[Garage81]

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050413/tech_...arns.html?.v=1

Reuters
Apple's Profit Rises More Than Sixfold
Wednesday April 13, 4:35 pm ET


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc.'s (NasdaqNM:AAPL - News) quarterly profit rose more than sixfold, paced by strong sales of its iPod digital music players, the Mac mini and new PowerBook notebook PCs.
Apple, based in Cupertino, California, said on Wednesday that net income for its fiscal second quarter ended March 26 rose to $290 million, or 34 cents per share, from $46 million, or 6 cents per share, on a split-adjusted basis.

Revenue surged 70 percent to $3.24 billion from $1.91 billion.

---

good job apple after the holiday season! the stock has dropped about 3 bucks in the last couple days, hope this causes a surge again. analysts were predicting 23cents a share, this is much higher than expected.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Apple shipped 1,070,000 Macintosh® units and 5,311,000 iPods during the quarter, representing a 43 percent increase in CPU units and a 558 percent increase in iPods over the year-ago quarter.

Nice!

You can listen to the call here: http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq205/ (About to start (2PM PST). I hope they comment on the how many Mac minis were sold during the quarter.

[history1me]

Awesome!

[Garage81]

i loaded up on the stock a few months ago when it was $40.00. it got as high as 44 a week ago. they really blew earnings expectations of .24 out of the water, im really hoping it rebounds and pushes towards a new 52wk high. another great quarter. will be very interesting to see how the ipod halo effect is shaping up.

[xi_hyperon]

holy crap.

[Mafia]

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally posted by E's Lil Theorem:
....I hope they comment on the how many Mac minis were sold during the quarter.

Oi, an analyst asked this very question and Apple refused to answer it saying something like, "we wont be reporting that sort of breakdown, blah, blah..."

Anyway, looking at the numbers they did report, iMac, eMac and Mac mini product lines (combined) were up 2% in units, but down 22% in revenue. I reckon that's all due to the mini eating into the iMac and eMac product lines.

EDIT: Also of note, PoweBook sales are up 30%+, while Power Mac sales are down 16%.

[RonnieoftheRose]

Saweet. If the Japanese and Chinese weren't acting childish and the US deficit wasn't as high the Nasdaq wouldn't have dropped so much in the last week. It really did some damage to tech stocks, even companies like Apple that are performing strongly. At least oil has come down in price. One problem goes and another comes.

Looking to the next quarter, if the new Power Mac comes out they should sell well again. PowerBooks will even out. Shuffles and iPods will continue selling well with travellers looking to take their music with them on holiday. Software upgrades to OS X and pro applications will do well too. iMacs so so due to the Mac mini. They need to get that one up to 2Ghz and update the graphics.

[analogika]

Originally posted by E's Lil Theorem:
Anyway, looking at the numbers they did report, iMac, eMac and Mac mini product lines (combined) were up 2% in units, but down 22% in revenue. I reckon that's all due to the mini eating into the iMac and eMac product lines.

Seeing as the quarter after Christmas is usually the slowest of the year, a two percent *increase* in CPUs overall compared to last quarter, with a 7% lower revenue, is quite spectacular.

Even better is the year over year growth:
43% growth in units moved, 29% increase in revenue.

I think that's well above industry average.

Woo-hoo.

[Spliff]

What were the figures from the previous quarter?

[zizban]

[analogika]

Originally posted by Spliff:
What were the figures from the previous quarter?

Try clicking on E's link above.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally posted by Spliff:
What were the figures from the previous quarter?

Click on this:

Originally posted by E's Lil Theorem:
...the numbers they did report...

[funkboy]

This is great news for Apple.

However, I'm disappointed that they're not repoting the sales statistics for the Mac mini. They said they were very happy with response - if this is true, why not brag about the actual number sold?

What's worse is next quarter Apple will not even break down the numbers of desktop lines into Power Mac vs. iMac/Emac/Mac mini, nor will they split up laptop sales into iBook and PowerBook.
Why would Apple change this? I'm wondering if they're going to move into some areas where cannibalization may occur more frequently, which would be fairly obvious with these statistics (say, they introduce an even cheaper laptop... though I can't imagine this happening).

Another theory as to this change could be confusion in accounting - next quarter they'll report desktop sales, portable sales, and music (iPod and iTunes-store-related) sales (along with software and other income). What if they introduced a new category, like video-on-demand? I doubt anything's in the pipeline that soon, but it would be neat if Apple is positioning themselves to go that way. Could this new reporting practice be a way to position themselves in the future?

[resuna]

Originally Posted by Garage81

will be very interesting to see how the ipod halo effect is shaping up.

Since Apple didn't split out sales of the Mini from the eMac and iMac, you can't tell how many of these sales are due to Jobs finally breaking down on his "No ugly monitors on nice Macs" position. Apple knows if the Mini Effect is bigger than the Halo Effect, but they're not telling...

[E's Lil Theorem]

In some related news, as of 8:48AM AAPL is down 5%, while the NASDAQ is down close to .5%.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

I'm kind of glad PM sales are down. which means they must upgrade it or it's going to get worse...

(also because i am in the market now !!! i last bought a mac in 2001!!!!)

[resuna]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

[...looking at] iMac, eMac and Mac mini product lines (combined) were up 2% in units, but down 22% in revenue. I reckon that's all due to the mini eating into the iMac and eMac product lines.

I've seen iMacs moving pretty well at CompUSA and Micro Center when I've been there, and the new iMac is pretty good. I was fairly down on it originally but after playing with it and looking at the G5 bus structure I'm a lot more impressed.

I can see them eating into the eMac sales, maybe (mostly because the eMac sucks like, um, something that sucks a lot...), but the margin on eMacs is similar to the margin on Mac minis and the price range is similar, so that's not going to show a major revenue drop.

And, really, you *expect* a revenue AND sales drop the quatrter after Christmas.

So I don't think the mac mini could really be said to have eaten into sales so much as boosting sales in a quarter where they've generally been low. Same as the iPod Shuffle did for the iPod line.

[RonnieoftheRose]

Oil is back up today.
Terrorism in Iraq escalating again.
Tension between China and Japan over gasfields.

That hurts. I suspect that those with many shares in AAPL are also doing some major selling to knock Apple's price down in order to pick the shares up cheaply later on.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by resuna

I've seen iMacs moving pretty well at CompUSA and Micro Center when I've been there, and the new iMac is pretty good. I was fairly down on it originally but after playing with it and looking at the G5 bus structure I'm a lot more impressed.

It doesn't mean it's like that everywhere though.

Originally Posted by resuna

...
And, really, you *expect* a revenue AND sales drop the quatrter after Christmas.

True, but sales went up 2%.

Originally Posted by resuna

So I don't think the mac mini could really be said to have eaten into sales so much as boosting sales in a quarter where they've generally been low. ...

Well, if they sold more units, but made less money (remember, a lot less money), how exactly do you explain it? I may be wrong in that the mini ate into iMac/eMac sales, but I doubt it.

[Superchicken]

Sweet... I think I'm going to invest in Apple when I have money.

[AssassyN]

I'm so PISSED AAPL went down today! Good heavens, they blew expectations away and the stock FALLS?! *grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr*

[RonnieoftheRose]

Originally Posted by AssassyN

I'm so PISSED AAPL went down today! Good heavens, they blew expectations away and the stock FALLS?! *grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr*

If the economy is looking gloomy then the share value of most profitable companies falter or slow down. Apple is falling because of:

-Drop in the NASDAQ
-Tension between China and Japan which can have knock on effects on Taiwan.
-Oil went back up today.
-Terrorism in Iraq returns. This hurts the price of oil.
-The IMF forecasted a slower global economy this year that should pick up in 2006.
-Even though Apple had a great last quarter their forecasts for the next quarter aren't nearly as high as the success they had in the previous two.
-Apple didn't release figures for the Shuffle and mini which is worrying because if they are low profit, didn't sell enough and cannibalized sales of iMacs that could spell doom for the mini. It's very hard to tell without figures. For low cost/low profit sales to work they have to be in the millions.

I would like to recommend that you sell your shares if you haven't already but the thing is the stock market is almost impossible to predict unless you're a billionaire who can manipulate share prices. It will go back up again but these last two weeks have shown that the world is a quaky shakey place. The Nasdaq has been getting weaker since January ever since oil climbed to over $40 a barrel. Now it's over $50 and it looks like it will keep climbing although much slower than some predicted last week

[mitchell_pgh]

I'm amazed the eMac/iMac are selling considering the eMac hasn't been updated in over a year and the iMac is a month over it's "average" update. IMHO, it's great to see that they are doing so well.

The PowerMac is also very long at the tooth update wise along with the iBook.

I don't remember Apple having so many systems so overdue for an update.

[angelmb]

Let me compare those numbers with the ones from SGI

45 million loss
160 million revenue

Apple's profit is much bigger than SGI's revenue… awesome.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

i just read the Forbes cover article on Steve Jobs (this month i think)

it claims the 3 major PC makers are begging him to release OSX on intel

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

i just read the Forbes cover article on Steve Jobs (this month i think)

it claims the 3 major PC makers are begging him to release OSX on intel

tin foil hat on? OK

OpenStep became Yellow Box (which ran on OS X Server [Rhapsody] and Windows)... and then Yellow Box became Cocoa.

Does that mean that Apple could still port a compatability layer to Linux and Windows if they wanted and run Cocoa applications on all platforms (like NeXt did with Intel, Sparc, Hewlett-Packard)

I wonder how many Cocoa applications are PPC specific. [I've probably said too much about how little I know about coding]

[MaxPower2k3]

AAPL is down (after the market closed) $3.78 to $37.26. It fell almost $2 yesterday, too. That kind of sucks, but I'm hoping it'll go up soon once more people hear about their profits and the market gets a bit better. I bought it at $41.96 (a day or two after the split).

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

tin foil hat on? OK

OpenStep became Yellow Box (which ran on OS X Server [Rhapsody] and Windows)... and then Yellow Box became Cocoa.

Does that mean that Apple could still port a compatability layer to Linux and Windows if they wanted and run Cocoa applications on all platforms (like NeXt did with Intel, Sparc, Hewlett-Packard)

That very thing used to come as part of WebObjects. I don't know if they still do it that way, though.

It might also be worth checking out GNUStep, who have been working since the NeXTstep days to reimplement the API on top of Linux. It's not perfect yet, but there are a few apps out there, such as GNUMail.app, which use it to create cross-platform Cocoa apps. A Windows port appears to be in the work as well.

I wonder how many Cocoa applications are PPC specific. [I've probably said too much about how little I know about coding]

It depends on how much OSX-specific functionality they deal with.

[Garage81]

down a bunch in after market today as well. im going to really have to load up to get my average buy down.

: puts foot in mouth :

[TailsToo]

It's ok... let it drop. Buy more cheap shares ($35) and then when they sell 10 million iPods this Holiday, sell at $85.

[RonnieoftheRose]

Oooh I wish! I sold everything before today's crash and am not sure if they will ever have that kind of predictable stability again.

[Garage81]

Originally Posted by TailsToo

It's ok... let it drop. Buy more cheap shares ($35) and then when they sell 10 million iPods this Holiday, sell at $85.

haha.

[DeathMan]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

i just read the Forbes cover article on Steve Jobs (this month i think)

it claims the 3 major PC makers are begging him to release OSX on intel

They might have better luck developing PPC hardware prototypes, and begging to be allowed to include OS X on the new hardware. Even then, I think Apple sees they've got a hot product now, and they're not about share.

Maybe with HP, though, eh? HP PPC with Mac OS X. Has a nice ring to it.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally Posted by DeathMan

Maybe with HP, though, eh? HP PPC with Mac OS X. Has a nice ring to it.

I think Dell PPC sounds much better

[Apple Pro Underwear]

that may be a good idea. we hate Dell but millions out there love that shyt

if Apple got themselves into a position where Dell and Apple can make a profit... why not?

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

that may be a good idea. we hate Dell but millions out there love that shyt

if Apple got themselves into a position where Dell and Apple can make a profit... why not?

because people will buy a Dell with OS X and think "this is a piece of sh*t, i'm going back to windows"

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

that may be a good idea. we hate Dell but millions out there love that shyt

if Apple got themselves into a position where Dell and Apple can make a profit... why not?

Because that won't ever happen, unless Apple goes a drastic change in management (not just Steve; he is part of the problem, but it goes much deeper than just him).

Apple doesn't sell software. It doesn't even really sell hardware. It sells price points, and is hopelessly addicted to these. In the summer of 1993, my father bought a 6100/60: the third-highest-end of the Macs available at the time. It cost about $2000. Today, almost twelve years later, the third-highest-end machine is a G5 dual1.8. It, too, costs about $2000. The 6100/60 has been tricked out well past its limits, by the way, but it's still kicking along.

When a machine gets old enough that Apple can no longer sustainably keep it at that price point, they introduce a new model rather than lowering prices. This is how they have always done it, and it's how they will continue to do it for the foreseeable future. Apple cannot afford for computing to get cheap. This is the only reason that Macs are still so much more expensive, despite the fact that they use almost entirely the same or cheaper parts than their PC bretheren: Apple artificially keeps the price high to satisfy its business model.

Clones make computing cheaper. This is how they compete; it is their business model. Apple has tried working in such an environment, but it just plain can't do it. Cloners can make machines as good as Apple's while lowering prices, simply because they're set up in such a way that they can deal with price points that aren't fixed in stone. It happened before, in the clone era. It would happen again if Apple allowed these vendors to sell OSX/Intel clones.

[analogika]

Note that while this is true *generally*, price points do vary +/- $200 or so, and prices in general *do* drop over time within this structure - especially on laptops.

[resuna]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

Well, if they sold more units, but made less money (remember, a lot less money), how exactly do you explain it? I may be wrong in that the mini ate into iMac/eMac sales, but I doubt it.

The phrase "ate into" implies "they sold fewer eMacs and iMacs than they would have without the mini". It implies that mini sales are lost potential iMac or eMac sales. And you don't have the figures to really argue that.

Consider: they would have expected to sell fewer eMacs and iMacs this quarter anyway, because sales are normally down this quarter. Therefore those Mac mini sales include sales they wouldn't have made at all without the Mini - I can point to six of those sales just among people I know, people who are in no way in the market for an eMac and only casually considered the iMac as a kind of "Mac of last resort". How many mini sales are new Mac owners, I don't know, but I personally believe that the majority of Mac mini sales are people like me, people who would never have considered buying a new Mac if the mini hadn't come out. What the Mini <i>is</i> cutting into are sales of used Macs... the prices for used Macs took a serious nosedive after the Mini came out.

[resuna]

Originally Posted by Millennium

In the summer of 1993, my father bought a 6100/60: the third-highest-end of the Macs available at the time. It cost about $2000. Today, almost twelve years later, the third-highest-end machine is a G5 dual1.8. It, too, costs about $2000.

Yeh, but -

(1) $2000 in 1993 is worth, what, $1200 now? Less?

(2) Between the time Steve took over and this year Apple hasn't even sold a model comparable to the 6100: a non-expandible headless desktop. The G5 is more like the 8100 family, the eMac and iMac like the Classic and 5xxx series. The unit you should be comparing the 6100 style of computer to is the Mac mini, which sells for $600.

Really, the 6100 was a distortion in the Mac product line. The first generation of Power PC Macs were massively overpriced and underpowered - running contemporary software the later Quadras kicked their butts. The same thing happened with the G3s, the last 9xx 604-powered multiprocessors were faster than the first Beige G3s. They've done a better job of not prematurely jumping on new technology more recently, but really... any price analysis of the Apple line that's based on the 6100/7100/8100 models is meaningless.

[edited - fixed typo - 200 for 2000]

[sworthy]

Originally Posted by resuna

Yeh, but -

(1) $2000 in 1993 is worth, what, $1200 now? Less?

Other way around... it's worth more now. Kind of like how $2 in 1900 is worth way more than $2 today.

[REB3L]

Ooo goody! My happiness is dependent on Apple's sales figures.

[OldManMac]

The reason the stock is down is rather simple; Apple is in danger of becoming a one-trick pony. The iPod is what is bringing in the huge numbers for Apple, and that isn't going to last forever. Additionally, the key segment of PowerMacs is down in sales, and that's really what Apple needs to pump up, in order to bring in sustained profit and volume sales.

When the iPod reaches market saturation, which may not be far off, then Apple may not have another killer product to keep the momentum going, and this is why investors are getting shy; they're afraid that, once again, Apple has reached a peak.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by resuna

The phrase "ate into" implies "they sold fewer eMacs and iMacs than they would have without the mini". It implies that mini sales are lost potential iMac or eMac sales. And you don't have the figures to really argue that.

....

No, I can argue it just fine with the figures available, I just can't give you concrete proof of it .

Now that you've explained yourself a bit more, however, I see your point clearly. Further, I'm willing to bet a few AAPL shares that the 2% increase in sales and the 20% drop in revenue was a little bit both (i.e., some people who would have bought iMacs/eMacs ended up buying minis and an expected drop in iMacs/eMacs sales because of the holidays in the last quarter). We may never know how exactly it breaks down.

[sworthy]

I just bought some more stock... I love it when the market gives me a flashing neon sign that says "BUY"

[RonnieoftheRose]

Originally Posted by sworthy

I just bought some more stock... I love it when the market gives me a flashing neon sign that says "BUY"

Bad decision. It look like AAPL will sink to $30-32 before reaching stability. Even then I'm not sure it will rise until then next quarter results show up. The whole market is very dodgy at the moment.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by resuna

I've seen iMacs moving pretty well at CompUSA and Micro Center when I've been there, and the new iMac is pretty good. I was fairly down on it originally but after playing with it and looking at the G5 bus structure I'm a lot more impressed.

I can see them eating into the eMac sales, maybe (mostly because the eMac sucks like, um, something that sucks a lot...), but the margin on eMacs is similar to the margin on Mac minis and the price range is similar, so that's not going to show a major revenue drop.

And, really, you *expect* a revenue AND sales drop the quatrter after Christmas.

So I don't think the mac mini could really be said to have eaten into sales so much as boosting sales in a quarter where they've generally been low. Same as the iPod Shuffle did for the iPod line.

CompUSA moves more Macs than any other single retailer, except Apple itself. Since Apple put their own employees in about 2/3 of CompUSA stores a little over three years ago, on a full time basis, the chain's Apple sales have skyrocketed, to the tune of hundreds of millions of $ per year. The Apple Solutions Consultants, as they are called, are considered the gold standard of sales people within Apple.