The problem is that Samsung is no longer releasing sales figures. I think these numbers are garnered from the quarterly financial statements of each company.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and Samsung Claim 99% of Profits Among Top Mobile Phone Vendors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The problem is that Samsung is no longer releasing sales figures. I think these numbers are garnered from the quarterly financial statements of each company.
I find it interesting that people laugh at samsung for having more sales and less profit.... I'm just putting it out there that if you're selling less units and pulling in a far larger product it means there's a huge mark-up which is more money out of your pocket. Unless you own shares in apple then it's probably not a great thing.
On another note, Good work apple on getting a crap load of profit
On another note, Good work apple on getting a crap load of profit
I find it interesting that people laugh at samsung for having more sales and less profit.... I'm just putting it out there that if you're selling less units and pulling in a far larger product it means there's a huge mark-up which is more money out of your pocket. Unless you own shares in apple then it's probably not a great thing.
On another note, Good work apple on getting a crap load of profit
That's what most people think until they learn how business works. Keep studying grasshopper.
This is the news we want to hear.
Apple have like 3 iPhone models for sale. Like >10% of total phone market share but has well the lions share of the profits. And you can use the latest version of iOS on the latest iPhone/
I'm sure Samsung and others would love to have this level of profit and love to have the latest version of the OS ship with their newest phones.
So basically Apple phones + Apple clone phones = >90% of the profits.
The sad story here is Nokia. 5 years ago they had >50% of the profits. Now they are ~2%? Such a big company, and such a fall from grace.
Apple have like 3 iPhone models for sale. Like >10% of total phone market share but has well the lions share of the profits. And you can use the latest version of iOS on the latest iPhone/
I'm sure Samsung and others would love to have this level of profit and love to have the latest version of the OS ship with their newest phones.
So basically Apple phones + Apple clone phones = >90% of the profits.
The sad story here is Nokia. 5 years ago they had >50% of the profits. Now they are ~2%? Such a big company, and such a fall from grace.
Last edited:
Problem is it would have probably been much cheaper to license their products via normal revenue share with other os makers instead of doing it themselves. Google's revenue share model is very attractive with developers. It becomes less attractive when you become direct competitors. I am not sure what google has done with android has been more financially viable then just doing their normal licensing deals. However much like with chrome they are trying to eliminate revenue sharing. I think it is a mistake on their part and leaves them open to real competition. Some people will choose not to partner with google in the future because they seem as a competitor or future competitor.
If they just provided the best tools with revenue share it would be nearly impossible to unseat them. Because they desire to grow into all these areas as competitors they open up vulnerabilities to their core business.
----------
Google has to be eyeing a total control device , system and ecosystem. I have been saying for a while now google will eol android and create a new os to work exclusively on the mmi/google devices. I think that path is pretty clear. Any android oem who does not have a 36 month plan that includes using a new os is doomed
Can all those other companies which produce Android phones refer Samsung to the DoJ for market dominance/monopoly?
Samsung maybe needs to acquire Android off of Google and become like Apple: the only manufacturer in its own iOS market.
With MSNokia, Samsung & Apple would each be sole operators in the own software markets.
Samsung maybe needs to acquire Android off of Google and become like Apple: the only manufacturer in its own iOS market.
With MSNokia, Samsung & Apple would each be sole operators in the own software markets.
I agree. Then again... what exactly is going on?
Are Samsung and Apple just too good?
Or is everyone else just that bad?
What you're seeing IS competition... this is the very essence of competition.
But those other guys are losing... that's an unfortunate byproduct of competition.
Nokia was like the zerg of cellphones. They produced hundreds of "zerglings" that weren't really strong. Samsung is slightly better, making dozens of marines. But Apple takes the crown. They brought in 5 "motherships" with reality distortion fields (invisibility aura) and vortex.
I hope you're not suggesting that only iPhone users are buying on credit and all Android users buy with cash.
All of the information that you're asking about is available. In this last quarter, Apple sold 35 million iPhones. Samsung sold about 42 million.
So, here's the math.
Apple = 73% x $14.4 billion = $10.5 billion / 35 million = $300 profit per phone
Samsung = 26% x 14.4 = $3.74 bil / 42 mil = $89 profit per phone
EDIT - I just re-read your post. I didn't quite answer what you were asking. Sorry. But smartphone market share charts are availalbe all over the place.
As for your question as to whether profit share is a measure of market success ... I contend that it's a significant component of market success. A high market share is useless if you're not making money off of that market share somehow. If you can demonstrate that selling a lot of units at a low margin will somehow contribute profits elsewhere, then we can talk. Otherwise, you're just burning cash.
Case in point - it's been noted that Amazon loses money on every Fire tablet they sell. But they're business model is that they'll make up the costs by having people buy other items at Amazon. Samsung doesn't quite have that ability, so they need to make profits on the hardware ... which they do. Note that Samsung is trying to branch out to other ventures, like music streaming services. Perhaps this is in anticipation of lower hardware margins ... who knows.
Anyways, Apple is at a good spot right now. They have the highest margins in the sector, they're number 2 in units sold, and they get extra revenue/profits in software/media sales. They are well positioned in many different competition scenarios. They can afford to drop prices (reduced margins) to maintain market share if needed. They can afford one or two products to bomb. The same cannot be said of some of these other manufacturers (I'm looking at you, Nokia).
ft
Last edited:
Yes, Apple can afford one or two products to bomb because their iPhone "motherships" have the ability to "mass recall."
Don't think I implied that at all. People in general these days value "swag" instead of thinking about the next 60+ years they have to live.
I bought the iPhone 3G and it lasted me until the 4S (I could've held on longer, but really liked Siri). I do think you have a point though, I notice a lot of people buying the "mothership" instead of the "marine" cause its swag.
Whether you have an iPhone or some Android phone... you're paying the same monthly fees.
Unless you're suggesting some people shouldn't use a smartphone at all... and instead use a pre-paid flip-phone.
There is sufficient competition. The problem is the quality. RIM introduces a new operating system, and their stock plummets. Nokia partners with Microsoft and their remaining sales evaporate. Says enough about what both markets (financial and consumers) think about the quality of their new products, wouldn't you agree?
Time for fresh competition?
Units sold isn't that meaningful when you count both a $600 phone and a $15 phone (full price, unsubsidized) as one phone. Profit equals market success. If you lose money then you don't have any success, even if you outsell all your competitors combined.
And if you sell more items than a competitor but make less profit, then either you are stupid, or the only reason why you sell more is that you have lower prices leading to higher sales but lower profit.