Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sabon said:
Their profit margin is lower than we would like because of R&D. Don't get me wrong. I don't want them to cut one penny from R&D or they would die like before Steve jobs.

Unless their sales go up a LOT they won't ever come close to 15% profits. Since they sell a lot less desktops than Dell. Their profit after R&D (which is HUGE compared to Dell's and it shows) will always be lower. Steve is fine with that and so am I. Better products is more important as long as they make just enough profits to continue to pad their coffers after R&D.

Good answer! I agree 100%. However, I think that their profit margins will be at 15% sooner than you'd guess.

Apple profit is set to SOAR with increasing market share.
 
widescreen just for fun?

Mr. Jobs said today, "We've got a strong product portfolio, with some amazing new additions coming later this year."

With airport express supporting peripheral speakers and the new "all widescreen HD" line-up... hmm. do you smell what the jobs is cooking?

on another note (or maybe not), does anyone else think that the airport express seems like it is meant to be used for more than (wireless internet and) external speakers and a shared printer. it just seems so random: speakers and a printer.

edit:
actually, it finally makes sense after reading dongmin's post #122.
 
iTunes Music Store mystery revenue

"Apple's iTunes Music Store turned in $73 million in revenue for the quarter, and also generated a small profit for the company, according to CFO Peter Oppenheimer, though he did not elaborate." - From MacCentral

If Apple had sold 70 million songs as of April 28th on their first anniversary, then that means that Apple only sold some 30 million songs in the quarter. How did that translate to $73 million in revenue? That's quite a bit more than 99¢ a song.

Any ideas?
 
220,000 PowerBooks sold for $435 mil.

Quite an amazing feat, considering how much people were complaining about the underpowered G4. It just goes to show you that when it comes to portables, people don't care that much about the perceived performance gap between laptops and desktops.

What's surprising is that the average revenue generated by a PowerBook ($1977) is higher than a Power Mac ($1919). Apple must still be selling a lot of the old G4 Power Macs.

The G4 still has some life in it...
 
will the imac have a cable tv hook-up? is it possible for the usb or firewire ports to work as inputs to the new displays? could a "cable" input be converted to a usb input?
 
vitaboy said:
Apple made a choice a couple years ago. They could have continued to go the Amelio route by cutting expenses to the bone and praying that Mac customers will keep coming back. We saw some truly awful products during this period - anyone remember the Performas? The exploding PowerBooks?
Sorry, this bit annoys me. It wasn't Amelio who nearly killed Apple, that was Spindler. [Sculley gets a bad rap for becoming complacent after things got too comfortable, but it was under his watch that Apple became the huge successful company that people remember; Jobs was long gone by then.]

Amelio only had the CEO chair for a few months before doing exactly what the company needed to survive: took a chunk of that cash pile everyone keeps questioning and bought NeXT, then did the administrator thing for another year until the current management team was ready to roll. That's Amelio's specialty, turning around sinking companies using whatever works, even if it seems weird. He even lent his personal money to Apple (and left the company half a million poorer than when he walked in) to keep the company afloat for the interim.

Apple was in real danger of being liquidated during this period, falling to either Sun or Oracle, both who would surely have ruined it for good. Amelio prevented that from happening.

Yes, Jobs paints a different picture and trashes the guy, but Jobs is legendary for trashing just about everyone.
 
Wonder Boy said:
hmm. a wall mounted model may change my mind.

All the new Apple displays can take any VESA standard wall-mount arm with the proper plate ($30?).

Apple isn't in the "stuff you screw into studs" business, nor should they be. They did exactly the right thing by going standard.

There's no reason to think the iMacs will be different, so you should get your wall-mount iMac real soon now.
 
VIIGemina said:
If Apple had sold 70 million songs as of April 28th on their first anniversary, then that means that Apple only sold some 30 million songs in the quarter. How did that translate to $73 million in revenue? That's quite a bit more than 99¢ a song.

Any ideas?

I suspect that random albums don't just appear on the front page of the iTunes music store, there's some payola involved.

What I want to know is if iTunes marketing comes out of that revenue or if Apple's general marketing fund eats it. iPod + iTunes spends A LOT of money on air time.

Yet Apple fails to understand that advertising a Mac would be useful...
 
iMeowbot said:
Yes, Jobs paints a different picture and trashes the guy, but Jobs is legendary for trashing just about everyone.

Yeah, I was there for Jobs's keynote when the G3 was brand new. (For the youngins in the crowd, the G3 absolutely smoked the older Macs. It was a very significant improvement.)

He cranked his reality distortion field to Warp 11 for it, despite the fact that it was an Amilio project. Then he trashed Amilio. Dick.
 
iMeowbot said:
Sorry, this bit annoys me. It wasn't Amelio who nearly killed Apple, that was Spindler. [Sculley gets a bad rap for becoming complacent after things got too comfortable, but it was under his watch that Apple became the huge successful company that people remember; Jobs was long gone by then.]

Amelio only had the CEO chair for a few months before doing exactly what the company needed to survive: took a chunk of that cash pile everyone keeps questioning and bought NeXT, then did the administrator thing for another year until the current management team was ready to roll. That's Amelio's specialty, turning around sinking companies using whatever works, even if it seems weird. He even lent his personal money to Apple (and left the company half a million poorer than when he walked in) to keep the company afloat for the interim.

Apple was in real danger of being liquidated during this period, falling to either Sun or Oracle, both who would surely have ruined it for good. Amelio prevented that from happening.

Yes, Jobs paints a different picture and trashes the guy, but Jobs is legendary for trashing just about everyone.

I'm not saying that Spindler did a good job but you are nuts to think that Amelio was a good CEO. He was in charge during two of Apple's worst quarterly losses ever. 1996 Q2 and 1997 Q2 they lost over $700,000,000. Also, for you to act as though he was only in charge for a few months is wrong as well. He was at the helm for a year before they purchased Next.

People in this forum are complaining that a $60,000,000 profit is not enough. He presided over almost $2,000,000,000 in losses. That is unbelievable.

Frank
 
appleface said:
how is the new imac going to be more of a digital hub for the average, mac-buying consumer than the last imac? the G5 imac can use airport express to power speakers and to print, obviously; but what new feature will apple add to enhance its authority as a digital hub?

What new features did they add to the current iMac? It was more about form and function. The 'hub' happens mostly in software.

That said this thing needs FW800 to handle HDTV and should have Bluetooth and 802.11g built-in.

If I were Apple I'd lean a bit more on the personal lifestyle hub, bluetooth phone sync, web/e-mail, and of course the old standby music, photos and home movies. Security as a timesaver, not as a geeky thing.
 
VIIGemina said:
If Apple had sold 70 million songs as of April 28th on their first anniversary, then that means that Apple only sold some 30 million songs in the quarter. How did that translate to $73 million in revenue? That's quite a bit more than 99¢ a song.

Any ideas?

One idea: iTMS also sells audio books. $40 mil would translate to ~2 million books, which seems a bit high, but the Clinton book did come out in June and they probably sold a few of those... Still, that seems like a lot of books.
 
ClimbingTheLog said:
Yeah, I was there for Jobs's keynote when the G3 was brand new. (For the youngins in the crowd, the G3 absolutely smoked the older Macs. It was a very significant improvement.)

He cranked his reality distortion field to Warp 11 for it, despite the fact that it was an Amilio project. Then he trashed Amilio. Dick.

Really, Steve Jobs is the dick? Not you guys?

Maybe you want Amelio back so we would still be waiting for Copland???

Give us all a break.

Frank
 
fossicker said:
One idea: iTMS also sells audio books. $40 mil would translate to ~2 million books, which seems a bit high, but the Clinton book did come out in June and they probably sold a few of those... Still, that seems like a lot of books.

That is a good point that I don't think any of us had thought of.

Frank
 
The highest quarterly shipment of Macs, huh?

Sounds to me like the iPod+iTunes racket has become Apple's "gateway drug."

Let's face it, as far as mindblowing improvents in Apple's computer lines go, this quarter (and the one before, and the one before) was pretty lame - all the focus and hype was iPod related.

I was a bit skeptical that PC iPod people would become Mac people...but I don't see another likely explanation.
 
ITMS Profit?

I'm surprised that more of you haven't commented on the ITMS profit. I think that is fabulous! I was sure that ITMS was a loss-leader, and that it would take a few years for them to turn a profit on it. That they already are is amazing, and we haven't seen nearly the potential of the store yet.

Way to Go Apple. From someone who has weathered every storm, turned aside every comment from my lame PC friends, and stuck with you even during the hard times, congrats!

:)
 
frankly said:
I'm not saying that Spindler did a good job but you are nuts to think that Amelio was a good CEO. He was in charge during two of Apple's worst quarterly losses ever. 1996 Q2 and 1997 Q2 they lost over $700,000,000. Also, for you to act as though he was only in charge for a few months is wrong as well. He was at the helm for a year before they purchased Next.
Huh? Amelio was hired in February 1996, and the Next acquisition was completed by December.

The July-September quarter in 1996 wasn't too shabby, Apple did manage a $25 million profit. That, in combination with those losses, isn't bad at all for a company that had spent the last several years foundering on dead-end paths for new technology. Those losses reflected writing off those inherited lost causes. Apple had nothing new to sell, and that stuff couldn't be produced from thin air. Platform alternatives (Be, MS, NeXT are known) had to be evaluated, and due diligence had to be carried out before a technology acquisition could be made final. That it was accomplished as quickly as it was is actually pretty damned impressive.

Then of course are the hardware products that saved Apple's butt, the G3 and iMac. Those projects weren't begun under Jobs' watch (and indeed, rumor mongers were babbling about how the Columbus project -- which was released under the name iMac -- had been an Amelio mistake he killed off), but he wasn't shy about taking full credit for them.
People in this forum are complaining that a $60,000,000 profit is not enough. He presided over almost $2,000,000,000 in losses. That is unbelievable.
More unbelievable is the notion that a company that size -- at its darkest, sales were still in the billions -- could be turned around completely within a few quarters.
 
SuperChuck said:
The highest quarterly shipment of Macs, huh?

Sounds to me like the iPod+iTunes racket has become Apple's "gateway drug."

Let's face it, as far as mindblowing improvents in Apple's computer lines go, this quarter (and the one before, and the one before) was pretty lame - all the focus and hype was iPod related.
What's amazing, though, is that PowerBooks, which arguably is the oldest in the lineup, is what's keeping Apple in the black. Apple sold 220,000 PBs for $435 mil. Compare that to the iPods, 860,000 units for $249 mil.

What's surprising is that iPods avg. out to $290 per unit which means that it's the iPod minis that are really driving sales. Apple needs to introduce some new cool features, like Home on iPod and video-out, to push more fo the higher-end iPods.
 
appleface said:
Mr. Jobs said today, "We've got a strong product portfolio, with some amazing new additions coming later this year."

With airport express supporting peripheral speakers and the new "all widescreen HD" line-up... hmm. do you smell what the jobs is cooking?
I hope it's non-widescreen monitors. Sure, widescreen is nice when I'm editing video, but I spend a lot more time looking at web pages and working on portrait-orientation documents. Steve's monitors are sideways for most of my needs. My choices are to buy some other company's monitors or to waste money paying for an Apple monitor on which I use only the left side or the right side (to get a useful aspect ratio) for the main work I do.
 
fossicker said:
One idea: iTMS also sells audio books. $40 mil would translate to ~2 million books, which seems a bit high, but the Clinton book did come out in June and they probably sold a few of those... Still, that seems like a lot of books.
Another idea: gift certificates, gift cards, and allowances that haven't been fully redeemed yet.
 
VIIGemina said:
"Apple's iTunes Music Store turned in $73 million in revenue for the quarter, and also generated a small profit for the company, according to CFO Peter Oppenheimer, though he did not elaborate." - From MacCentral

If Apple had sold 70 million songs as of April 28th on their first anniversary, then that means that Apple only sold some 30 million songs in the quarter. How did that translate to $73 million in revenue? That's quite a bit more than 99¢ a song.

Any ideas?

Audio books? I doubt they are counted as DL'ed songs.
Plus, they cost way more then your typical audio album.
 
Agh! I'm so sick of this.

Customers get pissed off because they say "How come you didn't tell us that they are upgrading the |whatever| right after I bought one?" when Apple upgrades something.

So now Apple has told everyone early. Solution to the above problem?
Yes, but now no one is buying iMacs at all!
 
Timothy said:
I'm surprised that more of you haven't commented on the ITMS profit. I think that is fabulous! I was sure that ITMS was a loss-leader, and that it would take a few years for them to turn a profit on it. That they already are is amazing, and we haven't seen nearly the potential of the store yet.

Way to Go Apple. From someone who has weathered every storm, turned aside every comment from my lame PC friends, and stuck with you even during the hard times, congrats!

:)


Personally, when the download numbers soared and Jobs said doubted if there was any money to be made off iTunes as it is all in the iPod, I wondered whether that was gentle flim-flam to keep wannabees out of the market..
 
Wardofsky said:
Agh! I'm so sick of this.
So now Apple has told everyone early. Solution to the above problem?
Yes, but now no one is buying iMacs at all!

Not that there would be any iMacs left to buy soon, though.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.