and is doing well by any standard.  But the numbers are inflated. Yesterday I saw a graph that made me take pause to look at all of these numbers. 

Jordan Golson of the Industry Standard broke out the iPhone vs Blackberry numbers over the last six quarters.  If we look back at the previous two quarters we see a lot of pent up, unmet demand for the iPhone.  We also see that the Blackberry's demand has been steadily rising.

 

If you remember back to last quarter, there were massive outages of the original iPhone.  Apple had made a finite (6 million) number of iPhones and it was sold out its few points of sale.  Even after Apple announced the 3G iPhone, there was a two-week wait until it was in anyone's hands.  

If Apple had a constant supply of iPhones over the last three quarters, would the graph have looked any different?  The best case scenario (I've added in light blue) is that Apple would have sold as many iPhones in Q4 that it had without stock in the previous quarters.  That would mean that Apple would have lost out on millions of sales in the pevious quarters.

Realistically, however, a lot of those people (everyone I know included) would have snapped up a 3G iPhone during the last quarter if it was made available then.  We waited like the good Apple customers do - according to Steve Jobs .  Additionally, there has been a great deal of pent up demand for the 3G iPhone in other countries.  When Apple opened the floodgates this quarter, everybody jumped in.  They'd been waiting.  Some over a year.

So, with that in mind, I think that Apple wouldn't have beat RIM this quarter had they had kept supplies up to snuff for the previous two quarters (Illustrated in Pink).  It also wouldn't have been the third-largest phone maker in the world.  While Apple's prospects will continue to accelerate, we shouldn't expect Apple to amaze us again next quarter (at least on the iPhone front - MacBooks may be another story)

That being said, the iPhone is transforming Apple and is the platform on which Apple will have the most opportunity for growth.  It has the secondary benefit of selling apps, movies and music for the company.  It is growing fast and is exciting.  But!

Let's just not get ahead of ourselves.

What People Are Saying

non-GAAP = fraud

"Non-GAAP accounting measures" means Vodoo Accounting, that would be illegal to include in Apple's official financial reports.

Another blogger points out that "RIM's quarter doesn't coincide with the calendar quarter", so Jobs isn't even comparing the same time periods.

In addition, RIM was between product launches. They are in the process of launching numerous new models.

Exactly the opposite.

Exactly the opposite - GAAP accounting is absurd

What is non-gap accounting?

Do you seriously write articles when you don't even know or understand the terms you are using? non-GAP accounting? Does that mean they don't buy their clothes at the GAP? Do you mean non-GAAP? GAAP stands for generally accepted accounting principles. Did you just hear someone say an acronym and decide to use it in your story without even understanding it?

Sometimes spell check is

Sometimes spell check is your friend, sometimes it isn't.

It is amazing how fired up I get the fanboys with only a slightly non super positive Apple post.

Funny how quick to throw at

Funny how quick to throw at the fan-boy term, when in reality its just bad editing and proof reading. Didn't you complain how people considered you a fan boy when you wrote articles that were anti-windows?

Pot meet kettle. It would be nice if a journalist took some responsibility instead of combatting their readers. This isn't TUAW, its supposed to be a legitimate publication.

non-gap accounting

Don't forget, he's just an internet blogger, not a journalist.
He doesn't need to know anything about the subject he is blogging about.

Myopic Article

First of all, the sales numbers are staggering, so the title of the article is stupid.

That being said, it's valid to be concerned that initial demand will not translate into long term demand. As an investor, you should consider this possibility.

What your forgetting though, is that the exact same thing could have been said for the original iPhone launch, and yet look at Q1 2008 vs Q4 2007 units. Original iPhone sold 1,119,000 in Q4, and then 2,315,000 units in Q1. Expect the same results this time. That translates to 14,258,248 units next quarter.

This can easily be explained by the fact that Apple tripled the addressable market for the phone, and at the same time lowered the up-front price from $600 to $200, which also increases it's target market.

Of course, all of this historical analysis is extremely limited. It doesn't tell you why people are buying it. The real reason Apple will win is because it holds the patents on multi-touch just like the ipod won because of the click wheel patents.

Interesting info on inventory levels

I think the 2 million units in inventory is just the normal six weeks worth Apple holds in inventory. I wouldn't assume smaller inventories after Christmas.

But since this is the first quarter on the market, let's say the true demand for the October quarter was 5m units. If you apply the same ratio as before that still gives you 10m units next quarter.

I still think that's the most reasonable way to look at the numbers. If memory serves me, the ratio of Christmas iPod sales to Q4 was typically about 2.5 to 1.

Absolute rubbish!

You wrote, " It also wouldn't have been the third-largest phone maker in the world."

Where do you provide any evidence of that? Steve Jobs' reference was to REVENUES, not unit sales. Your little chart was referencing unit sales. In Revenues, Steve said iPhone generated $4.6B this past quarter. He then went on to list the others and RIM was something like 7th with only $2.6B in quarterly sales. Are you always this inattentive?

No wonder you got all the "brick" info bassackward.

Sony Ericsson was 4th and

Sony Ericsson was 4th and would have been higher than Apple ($4.6 billion) had there not been pent up demand. RIM($2.1 billion) was 6th behind Sony Ericsson ($4.2 billion), LG ($3.4 billion), Motorola ($3.2 billion).

Also, I got the Brick exactly right.
http://www.macrumors.com/2008/10/17/notebook-event-rumor-wrapup-winners-and-losers/