Worst product rollout in Mac history?

[HenryDJP]

Wow ApplesAOranges, good one. I thought I was the only one out there that thought the way you do.

You are.

You're the only one here that thinks the way the ApplesAOranges does.

And when these fanboys talk about "Apple's job is to earn money for its shareholders", WHAT!!! Hasn't Apple only just started paying a dividend to shareholders and it's stock has dropped over the last year, so the muppets that bought Apple stock are sitting on a shrinking $.

Don't get me wrong, I like Apple kit but jeez, get a grip fanboys, it's not that good.

Seriously cool it on the fanboy name calling, mods don't take kindly anymore to it and it's rude anyway. Nobody called you or ApplesAoranges any names.

Oy vey, and MR thought it was a good idea to take away the downvote button.

 

[Omnius]

How do you know what I would do? If you want me to be honest then no, I would not use the same strategies that Apple uses. I would try to make the best possible products and the most powerful from the best materials, so the products would last many many years. Screw the planned obsolescence strategy! Then I would do my best to have the products available asap to as many people as possible. Screw the scarcity strategy!

You would likely go bankrupt and not make anything.

I´m not a greedy like the people at Apple and their shareholders. There´s actually still some people in this world that want to make it better.

Apple's got a pretty good reputation for attempting to produce environmentally friendly product. However, if you dislike their products, don't buy them.

I thought I already explained this. It´s called scarcity strategy. Why are you paraphrasing me?

High prices and a solid awareness of demand allow apple to continue to produce quality products.

Indeed. At least some people understand this.

I'm not sure you understand how businesses work.

And this is exactly the reason why everything is shait in this world. People with this attitude are the cancer!

Shareholders blah blah blah.... Yes I know it´s all about profit and pleasing the shareholders blah blah blah... And that is plain greed! So at least let´s be honest about it.

Businesses can not function without capital. Further, there is little incentive to make much of anything, let alone a quality product, without a reward for the work.

----------

What I wrote earlier applies to you as well:

Sure I know it´s "utopian wishful thinking and I could never be a CEO in this world at this time", but if every company would have my attitude, the world would be a better place for everyone. Watch the Zeitgeist movies.

The reason why I´m buying Apple products is simple. Is just picking one evil from the multiple evils. Apple being one the most evil and greedy ones out there. Still making nice products, but making me mad with their greedy and stupid business strategies. Who knows, maybe I don´t buy Apple products anymore the next year and in the future... I´m not a fanboy. I can switch as easily to something else as when I switched to Mac.

Thinking such as yours created the horrible conditions in the soviet union for a very long time. It sounds great right up until it's implemented and everyone realizes that it doesn't work. Businesses rely on capital to function, they get capital through investments. Investors expect(hope) to earn a profit, otherwise they wouldn't bother wasting their own resources and they would dispose of them as they desire.

 

[Omnius]

Wow ApplesAOranges, good one. I thought I was the only one out there that thought the way you do.

And when these fanboys talk about "Apple's job is to earn money for its shareholders", WHAT!!! Hasn't Apple only just started paying a dividend to shareholders and it's stock has dropped over the last year, so the muppets that bought Apple stock are sitting on a shrinking $.

Don't get me wrong, I like Apple kit but jeez, get a grip fanboys, it's not that good.

Apple has been an excellent investment for many people. Dividends are not the only way people earn a profit on investments. Buying and selling over various increments of time can and usually is vastly more profitable to the investor than sitting around collecting dividends. Of course, no Apple investor ever expected a dividend in the past so buying and selling was the entire means of making a profit.

It's probably best not to opine as to the value of an investment when one lacks a grasp on the fundamentals of investing.

----------



Many people on this forum are business owners/shareholders of a variety of business types. Running successful businesses keeps families fed, a roof over our heads, cars in our garages, and the prospect of occasional vacations. Of course, mismanaging our businesses would result in being homeless or parasitic upon other members of society. The principles behind a sound business are often the same whether you own a little corner grocery store or a multinational corporation.

I'm sorry you think we're brainwashed fanboys for understanding that there is nothing wrong with successful business practices. I liken your desire to build zillions of factories to produce unlimited products as akin to the corner grocery store buying a truckload of bananas. Sure, both businesses can meet demand easily enough but excess supply leads to massive waste and eventually losses. The excess computers will become out of date and useless just as likely as the 10 tons of bananas. Repeat that process a few times and even the greatest grocery stores and computer manufacturers will collapse.

 

[Nuke61]

No.Apple has all the money in the world to build new factories and hire more people to produce their products faster, but they choose not to, because they are greedy.

Maybe you missed this earlier, but here you go:

The recent delay in shipping 27-inch iMac systems is being blamed on LG Display problems. According to sources at DigiTimes, the problem has been caused by trouble with the lamination process.

According to production numbers, the 27-inch iMac systems have been limited to just 100,000 units per month.

In comparison, the 21.5-inch iMacs are shipping 300,000 to 400,000 units per month without display delays.

Apple is hoping to push up production of 27-inch iMac units by February 2013. http://www.inquisitr.com/476971/27-inch-imac-delays-caused-by-lg-display-problems/

Are you saying that you think Apple should pay money to build factories FOR LG, so LG can produce more displays?? As it is now, it's pretty obvious that LG are probably pushing TOO hard to meet the display demand for the 27" iMac, because there are numerous reports of display issues, along with other quality control issues. That doesn't generally happen if you have a *contrived* shortage, but rather, when you're rushing to try and make up for a *real* shortage of product.

Samsung had a shortage of the SIII and they make nearly all of the parts for that phone, unlike Apple who generally only make a small fraction of the parts for their products and who instead rely on a supply chain from other manufacturers.

 

[Mike in Kansas]

Wow, I feel sorry for you. So hypnotized by Apple´s marketing propaganda. Seriously wow!

I know exactly how business and this world works and it´s not pretty sight let me tell you!!!!!!

Ok, I get it. This is just 1 big joke, right? You truly can't really believe all of the junk you are spewing. I can't believe someone would go off the deep end like this just because they can't get a $2000 electronic item when they want it... You are just pulling our legs now, right...? When do you say "gotcha!"?

 

[phoenixsan]

Not.....

too sure about the "worst" product rollout in Apple history, but then:

a)Constrained supply in some channels and issues with a newly released product dont do any good to a company. Seems to me a "bad" rollout.

b) Companies are, as most people knows, entities to generate revenue. That said, one can qualify them as greedy or as whatever one wants. But also, companies, for me, are responsible to bring quality products to the market, in time and enough quantities.

c)Putting aside economic/philosophical considerations, maybe Apple was shortsigthed about the iMac launch. But I think I can be proved wrong, because, as most of us knows, Tim Cook is a master of logistics and supply chain. Seems to me as an executive not to prone to make big blunders....

This last is a suggestion/plea: Please mantain the comments civil, educated and informated. Name calling for the sake of defending an argument dont do any good to a good comunity as MacRumors

 

[kaellar]

ApplesAOranges, jeezus, what a butthurt..
"picking one of the many evils"? seriously?! If you hate Apple's strategy, why do you even post so many idiotic messages at this forum? Simply forget about those greedy MFs and buy something else you'll be comfortable with in many ways. From what you say, it should be so easy.

 

[seanm9]

How are iMacs planned to be obsolete... Because they don't use the chips that intel hasn't made yet? What if this years iMac used the chips that intel will release in 5 years... What would stop someone else from inventing a better chipset. If the engineers at Intel/AMD/Freescale/Apple stopped innovating what would stop someone else from innovating... Collusion.... Lets face it planned obsolescence is not real... You invent a better way to work, and make my way obsolete, and I am forced to keep up and improve on you... It's an endless cycle

 

[Billywiz1307]

OK, let's get back to the facts here. The 27" iMac was released 30th November 2012 with a note saying it wasn't being shipped until during December, that later slipped to January. And here we are now, tomorrow is March and iMac deliveries are still not fully on-stream. Now surely, even the staunchest of Apple's supporters can't defend that delivery record.

And to answer the guy that said the reason people buy stock is to turn a profit later when they sell! Well you don't say. However, when a stock starts to head downwards it's a problem, especially when along the way there has been no dividends paid because the leaders of that company thought it could get away with it. My company would be all the richer if we didn't have to pay out dividends to all those pesky investors.

And I'm sorry for calling you all fanboys but just look at you all tearing crap out of anyone for having the audacity to raise an issue that criticises Apple.

 

[elev8d]

I actually wish that this would be a planned artifical scarcity strategy, ´cause what I hate more than evil people, is incompetent stupid people.

So guys, which case do you think this is?

1. Planned artificial scarcity strategy

2. Plain incompetence (with a pinch of stupidity and greediness for not willing to hire more people and building more factories).

I'm going to say option 2. From all the display issues I've been reading about in the forums, I hypothesize that this iMac has had a much higher return rate than prior iterations. I also think, they are trying to produce sufficient stock for the Apple Stores and Best Buys, before reducing ship dates on the online store. Producing custom configs as opposed to the cookie cutter versions for retail stores probably produces slightly higher overhead.

 

[Fishrrman]

"My thought is that Apple is not being greedy, they just got severely behind on the imac and weren't ready for release. Somebody miscalculated somewhere along the line in the development process. I still think these delays are embarrassing for them at a point almost 4 months in."

I believe it was a case of the Apple designers getting a little too-far-removed from the realities of what the factories (and the technology within) could produce, and how quickly they could deliver product.

Because these issues weren't addressed properly during the pre-production phase (remember 6 months ago or more, the reports that there were problems getting sufficient yield during the screen lamination process?), and because the same issues may still be putting a drag on production, there are delays. I'll reckon the "yield rate" for the screens has increased, but still isn't optimum.

 

[1972]

Ordered it on Nov. 30th. Received it a couple of weeks later. Works great. no complaints.

 

[Brian Y]

Wow, I feel sorry for you. So hypnotized by Apple´s marketing propaganda. Seriously wow!

I know exactly how business and this world works and it´s not pretty sight let me tell you!!!!!!

You know how businesses and the whole world works? You're in the wrong job dude. Don't you have some economies to fix?!?

Your entire argument is nullified by the fact that I can walk into an Apple store, and buy one. Anyone can.

 

[jwp333]

You know how businesses and the whole world works? You're in the wrong job dude. Don't you have some economies to fix?!?

Your entire argument is nullified by the fact that I can walk into an Apple store, and buy one. Anyone can.

I'm afraid I don't buy that response to the argument. I don't doubt that you can buy one at an Apple store depending on your luck on a particular day. I really am not sure what the stock is typically at my local Apple Store. But if they are so readily available at the Apple Store, why does online ordering take 3 to 4 weeks? Why do the online resellers have the same issue? The answer is the supply chain is not up to snuff. I'll continue to buy Apple products, but a little criticism is justified in this case. I'm sure the Apple execs are no more happy than I am about this.

 

[kaellar]

yep, that's the other side of today's high technologies - it's way too difficult to grab that f*n phone and call your local Apple store to find out if they have what you need..

 

[Brian Y]

I'm afraid I don't buy that response to the argument. I don't doubt that you can buy one at an Apple store depending on your luck on a particular day. I really am not sure what the stock is typically at my local Apple Store. But if they are so readily available at the Apple Store, why does online ordering take 3 to 4 weeks? Why do the online resellers have the same issue? The answer is the supply chain is not up to snuff. I'll continue to buy Apple products, but a little criticism is justified in this case. I'm sure the Apple execs are no more happy than I am about this.

Record sales? iMac demand up what - 30%? Yeah, I'm sure they're unhappy.

 

[HenryDJP]

I'm afraid I don't buy that response to the argument. I don't doubt that you can buy one at an Apple store depending on your luck on a particular day. I really am not sure what the stock is typically at my local Apple Store. But if they are so readily available at the Apple Store, why does online ordering take 3 to 4 weeks? Why do the online resellers have the same issue? The answer is the supply chain is not up to snuff. .

I can easily answer your question. Did it occur to you that not everybody is an internet whore? There are several more people that would prefer to purchase at the stores rather than online. My stepmother loves websurfing and facebook all day but I can't get her to pay her bills online for the life of me. The stores have to keep stock for the people that don't want to shop online. Online resellers are definitely not going to get stock before the main company that creates and sells the product. That would make zero sense.

Now, while the online purchasers may have to wait a while for their order to ship, they can be virtually anywhere that allows them to purchase Apple products. They don't have to burden themselves driving to stores that aren't anywhere near their home, nor do they have to deal with the overcrowded retail stores. It's going to have to be trade off. Sit home and wait a while and be inconvenienced or drive miles and miles to a nearby Apple store (if there is one) and be inconvenienced.
And let's be real about it, most of the reasons why anyone would buy from the 3rd party resellers is to ditch the tax if applicable which is something you can't do if you buy directly from Apple, unless the state it's being shipped to has no sales tax.

 

[crovian]

And when these fanboys talk about "Apple's job is to earn money for its shareholders", WHAT!!! Hasn't Apple only just started paying a dividend to shareholders and it's stock has dropped over the last year, so the muppets that bought Apple stock are sitting on a shrinking $.

If you knew anything about corporate finance you would know that dividends are not the only way to maximize shareholder wealth. In fact, no rational investor longs just to profit from dividends.

I'm 20 shares into AAPL bought at around $410 and recent decline has been frustrating but that's about 5% of my portfolio so I'm not really worried as I'm generally bullish on the company.

I just find it funny so many people start talking about corporate strats and market structure who hasn't taken anything beyond first year finance courses suddenly start thinking they can all be bankers under the face of anonymity on MR

 

[Brian Y]

Plus - Apple are of course going to prioritise their own retail stores. Apple have always put an emphasis on the "Personal" service you get at retail stores, and that's their preferred method of sale.

If you buy it from an Apple store you don't just get a box. They'll get it set up for you, get your app store/itunes account setup, etc, etc. For people here, that's not a huge thing - but for your regular consumer, it's great - and is much more likely to make them a loyal Apple customer.

 

[forty2j]

I actually wish that this would be a planned artifical scarcity strategy, ´cause what I hate more than evil people, is incompetent stupid people.

So guys, which case do you think this is?

1. Planned artificial scarcity strategy

2. Plain incompetence (with a pinch of stupidity and greediness for not willing to hire more people and building more factories).

It's an overly aggressive design, mixed with some incompetence on the supply chain.

 

[jwp333]

Astonishingly poor quarter, down 21% according to analysts, is due to the limited availability of the iMac. See following:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13...y-poor-quarter-mac-sales-predicted-to-rebound


Pent up demand does no good if you can't supply the product. I still don't think that Apple execs planned it this way.

 

[Mike in Kansas]

Astonishingly poor quarter, down 21% according to analysts, is due to the limited availability of the iMac. See following:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13...y-poor-quarter-mac-sales-predicted-to-rebound


Pent up demand does no good if you can't supply the product. I still don't think that Apple execs planned it this way.

This is neither a surprise nor unanticipated. When Apple announced the new iMac lineup in late October 2012, sales came to a screeching halt. Why buy a 500+ day old computer when a new one is right around the corner? Admittedly, they haven't geared up production as fast as they would have liked, but they are in it for the long haul and won't be impacted by a delay in the short term.

Since iMac sales in January 2013 were estimated at being 31% above January 2012, I would hazard to guess that things are almost back to being right on track.

And Apple wasn't down 21% for the quarter like you are implying; their Mac sales were down 22%. The only thing surprising are the "analysts" who are trying to make something out of this.

 

[Brian Y]

Astonishingly poor quarter, down 21% according to analysts, is due to the limited availability of the iMac. See following:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13...y-poor-quarter-mac-sales-predicted-to-rebound


Pent up demand does no good if you can't supply the product. I still don't think that Apple execs planned it this way.

No, as said above - mac sales were down 20%. Which you can easily put down to the fact that they stopped selling iMacs for a month.

And you're also wrong again, Apple just announced a record quarter - it was their best ever. You're almost as bad as these "professional" analysts who come up with ridiculous predictions to manipulate the stock market, to their own advantage (buy AAPL shares, predict impossibly high quarterly results, watch shares climb, sell just before inevitable announcement that AAPL hasn't done as well as "expected" since it could never meet the ridiculous predictions - same thing happens almost every quarter).

 

[JAT]

OK, let's get back to the facts here. The 27" iMac was released 30th November 2012 with a note saying it wasn't being shipped until during December, that later slipped to January. And here we are now, tomorrow is March and iMac deliveries are still not fully on-stream. Now surely, even the staunchest of Apple's supporters can't defend that delivery record.
...
And I'm sorry for calling you all fanboys but just look at you all tearing crap out of anyone for having the audacity to raise an issue that criticises Apple.

All the discussion here has been quite specific. Not "defending" Apple or responding just because there is criticism, but correcting the reasons to accurate ones.

 

[minifridge1138]

People are greedy.

Have you ever heard of an employee declining a raise? I'm sure it has happened, but not as often.

I think this roll out has gone better than the original iPhone. It was sold out and back ordered. Then a few months later the price was lowered. You had some very angry early adopters.

I'm not saying that the iMac rollout has been perfect, but it certainly could be worse.
There are plenty of reasons to criticize Apple. Not meeting demand is one of them, but I don't think it's the most evil thing they do (I'm not even sure that it is evil at all).

Sure, Apple could spend some of their cash to build factories and hire workers. But what happens if/when the demand goes back down? What do you do with the factory? What do you do with the employees?

Planned scarcity is good. Which problem would you prefer to have:
1) We can't build them as fast as people are buying them.
2) We have thousands sitting in a warehouse that nobody wants.

Number 1 costs you nothing, financially. You're making money, just not as much as you could be making.

Number 2 costs you a lot. What do you do with the unsold units? Slash prices? Slash them too much and you will have spent more on each unit than you make selling them. Slash them too soon and the people that already bought will feel cheated. Hold onto them until demand comes back? And you have to shutdown the factory that's making them. Fire the workers?


Basic rule for finance: bring in more money than you send out.
If you're good at that, then you end up with a surplus (Apple's current situation). What do you do with that surplus? Nothing that would cause you to break the rule.
If you're bad at that, then you end up in trouble.