Apple's iPhone 8 Plus Was the Top Selling iPhone in the U.S. During Q2 2018

[FFR]

listening to the radio this morning BNN/Bloomburg news mentioned briefly that the quarterly results are expected tomorrow, but investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the iPhone for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

Haters gonna hate

2005:
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]iPod[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

2001:
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]imac[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

1996
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]mac[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

 

[LordVic]

Haters gonna hate

2005:
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]iPod[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

2001:
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]imac[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

1996
investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the [/b]mac[/b] for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.

it's not "haters gonna hate". it is however how the markets work. The stock market isn't based on value today. it's based on perceived value in the future. Investors don't care about the stuff we generally do. They don't sit on tech sites and blogs and measuring the A performance versus the qualcomm. they don't care about that.

what they care about is what they BELIEVE the future will hold. Companies that tend to do extremely well on the market also tend to be ones that are highly divested and non-reliant on singular points of failure. This has nothing to do with the current state of Apple or the iPhone, but the perceived lack of ability to divest to other businesses.

Right now, the iPhone is a halo product that lifts Apple in the eye of wall street. Without it, They'd be a fraction of what they are. Most of Apple's business currently revolves around the iPhone. Their services are tied heavily to iOS / iPhones. Most of their accessories are iPhone accessories. Even their computers these days are heavily sold because they're the only way to develop software for iOS. if the iPhone saw a 20% dip in sales, investors are not unreasonable to believe that there'd be a corresponding, if not greater dip in all of Apple.

is there evidence of this happening? No, of course not. But the stock market doesn't care about how Apple does today. They care about how Apple does tomorrow. So Don't confuse the two. and labeling an opinion as a "hater" because you don't agree with it doesn't suddenly make that opinion, especially those of people willing to invest millions of dollars in stocks as wrong either.

Today will be interesting though as the quarterly results are out. Like usually I do expect Apple to match their own predictions / forecasts and like usual the investors "doom and gloom" to be unrealized. But that doesn't mean the potential of disaster is not there and should be ignored as just "haters gonna hate"

 

[I7guy]

it's not "haters gonna hate". it is however how the markets work. The stock market isn't based on value today. it's based on perceived value in the future. Investors don't care about the stuff we generally do. They don't sit on tech sites and blogs and measuring the A performance versus the qualcomm. they don't care about that.

what they care about is what they BELIEVE the future will hold. Companies that tend to do extremely well on the market also tend to be ones that are highly divested and non-reliant on singular points of failure. This has nothing to do with the current state of Apple or the iPhone, but the perceived lack of ability to divest to other businesses.

Right now, the iPhone is a halo product that lifts Apple in the eye of wall street. Without it, They'd be a fraction of what they are. Most of Apple's business currently revolves around the iPhone. Their services are tied heavily to iOS / iPhones. Most of their accessories are iPhone accessories. Even their computers these days are heavily sold because they're the only way to develop software for iOS. if the iPhone saw a 20% dip in sales, investors are not unreasonable to believe that there'd be a corresponding, if not greater dip in all of Apple.

is there evidence of this happening? No, of course not. But the stock market doesn't care about how Apple does today. They care about how Apple does tomorrow. So Don't confuse the two. and labeling an opinion as a "hater" because you don't agree with it doesn't suddenly make that opinion, especially those of people willing to invest millions of dollars in stocks as wrong either.

Today will be interesting though as the quarterly results are out. Like usually I do expect Apple to match their own predictions / forecasts and like usual the investors "doom and gloom" to be unrealized. But that doesn't mean the potential of disaster is not there and should be ignored as just "haters gonna hate"

What does Warren Buffet believe?

I agree anything can happen. One never knows for example when a meteor will hit the earth.

 

[FFR]

it's not "haters gonna hate". it is however how the markets work. The stock market isn't based on value today. it's based on perceived value in the future. Investors don't care about the stuff we generally do. They don't sit on tech sites and blogs and measuring the A performance versus the qualcomm. they don't care about that.

what they care about is what they BELIEVE the future will hold. Companies that tend to do extremely well on the market also tend to be ones that are highly divested and non-reliant on singular points of failure. This has nothing to do with the current state of Apple or the iPhone, but the perceived lack of ability to divest to other businesses.

Right now, the iPhone is a halo product that lifts Apple in the eye of wall street. Without it, They'd be a fraction of what they are. Most of Apple's business currently revolves around the iPhone. Their services are tied heavily to iOS / iPhones. Most of their accessories are iPhone accessories. Even their computers these days are heavily sold because they're the only way to develop software for iOS. if the iPhone saw a 20% dip in sales, investors are not unreasonable to believe that there'd be a corresponding, if not greater dip in all of Apple.

is there evidence of this happening? No, of course not. But the stock market doesn't care about how Apple does today. They care about how Apple does tomorrow. So Don't confuse the two. and labeling an opinion as a "hater" because you don't agree with it doesn't suddenly make that opinion, especially those of people willing to invest millions of dollars in stocks as wrong either.

Today will be interesting though as the quarterly results are out. Like usually I do expect Apple to match their own predictions / forecasts and like usual the investors "doom and gloom" to be unrealized. But that doesn't mean the potential of disaster is not there and should be ignored as just "haters gonna hate"

Again same thing was said about the Mac, the iMac and the iPod and none of it came true.

O for 3.

Now they are saying it with the iPhone.

Sure.

 

[StellarVixen]

Pretty much everything that can be said about this has already been said more or less, but I have to add: what a brilliant strategy this proved to be!

If they released just the iPhone X, this would be one very painful year for Apple. But, by releasing the iPhone 8/8+, Apple has probably though that people do not mind the classic design, and that many will buy it, together with iPhone X.

And just how right they were! Kudos.

 

[ftaok]

Well, the Q3 results are out and based on what I've read and heard yesterday, my opinion is that this survey is highly flawed.

The CIRP data shows the 8plus outselling the X in the US by a wide margin (24% vs 17% on the chart).

Yesterday, Tim Cook reported that the X was the best selling iPhone for the entire quarter (once again). Sure, this is worldwide numbers and the CIRP data is US-only, but I can't imagine that the numbers would differ that wildly.

Interesting nugget from yesterday's conference call. Tim did not use the phrase that "the iPhone X has been the best selling iPhone model for each and every week that it has been available". So either another model slipped in there to win week or two (or more), or he got tired of that phrase. Unfortunately, none of the analysts on the call asked him about that.
[doublepost=1533127728][/doublepost]

what they care about is what they BELIEVE the future will hold. Companies that tend to do extremely well on the market also tend to be ones that are highly divested and non-reliant on singular points of failure. This has nothing to do with the current state of Apple or the iPhone, but the perceived lack of ability to divest to other businesses.

While true, highly diversified companies aren't immune to all of their diversity going to crap at the same time. Look at GE.

Personally, I feel that AAPL is undervalued and has been for years. The stock is currently trading at P/E of 18. The last several years it's been in the 14 to 15 range. GOOG trades in the 50's and they're even less diversified than AAPL (all of their eggs are in the advertising basket). The difference between these two companies is that GOOG publicly touts all of their future ideas when it's still in infancy. This gives the perception that they have markets to dominate in the future.

Apple, on the other hand, hardly ever talks about future new product or projects. And the market punishes the stock because of it. Personally, I think AAPL should be trading at a P/E of about 25, which would be about a 40% higher stock price.

NOTE - all P/E's discussed above are trailling P/E.

 

[LordVic]

While true, highly diversified companies aren't immune to all of their diversity going to crap at the same time. Look at GE.

Personally, I feel that AAPL is undervalued and has been for years. The stock is currently trading at P/E of 18. The last several years it's been in the 14 to 15 range. GOOG trades in the 50's and they're even less diversified than AAPL (all of their eggs are in the advertising basket). The difference between these two companies is that GOOG publicly touts all of their future ideas when it's still in infancy. This gives the perception that they have markets to dominate in the future.

Apple, on the other hand, hardly ever talks about future new product or projects. And the market punishes the stock because of it. Personally, I think AAPL should be trading at a P/E of about 25, which would be about a 40% higher stock price.

NOTE - all P/E's discussed above are trailling P/E.

Yeah, I believe th stock, especially considering that despite what I've mentioned Apple does continue to perform. None of what you say here is wrong.

I'm just explaining WHY investors aren't valuing the stock higher, closer to what current performance should indicate it.

No company, regardless of how diversified is immune from changing markets, shifting priorities, or poor management. Many companies have fallen who are better diversified, and many companies who are top fo their industry have also failed.

However, looking at yesterday's numbers, Apple has done a pretty decent job at getting their services revenues up, which should help future valuation. The question will still remain is how dependant on those services are iPhone sales? Interesting note was that despite no significant increase in volume (41.3m vs 41m), revenues on both iPhone (as i predicted due to increased prices) and Services did grow.

 

[ftaok]

Yeah, I believe th stock, especially considering that despite what I've mentioned Apple does continue to perform. None of what you say here is wrong.

I'm just explaining WHY investors aren't valuing the stock higher, closer to what current performance should indicate it.

No company, regardless of how diversified is immune from changing markets, shifting priorities, or poor management. Many companies have fallen who are better diversified, and many companies who are top fo their industry have also failed.

However, looking at yesterday's numbers, Apple has done a pretty decent job at getting their services revenues up, which should help future valuation. The question will still remain is how dependant on those services are iPhone sales? Interesting note was that despite no significant increase in volume (41.3m vs 41m), revenues on both iPhone (as i predicted due to increased prices) and Services did grow.

Good conversation.

Regarding the slowdown in iPhone unit growth. Much of the slowdown is due (IMO) to longer upgrade cycles and smartphone market maturity. People are just holding onto their phones longer because they still do what they need them to do.

Back when the US market decided to go away from the subsidy (new every 2) plan, I imagined that Apple would be relatively immune to any damages from that shift. I surmised that people would likely hold onto their phones longer, but they would also likely buy higher end models. The thinking went like this.

Under the subsidy plan, you could get a base storage iPhone flagship for $200. Or for $100, you'd get last year's flagship at the base storage. Or for "free", you'd get the 2 year old flagship. Or you could bump up storage for $100 more.

To me, I felt that people would likely stick to the base storage phones because the jump to the next model or tier was $100, or 50% more money.

Under the current plan, you walk in and buy a base flagship for $650. Or for $100 more, you'd upgrade the storage. That's only 15% more. Or for 30%, you could upgrade to plus with more storage. The psychological hit is smaller.

Conversely, you'd only save 15% by getting last year's model. Not that big a savings.

To me, this was key in Apple increasing ASP and driving people to higher end models to offset the longer upgrade durations.

Plus Apple has been great at keeping people in the ecosystem once they're in. They've added the AW, iMessages, and AirPods to give that experience that you don't get under Android. Keeps people in the flock.

Eventually, Apple will have to provide more than just the iPhone. They've been able to skate to where the puck will be in the past, so there's no reason they can't continue to do that in the future.

disclosure - I long on AAPL and I'm a huge fanboy.

 

[LordVic]

Again same thing was said about the Mac, the iMac and the iPod and none of it came true.

O for 3.

Now they are saying it with the iPhone.

Sure.

actually 1/2

or did you forget the period of time where Apple was solely dependant on Mac sales and those were cratering so hard that they were < .5% of the worlds computer usage and Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy.... Apple was also NEVER wholy dependant on the iMac. By the time the iMac was released, Apple had already moved on to the iPod for consumer electronics and the iMac/Mac lineup was no longer the only relied upon product category apple had.


the reason the iPod didn't result in disaster when it started to dwindle was the iPhone coming in and supplanting it. By the time the iPod started to decrease, the iPhone was skyrocketting into new market sectors, which also overlapped with previous portable media devices. if Apple did not have the iPhone ready by the time that smartphones started replacing PMPs, we'd be looking at 2/2.

The question that investors have right now, is Apple capable of doing the same thing should there be issues with iPhone sales? do they have the framework ready to transition bulk of their business to other products and services? (this is rhetorically being asked, as I'm not in Apple's executives, I can't answer that, I can only speculate)
[doublepost=1533131862][/doublepost]

Good conversation.

Regarding the slowdown in iPhone unit growth. Much of the slowdown is due (IMO) to longer upgrade cycles and smartphone market maturity. People are just holding onto their phones longer because they still do what they need them to do.

Back when the US market decided to go away from the subsidy (new every 2) plan, I imagined that Apple would be relatively immune to any damages from that shift. I surmised that people would likely hold onto their phones longer, but they would also likely buy higher end models. The thinking went like this.

Under the subsidy plan, you could get a base storage iPhone flagship for $200. Or for $100, you'd get last year's flagship at the base storage. Or for "free", you'd get the 2 year old flagship. Or you could bump up storage for $100 more.

To me, I felt that people would likely stick to the base storage phones because the jump to the next model or tier was $100, or 50% more money.

Under the current plan, you walk in and buy a base flagship for $650. Or for $100 more, you'd upgrade the storage. That's only 15% more. Or for 30%, you could upgrade to plus with more storage. The psychological hit is smaller.

Conversely, you'd only save 15% by getting last year's model. Not that big a savings.

To me, this was key in Apple increasing ASP and driving people to higher end models to offset the longer upgrade durations.

Plus Apple has been great at keeping people in the ecosystem once they're in. They've added the AW, iMessages, and AirPods to give that experience that you don't get under Android. Keeps people in the flock.

Eventually, Apple will have to provide more than just the iPhone. They've been able to skate to where the puck will be in the past, so there's no reason they can't continue to do that in the future.

disclosure - I long on AAPL and I'm a huge fanboy.

you don't sound fanboyish at all. most of these points are very valid and mirror why I believe Apple did raise the base model prices accross the board. They did the same with the mac lineup as well. I believe there's an expectation of slowdown of growth in actual units, and to meet specific financial goals and considerations, to offset less volume, the price has to increase.

As evidenced by last quarter, there was no appreciable difference in volume from the same period last year. However, revenues were record setting for this quarter. This can only be achieved via increased pricing, and diversification into other segments. The first one is clearly evidenced by higher prices. The second one is starting to show some traction by a decent jump in their services sector.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Well, the Q3 results are out and based on what I've read and heard yesterday, my opinion is that this survey is highly flawed.

The CIRP data shows the 8plus outselling the X in the US by a wide margin (24% vs 17% on the chart).

Yesterday, Tim Cook reported that the X was the best selling iPhone for the entire quarter (once again). Sure, this is worldwide numbers and the CIRP data is US-only, but I can't imagine that the numbers would differ that wildly.

Interesting nugget from yesterday's conference call. Tim did not use the phrase that "the iPhone X has been the best selling iPhone model for each and every week that it has been available". So either another model slipped in there to win week or two (or more), or he got tired of that phrase. Unfortunately, none of the analysts on the call asked him about that.
[doublepost=1533127728][/doublepost]
While true, highly diversified companies aren't immune to all of their diversity going to crap at the same time. Look at GE.

Personally, I feel that AAPL is undervalued and has been for years. The stock is currently trading at P/E of 18. The last several years it's been in the 14 to 15 range. GOOG trades in the 50's and they're even less diversified than AAPL (all of their eggs are in the advertising basket). The difference between these two companies is that GOOG publicly touts all of their future ideas when it's still in infancy. This gives the perception that they have markets to dominate in the future.

Apple, on the other hand, hardly ever talks about future new product or projects. And the market punishes the stock because of it. Personally, I think AAPL should be trading at a P/E of about 25, which would be about a 40% higher stock price.

NOTE - all P/E's discussed above are trailling P/E.

I think it’s safe to assume the 8 Plus outsold the X some weeks. Most of the X buyers are the type who would buy in Q1 or Q2 at least; by Q3 and certainly Q4 quite a few potential customers would rather wait until September for the newer model.

Yes no doubt Apple is undervalued; Apple sure thinks so anyway, as evidenced by the continuing buyback program—even at current prices. No one’s in a better position to know what the future might bring wrt Apple’s future earnings growth than is Apple themselves, and they’re all in.

 

[StyxMaker]

I'm learning a great deal from these pro graphics creators. Today's lesson: If you randomly assign colors in a graph used to compare things that tend to come in pairs, it will make the data more difficult to grasp.

6 - bluish, 6S Plus - orangish
7 - purplish, 7 Plus - bluish
8 - orangish, 8 Plus - bluish

And be kind to us red/green colorblind men with your color selections.