Slashdot Mirror
iPhones Produced in China Smuggled Right Back in
Ponca City, We Love You writes "Factories in China produce iPhones that are exported to the United States and Europe and then smuggled right back in helping explain why Apple says it sold about 3.7 million iPhones last year while only 2.3 million are actually registered in the United States and Europe. For Apple, the booming overseas market for iPhones is a sign of its marketing prowess but also a blow to Apple's business model, costing the company as much as $1 billion over the next three years, according to some analysts. Since negotiations between Apple and China Mobile, the world's biggest mobile-phone service operator with more than 350 million subscribers, broke down last month, the official release of the iPhone in China has been stalled producing a thriving gray market. Copycat models are another possible threat to Apple in China. Not long after the iPhone was released, research and development teams in China were taking it apart, trying to copy or steal the design and software for use in iPhone knockoffs, or iClones and some people who have used the clones say they are sophisticated and have many functions that mimic the iPhone. "A lot of people here want to get an iPhone," says Shanghai lawyer Conlyn Chan."
If you do not want people to copy your product then do not have them made in China.
Recently I've found some iPod Nano knockoffs. These devices look good. They copy the Nano right
down to the nice plastic case that if it in on the shelf. The only difference is that these
devices do not have the feature where you can move your finger across the dial and they do not
have Apple's software. They are easy to use and cost less than $50 for a 4GB model. I've not
bought one yet. I have a 20GB iPod and it still works for me. When it breaks I'm buying a clone!
If you notice, we haven't heard ANYTHING from Apple. Apple looks like they are preventing this, because why would AT&T give them a cut if everyone else can carry the iPhone with unlocked iPhones. Apple seems to enjoy the extra sales and profits, but doesn't want to jeopardize the AT&T gravy train.
The funny math comes from business reporters/analysts that have been trained by this given the Record Labels/Movie Studios, as you pointed out. Also, it does matter to business analysts, because they are trying to project Apple profits. If you priced all iPhone sales as the deferred revenue model, you would be overstating future sales/profits. You need to know how many are "lost" to back them out of projections.
The loss is also probably more an accounting/spreadsheet thing.
If your estimate is $300 in profit from iPhone over 3 years, your line is probably:
If you estimate 1m/year
Year 1: $100m, Year 2: $200m, Year 3: $300m, Year 4: $300m, (and $300m in perpetuity)
Now, if you need to adjust that in future years, your choices are, recalculate and estimate new sales vs. unlocked sales. Or, put in a line under there: Loss from unregistered phones. The latter is easier, and looks more like an income statement's bad debt expense.
Bad debt expense is booked as an expense and a loss. However, for a company with virtual sales (software), obviously it's not really an expense. Producing the item cost you zero marginal costs, so if you don't get paid, you're no worse off than if you didn't make the sale. However, accounting treatment requires you to book the sales and then book the estimated losses from bad debts as a percentage, rather than incurring as you go.
For a small business, you might just not spend the cash until the credit card/check payment clears, but bigger businesses need to worry about GAAP compliance, and it's really important that revenue/costs are booked in the period that they occur, not when the cash clears.