Apple Reports Second Quarter Results
apple.com
apple.com
Of course if they are pulling all that money in there has to be folks who would be willing to pull in just a bit less (in market economies) so it will be interesting to watch the response of folks like Google, Microsoft, and HP as they maneuver around in this space.
Songs will be sung of this time in technology :-)
Somebody can. But we're all just too busy looking and marvelling at Apple's astounding success to see that, if just enough insight and resources were given to the R&D departments at a bunch of different companies, similar results could be achieved elsewhere.
Apple was just like other companies 15 years ago. Worse, actually. They were failing in 1997. It was about to go under or be acquired. All Steve Jobs did was return and re-focus the company on products instead of marketing. Granted the focus he brought was perfectionist to a neurotic degree, but those tendencies aren't limited to Apple.
So why aren't other companies doing that?
My kid could paint that, he just didn't.
"All Steve Jobs did" is nearly impossible for every single company. I'm watching bosses fight over the possibility of including dynamic content in a jQuery slideshow. I'm wading through thirty meetings to get approval to roll out an update to a javascript file that was nothing more than changing an easing function.
Most companies are not able to move beyond political infighting to coalesce around a goal, let alone the correct goal.
They coast.
Actually, if you take the textbook "four p's" definition of marketing, what Steve Jobs did was take Apple and finally do the marketing right.
Product: The right product in the right place at the right time. No more need be said.
Price: Thanks to Apple's tireless devotion to operations, they can offer that product at a competitive price, even if it has a retina display or a new type of glass that has never been mass produced before or laser-drilled microscopic holes in the bezel to make an indicator disappear.
Promotion: Bringing back Chiat/Day, turning the keynotes and product announcements into major events, and playing the press like a violin.
Place: Apple's online and retail stores.
This is not a very urgent question at the moment, but one can clearly see that were Apple content to coast on profits from iPod and Macs alone they would still be a profitable company but a shadow of their current self.
My estimate is that it will take 2-3 years for competitors to really start eating into Apple share in phones and tablets. Also, the market will become more mature and people will not rush to upgrade Iphone 6 to Iphone 6s. Or Ipad to new Ipad. I mean once you go retina screen, how do you differentiate the Ipads? Quad core vs Octo core is not going to matter to regular buyer.
Currently Apple has great Operations(Cook) and great Design (Ives), the Vision is under the question mark.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2012/04/liveblog-apples-fy...
APPLE SEES 3Q REV. ABOUT $34B, EST. $37.49B APPLE SEES 3Q EPS ABOUT $8.68, EST. $9.96
EDIT (answer): I didn't downvote you.
"Apple sold 7.7 million iPods, a 15 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter."
I wonder why the decline and if there is a concern?
Everyone that wants one has one? More competitors? Everyone who has an iPod transitioning to the iPhone?
Bingo, although I think it's more like "everyone who has an iPhone (or any smartphone, really) doesn't feel the need to also have an iPod".
Apple has repeatedly said they are not worried about this on their conference calls. The consensus is that the iPhone has been cannibalizing sales since its release.
See: http://blog.fraserkelton.com/2011/09/24/cannibalize-yourself...
where Steve Jobs is quoted as saying if there’s going to be cannibalization of Apple, they want it to be by Apple.
This is why its important to fund R&D at companies. It enables exploration and innovation, to create the next disruption and/or continuous innovative use of products.