Tim Cook on Defending Marketshare, Product Pipeline 'Chock Full', Apple TV Growth

[gnasher729]

+1. The whole point of a company is to make profit

1. Companies are run by people. The goal of those people is quite often not making the biggest possible profit for the company.

2. In the computer business, and in many other businesses, it has been shown that making decisions solely looking at profit will damage the business in the long term. If you set the company goal "we want to make as much profit as possible" and act on it, it will end in tears. Since the first iMac, Apple has consistently worked to give customers the best possible products, built and sold with decent profit. And trying to achieve this goal, not the search for profit, has made Apple the most profitable company in the world, with their last quarter being the most profitable ever.

if you think that a macs build quality is superior, then you need your head examined, its made from the same parts, sourced at the same locations as everyone else

Try the 15" Retina MacBook Pro. Just try it. Then go back to whatever laptop you are using that is made from the same parts, sourced at the same locations, and whenever you use it, you feel the pain in your heart.

 

[gnasher729]

Could it be that the Retinas are just too expensive in this current economy?

I remember people saying "in this current economy" in 2002 and ever since. Few people have enough cash to buy a Retina MBP on a whim. Most people have enough money to buy one if they decide that purchase has priority over other purchases.

Being interested in revenue for the sake of revenue is not a bad thing. In fact, it's a smart thing. I wish Tim Cook would've been honest and said something like this:

"We made a ********* of cash last quarter, we already had a ********* of cash in the bank, and our goal for next quarter is to release some really good stuff so we have even more cash in the bank the next time we report back to you. We're interested in making really good products; but we're only going to focus on the products that increase revenue. Revenue keeps the lights on, devs employed, and stockholders happy. So yes, in case you were wondering, we really ARE interested in revenue for the sake of revenue."

So how much more revenue could Apple make by dropping the price of all their devices to the point where they make no profit? I think Apple could easily double their revenue if they were willing to lose money. Not that it would make any sense.

What you don't get (and many businesses, and many analysts don't get), is that Apple's strategy for the last 12 years, creating great products that people want to buy and selling them at a good profit, just works. Here's an example what doesn't work: A company like Acer, trying at all cost to increase revenue, by buying companies like Gateway, eMachines, and one or two others. And forgetting that there's no point in having revenue when you make no money. And then suddenly it goes all sour and you are in trouble, like Acer is right now.

 

[gnasher729]

Jony Ive has said the same thing. Make great products, run your business well and the money will come. I doubt when Apple's designers are working on new products they're thinking about how much money it's going to make the company.

Imagine Jony designing the iPad, and at every design decision he asked himself "what will make Apple more money"? Somehow I don't think you get a good product, or even an almost acceptable product, with that kind of thinking.

 

[throAU]

And yet iOS is stagnating.

Stangating in the same way that cars have had 4 wheels and internal combustion for the past 100 years - yet they still sell?

The core features for a smartphone are done.

Widgets and a lot of the additional android stuff, to many people is just window dressing, non-essential, non-core features.

I'm sure someone will argue that point that "blah feature is essential!" but the market share numbers indicate that no, to many people it isn't.

 

[The Phazer]

Stangating in the same way that cars have had 4 wheels and internal combustion for the past 100 years - yet they still sell?

The core features for a smartphone are done.

Widgets and a lot of the additional android stuff, to many people is just window dressing, non-essential, non-core features.

I'm sure someone will argue that point that "blah feature is essential!" but the market share numbers indicate that no, to many people it isn't.

Market share numbers indicate they are, as iOS's share collapses and Android's share skyrockets.

Android is changing and improving very rapidly still. iOS is fundamentally broken in many areas, and going backwards.

 

[mde24]

+1. The whole point of a company is to make profit

Exactly, but hardly confusing. There is a very important difference between revenue (total cash in) and earnings/profit (total cash in - total cash out). OK, this is a gross simplification but something important to bear in mind.

On top of the cash in/cash out calculation on current operations, the value of assets needs to be taken into consideration, with depreciation/amortisation affecting the profit (but not the revenue).

Finally, Apple has a very important intangible asset that is not really reportable in financial reports, and that is its brand. Apple could easily increase profit in any one quarter - or even year - by selling cheaper but less good Apple-branded gear. But it wouldn't be worth it if it reduces the value of the brand and thus the ASP of future Apple products.

As an Apple stock holder, I am very happy with the way the company is going apart from the bad publicity surrounding Maps being released before it was ready. Apple has always been severely undervalued apart from a few months this summer when it was slightly undervalued - it looks like we're returning to the old days of severely undervalued. I bought my first tranche of Apple stock a little under 4 years ago at $110 (Apple's cash pile alone is now worth over $140 per share) and will be buying more when the current bear run bottoms out.

 

[driceman]

Are people calling this a lie because they don't think Apple makes the best products they can or because they think Apple's primary motivation is money not making great products?

I called it a lie because for Cook to say that they have no interest in revenue and profit is, well, a lie. I do think they make the best products they can, at least the majority of the time.

----------

They want to make profit, which requires revenue, not revenue for it's own sake.

Okay, profit. But you get my point.

 

[SeanR1]

The rumor was confirmed to be false.

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/ba...iphone/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Where there's smoke there's usually fire.

 

[1Alec1]

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/ba...iphone/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Where there's smoke there's usually fire.

Not a reputable source. And I think the rumor was announced then confirmed false then announced again then re-confirmed false, so you can't really trust anything.

 

[SeanR1]

Not a reputable source. And I think the rumor was announced then confirmed false then announced again then re-confirmed false, so you can't really trust anything.

Very true. Time will tell as always.

 

[CalgaryTechGuy]

There needs to be some better reading comprehension by people. Let me help you. First, Revenue is not the same as Profit. Apple has always focused on profit not revenue. Second, it was revenue for revenue's sake. This means that if Apple could make more revenue by making a crappy product than by making a quality product they would not do it. And they have demonstrated repeatedly that they aren't out for just revenue, or just market share.

Exactly.

You know the funny thing is, if you make a great product, making a profit is much easier.

----------

Exactly, but hardly confusing. There is a very important difference between revenue (total cash in) and earnings/profit (total cash in - total cash out). OK, this is a gross simplification but something important to bear in mind.

On top of the cash in/cash out calculation on current operations, the value of assets needs to be taken into consideration, with depreciation/amortisation affecting the profit (but not the revenue).

Finally, Apple has a very important intangible asset that is not really reportable in financial reports, and that is its brand. Apple could easily increase profit in any one quarter - or even year - by selling cheaper but less good Apple-branded gear. But it wouldn't be worth it if it reduces the value of the brand and thus the ASP of future Apple products.

As an Apple stock holder, I am very happy with the way the company is going apart from the bad publicity surrounding Maps being released before it was ready. Apple has always been severely undervalued apart from a few months this summer when it was slightly undervalued - it looks like we're returning to the old days of severely undervalued. I bought my first tranche of Apple stock a little under 4 years ago at $110 (Apple's cash pile alone is now worth over $140 per share) and will be buying more when the current bear run bottoms out.

And this is the problem with the stock market, the average investor doesn't know the difference between revenue and earnings.

 

[Technarchy]

Wrong. The point of a company is to create something of value for customers in exchange for money. Making profit is a result of getting that right.

Tim is absolutely right to assert that it is about making the best products as that is the purpose of the company. The profit is the result they want to obtain from doing that right.

What, it's not better to be like HP and Dell and chase every penny and devalue your brand to the point of comedy?

It's not just about grabbing share and revenue. Companies that believe that tend to make a lot of crap with occasional quality.

I'd rather Apple stick to the limited product line, limited release schedule where the goal is good products are priority one.

 

[vvswarup]

1. Companies are run by people. The goal of those people is quite often not making the biggest possible profit for the company.

2. In the computer business, and in many other businesses, it has been shown that making decisions solely looking at profit will damage the business in the long term. If you set the company goal "we want to make as much profit as possible" and act on it, it will end in tears. Since the first iMac, Apple has consistently worked to give customers the best possible products, built and sold with decent profit. And trying to achieve this goal, not the search for profit, has made Apple the most profitable company in the world, with their last quarter being the most profitable ever.




Try the 15" Retina MacBook Pro. Just try it. Then go back to whatever laptop you are using that is made from the same parts, sourced at the same locations, and whenever you use it, you feel the pain in your heart.

Your post is partially correct. There are two ways of making a profit. One way is to just focus on costs. Essentially, that involves milking an existing revenue stream for profit. That will most certainly lead to unfavorable results.

The other way is to look for ways to both grow revenue and cut costs.

Apple aims to make a profit as any business should, except that they don't just focus on cost-cutting. They focus on growing revenue and cutting costs.

----------

Exactly.

You know the funny thing is, if you make a great product, making a profit is much easier.

----------



And this is the problem with the stock market, the average investor doesn't know the difference between revenue and earnings.

Tell me about it. I posted on a different thread about this very issue. There are many articles talking about how Android is beating Apple, and that has probably been a factor in the declining stock price.

But when one looks at the hard numbers, a different picture emerges. What should be of paramount importance to an investor is the ability of a company's business model/strategy to generate cash flow.

IMO, Apple's iOS strategy demonstrates greater cash-flow generating potential than Google's Android strategy.

Many Wall Street analysts are saying Apple needs to introduce a low-cost iPhone in order to take on Android better, particularly in China. Their argument is that Apple ought to grow their market share in this region.

It's likely that the stock price would be much higher than it is today if Apple were to do this. But frankly, these Wall Street analysts' armchair CEO behavior fails to take into account the fact that Apple will earn less profit per phone with this "cheaper iPhone" even though they'll have more market share. Lower profit impairs the potential of Apple's product lines to generate cash.

Disclosure: I am long Apple.

 

[twoodcc]

hopefully they start releasing new stuff soon

 

[SeanR1]

Not a reputable source. And I think the rumor was announced then confirmed false then announced again then re-confirmed false, so you can't really trust anything.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/0...&utm_campaign=Feed:+iphonedlb+(iDownloadBlog)

Looking closer.