Samsung Reclaims Title of World's Largest Smartphone Maker As It Recovers From Galaxy Note7

[Cloudkicker]

Apple sell four different phones. Samsung probably sell 40 different phones. Of course they're going to take up most of the market share.

lol Doesn't Apple sell something like, 16 versions of iPads? Same boat, different shape.
[doublepost=1491965858][/doublepost]

Looks like the main winner here is Google android OS with up to 80% plus or minus market share.
If so that is incredible.
Would like to know what Google charge for their OS, I seem to remember Symbian and a figure of £5.00 per device to licence the software.

⬆ This is the main take away. If Apple doesn't want to licence their 2 OSs, they will stay in perpetual single digits.

Tesla can't fault their market share just because everyone else uses a gasoline driven motor. If you want to be "different" or "elite".
[doublepost=1491966177][/doublepost]

I don't know what you're smoking, but Touch ID has worked flawlessly for me. And although I'd like to see more vendors adopting apple pay, where it is supported, it works also flawlessly. Stop exaggerating reality.

Now who's exaggerating? Just because it's worked flawlessly for you (I question your claim not even 1 misfire ever!) doesn't mean others can't have problems... from both users & merchant's end. If it's one time, a few times every so often, it is a possibility it has occured.

"Sorry, Apple Pay down." hand written signs @ cashiers.

 

[I7guy]

lol Doesn't Apple sell something like, 16 versions of iPads? Same boat, different shape.
[doublepost=1491965858][/doublepost]

⬆ This is the main take away. If Apple doesn't want to licence their 2 OSs, they will stay in perpetual single digits.

Tesla can't fault their market share just because everyone else uses a gasoline driven motor. If you want to be "different" or "elite".
[doublepost=1491966177][/doublepost]

Now who's exaggerating? Just because it's worked flawlessly for you (I question your claim not even 1 misfire ever!) doesn't mean others can't have problems... from both users & merchant's end. If it's one time, a few times every so often, it is a possibility it has occured.

"Sorry, Apple Pay down." hand written signs @ cashiers.

Apple doesn't care about marketshare, according to them. They can stay in the single digits and by every metric it's working out for them.

 

[Skoal]

Let's see....
Swift, new file system, Metal, some smarter OS features, improving services, making a kick ass music service (bias but dang I love the integration), etc. Also, it seems like a lot of people who actually own the MacBook Pro are liking it. Let's be honest with ourselves, Apple is doing a lot. Just focusing on other things and I for one would rather they modernize things that will make it easier to work with them than make a moderately better phone with only a screen improvement.

And 99.9% of business runs just fine without a new MacPro.

 

[Skoal]

Why in the world would they sell a phone at a loss?
[doublepost=1491923624][/doublepost]
And the vast majority of Samsung customers didn't have any device that spontaneously combusted. It was only a few total that did.

So it was only 3 Samsung phones total that combusted?

 

[Hady_5s]

No doubt, Samsung is the best brand ever.

Making tons of phones with awesome stuff low priced/high priced(flashship)

Unlike apple, just a name and same features and look are the same


I tell u a joke, apple just made a red colored phone lol

 

[deckard666]

No doubt, Samsung is the best brand ever.

Making tons of phones with awesome stuff low priced/high priced(flashship)

Unlike apple, just a name and same features and look are the same


I tell u a joke, apple just made a red colored phone lol

If they're so good how come they can't ship with a flagship feature enabled, I'm looking at you Bixby...

 

[Abazigal]

The company that sells less and takes 90% of the profit is taking too much of your money. Of course you need to make profit for future investments. But overprice it for too long and your customers shop elsewhere. I don't like the samsung company culture, it's too aggressive and isn't ashamed in stealing other good ideas. But on the other hand, there products are competitive priced and they offer value for money. That's a thing Apple forgot by milking their customers for way too long.

You aren't the first person to tell me that I am overpaying for my iPhone. Suffice to say, value is what I get out of my products, which isn't entirely predicated on price. And I can tell you that I am getting plenty of value out of my iPhone despite its comparatively higher price.

The logic is simple. My Apple products may have cost me more upfront, but they have since more than paid for themselves in the form of improved productivity and fewer problems overall. That in itself is value for me, and something I don't think I am overpaying for in an iPhone.

 

[Abazigal]

It's also important to remember that money isn't everything - not in life, not even in business.

Profits isn't everything.

Not making profits isn't anything.

 

[JaySoul]

How are three random letters, S, A and J clear definition? They tell me nothing about those products.

Well, the price and specifications tell you, surely. What does 'iPhone SE' actually tell you?

S - Premium range. (S8 Mini, S8, S8 Plus)

A - Upper mid-range. (A3, A5, A7, A9)

J - Entry-mid range. (J3, J5, J7)

Note - Premium/productivity. (Note 8).

There you go. 11 phones. That's not massively hard to comprehend, and there is pretty much something for everyone (I think the 'A' series has become their biggest seller globally).

The problem is the having multiple variants for different markets, multiple configurations (e.g. A9 and then A9 Pro too, but then THAT can vary etc etc). Then you get a random 'E' phone, and random 'Y' Phone, the 'On' range(?!?!), 'C' (for China), etc etc. (Let's not mention their ultra-confusing tablet range for now!)

If they kept that clearly defined range of S, A, J and Note, it would benefit their business, I'm sure. Plus help with software updates.

 

[Hady_5s]

If they're so good how come they can't ship with a flagship feature enabled, I'm looking at you Bixby...

No more creativity the same look of iphone. The low priced phone in Samsung has every feature in iphone as well as accessibilities. Why are yoi trying to hide the truth buddy

 

[I7guy]

The company that sells less and takes 90% of the profit is taking too much of your money. Of course you need to make profit for future investments. But overprice it for too long and your customers shop elsewhere. I don't like the samsung company culture, it's too aggressive and isn't ashamed in stealing other good ideas. But on the other hand, there products are competitive priced and they offer value for money. That's a thing Apple forgot by milking their customers for way too long.
[doublepost=1491926520][/doublepost]
I totally agree on you with that. If it had an Apple badge on the back everyone would praise it to heaven

Apple company financials seem to disagree about the milking the customers part.

 

[deckard666]

No more creativity the same look of iphone. The low priced phone in Samsung has every feature in iphone as well as accessibilities. Why are yoi trying to hide the truth buddy

The truth ? Are we talking about some almighty biblical paradigm shifting truth here or just semantics whilst I while away 5 mins at the bus stop ? This place should get a grip, Apple and Samsung et al are just flotsam.

 

[maflynn]

Not making profits isn't anything.

Actually corporations (Apple/Samsung/etc) are in the business to make profits and if they're not their owners start getting angry.

While companies can use a loss leader to grow marketshare, at some point they need to turn a profit.

 

[kazmac]

I tried Android and it wasn't for me, but it is for millions of people. Whatever works for folks, works for me.

 

[Carnegie]

Just remember:

Profit is just Revenue minus Costs

So, for a company to say have, 40% profit margin, it means that after all expenses a company might have, 40% of what you pay for the device is pure profit.

Example Numbers for simplicity:

Two phones. Both cost $1,000

Phone A: Combined costs of business come to $500 / device. with $500 profit, the company has a 50% Profit margin
Phone B: Combine costs of business come to $800 / device. With $200 Profit, the company has a 20% profit margin.

Based on these two numbers, which phone sounds like the better value to you as the consumer? (I know, it's not as cut and dry, But from a purely "business" standpoint, it's just evidence why repeating the "Biggest profits in the industry" doesn't prove anything about quality, components, or well, ANything regarding the hardware.

it only shows that the business practices of the companeis are different, and they are fine with different percentage of profit margins. Because at the end of the day, if both companies have all their current costs covered, AND have more than enough money for future budgeting costs and growth, than how much actual pure profit is meaningless to anyone but the investors.

Since you're referring to pure profit (rather than, e.g., gross profit), I'd point out that it doesn't necessarily work like that. Often a significant portion of the costs aren't incurred on a per-device basis. So, e.g., the more devices you sell the less cost there are per device, and that's true even without taking into account production and sourcing efficiencies that come from greater scale. I'm referring largely to R&D and SG&A expenses.

Apple no doubt realizes good gross margins on its iPhones. But so do some of its competitors when it comes to the comparable products that they sell - i.e., premium smartphones. That's not where most of the separation between Apple and others comes from when it comes to their relative profitability.

The separation also comes from two general dynamics: (1) Apple sells more premium smartphones, those for which it (as well as its competitors) realize high gross margins and (2) Apple's operational efficiency. If Samsung sold as many high-end smartphones as Apple does, and if it was as efficient as Apple was operational (e.g., didn't have to spend as much on marketing relative to revenue), then it could make as much profit as Apple does.

Company-wide, Samsung's gross margins are about the same as Apple's are (though that's not the case when it comes to smartphones in particular largely because Samsung sells so many less-than-premium smartphones on which in realizes smaller gross margins). But whereas most of Apple's gross profit falls to the (pre-tax) bottom line because it spends considerably less on operational expenses, most of Samsung's gross profit gets eaten up by such operational expenses.

For its FY2016, Samsung's company-wide gross margin was over 40%. But 26% of its revenues (or 64% of its gross profit) went to SG&A and R&D. So its operating margin was only 14.5%. Apple's company-wide gross margin for its FY2016 was just over 39%. But it only spent 11% of its revenues (or 29% of its gross profit) on SG&A and R&D. That left it with an operating margin of 27.8%. That's where much of the difference is - operating expenses, not cost of goods or gross margins (on comparable products). A similar comparison, though with somewhat different numbers, holds when it comes to their (premium) smartphone businesses in particular.

Part of Apple's greater operational efficiency comes from the greater leverage that its greater sales of premium products exert on its operating expenses. Part of it comes from the way the company is structured and run.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

Awesome. Stuff like this just pushes Apple to be better.

Agreed. Nice to see Samsung back on their feet. The ball is in Apple's court now.

 

[ktecac]

Be careful out there guys. All those Samsungs could catch fire any minute.

 

[niceandeasy]

No doubt, Samsung is the best brand ever.

Overall that's an interesting argument. They're in the Philips / Siemens space of making pretty much every form of electronics out there. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

[Radon87000]

Apple company financials seem to disagree about the milking the customers part.

On the contrary their financials prove they milk their customers

 

[deckard666]

On the contrary their financials prove they milk their customers

Or make the best products as if they weren't then the customers wouldn't pay the high prices for them.... If I could choose I'd rather be the most profitable rather than the largest...

 

[I7guy]

On the contrary their financials prove they milk their customers

That's all fine and dandy, their customers, including you allow it to happen by purchasing their products.

 

[LordVic]

Since you're referring to pure profit (rather than, e.g., gross profit), I'd point out that it doesn't necessarily work like that. Often a significant portion of the costs aren't incurred on a per-device basis. So, e.g., the more devices you sell the less cost there are per device, and that's true even without taking into account production and sourcing efficiencies that come from greater scale. I'm referring largely to R&D and SG&A expenses.

Apple no doubt realizes good gross margins on its iPhones. But so do some of its competitors when it comes to the comparable products that they sell - i.e., premium smartphones. That's not where most of the separation between Apple and others comes from when it comes to their relative profitability.

The separation also comes from two general dynamics: (1) Apple sells more premium smartphones, those for which it (as well as its competitors) realize high gross margins and (2) Apple's operational efficiency. If Samsung sold as many high-end smartphones as Apple does, and if it was as efficient as Apple was operational (e.g., didn't have to spend as much on marketing relative to revenue), then it could make as much profit as Apple does.

Company-wide, Samsung's gross margins are about the same as Apple's are (though that's not the case when it comes to smartphones in particular largely because Samsung sells so many less-than-premium smartphones on which in realizes smaller gross margins). But whereas most of Apple's gross profit falls to the (pre-tax) bottom line because it spends considerably less on operational expenses, most of Samsung's gross profit gets eaten up by such operational expenses.

For its FY2016, Samsung's company-wide gross margin was over 40%. But 26% of its revenues (or 64% of its gross profit) went to SG&A and R&D. So its operating margin was only 14.5%. Apple's company-wide gross margin for its FY2016 was just over 39%. But it only spent 11% of its revenues (or 29% of its gross profit) on SG&A and R&D. That left it with an operating margin of 27.8%. That's where much of the difference is - operating expenses, not cost of goods or gross margins (on comparable products). A similar comparison, though with somewhat different numbers, holds when it comes to their (premium) smartphone businesses in particular.

Part of Apple's greater operational efficiency comes from the greater leverage that its greater sales of premium products exert on its operating expenses. Part of it comes from the way the company is structured and run.

Yes, Want everyone else to read your response. I was keeping it really simple and you went on into more depth.

i am not passing judgement here on either Apple or Samsung, only that they are operating with different business methodologies and different expense break downs.

This means that comparing profits doesn't really prove what many think it does (That one companies products are better than the others).

I also was just stating, originally, which spurred this conversation, that Profits are not the sole and only motivator of business. And shouldn't be. it's important, but there are far FAR greater factors than simply "how much profit". and believing that profit is the only important thing to operating a business, is narrow minded, and a fairly un-intelligent way of looking at operating a business.
[doublepost=1492018563][/doublepost]

Or make the best products as if they weren't then the customers wouldn't pay the high prices for them.... If I could choose I'd rather be the most profitable rather than the largest...

This isn't to state anything about the quality of iPhones (They're a high end, top quality phone IMHO),

But popularity and profits don't prove that. EG: Nobody would ever say that Backstreet boys are the best most talented musicians in the world. Yet they frequently topped the charts, sold out concerts and earned millions from fans.

Popularity doesn't prove quality.

 

[Radon87000]

Or make the best products as if they weren't then the customers wouldn't pay the high prices for them.... If I could choose I'd rather be the most profitable rather than the largest...

That's exactly what I mean by milking. You make a great first gen product. Hook in the customers and then remain stagnant as the same rehashed product year after year brings in the dough.

Nothing new as this happens with movies and games frequently.

 

[Radon87000]

That's all fine and dandy, their customers, including you allow it to happen by purchasing their products.

So everyone buying Volkswagen cars support them faking their pollution test

 

[I7guy]

So everyone buying Volkswagen cars support them faking their pollution test

The analogy has no relevance to your original comment, but whatever...