All iPads: Success preditions for the iPad mini

[PracticalMac]

What do you consider indicates how successful is Mini?

3 metrics I can see.

1. Naturally Apple will sell millions of Mini's simply by Apple's market dominance, not a useful metric IMHO.

2. At the very least, Mini should outsell any model of Android tablet IMHO.
Failure to sell more units than Nexus or Fire is a bad sign. Goal is largest piece of pie in <8" market.

3. What about in comparison with its big brother?
If you divide the Andorid tablets between <8" and >8", the clear winner is <8", predicted by 70%.
I do not expect the mini to outsell the major by 70%, but it will be substantial.
The way I see it, if less then 20% of iPad's are Mini's, it is a failure by Mini (thus Apple) to penetrate an area now solidly Android.
30% would be minimum of success (shows broad acceptance of the new form factor)
50% would be wildly successful (but only if Apple also has significant gains in the overall tablet market).


Apple must have been guesstimating the price point, fearful a price less than $329 would steal sales from the full size iPad but not gain market share. Wrong attitude IMHO.
1. Apple is late in the game for small tablets.
2. Small tablets are synonymous with low cost.
3. Small tablets are the entry point for many new consumers.
4. Perception is everything.


So, was Apple right to sell Mini for $329, or should they have aimed lower ($299) to attract interest of buyers, even if still $100 more then entry price of Nexus and Fire?

Time will tell.

Discuss.

[DoctorYuyi]

Oh look, this thread again. [x38]

If you're wondering why I put [x38] it's because this is literally the 38th thread about this same thing.

[ditzy]

I could be totally wrong here, but I wouldn't be surprised if we never know. Again I could be totally wrong but I'm expecting Apple to lump all iPad sales together in their earning calls.

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by ditzy

I could be totally wrong here, but I wouldn't be surprised if we never know. Again I could be totally wrong but I'm expecting Apple to lump all iPad sales together in their earning calls.

Of course they will.

Amazon does the same thing to make people guess their success.

The marketplace is changing, Apple no longer dominates tablets, and being vague with details will make iPad look better (why hide it if it is better??).

[maflynn]

I don't expect them to be at the same level of dominance as they used too, just by the sheer fact that there's more competition.

I do think the mini is a out right success and while many people have criticized the mini on price and/or screen its quite clear that people are voting with their wallet

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by DoctorYuyi

Oh look, this thread again. [x38]

If you're wondering why I put [x38] it's because this is literally the 38th thread about this same thing.

I looked several pages in, and could not find one of the 38 you speak off, or it is not obvious.

Or are they predictions BEFORE Apple announced?

Anyway, I pointed out 3 ways to measure success. What do you say?

[urkel]

Originally Posted by maflynn

I do think the mini is a out right success and while many people have criticized the mini on price and/or screen its quite clear that people are voting with their wallet

As a long time Apple user and also a selfish consumer, it really sucks that Apple can find success without even trying nowadays. Apple biggest accomplishments and most compelling products always came when they were the underdogs and they needed to prove themselves. But what we've seen in the last few generations of products then the upgrade cycle has relied on a single compelling feature rather than a revolutionary or reinvented product. (And I say that as someone who bought TWO minis)

Obviously some people will take offense to that, but the Mini looks amazing but internally its two generations old and its pricepoint is justified more by its sexy new look than it is on cutting edge tech.Apple can do much much better so its a shame that they don't feel the need to.

[ActionableMango]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

2. At the very least, Mini should outsell any model of Android tablet IMHO.
Failure to sell more units than Nexus or Fire is a bad sign. Goal is largest piece of pie in <8" market.

This is completely incorrect. You have a poor understanding of Apple's goals.

Apple strives for the largest share of the profit. Not the largest sales volume. They purposely make higher end, higher priced equipment where the margins are a lot higher and the volume is lower.

Apple's share of the phone market is less than half, yet they make nearly all of the profit found in the phone industry.

Apple's share of the tablet market is about half, yet they make nearly all of the profit found in the tablet industry. In fact, leading competitors sell their tablets at cost, making no profit at all.

Apple's share of the PC market is about 9%, but has a larger share of the profits than any other PC maker.

SHARE OF SALES VOLUME IS NOT A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by ActionableMango

Apple strives for the largest share of the profit. Not the largest sales volume.

....

SHARE OF SALES VOLUME IS NOT A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

If that is so, why does Apple go to extremes to hinder other tablet makers from getting parts?
Conversely stocking up huge piles of spare parts?


I always heard Apple strives for the best products, and the price is what the market will reasonably bare.

And volume also attracts developers, hardware needs developers.
See PlayBook and HP tablet. Died because to few developers wanted to make software for it.

[zhenya]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

And volume also attracts developers, hardware needs developers.
See PlayBook and HP tablet. Died because to few developers wanted to make software for it.

Volume doesn't drive developers, profits do. Like with hardware, the vast majority of app store profits come from the iOS App Store.

[mantan]

Originally Posted by urkel

As a long time Apple user and also a selfish consumer, it really sucks that Apple can find success without even trying nowadays. Apple biggest accomplishments and most compelling products always came when they were the underdogs and they needed to prove themselves. But what we've seen in the last few generations of products then the upgrade cycle has relied on a single compelling feature rather than a revolutionary or reinvented product. (And I say that as someone who bought TWO minis)

Obviously some people will take offense to that, but the Mini looks amazing but internally its two generations old and its pricepoint is justified more by its sexy new look than it is on cutting edge tech.Apple can do much much better so its a shame that they don't feel the need to.

I couldn't agree more. As much as I like Apple as a company, I'm a selfish consumer first.

I feel like Apple is coasting right now. But you can't fault them for a non-Retina screen or price point, because they will likely sell just as many as if they put in a higher resolution screen, more RAM or a $299 price point. They can line up releases like dominos and watch the money roll in.

I've been longing for an iPad Mini for months. But I just feel like my money is being spent encouraing them to coast.

So I'm going to buy a Nexus 7 instead. If I don't like it, I'll return it and wait for a Mini 2. My one sale doesn't amount to anything in the big picture, but philisophically I'll feel better that my money is being spent to help promote some competition.

[Krevnik]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

Of course they will.

Amazon does the same thing to make people guess their success.

The marketplace is changing, Apple no longer dominates tablets, and being vague with details will make iPad look better (why hide it if it is better??).

It's partly because companies consider sales figures of specific models to be competitive information these days. In the days where someone can data mine and get pretty accurate profiles of individuals from aggregate behavior, you can do the same thing with financials and companies.

Imagine if I was able to data mine my competitor's sales numbers, trends, etc down to the exact model, features and storage. I could track market trends on that data and compete against someone like Apple, Dell, or Amazon using their own market data against them. So that market data has value, and companies are realizing that if they want to keep any edge that data gives them, they have to keep it closer to the chest than they have in the past.

Originally Posted by zhenya

Volume doesn't drive developers, profits do. Like with hardware, the vast majority of app store profits come from the iOS App Store.

Yet, volume is a factor in my potential profits as an app developer. Smaller install bases and stagnating platforms mean my potential market is smaller, and maybe even shrinking and I should look elsewhere.

The reason app store profits are better on the iOS App Store is because the larger volume of folks willing to pay. And there's many reasons for that, but it is still boiling down to "how many customers can I sell to?"

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

Of course they will.

Amazon does the same thing to make people guess their success.

Amazon doesn't report Kindle units shipped or sold as part of their quarterly reports.

Originally Posted by urkel

Obviously some people will take offense to that, but the Mini looks amazing but internally its two generations old...

You can look at it as two generations old. Or you can look at it as an significant improvement to what was the top of the line model 7 months before it was released. At a significantly lower price.

[Rm.237]

Originally Posted by DoctorYuyi

Oh look, this thread again. [x38]

If you're wondering why I put [x38] it's because this is literally the 38th thread about this same thing.

Oh look, it's the billionth time that some one like you brings up something like this while someone like me who has yet to read on the posts subject matter finds it fantastically convenient that it's on Page 1.

I know it's the billionth time because I have a notion of the redundancy of said posts.

As far as the OP is concerned I think the iPad Mini will ultimately be only behind the iPhone in the sales department. It's gonna be HUGE.

[Tigger11]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

If that is so, why does Apple go to extremes to hinder other tablet makers from getting parts?
Conversely stocking up huge piles of spare parts?

I would love to hear to what extremes Apple goes to, to hinder other tablet makers in your opinion. You do realize that the majority (by cost) of parts used in the iPads are custom for the iPads (Case, touchscreen, pwb, processor, cables etc). They have bought equipment for vendors (Sharp, Samsung, etc) to make their screens but thats not impacting other tablet makers. Noone else uses an A5, A6 or A6X, so thats not an impact either. Apple buys a huge amount of Flash for their products, but even with 3 suppliers they have been known to get within a few days of being out of memory at times.

[ActionableMango]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

And volume also attracts developers, hardware needs developers.
See PlayBook and HP tablet. Died because to few developers wanted to make software for it.

Your own example defeats your own argument. iOS has 32.4% of the market share. Andriod 51.6% of the market share. Who has more developers and more apps? iOS by far, because that's where more money is made. SHARE OF SALES VOLUME IS NOT A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

Example:
Apple makes 5.2% of the world's PCs. They earn 35% of all the profit in the PC market.

Dell makes 16% of the world's PCs. They earn 21% of all the profit in the PC market.

Apple makes less than 1/3 the number of PCs than Dell, yet at the end of the year they made more money overall from PCs than Dell did. So Apple is more successful than Dell, despite having only 1/3 the market share. SHARE OF SALES VOLUME IS NOT A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

Using sales volume as a measure of success, you'd have to pick HP. HP is the world's leading PC maker and yet they are considering existing the PC business because margins are too low. SHARE OF SALES VOLUME IS NOT A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

Let me put it to you yet another way... Apple could sell iPad Minis for $5, take 100% of the market, and go out of business. That's not success.

In the opposite extreme, if you could make a single tablet and sell it for $20 billion, you'd have the smallest share of sales volume, yet it would be a wild success.

Do you get it yet?

[bcaslis]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

What do you consider indicates how successful is Mini?

3 metrics I can see.

1. Naturally Apple will sell millions of Mini's simply by Apple's market dominance, not a useful metric IMHO.
...

So selling millions at a higher price and higher profit than the competition is not a measure of success? OK, good luck with that.

[DoctorYuyi]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

I looked several pages in, and could not find one of the 38 you speak off, or it is not obvious.

Or are they predictions BEFORE Apple announced?

Anyway, I pointed out 3 ways to measure success. What do you say?

That's because they were removed.

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by Tigger11

I would love to hear to what extremes Apple goes to, to hinder other tablet makers in your opinion. You do realize that the majority (by cost) of parts used in the iPads are custom for the iPads (Case, touchscreen, pwb, processor, cables etc). They have bought equipment for vendors (Sharp, Samsung, etc) to make their screens but thats not impacting other tablet makers. Noone else uses an A5, A6 or A6X, so thats not an impact either. Apple buys a huge amount of Flash for their products, but even with 3 suppliers they have been known to get within a few days of being out of memory at times.

1. As you pointed out, some items ARE used by other tablets.
2. You need a factory, and if you reserve 75% of the factory space, how can any competitor compete when they are limited to 25%?
3. If you a factory, the sure bet is to offer best MFG rates to a company that will keep your factories humming for YEARS, and your profits growing. No question Apple gets huge discounts.
4. Expanding in other countries competition can't touch! Brazil has something like 100% tax on imported goods. Now that Apple and Foxconn built factory in Brazil, and iPad Mini costs similiar to US, but a Galaxy will be like $800 base model. Expect Brazil to put an Apple logo on its flag.

I could go on...

----------

Originally Posted by bcaslis

So selling millions at a higher price and higher profit than the competition is not a measure of success? OK, good luck with that.

Because it is a GIVEN.

A company can make record sales, record gross profits, but your slice of the market can be sinking if the overall market is expanding.

Put another way:
The Mini has 30 million in sales per year, BUT it all comes out of 10" iPad sales.
You have a profit LOSS because the profit margin for mini is less.

Going simply by total sales is a mistake.

----------

Originally Posted by urkel

it really sucks that Apple can find success without even trying nowadays.

I am not offended, and you are right.

Apple seems to be conservative with its designs these days or pricing.
BUT we don't know everything, and Apple is probably doing the best it can.

The A6/A6X chip is a very bold step for Apple, to make its own chip!
It could have been a disaster, but instead it worked out very well.

[Tigger11]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

1. As you pointed out, some items ARE used by other tablets.
2. You need a factory, and if you reserve 75% of the factory space, how can any competitor compete when they are limited to 25%?
3. If you a factory, the sure bet is to offer best MFG rates to a company that will keep your factories humming for YEARS, and your profits growing. No question Apple gets huge discounts.
4. Expanding in other countries competition can't touch! Brazil has something like 100% tax on imported goods. Now that Apple and Foxconn built factory in Brazil, and iPad Mini costs similiar to US, but a Galaxy will be like $800 base model. Expect Brazil to put an Apple logo on its flag.

1. Very few and I can't find a shortage for any of them, so do you have an actual part that you think Apple is making hard for others to get, or are you going to push "parts" as your answer?
2. Apple uses way less then 50% of Foxconn's factories, disregarding all the other contract manufacturers in the work, where do you get a silly number like 75%?
3. Apple pays higher MFG rates then lots of others as has been pointed repeatedly.
4. Acer (for one) makes lots of stuff in Brazil and Foxconn makes more Sony stuff in Brazil then Apple, though when the 5th Foxconn factory in Brazil goes online it may swap the other way. Foxconn makes stuff for lots of companies as do the other contract Manufacturers (Jabil, Flextronics, Celestica, etc).

[PracticalMac]

OOOOhhhhh, Tigger, Tigger, Tigger...
Sorry to do this to you:

Originally Posted by Tigger11

1. Very few and I can't find a shortage for any of them, so do you have an actual part that you think Apple is making hard for others to get, or are you going to push "parts" as your answer?

RAM memory
NAND memory
controller chips
circuit devices (resistors, capacitors, inductors, etc)
cameras
and most of all
cellular chips, the Quallcomm stuff

Originally Posted by Tigger11

2. Apple uses way less then 50% of Foxconn's factories, disregarding all the other contract manufacturers in the work, where do you get a silly number like 75%?

Did I say Apple?
I as YOU, meaning an example, or how someone can lock out other companies by hogging all the capacity.

Originally Posted by Tigger11

3. Apple pays higher MFG rates then lots of others as has been pointed repeatedly.

Show me.
Not counting the recent Samsung 20%, I read Apple gets preferred rates for mfg.
And do not equate the construction costs for the labor the factory charge. It is much more expensive to make aluminum case over plastic.

Originally Posted by Tigger11

4. Acer (for one) makes lots of stuff in Brazil and Foxconn makes more Sony stuff in Brazil then Apple, though when the 5th Foxconn factory in Brazil goes online it may swap the other way. Foxconn makes stuff for lots of companies as do the other contract Manufacturers (Jabil, Flextronics, Celestica, etc).

I believe you confused its China plants for Brazil.
Foxconn only started building the Brazil plants last year (2011), and everything suggests it is only for iOS devices (iPhone confirmed), however "tablets" could mean competing ones as well. WJS says Acer has its own plant there.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...309270246.html

[Tigger11]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

OOOOhhhhh, Tigger, Tigger, Tigger...
Sorry to do this to you:

RAM memory
NAND memory
controller chips
circuit devices (resistors, capacitors, inductors, etc)
cameras
and most of all
cellular chips, the Quallcomm stuff

Again PracticalMac tell me which of those parts are on a shortage because of Apple? With the possible exception of Qualcomm (because of the TMSC issue), there are none, unless you think your BOM search is better then mine, and if so share what you think is the issue.

Did I say Apple?
I as YOU, meaning an example, or how someone can lock out other companies by hogging all the capacity.

And I pointed out that Apple isn't tying up anyones capacity in fact as has been discussed at WSJ etc, Contract Manufacturers are nowhere near running at full capacity.

Show me.
Not counting the recent Samsung 20%, I read Apple gets preferred rates for mfg.
And do not equate the construction costs for the labor the factory charge. It is much more expensive to make aluminum case over plastic.

First of all you are confused again. MFG isnt the cost of parts, Samsung increased a parts cost, I said (and stand by) that Apple pays more for Manufacturing costs then others, just on this site we've seen all about increasing the wages and benefits of those making apple products, Apple is paying more then Microsoft, Sony & HP to get Foxconn to make their products.

I believe you confused its China plants for Brazil.
Foxconn only started building the Brazil plants last year (2011), and everything suggests it is only for iOS devices (iPhone confirmed), however "tablets" could mean competing ones as well. WJS says Acer has its own plant there.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...309270246.html

By far the funniest part of your post, I'm not confused about anything. The title of this article you have pointed to with this URL is "Foxconn to Build Fifth Brazil Plant". So you using it to imply that Foxconn has only one plant in Brazil is just hilarious. Also Brazil is pushing hard to become a good place to make stuff, that is why Foxconn, Celestica, Jabil & Flextronics have facilities there.

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by Tigger11

Again PracticalMac tell me which of those parts are on a shortage because of Apple? With the possible exception of Qualcomm (because of the TMSC issue), there are none, unless you think your BOM search is better then mine, and if so share what you think is the issue.

And I pointed out that Apple isn't tying up anyones capacity in fact as has been discussed at WSJ etc, Contract Manufacturers are nowhere near running at full capacity.

First of all you are confused again. MFG isnt the cost of parts, Samsung increased a parts cost, I said (and stand by) that Apple pays more for Manufacturing costs then others, just on this site we've seen all about increasing the wages and benefits of those making apple products, Apple is paying more then Microsoft, Sony & HP to get Foxconn to make their products.

By far the funniest part of your post, I'm not confused about anything. The title of this article you have pointed to with this URL is "Foxconn to Build Fifth Brazil Plant". So you using it to imply that Foxconn has only one plant in Brazil is just hilarious. Also Brazil is pushing hard to become a good place to make stuff, that is why Foxconn, Celestica, Jabil & Flextronics have facilities there.

You are saying "shortages", not me.

I too read Apple is offering higher wages for the workers, but do you know how this compares to what Dell, Sony, and others pay?
What about last year? How did Apple compare to other customers?

Again, you are imagining words and meaning I did not write.
I said "plantS", obviously you imagined it was "plant".

Looks like the article is now in subscription mode, but I found the bit it says:

Contract manufacturer Foxconn will build a fifth factory in Brazil, where it made its first investment only last year.

So Foxconn built 4 factories last year.

[Tigger11]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

You are saying "shortages", not me.

If there are not shortages, then Apple cannot "hinder other tablet makers from getting parts", unless there is a problem getting a part (ie a shortage).
Q.E.D.

I too read Apple is offering higher wages for the workers, but do you know how this compares to what Dell, Sony, and others pay?

I know its higher and honestly don't care what it was last year, your original comment was that Apple pays less, in actuality they pay more, so you are wrong again.

Again, you are imagining words and meaning I did not write.
I said "plantS", obviously you imagined it was "plant".
Looks like the article is now in subscription mode, but I found the bit it says:
So Foxconn built 4 factories last year.

Again you seem to be taking us off topic to cover your mistakes:

I wrote:
"Foxconn makes more Sony stuff in Brazil then Apple, though when the 5th Foxconn factory in Brazil goes online it may swap the other way"

and you post

"I believe you confused its China plants for Brazil.
Foxconn only started building the Brazil plants last year (2011)"

Then you post your URL that talks about the 5th Plant in Brazil being built but try and use it to imply I am confused about the number of plants in Brazil. Now you are quoting from the article and pointing out they are building a 5th plant (which is what I originally posted). This is just getting silly PracticalMac. Also I'd like to point out that Foxconn has been making things in Brazil alot longer then since 2011.

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by Tigger11

If there are not shortages, then Apple cannot "hinder other tablet makers from getting parts", unless there is a problem getting a part (ie a shortage).
Q.E.D.


I know its higher and honestly don't care what it was last year, your original comment was that Apple pays less, in actuality they pay more, so you are wrong again.



Again you seem to be taking us off topic to cover your mistakes:

I wrote:
"Foxconn makes more Sony stuff in Brazil then Apple, though when the 5th Foxconn factory in Brazil goes online it may swap the other way"

and you post

"I believe you confused its China plants for Brazil.
Foxconn only started building the Brazil plants last year (2011)"

Then you post your URL that talks about the 5th Plant in Brazil being built but try and use it to imply I am confused about the number of plants in Brazil. Now you are quoting from the article and pointing out they are building a 5th plant (which is what I originally posted). This is just getting silly PracticalMac. Also I'd like to point out that Foxconn has been making things in Brazil alot longer then since 2011.

You still do not understand, do you.
Supporting facts:

Apple "pre-buying" parts to gain advantage with part supplies.
How Apples pre-buying of parts limits availability for others.
from above link:

Motorola on the other hand, is completely dependent upon other companies for nearly all of the components in its devices, and in particular, the Xoom tablet. We’ll know for sure if there’s any Motorola hardware inside after the Xoom launches and is torn down for examination, but few, if any, of the components will be made by Motorola. ... Instead, the company has to coordinate the price and availability of components from various vendors — and if any of those parts are also used in similar Apple products, it’s a safe bet that they’ll either be scarce or will cost more. Indeed, the supply of tablet display panels and other components could crash the growing wave for tablet computers for companies that don’t invest in long-term deals for parts.

And you are completely wrong about Brazil, Foxconn only started expanding to Brazil in 2011.
I find nothing to even suggest anything earlier.
May 2011: China Tech announcing Foxconn

has decided to build a new plant in Jundiai

.


I am more then refuted everything you said with links to relevant publications.
PracticalMac 3: Tigger11 0


The one item that will be next to impossible to know for sure is the true cost of mfg. One cannot simply take what the "blue collar" rate is becuase we do not know how many man-hours it takes to build 1 unit, how many units built, facility costs, management costs, transportation costs, etc. Only the except at Foxconn know this, and it is a guarded secret.
The only sure thing is right now Foxconn is completely wedded to Apple, and they will find ways to maintain that favored status.