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.
iPhone X Responsible for 35% of Total Worldwide Phone Profits in Q4 2017
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You don't understand what profit share (or this graph) means.
In any case, sure the the iPhone X could have been $749 but Apple would have lost money on them. Apple has a net profit margin of about 21%. This is across all products and services, after tax, operating costs, etc. That means for Apple to remain profitable, the iPhone X would need to sell for a minimum of $790. That's essentially the break-even point. We don't know the net profit margin for the iPhone X (it could be higher or lower than Apple's 21% overall) but your call for a $750 iPhone X is exactly why Apple has all smartphone profits - other companies (except Samsung) lose money on all their phones. That's not a great business model.
[doublepost=1524001407][/doublepost]
...they'd need to look elsewhere. These data could also be proof all other phones (other than Samsung's flagship ones) are underpriced.
The point went right over your head.
It was directed at all of the concern trolls who "worry" about Apple's overall smartphone market share.
The graph is what utter market domination looks like.
And no, selling crap devices at a loss does not count for domination game.
And no, selling crap devices at a loss does not count for domination game.
These are numbers for the iPhone X for two months only right after the initial launch. You can't make any credible statement about sales after January 1 one way or the other based on this. For six or seven weeks after launch the iPhone X was in short supply and was selling as fast as Apple could make them; however, by the middle of December the wait time had dropped to a matter of two or three days and many Apple stores had them in stock for immediate delivery. No credible conclusion can be made from those facts either, but it is certainly possible the iPhone X may have sold extremely well for two months as pent-up demand was satiated and then sold worse than expected after Christmas. It is just as supported a position as the one that says the iPhone X is still selling well above expectations and rumors of supply cuts are nothing more than analysts artificially driving the stock price down.
We'll know more in a couple of weeks when Apple releases Q2 results and Q3 estimates.
Selling price accounts for most of the difference in the share of total profit dollars.
iPhone 8, $700. 20% profit gives $140
iPhone X, $1000. 20% profit is $200
The iPhone X makes Apple 43% more profit, even if they sell in identical quantities.
It’s $200 and $300 respectively. That is not an insignificant difference to a lot of people
And still the iPhone X is being discontinued, no Gold version, no RED.
This is what I call JUNK SCIENCE! Actions speak louder than words. Timmy can keep saying the iPhone was the most successful iPhone launch in Apple history and junk science analysis like this one can keep validating his nonsense. I'm sure they made the most profit per sale off this phone than any iPhone, but that's junk science. It doesn't mean the money they put into the product resulted in the desired number of sales for the expected return on investment.
In reality, the iPhone X is being discontinued as we speak! The combination of no Touch ID and gimmickry + a ridiculously high price doomed the product. It simply didn't meet expectations.
Apple would never admit that iPhone 7 & 8 outsold the iPhone X.
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. IT FAILED, ITS DISCONTINUED. GET OVER IT.
This is what I call JUNK SCIENCE! Actions speak louder than words. Timmy can keep saying the iPhone was the most successful iPhone launch in Apple history and junk science analysis like this one can keep validating his nonsense. I'm sure they made the most profit per sale off this phone than any iPhone, but that's junk science. It doesn't mean the money they put into the product resulted in the desired number of sales for the expected return on investment.
In reality, the iPhone X is being discontinued as we speak! The combination of no Touch ID and gimmickry + a ridiculously high price doomed the product. It simply didn't meet expectations.
Apple would never admit that iPhone 7 & 8 outsold the iPhone X.
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. IT FAILED, ITS DISCONTINUED. GET OVER IT.
with the amount of money in the bank that Apple is hoarding and not returning to shareholders or paying tax in the country it was earned in, this is just pure greed.
[doublepost=1524002534][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1524002534][/doublepost]
yup, massively overpriced.
Same thing happens every year with laptops, computer graphics cards, other brands of cell phones (OnePlus just a quick example)...take your pick. Products get discontinued / EOL status for new models all the time, doesn't mean they aren't successful.
Just because one device got the largest share of the profit pie because it was sold at a premium is a skewed stat. It is also meaningless when overall smart phone sales are down. The X has sold far less than expectation, less than previous models. Apple has not increased it's user marketshare. All they did was sell a high priced phone to diehards to squeeze more money out of a shrinking market rather than expand it. They're not getting new people into the ecosystem, hell they're not even convincing enough aleady there to upgrade since the most used models is the 6 & 6s. The 7 has sold less and the new 8 even fewer having been crunched by the X at the top end & the more affordable 7 & 6s with the SE at the bottom. A tarted up 5 year old model is the best they can offer at an entry level while an upcoming LCD "X" is totuted as "affordable" at $800 with less features than an 8+ at the same price now??
What in that article says anything about the “massive markup” you’re claiming? An article from a single market (US) mixing sales of a device available for only 2 months (X) vs those available since launch (8/8P)?
And how do you reconcile those “rumors” with Apples actual data from their earnings call (with ASP near $800)? You can’t get that kind of ASP unless the X was the #1 selling device.
Pontiac sold 100.000 Azteks while Ferrari only sold less than ten thousand F430, its top selling car, in the same years.
This is how the Android-Apple comparison feels right now.
This is how the Android-Apple comparison feels right now.
Absolutely. It’s not insignificant to billions of people.
But Apple’s target market is a couple hundred million people. Consumers with a fair amount of disposable cash. To tens of millions, $300 upfront, or $25/month, isn’t a big deal. Maybe it’s just a choice to spend $575/month eating out, instead of $600.
It’s all about how an individual chooses to spend his or her discretionary cash. I still have my 6S, others are in the annual upgrade plan.
Don’t listen to this guy, it’s common for him to come here and bash apple, as a couple others here do.
Meanwhile - many of us love our X’s to death. Pretty awesome for a first generation design.
I would guess that the SE probably sells pretty well but their profit margin (even in terms of % of price) is much lower than all other phones. Apparently is almost 1/2 the cost of the next cheapest phone ($650?) So maybe the most bang for the buck
Only when Apple is winning. Typical Apple; hence no Mac OS single digit penetration after 3+ decades. Also major b.s. not to break down sales by device. What's super-secretive Apple afraid of?
Also, iOS vs. Android, it's still 86% Android, 14% iOS.
Imagine if Samsungs didn't break down their high-end phone sales with their $110 my-first-phone • old-people • burner-phone & said: "The Galaxy 9 is spectular in sales!"
[doublepost=1524004526][/doublepost]
Why Rolex is better than Apple Watch. lol
No, the X priced right.
Again, it's not for everybody, and is why Apple has multiple phones at different price points and features available. GPMs are likely in the high 30% range as, other Apple products. Nothing unusual about that.
As an aside, the Fortune 200 company I last worked for sought to attain 80% GPM. If I proposed a new product that could not meet or at least get very close to that, it would not get approved to go forward. Again, not unusual.
You can always leave the Apple ecosystem if it is too much to bear. And whether it is bid or MSRP, the customer decides and pays. Maybe another analogy would be if you could find a job at a new workplace that increases your income by 20%, but doesn’t increase your workload at all. Would anyone turn it down if all other factors were equal? Apple decided to make a premium tiered phone, and they essentially priced it to make more money per unit and sell it to fewer people, as opposed to making it cheaper to sell it to more people. Apple has always priced themselves in the top tier. They never made a netbook. They don’t infect their OS with ads and heavy tracking. They count on selling hardware and for-pay services to make money.
Another possibility is that if they manage to sell a high margin device well, then maybe they can afford to offset a low-margin product. Base iPad is cheap now.
I was speaking in absolute profit per unit, not as a percent. However, even if you compare by percent, it shows that the X has a big markup. If you assume identical quantities sold and that Apple had a profit of 20% on the 8 (not an unreasonable assumption), then the iPhone X would've had to give Apple a profit of $256 per unit to come out with the article numbers of 19.1% for the 8 and 35% for the X. This means Apple's profit per unit would've been 25.6%, which goes back to showing that Apple likely priced the margins on the X much higher than previous iPhones.
Like I already said, there's two ways to make a lot of profit, volume or markup. If it's not volume, then it's markup by default. And let's not forget that the America's are Apple's largest market, and the U.S. is probably the market willing to spend the most money as well.
Considering that the base iPhone 8 is $700 and the base iPhone 8+ is $800, an ASP of $800 isn't that impressive on the X. In fact if you assume all three models sold in equal volumes, the ASP should've been $833.