Skip to main content

Apple May Be Reliant On The iPhone, But That Isn't A Problem

When Apple's recent earnings call failed to live up to analyst's expectations last month, it sent the company's stock tumbling. Strange, in what appeared to be yet another blockbuster of a quarter. Aside from an element of market manipulation, which always appear to be a risk with Apple's shares, there is a reason for this: the iPhone.
The line goes that Apple's income is so heavily reliant on the iPhone (nearly two-thirds of revenue) that any sign that the flagship device is failing sets investors panicking.
Ignoring for a moment that the analysts themselves make the predictions and then kick Apple for failing to meet them, how accurate a perception is this?
Currently the iPhone holds a small, but incredibly valuable part of the smartphone market. Globally that amounts to somewhere between a fifth and a third of overall smartphone sales, depending on which quarter we are in.
Focusing on the premium market, Apple's share is somewhere more like 60-80%.
The iPhone is an aspirational device, whilst there are many smartphone buyers who can afford to choose an iPhone and don't, there are a far greater proportion who can't, but would if they could. As a result we see Apple making sales to large numbers of defectors from other platforms. I'm willing to bet that a lot of those are driven by a change in circumstance meaning the buyer can now afford the phone they desire.
Given a choice smartphone buyers migrate to the iPhone at far greater rates than they move away. Add in the effect of repeat sales thanks to Apple's customer loyalty and almost total retention of customers and you'll see why concerns about iPhone sales are nonsense.
iPhone sales growth will continue for the foreseeable future. Investors worrying about whether the rate of growth matches random numbers picked by analysts are really getting their underwear in a twist for no good reason.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…