Those margins are not anything close to that stated in the original post. Microsoft is primarily a software comapny and has margins in line for that industry.
You are confusing the margins on the devices that Blackberry sells with the fact that they sell far to little to make a profit. Apple has those high margins because they sell so many. As for Microsoft, they sure as hell sell hardware, but either at low or negative margins.
As to Samsung, their margins are actually at the upper end of recent years.
As to Apple and software sales, what is the margin on Final Cut Pro (and think what it was when it cost more than $299) Logic Pro X @ 199? But in the end, those do not matter as without iPhone Apple is at best a third or fourth place computer maker with marketshare in the 5 to 10% range (historically).
Yeah, they've only outgrown the rest of the PC market for almost all quarters during the last couple of years. Total failure.
The closure of the Japanese electronics company's sole dedicated plasma-TV factory in China... The company intends to move operations to another Chinese TV factory in the eastern province of Shandong, where it currently produces LCD television sets.
Also what is in their annual report isn't necessarily accurate anyway, so don't just throw that link at me.
Apple wasn't even reporting its U.S. taxes accurately, either, the Senate subcommittee found. Its annual report disclosed it paid much higher U.S. taxes than it actually paid to the IRS. To investors, Apple said it paid $6.9 billion in U.S. taxes in 2011. But it actually only paid the IRS $2.5 billion, according to its tax return.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com...
Err-hunh. Yeah. That's why Apple has been fined for not paying their taxes. And no, Apple hasn't said they paid those taxes, they said they provisioned that amount for taxes. IOW they stated what taxes they would have to pay for all of their profits, but only actually paid out to the IRS that which they owed by not repatriating foreign profits. Which is not only legal, it is required by tax accounting rule APB 23 unless you plan to invest those foreign earnings abroad permanently.
The only difference to most other companies is that Apple doesn't pretend to keep it there in their statements (even if they don't actually want to without a repatriation holiday), while others pretend to do that to make their profits seem higher (even if they then actually have to bring back those earnings). Recent example is eBay which "paid" over 300% taxes first quarter last year because they repatriated "permanently invested" foreign earnings of $9 billion.
Are you actually going to blame Apple for the cluster-fucked up tax (reporting) laws in America, just because they are not only smart enough to make a profit, but because they also actually pay taxes?
BTW, Apple reports how much taxes they paid (in total) under the all to obvious moniker "Cash paid for income taxes, net". Which for FY 2014 comes to $ 10,026 million - most, but not all as federal income tax.
It's a quarterly profit announcement, not for the year.
So the real questions are what is the declared profit / loss for the entire year and how much actual tax are they actually paying on the year?
Gee, do you really expect Apple report to their annual numbers when they just have finished their 2nd FQ? Not even to mention that the tax they will be actually paying 2014 will be actually mostly for the actual year before, because that's the actually way paying corporate tax works?
Managers with CFO and COO backgrounds aren't good at innovating. They can't innovate their way out of a paper bag. Guess where Tim Cook came from.
So Cook can't innovate because he's a he has an MBA. While Jobs couldn't innovate because he didn't even master in Fine Arts. Both are however smart enough to hire people who can. Suck it up.
Jobs had many products and ideas already in the pipeline prior to his death. To my knowledge, the only thing new is iPhone+. There's nothing magical about that decision. By the numbers, the market was clear in that people wanted a phablet. So they took an iPhone and increased the size; BFD.
So the only innovative thing Apple has done last quarter was the fucking thing driving up their revenue to insane levels. What losers. It's left to the reader if that means Apple or the people whining.
It may be 24% on average, but it's much higher on some items. Flash memory upgrades for phone and tablets cost 10-15x what other manufacturers charge,
Errm, most don't even offer any memory upgrades. Many even stopped offering SD, like Google itself. Because that fucking doesn't work as well as people like you keep claiming.
If corporations don't pay their share of tax, then ordinary law-abiding citizens will just be charged more.
Maybe you should complain about Amazon then, because while having dozens of billions in revenue, they pay little if any taxes by (supposedly) making little profit. Instead of paying several billions like Apple.
funny. when it comes to most people, the actual dollar amount never seems to matter. The fact that the top 10% of americans pay almost 70% of all the taxes collected by the feds never seems to matter.
Seems unfair - when they only own over 80% of the money.
So do you route your savings through Nevada to a bank account in the Virgin Islands that doesn't pay tax too? You do know that savings accounts pay taxes don't you?
Now I see where your problem is - you aren't incorporated. That's your problem, and the governments fault, not Apple's.
The A9 connects Munich to Ingolstadt, which are respectively the main hubs for BMW and Audi, so it makes sense to use that road for testing.
Moreover, both cities are in the state of Bavaria, which makes it easier to get things going on the government level.
Bavaria is also the home state of the traffic minister Dobrindt - so pork.
And 10% savings with no changes to technology (apart from the platooning system of course) or driving is pretty good, isn't it?
Only on a closed track, and remember that my assertion isn't that the gas savings aren't there, it's that even with self-driving cars 8 meters isn't safe once you start trying to move it to production, especially when you'd have cars of different makes, and maintenance levels in the 'platoons'. It'd also be limited(mostly) to the highway systems, which doesn't do much for most commutes.
The safety brake system (used in production cars) I mentioned was obviously tested to avoid collisions with suddenly breaking cars just 8 meters away without even pre-charging the breaks. Not to mention that the 10% saving is for 15 meters.
But you sure do know more about these things than the people who build them. Volvo. The guys with the car safety record.
15 meters is the max they measured, you really need to be within 9 meters to realize 10% fuel savings.
No, 8 meters is the closest they have measured with cars, and they only didn't g closer because the build-in proximity sensors (safety standard in the production cars) didn't allow them to go closer without the breaks pre-charging, ruining mileage. And 10% savings with no changes to technology (apart from the platooning system of course) or driving is pretty good, isn't it? Of course the least saving was showing for the big petrol engined car, so it's clear that this isn't for America with its huge engines.
Isn't the point to test automatic cars under real conditions? Google did this years ago. With hand-picked, pre-mapped roads, but still under real conditions with real human-driven traffic. Remember the euro search engine? The euro book digitizing project? Every time Germany/EU tries to copy what Google does, only years later, by government decree and without Google, the result is the same. Burnt money. Next thing they will try to ban undeutsche autonomous cars from deutsche autobahn.
PROMETHEUS profited from the participation of Ernst Dickmanns, the 1980s pioneer of driverless cars, and his team at Bundeswehr Universität München, collaborating with Daimler-Benz. A first culmination point was achieved in 1994, when their twin robot vehicles VaMP and VITA-2 drove more than one thousand kilometers on a Paris multi-lane highway in standard heavy traffic at speeds up to 130 km/h. They demonstrated autonomous driving in free lanes, convoy driving, automatic tracking of other vehicles, and lane changes left and right with autonomous passing of other cars.
Research done has shown that for real mpg improvements you need to be closer than even a computer controlled car can compensate for, and you pay for it by needing to brake so often that you burn off any potential savings.
Actually, the second bomb and the threat of 9 more produced "peace".
Many have suggested that the second bomb brought hostilities to a close a day or two earlier than would otherwise have happened. It was taking the Japanese a while to get their heads around the problem of not being invincible.
Others have suggested it was removing the clause to indict the Emperor for war crimes (and instead leave him be head of state) from the conditions of surrender that let the Japanese allow to surrender without losing face.
Slashdot Mirror
Er... huh? "Apple's Gross Margin is 39.9% - Samsung's is 39.87." Both sell a lot of hardware, and in Samsung's case a lot of other random stuff.
So what was your "I'm sure that Apples margins on software products is comparable" about?
As to the others, I refer you to: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?... http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?...
Those margins are not anything close to that stated in the original post. Microsoft is primarily a software comapny and has margins in line for that industry.
You are confusing the margins on the devices that Blackberry sells with the fact that they sell far to little to make a profit. Apple has those high margins because they sell so many. As for Microsoft, they sure as hell sell hardware, but either at low or negative margins.
As to Samsung, their margins are actually at the upper end of recent years.
As to Apple and software sales, what is the margin on Final Cut Pro (and think what it was when it cost more than $299) Logic Pro X @ 199? But in the end, those do not matter as without iPhone Apple is at best a third or fourth place computer maker with marketshare in the 5 to 10% range (historically).
Yeah, they've only outgrown the rest of the PC market for almost all quarters during the last couple of years. Total failure.
My Panasonic TV was made in Japan,
Suuuuure
The closure of the Japanese electronics company's sole dedicated plasma-TV factory in China ... The company intends to move operations to another Chinese TV factory in the eastern province of Shandong, where it currently produces LCD television sets.
Oh, wait, you still have a CRT TV, right?
Also what is in their annual report isn't necessarily accurate anyway, so don't just throw that link at me.
Apple wasn't even reporting its U.S. taxes accurately, either, the Senate subcommittee found. Its annual report disclosed it paid much higher U.S. taxes than it actually paid to the IRS. To investors, Apple said it paid $6.9 billion in U.S. taxes in 2011. But it actually only paid the IRS $2.5 billion, according to its tax return. Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com...
Err-hunh. Yeah. That's why Apple has been fined for not paying their taxes. And no, Apple hasn't said they paid those taxes, they said they provisioned that amount for taxes. IOW they stated what taxes they would have to pay for all of their profits, but only actually paid out to the IRS that which they owed by not repatriating foreign profits. Which is not only legal, it is required by tax accounting rule APB 23 unless you plan to invest those foreign earnings abroad permanently.
The only difference to most other companies is that Apple doesn't pretend to keep it there in their statements (even if they don't actually want to without a repatriation holiday), while others pretend to do that to make their profits seem higher (even if they then actually have to bring back those earnings). Recent example is eBay which "paid" over 300% taxes first quarter last year because they repatriated "permanently invested" foreign earnings of $9 billion.
Are you actually going to blame Apple for the cluster-fucked up tax (reporting) laws in America, just because they are not only smart enough to make a profit, but because they also actually pay taxes?
BTW, Apple reports how much taxes they paid (in total) under the all to obvious moniker "Cash paid for income taxes, net". Which for FY 2014 comes to $ 10,026 million - most, but not all as federal income tax.
It's a quarterly profit announcement, not for the year.
So the real questions are what is the declared profit / loss for the entire year and how much actual tax are they actually paying on the year?
Gee, do you really expect Apple report to their annual numbers when they just have finished their 2nd FQ? Not even to mention that the tax they will be actually paying 2014 will be actually mostly for the actual year before, because that's the actually way paying corporate tax works?
Managers with CFO and COO backgrounds aren't good at innovating. They can't innovate their way out of a paper bag. Guess where Tim Cook came from.
So Cook can't innovate because he's a he has an MBA. While Jobs couldn't innovate because he didn't even master in Fine Arts. Both are however smart enough to hire people who can. Suck it up.
Inertia.
Jobs had many products and ideas already in the pipeline prior to his death. To my knowledge, the only thing new is iPhone+. There's nothing magical about that decision. By the numbers, the market was clear in that people wanted a phablet. So they took an iPhone and increased the size; BFD.
So the only innovative thing Apple has done last quarter was the fucking thing driving up their revenue to insane levels. What losers. It's left to the reader if that means Apple or the people whining.
It may be 24% on average, but it's much higher on some items. Flash memory upgrades for phone and tablets cost 10-15x what other manufacturers charge,
Errm, most don't even offer any memory upgrades. Many even stopped offering SD, like Google itself. Because that fucking doesn't work as well as people like you keep claiming.
I'm sure that Apples margins on software products is comparable. Apple is 90% phone mfg. now. 40% margins on end-user hardware is quite high.
You seem to completely have missed the numbers for Samsung and Blackberry. Probably because they defy your narrative.
Maybe you should bother to look so you don't sound like you're an idiot.
Revenues from hardware - $69.8B Revenues from other(iTunes) - $4.8B
Net profits (not broken down) - $18B
Even if 100% of revenues from iTunes was profit (i.e. no cost to run the App Store), it's still less than 1/3 of total profits.
The often lamented fact that Apple takes 30% of the iTunes revenue for itself (boo-hiss) means its actually has to be less than 1/9.
Imagine someone steals your TV and sells it to a fence. Who is the criminal? The fence or the thief? Both.
Since you are an American, you are an accomplice to this. Turn yourself in now.
If corporations don't pay their share of tax, then ordinary law-abiding citizens will just be charged more.
Maybe you should complain about Amazon then, because while having dozens of billions in revenue, they pay little if any taxes by (supposedly) making little profit. Instead of paying several billions like Apple.
funny. when it comes to most people, the actual dollar amount never seems to matter. The fact that the top 10% of americans pay almost 70% of all the taxes collected by the feds never seems to matter.
Seems unfair - when they only own over 80% of the money.
So do you route your savings through Nevada to a bank account in the Virgin Islands that doesn't pay tax too? You do know that savings accounts pay taxes don't you?
Now I see where your problem is - you aren't incorporated. That's your problem, and the governments fault, not Apple's.
Apple routes US profits through offices in US states with favorable tax regimes (e.g. Nevada). In Europe they route them through Ireland.
Yeah, and they are the only company that does so, too. Well, maybe only a handful. Okay, almost all do. What was your point again?
+5, Bullshit
The A9 connects Munich to Ingolstadt, which are respectively the main hubs for BMW and Audi, so it makes sense to use that road for testing. Moreover, both cities are in the state of Bavaria, which makes it easier to get things going on the government level.
Bavaria is also the home state of the traffic minister Dobrindt - so pork.
And 10% savings with no changes to technology (apart from the platooning system of course) or driving is pretty good, isn't it?
Only on a closed track, and remember that my assertion isn't that the gas savings aren't there, it's that even with self-driving cars 8 meters isn't safe once you start trying to move it to production, especially when you'd have cars of different makes, and maintenance levels in the 'platoons'. It'd also be limited(mostly) to the highway systems, which doesn't do much for most commutes.
The safety brake system (used in production cars) I mentioned was obviously tested to avoid collisions with suddenly breaking cars just 8 meters away without even pre-charging the breaks. Not to mention that the 10% saving is for 15 meters.
But you sure do know more about these things than the people who build them. Volvo. The guys with the car safety record.
15 meters is the max they measured, you really need to be within 9 meters to realize 10% fuel savings.
No, 8 meters is the closest they have measured with cars, and they only didn't g closer because the build-in proximity sensors (safety standard in the production cars) didn't allow them to go closer without the breaks pre-charging, ruining mileage. And 10% savings with no changes to technology (apart from the platooning system of course) or driving is pretty good, isn't it? Of course the least saving was showing for the big petrol engined car, so it's clear that this isn't for America with its huge engines.
Isn't the point to test automatic cars under real conditions? Google did this years ago. With hand-picked, pre-mapped roads, but still under real conditions with real human-driven traffic. Remember the euro search engine? The euro book digitizing project? Every time Germany/EU tries to copy what Google does, only years later, by government decree and without Google, the result is the same. Burnt money. Next thing they will try to ban undeutsche autonomous cars from deutsche autobahn.
German (and others) scientists did that years before Google even existed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_Prometheus_Project
PROMETHEUS profited from the participation of Ernst Dickmanns, the 1980s pioneer of driverless cars, and his team at Bundeswehr Universität München, collaborating with Daimler-Benz. A first culmination point was achieved in 1994, when their twin robot vehicles VaMP and VITA-2 drove more than one thousand kilometers on a Paris multi-lane highway in standard heavy traffic at speeds up to 130 km/h. They demonstrated autonomous driving in free lanes, convoy driving, automatic tracking of other vehicles, and lane changes left and right with autonomous passing of other cars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EH3R6c7Ufg
Well, it should be. York is in England, therefore New York should be in New England!
But it was once New Amsterdam (not Constantinople) - so it is in New Netherlands.
Research done has shown that for real mpg improvements you need to be closer than even a computer controlled car can compensate for, and you pay for it by needing to brake so often that you burn off any potential savings.
Mythbusters isn't "Research". This is.
Around 30-35% of iPhones in China are jailbroken, if reports are to be believed. In any case, the jailbreaking tools get millions of downloads,
Compared to over a hundred million iPhones sold each year? Yeah , whatever.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/12/31/0310256/doppler-radar-used-by-police-to-determine-home-occupancy
Actually, the second bomb and the threat of 9 more produced "peace".
Many have suggested that the second bomb brought hostilities to a close a day or two earlier than would otherwise have happened. It was taking the Japanese a while to get their heads around the problem of not being invincible.
Others have suggested it was removing the clause to indict the Emperor for war crimes (and instead leave him be head of state) from the conditions of surrender that let the Japanese allow to surrender without losing face.
Didn't people here defend Buzz when he punched Bart Sibrel in the face after he merely called him "a coward, and a liar, and a thief."?