Apple Reimbursed Samsung $683 Million After Missing OLED Display Targets

No wonder the store pushes upgrades rather than repairs. Even the genius people are now doing sales.
 
vertical smile said:
Some people might say that this is the effect:
I think that drop in sales can be equated to lengthening purchase cycles, but not the effect of it. It is the results of the things that are mention many times in this post.

This is one:

I agree!
This is in part in what my post was pointing out. But, I don't think this is the only reason, but a bunch of reasons, and this is one of them.
[doublepost=1562335386][/doublepost]

I would also add to your statement that it isn't just the iPhones are fast enough, but that there has not been any new features that provide useful utility to the new iPhones.

Getting a faster iPhone was not the only reason for one to upgrade in the past.
Click to expand...
It’s been 12 years. iPhone is a mature product line. I’m not sure what features you think Apple could add that would drive upgrades. From the sales of the pixel, it certainly isn’t better low-light pictures.

Besides fast/good enough, another major factor playing into longer purchase cycles was the unbundling of phones from cellular service. Once people saw just how much of that “$200” iPhone was buried in the monthly bill, they weren’t quite so eager to fork over for a new phone.

The hardware being subsidized by two-year phone contracts also created a disincentive _not_ to upgrade. “I might as well upgrade because after 24 months I’m eligible, and if I don’t my bill won’t go down anyway, so why not?” Along with more demanding apps and OS features making your old phone appreciably slower—and a degraded battery—it made a lot of sense to upgrade. And after two years there was also a significantly better camera; that’s a big upgrade driver.

I’m sure there will be features in the future that will drive upgrades, but don’t ask me what those will be. I’m pretty sure it won’t be a $2,000 or $2,800 folding tablet.
 
vertical smile said:
Maybe I am not sure of what war you are referring to, but I don't think obliterated would be an appropriate word when it comes to comparing the smartphone market of Apple and Samsung.
Click to expand...

When the iPhone outsells Samsung by close to 4:1, then I think obliterated is the correct term. Especially when at one point Samsung was actually catching up to Apple in sales.
 
realtuner said:
When the iPhone outsells Samsung by close to 4:1, then I think obliterated is the correct term. Especially when at one point Samsung was actually catching up to Apple in sales.
Click to expand...
4:1 for flagships, but Samsung sells a lot of $50-75 phones. Of course, there’s no profit in those sales. Apple wins (most of) the profits in the smartphone market, that’s for sure.
 
Last edited:
I am oddly satisfied with this outcome even though I love Apple and really hate Samsung. Apple’s prices are idiotic. Max I can pay is $700 for any phone. So these days I am a year or two behind in buying iPhones. Just got iPhone X 256 GB new for $680. It has got 1 yr warranty and is plenty fast for my needs. I intend to buy this year’s iPhone X2 after 2 tears for similar price.
 
realtuner said:
The court case was a minor skirmish. All it succeeded in doing is showing the world Samsung steals IP.

Apple obliterated Samsung in the smartphone war. I think Apple is pretty happy about their position in the market, being #1 and all, and doesn’t worry about the occasional mosquito buzzing around.
Click to expand...

Rounded corners is only IP inside courtrooms, esp ones where you have the jurisdictional home court advantage. In the real world, IP is things like OLED displays and 5G modems. As for winning "the war", that only matters if you're a shareholder, or a fanboy.
 
realtuner said:
When the iPhone outsells Samsung by close to 4:1, then I think obliterated is the correct term. Especially when at one point Samsung was actually catching up to Apple in sales.
Click to expand...
I would question your 4:1 in sales, as this quick something search has many links that show a different story, but even if it was 4:1, obliterated is extreme, imo.

Now, if you compared smartphone sales of Apple to Nokia, I would consider that obliterated.
[doublepost=1562340391][/doublepost]
PickUrPoison said:
It’s been 12 years. iPhone is a mature product line. I’m not sure what features you think Apple could add that would drive upgrades.
Click to expand...
Maybe there isn't any new features to add, but that doesn't make what I said untrue.
 
JetTester said:
Wow, $683 million, and no accompanying lawsuit. How can that happen???
Click to expand...
Because Apple honors their contracts. According to rumors they tried to negotiate an alternative outcome, but Samsung needed the cash, so no dice.

However, something tells me they’ll recover a significant portion of that in the future, especially as they depend less and less on Samsung for OLED.
 
EugW said:
Drop the prices, Apple.
Click to expand...

Boring, popular statement.
And: You forgot the consequences for Nokia.
Apple paid more attention on stuff like that than you can.
If you don't want a strong American company, your suggestion is right.
 
Last edited:
Morgenland said:
Boring, popular statement.
And: You forgot the consequences for Nokia.
Apple paid more attention on stuff like that than you can.
If you don't want a strong American company, your suggestion is right.
Click to expand...
Yeah cuz paying Samsung a $0.7 billion penalty for not meeting expected quotas is a great way to make a strong company, right?
 
EugW said:
Yeah cuz paying Samsung a $0.7 billion penalty for not meeting expected quotas is a great way to make a strong company, right?
Click to expand...
These are standard contract payments. And it is not unusually much.
I see you have little insight and clarity for such contracts.

The mobile phone market is close to saturated, which will be a big challenge for all involved. And Nokia has died of a cheap-price strategy.
 
realtuner said:
Total sales for “smartphones” is not the same as flagships.
Click to expand...
Well, you didn't specify flagship, you stated:
realtuner said:
Apple obliterated Samsung in the smartphone war.
Click to expand...
Not flagship smartphone war.

But still, even with the 4:1 ratio, I still wouldn't consider that obliterated. Maybe comparing the sales of Apple's flagship phone to Nokia's, then I would say obliterated might be an appropriate word, but even then it might be a little too strong of a word to use.

Apple sells a lot of phones, and I am sure selling high profit margin smartphones at that fraction of Apple is still a very desirable position.
 
vertical smile said:
Well, you didn't specify flagship, you stated:

Not flagship smartphone war.

But still, even with the 4:1 ratio, I still wouldn't consider that obliterated. Maybe comparing the sales of Apple's flagship phone to Nokia's, then I would say obliterated might be an appropriate word, but even then it might be a little too strong of a word to use.

Apple sells a lot of phones, and I am sure selling high profit margin smartphones at that fraction of Apple is still a very desirable position.
Click to expand...

It's common sense. @PickUrPoison picked it up right away in their post above. This has also been discussed ad nauseam here at MR. Posters routinely compare Samsung overall sales to iPhone sales as if it somehow matters. Anything to chalk up a win, I guess.

At one time Samsung was actually catching up to the iPhone (the S4 famously sold 10 million in only 29 days). Galaxy S sales were rapidly climbing between the S2 and S4 to the point where the ratio of Galaxy phones to the iPhone was less than 2:1 at one point. Aaaaaaand...that's as close as Samsung ever got. Since the S4 Apple has run away from Samsung for flagship sales.

In a small and defined market for flagship devices with a finite number of potential customers I think it's perfectly fair to say Apple obliterated Samsung. They will never recover and get back anywhere near their former sales. their chance to gain a bigger foothold has passed.
 
allenvanhellen said:
Make an OLED all-screen iPhone 4S-sized device. Problem solved. Bonus sales for headphone jacks and squarish edges (or maybe iPod Touch thinness).
Click to expand...

Good idea. Unfortunately Apple will make a larger profit by only selling overpriced iPhone XS models compared to offering both iPhone XS models and cheaper 4” iPhone XSE (or iPhone SEX) model.
 
The market for an OLED 4S-sized iPhone is exceedingly small. Definitely not worth it.

Plus, the OS isn’t even designed for it and it would take a major reworking to even work properly on a phone that small.

ie. Not gonna happen.
 
realtuner said:
This has also been discussed ad nauseam here at MR. Posters routinely compare Samsung overall sales to iPhone sales as if it somehow matters. Anything to chalk up a win, I guess.
Click to expand...
I personally couldn't care less about the sales between the two.

Actually, I think Apple made a lot better product when compared to the competition when they hardly had a market share in any category.

realtuner said:
In a small and defined market for flagship devices with a finite number of potential customers I think it's perfectly fair to say Apple obliterated Samsung.
Click to expand...
I guess if you want to exaggerate, I would agree.

realtuner said:
They will never recover and get back anywhere near their former sales.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say never, as no one stays on top forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top