4 ms·

Doesn't Samsung produce a much vaster chain of models, which also contain very cheap versions which are obviously more affordable than Apple's? If that's the ca

Doesn't Samsung produce a much vaster chain of models, which also contain very cheap versions which are obviously more affordable than Apple's? If that's the case, I think this statistic might be a little skewed, because it's pretty obvious that you'll end up with a bigger market share if you sell 10 different flavors of the same thing compared to a company which only sells one.

adventured 13y ago
I think this is such a news story, because for a long time it was touted that while Apple was rapidly losing market share, they still took home the radical majority of industry profit. That is no longer the case. And given Apple's growth has flat lined, they're losing market share in China, and their margins are under attack by good-enough cheap Android phones, it is very likely their profitability will continue to struggle against prior expectations.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  Given that Apple has completely saturated the high-end phone market in China, it makes sense that their market share isn't growing anymore. China has a lot of poor farmers upgrading their feature phones to Huawei's. Trust me, the China markets for cheap Android phones and iPhones are completely disjoint. The biggest competitor iPhone has in the high end market seems to be...weirdly enough, the Galaxy Note.
yulaow 13y ago
Well that's a fault of apple, not of samsung. Infact there are chance that in the near future apple releases a cheap iphone version (but how much cheap considering that the iphone is one of the phone with the higher price on the market?)
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  Maybe Apple doesn't want to go there (yet). Louis Vuitton doesn't necessary miss out on the mass market for bags. If they decided to do mass market bags tomorrow, it would be very painful and the market would be very confused. Samsung, on the other hand, is just a mid-quality brand, they can safely hit the low end without confusing consumers. Apple is run pretty decently; I'm sure they'll take advantage of opportunities as they see them. It might make sense for them to focus on high-end phones and invest in other non-phone products then to regain the "most profit on phones" crown.
amanne 13y ago
>because it's pretty obvious that you'll end up with a bigger market share if you sell 10 different flavors of the same thing compared to a company which only sells one. So Blackberry needs to make 20 different models and they can beat Samsung? That doesn't make much sense.
continuations 13y ago
That's like saying if Bentley produces as many models as Toyota it too will be as profitable.
Vaskerville 13y ago
Have they factored in how much Samsung spends on advertising? It's far more than Apple spends...
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  Assuming they are measuring profit correctly, then they would bother subtracting expenses from revenue. It is unclear if they count Samsung's component business in the profit calculations, including the components that Samsung sells to Apple for making iPhones.
zdw 13y ago
To use a car analogy, Apple is a premium car maker, similar to how Lexus is viewed in the USA. They make mid to high end products, at higher than average prices, with much less product variation. Lexus isn't selling trucks, for example. Compare this to say GM, which makes a very wide range of products in multiple market segments Lexus doesn't attempt to even exist it, and frequently at the same to much lower prices in the market segments that they have in common. So, with Apple, you basically have 3 device sizes to choose from, with or without WAN modems, at 4 incremental price points, all with fairly similar specs that tend towards the higher end. Samsung and other Android phone makers have tens to hundreds of devices that range the gamut from tiny to huge. Want a 6" phone/tablet with a stylus? Android has it. Want a head unit that goes in your car and runs Android? Sure. And with more choices * on average lower price points = more market penetration. I'd on a per-car, Lexus makes more than GM, and in the same way, on a per-device basis, Apple makes more than Samsung.
- corresation 13y ago
  To use a car analogy, Apple is a premium car maker, similar to how Lexus is viewed in the USA. Apple ships absolutely enormous volumes of devices to virtually every strata of the economy, selling the "premium" iPhone 5 (which is still owned by kids with burger-flipping jobs -- my jobless niece in a working-class family has one), to the last generation iPhone 4S discount device, to the even older generation iPhone 4 ultra-discount device. Then there's the incredible value iPod Touch that Samsung can't compete with. They may not offer dollar-store products, but they're more like the Old Navy of brands than any sort of elitist assumptions. They make good products and they stay away from the very low end (though they do still pitch a three year old device), but luxury comments aren't rationally supported. Worth noting that Samsung's smartphone ASP (average selling price) is just under $500. Apple's is currently $580. The narrative that Samsung made bank on waves on discount devices just aren't supported by economics, and the models are much closer than many seem to think.
  - CrazedGeek 13y ago
    > Then there's the incredible value iPod Touch that Samsung can't compete with. Not for a lack of trying: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-players http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-players
statictype 13y ago
I believe the news is about profits, not market share. Completely different thing (as many Apple-centric journalists like to point out). Apple has never been a dominant force in market share but it has been the profit leader for many years until, apparently, now.

adventured 13y ago

I think this is such a news story, because for a long time it was touted that while Apple was rapidly losing market share, they still took home the radical majority of industry profit. That is no longer the case. And given Apple's growth has flat lined, they're losing market share in China, and their margins are under attack by good-enough cheap Android phones, it is very likely their profitability will continue to struggle against prior expectations.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
Given that Apple has completely saturated the high-end phone market in China, it makes sense that their market share isn't growing anymore. China has a lot of poor farmers upgrading their feature phones to Huawei's. Trust me, the China markets for cheap Android phones and iPhones are completely disjoint. The biggest competitor iPhone has in the high end market seems to be...weirdly enough, the Galaxy Note.

yulaow 13y ago

Well that's a fault of apple, not of samsung. Infact there are chance that in the near future apple releases a cheap iphone version (but how much cheap considering that the iphone is one of the phone with the higher price on the market?)

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
Maybe Apple doesn't want to go there (yet). Louis Vuitton doesn't necessary miss out on the mass market for bags. If they decided to do mass market bags tomorrow, it would be very painful and the market would be very confused. Samsung, on the other hand, is just a mid-quality brand, they can safely hit the low end without confusing consumers. Apple is run pretty decently; I'm sure they'll take advantage of opportunities as they see them. It might make sense for them to focus on high-end phones and invest in other non-phone products then to regain the "most profit on phones" crown.

amanne 13y ago

>because it's pretty obvious that you'll end up with a bigger market share if you sell 10 different flavors of the same thing compared to a company which only sells one. So Blackberry needs to make 20 different models and they can beat Samsung? That doesn't make much sense.

continuations 13y ago

That's like saying if Bentley produces as many models as Toyota it too will be as profitable.

Vaskerville 13y ago

Have they factored in how much Samsung spends on advertising? It's far more than Apple spends...

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
Assuming they are measuring profit correctly, then they would bother subtracting expenses from revenue. It is unclear if they count Samsung's component business in the profit calculations, including the components that Samsung sells to Apple for making iPhones.

zdw 13y ago

To use a car analogy, Apple is a premium car maker, similar to how Lexus is viewed in the USA. They make mid to high end products, at higher than average prices, with much less product variation. Lexus isn't selling trucks, for example. Compare this to say GM, which makes a very wide range of products in multiple market segments Lexus doesn't attempt to even exist it, and frequently at the same to much lower prices in the market segments that they have in common. So, with Apple, you basically have 3 device sizes to choose from, with or without WAN modems, at 4 incremental price points, all with fairly similar specs that tend towards the higher end. Samsung and other Android phone makers have tens to hundreds of devices that range the gamut from tiny to huge. Want a 6" phone/tablet with a stylus? Android has it. Want a head unit that goes in your car and runs Android? Sure. And with more choices * on average lower price points = more market penetration. I'd on a per-car, Lexus makes more than GM, and in the same way, on a per-device basis, Apple makes more than Samsung.

corresation 13y ago
To use a car analogy, Apple is a premium car maker, similar to how Lexus is viewed in the USA. Apple ships absolutely enormous volumes of devices to virtually every strata of the economy, selling the "premium" iPhone 5 (which is still owned by kids with burger-flipping jobs -- my jobless niece in a working-class family has one), to the last generation iPhone 4S discount device, to the even older generation iPhone 4 ultra-discount device. Then there's the incredible value iPod Touch that Samsung can't compete with. They may not offer dollar-store products, but they're more like the Old Navy of brands than any sort of elitist assumptions. They make good products and they stay away from the very low end (though they do still pitch a three year old device), but luxury comments aren't rationally supported. Worth noting that Samsung's smartphone ASP (average selling price) is just under $500. Apple's is currently $580. The narrative that Samsung made bank on waves on discount devices just aren't supported by economics, and the models are much closer than many seem to think.
- CrazedGeek 13y ago
  > Then there's the incredible value iPod Touch that Samsung can't compete with. Not for a lack of trying: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-players http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-players

statictype 13y ago

I believe the news is about profits, not market share. Completely different thing (as many Apple-centric journalists like to point out). Apple has never been a dominant force in market share but it has been the profit leader for many years until, apparently, now.