Samsung's Goals for 2012: 'Beating Apple is #1 Priority'

[Chazz08]

Must be why Samsung rushed out their "smart"watch. Even though it was a terrible product, they just wanted to beat Apple. That's their number one priority, not customers and quality products.

 

[n-evo]

Stop with this propaganda. Everybody knows that Samsung now makes more profits than Apple. They might be making a little less profits than Apple in mobile in general but I believe in their profits in smartphones are actually higher than that of Apple (they are still behind in tablets). And even if Apple did make more profits so what? Samsung is a different animal. They reinvest a lot more than Apple. Their capital expenditures are order of magnitude higher, their R&D budget is way higher. They make sure they succeed not just today but also in the future.

Isn't that kinda logical since Samsung produces a lot more different products beyond smartphones, tablets and computers? Unlike Apple which focusses on a single core business.

 

[Rocketman]

And unlike some, I am not questioning the motives of others.

If motives are not responsible for posts that are so opposite fact, that leaves . . . .

 

[adnbek]

it will be interesting to see what it's like and how it compares to the Apple Store not that far away.

If I had to guess.... I'd say almost an exact copy.

 

[the-msa]

I follow all smartphones pretty close. School me. What phone is available under $500 unlocked that isn't using 2+ year old technology or isn't crap. And please don't say nexus phones. They too are subsidized heavily. Only difference is google subsidizes them instead of carriers.

why do you care if they are subsidized or not? you probably never cared that apple takes a 50% premium charge on their products did you.

either way, the moto g and x are rather decent phones for a decent price. and, well, nexus 5.

The point was that it's a subsidized phone. Google is eating hundreds on it. Its not the true cost of the phone. LG sure couldn't sell it for that price.

whats the true cost? apple isnt selling their products for the "real" price either. apple is having their customers eat on it.

 

[brendu]

why do you care if they are subsidized or not? you probably never cared that apple takes a 50% premium charge on their products did you.

either way, the moto g and x are rather decent phones for a decent price.



whats the true cost? apple isnt selling their products for the "real" price either. apple is having their customers eat on it.

What I meant by true cost is what the manufacturer charges for a phone. When you buy from google you are not buying from the manufacturer of the phone. When buying unsubsidized from a carrier you are usually paying what they paid for the phone so you are paying what the manufacturer charged or my "true price"

Also, the moto X which is barely a top tier phone is $499 unlocked which is right where I said the cutoff was earlier. The moto g is using older tech which also fits into what I said earlier. Having said that I think the moto g is absolutely the best value available for a smartphone. Anyone on a budget should consider it.

 

[adnbek]

CNN Money:

Image

It's called focus. I'd argue that Apple's R&D is spent more effectively than the others, when looking back at the last 15 years. Moving forward though, we'll see...

 

[ilmman]

It's called focus. I'd argue that Apple's R&D is spent more effectively than the others, when looking back at the last 15 years. Moving forward though, we'll see...

Agreed, it would be more interesting to see what figures are for each category of product they spend on since Samsung really has a huge variety of product..

 

[the-msa]

What I meant by true cost is what the manufacturer charges for a phone. When you buy from google you are not buying from the manufacturer of the phone. When buying unsubsidized from a carrier you are usually paying what they paid for the phone so you are paying what the manufacturer charged or my "true price"

Also, the moto X which is barely a top tier phone is $499 unlocked which is right where I said the cutoff was earlier. The moto g is using older tech which also fits into what I said earlier. Having said that I think the moto g is absolutely the best value available for a smartphone. Anyone on a budget should consider it.

well, where i'm from, its a 300€ phone when you avoid mainstream retailers like amazon, which is around 420 usd.

 

[brendu]

well, where i'm from, its a 300€ phone when you avoid mainstream retailers like amazon, which is around 420 usd.

Wow. That's a good deal. I like Motorola. I think they have been focused on the right things. I hope Lenovo keeps them on the track they have been on the past year.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Stop with this propaganda.

Follow your own advice.

 

[aPple nErd]

their problem is the whole carrier thing. i do not want a giant glaring verizon/att logo in my eye when using my phone...

 

[lilo777]

Follow your own advice.

You probably did not read the whole thread. Facts are not propaganda and I provided the facts that show that Apple is not much more profitable than Samsung anymore - not as a whole and not in the mobile domain. Stating the opposite is a lie and a propaganda.

 

[pubwvj]

Samsung should make "Let's survive to next year" be their number one goal.

 

[Taz Mangus]

You probably did not read the whole thread. Facts are not propaganda and I provided the facts that show that Apple is not much more profitable than Samsung anymore - not as a whole and not in the mobile domain. Stating the opposite is a lie and a propaganda.

More like you did not read the whole thread. Your assertion has already been debunked in this thread:

http://bgr.com/2014/03/18/apple-samsung-smartphone-profits-3/:

Apple was particularly dominant, as it generated around $133 billion in profits, or just under 62% of the total. Samsung trailed far behind but still generated a healthy $56 billion in profits, or around 26% of the total.

So by all means, keep moving the goal posts to make your posts look like the truth. After all that is what good propaganda is all about.

pro·pa·gan·da noun \ˌprä-pə-ˈgan-də, ˌprō-\
: ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc.

If you repeat *your* truth enough times even you will start to believe it. Try harder.

 

[dec.]

Samsung should make "Let's survive to next year" be their number one goal.

And posts like these make me understand why there are some regular forum members on here that don't seem to care about Apple as much as pointing out "funny" posts by others.

 

[AppleScruff1]

And posts like these make me understand why there are some regular forum members on here that don't seem to care about Apple as much as pointing out "funny" posts by others.

No way! No one here would do that.

 

[dec.]

No way! No one here would do that.

Everyone has their price

 

[MrX8503]

Honestly, no one should be surprised by any of these documents. Samsung wants to beat Apple and Apple is worried about Android. This is what you call healthy competition.

 

[brinary001]

Hahahaha! Someone feels a little threatened...

 

[henzpwnapple]

Apple's only real rival is itself - since the beginning.

 

[peterdevries]

CNN Money:

Image

If you would really REALLY know how innovation works, then you would know that these numbers don't mean anything.

 

[Jibbajabba]

But can we punish Samsung for trying to beat Apple when Samsung does it illegally?

This is not the same as Apple trying to beat Samsung, where they are doing it legally.

Yea I am sure Apple are saints.

 

[Beautyspin]

Ok tell me why they are not doing so great

There isn't a single unsubsidized phone that costs under $500 and isn't old technology or crap. Your argument only works because apple doesn't make ****** cheap phones. I'm glad they don't. I'll happily pay $600 for a phone that is this good. I buy my phones unlocked and I still buy the iPhone. Crazy right??!?

Ok tell me why they are not doing so great in countries there are no subsidies then?

 

[brendu]

Ok tell me why they are not doing so great in countries there are no subsidies then?

Because in those countries people buy cheap phones. They aren't buying galaxyS4 or Nokia 1020's either.