backtop


Print 59 comment(s) - last by euclidean.. on May 1 at 11:26 AM


  (Source: Cult of Mac)
And that's all without the Galaxy S IV even; Samsung is almost even with Apple in profitability

While reviewers were generally enthusiastic, but a bit critical of Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.'s (KSC:005930) hot new flagship phone -- the Galaxy S IV -- the company has little to feel bad about currently.  Even without the GSIV anchoring its Android tag team, Samsung managed to crush rival Apple, Inc. (AAPL) in unit sales and deliver a fiscal performance that blew past analyst estimates.

The high profit was a bit of a surprise -- a survey of 10 analysts by UK-based Financial Times, a Pearson PLC unit (LON:PSON), found an expectation of 8.0T won ($7.2B USD) in profit.  A newer compilation by Bloomberg of 39 analysts' predictions showed an average expectation for 8.4T won ($7.6B USD) in profit.

Instead, Samsung delivered 8.8T won ($7.9B USD) profit, up over 50 percent from the 5.7T won ($5.1B USD) profit it posted in the first calendar quarter of 2012 and 10 percent better than the early analyst estimates.  The Android mobile division drove the big win. 6.51T won ($5.7B USD) of the profit -- nearly three-quarters -- came from the mobile unit.  Total revenue came in at 52.87T won ($47.6B USD).  These figures were in line with Samsung's estimate released near the start of the month.
 
After years of Apple fans and shareholders mocking Samsung as "less profitable", Samsung is almost even with Apple in profitability.  Apple reported its first quarter results at the start of the week, announcing its first YOY decline in profit in a decade.

Apple has seen its momentum halted by the death of its iconic leader Steven P. Jobs (in 2011) and then by disappointment over the iPhone 5 sales growth and hardware. Google meanwhile has surged as Apple's court bid to ban Android stalled [1][2], and as its OEM partners pounced on Apple in terms of hardware offerings.  Stock and profit for Apple are riding at recent lows.  Apple's supporters point to new products and refreshes, optimistically -- but Samsung is boasting the same upcoming events (see: Samsung Smart Watch, for example).

Here's a quick recap on how the two companies are stacking up:

Apple v. Samsung

Samsung appears poised to potentially pass Apple in profit in Q2. And early indications show that if the Galaxy S IV has any problem it will be in being unable to keep up with wild demand.  

The phone is launching in coming weeks on 327 mobile carriers in 155 countries, backed by a massive global advertising campaign that kicked off this week.  In the U.S. Samsung has paired with top brick-and-mortar electronics retailer Best Buy Comp., Inc. (BBY) to set up "mini-stores" promoting the phone within Best Buy's retail locations.

Galaxy S IV
Galaxy S IV preorders are higher than expected [Image Source: Samsung]

According to Reuters, the very high level of preorders have surprised even analysts, and indicate that Samsung may struggle to fulfill demand.  That's a pretty good problem to have, though.

Samsung hopes to sell 390 million smartphones this year.

Source: Samsung



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Apple getting what it deserves
By techxx on 4/26/2013 1:58:34 PM , Rating: 5
Rather than Apple bringing innovation to their own products, they focus all their energy on suing the competition and banning competitor products off the market. Nice to see their quest for a monopoly failing.

Kudos to Samsung for knocking Apple off its pedestal! This article brought a smile to my face. :)




RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Nortel on 4/26/13, Rating: 0
RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Rukkian on 4/26/2013 3:06:47 PM , Rating: 6
While Apple does have the lead, I am not sure where you are getting your info, as this is from the article you are posting about:
quote:
Instead, Samsung delivered 8.8T won ($7.9B USD) profit


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Lifted on 4/26/2013 6:23:44 PM , Rating: 3
This comment response receives 6?

Really?

Not funny. Not informative. No original thoughts. Just pointing out someones oversight from the article.


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Tegeril on 4/27/2013 4:03:05 AM , Rating: 2
Minus the part where Mick got it wrong in the article and he got it right.


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Rukkian on 4/29/2013 2:27:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Minus the part where Mick got it wrong in the article and he got it right.


Source?


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Lifted on 4/29/2013 8:08:45 PM , Rating: 3
Did you try ready the very first paragraph in the link at the bottom of the article titled "Source".

Yes, I understand the actual source for the article would not seem like the likely place for the correct information since the article was wrong, but that's only if you make the mistake of assuming the author can comprehend a clearly worded financial report.

quote:
SEOUL, Korea – April 26, 2013 – Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. today announced revenues of 52.87 trillion won on a consolidated basis for the first quarter ended March 31, 2013, a 6-percent decrease from the previous quarter. Consolidated operating profit for the quarter reached 8.78 trillion won , representing a 1-percent decline (QoQ), while consolidated net profit for the same quarter was 7.15 trillion won .


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By ilt24 on 4/26/2013 10:22:40 PM , Rating: 2
The problem here is the article isn't correct.

It appears that Jason is comparing Samsung's Operating Profit of $7.9B with Apples Net Profit of $9.5B.

Net Profit Samsung $6.5B vs. Apple $9.5B
Operating profit Samsung $7.9B vs. Apple $12.6B


By karlostomy on 4/27/2013 2:28:40 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you for the clarification.

It shows that the gap isn't quite as narrow as was made out to be. So I welcome the factual clarification.

Still, Samsung achieved this on the on the eve of the launch of the Galaxy S4.
I expect Samsung's net profits will continue to rise on the strength of sales of the S4.
Not sure I can say the same for Apple.

But yeah, that's just my opinion, given Apple's recently declining profit margins.


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Tegeril on 4/27/2013 3:59:19 AM , Rating: 2
Whoa whoa whoa, you expect DailyTech to accurately report on issues involving Apple and Samsung?


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Lifted on 4/28/2013 3:15:00 AM , Rating: 2
shocker


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By BRB29 on 4/29/2013 12:04:56 PM , Rating: 2
how do you even get a 6?


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Reclaimer77 on 4/26/2013 7:30:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Apple spends over 11 million dollars a day on R&D.


That's a blatant lie dude. Sorry.


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/26/2013 8:24:51 PM , Rating: 2
As much as I can't stand him and his trollish ways, it appears to be true.

http://www.zdnet.com/apple-spending-over-11-6-mill...


By Reclaimer77 on 4/26/2013 10:30:42 PM , Rating: 5
Apple has always been a poor historic R&D spender. They weren't even in the top 20 in 2012. Despite the insane profits, they refuse to invest in their future.

http://www.thephoenixprinciple.com/.a/6a00d8341c27...

So, okay, apparently Apple just now this quarter decided to kick it up a notch.

*golfclap*

By the way, it's presented as a big number. Wow, you think, $11 a day! That's a little over $4 billion a year. Which wouldn't have even placed them on that top 20 chart for last year.

Compared to their profits, Apple's R&D budget is charity.


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By nikon133 on 4/28/2013 6:25:05 PM , Rating: 2
It is nice to see MS is spending $27 mil a day, according to the same article.

Now that is what I call "a company bent on innovation".


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By BRB29 on 4/29/2013 12:01:41 PM , Rating: 2
spending more does not equate to more productivity. Efficiency is what keeps you in the black. Look at apple's profit margins. That's very high for a company that size. Normally, you only see that kind of margins in a monopoly that is dominating the market. For example intel and microsoft.

$11mil a day in R&D is less than the interest they can get for their massive amount of cash.

You don't have to like Apple to acknowledge the fact that they are a very efficiently managed company. Much like Walmart and its success.


By euclidean on 5/1/2013 11:26:32 AM , Rating: 2
You would be surprised in all that M$ does in the R&D space...some really interesting designs...

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2020268/meet-micros...


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By jimbojimbo on 4/26/2013 8:17:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Apple spends over 11 million dollars a day on R&D
If this was at all true then after all that the best they could come up with is another line of static icons... just 4 icons at that.
Do you really believe in a company that can spend 4billion a year in R&D and just add another row of icons?


RE: Apple getting what it deserves
By Tegeril on 4/27/2013 4:00:23 AM , Rating: 2
Profiting off of fragile phones
By Lord 666 on 4/26/13, Rating: 0
RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By V-Money on 4/26/2013 7:26:06 PM , Rating: 2
I know, they should have went with Apple, I don't know anyone with an iPhone/iPod with a cracked screen 8-/


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By StevoLincolnite on 4/27/2013 4:04:00 AM , Rating: 3
Funny. I've repaired dozens of iPhone/iPod cracked screens.

Don't pretend they're immune to such issues.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By BZDTemp on 4/28/2013 12:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
I think you replied to the wrong post ;-)


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/26/2013 7:26:43 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps they should quit being so rough on the phones. They aren't that fragile.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Lord 666 on 4/26/2013 8:25:38 PM , Rating: 2
Of the 40 or so RAZR M and RAZR HD devices within my company, none have had a broken screen yet or died.


By Cheesew1z69 on 4/26/2013 8:34:47 PM , Rating: 2
And? Many people have GS3 that have dropped them with 0 issues. I have dropped mine several times with minor scratching. Again, they need to quit manhandling the phones. And 4 times? Seriously? I find it highly suspect that ONE person has had his screen cracked FOUR times in a row.

My Razr that was given to my wife, the screen broke when my 8 month old grabbed it and threw it on the floor.

Not quite sure what your point is?


By Reclaimer77 on 4/28/2013 1:35:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Of the 40 or so RAZR M and RAZR HD devices within my company, none have had a broken screen yet or died.


Hey physics dropout, compare the weight of a Razr to that of the GS3. Notice something?

Anyway enough of this stupid sophomoric argument. I don't care how many phones broke in your made up example. The GS3 in real life doesn't have anything close to the 90%+ brick-on-drop rate you're claiming.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Yongsta on 4/26/2013 9:49:02 PM , Rating: 2
That's the thing with Anecdotal evidence. I know plenty of people with SG3s and no cracked screens yet so many cracked screens on people who have iphone 4s & motorola droids.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Lord 666 on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By SlyNine on 4/26/2013 11:57:55 PM , Rating: 4
What he clearly meant was your sample is pathetic and you cannot infer any reasonable data from that limited sample.

If these other sources you mention have data supporting your hypothesis, then you should have cited them instead. As it stands you are committing the fallacy; begging the question, by implying that perhaps Samsung isn't as hardy as the IP4 and that Samsung is only beating apple because of their inferior product (again IMPLYING).


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Solandri on 4/27/2013 12:20:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Where is the anecdotal evidence?

I've put it in bold for you.
quote:
Of the 12 or so people who I know who have SG3s

As the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data. A proper sample would control for factors like how roughly or carefully people handle their phones (also whether it's a personal or company-provided phone), how many hours/day the phones are used (and thus vulnerable to being dropped), height of the person, the environment they're most often used in (carpeted floor or outdoors on concrete), etc. And even after you control for those, the angle the phone hits the ground will make a huge difference too.

I haven't seen any studies which attempt to systematically answer the question of phone durability. It'd probably be too expensive because you'd have to destroy so many phones. The manufacturers probably do get breakage statistics from their retailers, but even that is to some extent a self-selected sample. Occasionally I do see different devices treated the exact same way, making it worthy of mentioning, but still not what I'd call reliable data.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MMmLQlrBws#t=0m29s

For me personally, it's an academic point. Over the last 15 years I've dropped each phone I've owned about a dozen times. The only screen I've managed to smash was one which fell out of my pocket as I was closing the car door and got crushed between the door and frame (the plastic-body phone bounced back to shape and still worked btw; I suspect a metal one would've deformed and lost battery contact). So if one does finally break from a drop, I'm more inclined to chalk it up to plain bad luck (i.e. it happened to hit the ground just right to break it) before I'll attribute it to a design defect.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By BRB29 on 4/29/2013 8:37:02 AM , Rating: 1
A sample set of 12 is not statistically effective. Your chart wouldn't make any sense. I can't wait to see how wide your predictions are with a 95 or 99% confidence.

Also, I don't know of too many companies handing out GS3s for corporate use. It's not a good corporate phone. I've seen more iphones and motorolas than anything else.

IDK who made the decision for using GS3s but it is more of a consumer phone and it's excellent at that.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By retrospooty on 4/27/2013 8:39:23 AM , Rating: 4
" one person has gone through four SG3s; three with smashed screens and one lost"

Ummm... Ya, that isnt a user issue, must be a bad phone LOL. The GS3 isnt the most sturdy phone ever built, but its doesnt break when dropped. Not to a problematic point. WTF do these 12 people do for work? Are they some sort of field service that uses the phone outdoors and in rugged environments? If so, they should be getting rugged phones. If someone broke 3 phones in less than 1 year you really need to give that person a feature phone because hey arent responsible enough to own a smartphone.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By messele on 4/27/13, Rating: 0
By retrospooty on 4/28/2013 9:36:29 AM , Rating: 2
??? I guess you troll'd me.

Sorry, starve bitch.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Reclaimer77 on 4/27/2013 11:28:45 AM , Rating: 2
Am I the only one that's missing the part about him knowing 12 or so people who all own GS3's?

Yeah clearly the phone must suck when almost everyone you know bought one...

Lord 666 is a chronic liar, however. Even if he wasn't, his claims require a complete suspension of disbelief.

Hey guys I know 12 people with iPhones, all of them had their batteries explode. One person has done it four times already and caused his house to burn down. True story!!! *wink*


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By Lord 666 on 4/27/2013 5:30:08 PM , Rating: 2
Liar? The 12 people with SG3s are all corporate issued by myself. Did all of them break; nope. Learn how to read.

What part am I missing that you have "this suspension of disbelief?"

At no point did I say the SG3 suck. The phone has its place and increased Android market share. My only question was of Samsung's sales, how much of it is from conquests and same-phone replacements?

Where did I even bring up iPhones?


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By cyberguyz on 4/28/2013 7:22:20 AM , Rating: 3
Dude, sometimes when a smartphone falls and hits a hard surface, it breaks. I don't care who makes it. That will hold true for any smartphone - not just the SG3. They are ALL fragile of mishandled.

Now that Samsung has people who broke their phones coming back to them for another of the same phone tells me that Samsung is doing something right. After all there is no real reason why most of those people can't go out and buy something else line an HTC One or iPhone to replace it, right? They are going out and buying another Galaxy.

You call it profiting off of fragility. I call it Samsung making their customers so happy they keep coming back. That to me sounds like good business.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By retrospooty on 4/28/2013 3:05:09 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly... There have been 50 million GS3's sold. If it were epidemic, the internet would be on fore complaining about it. All phones break when dropped in certain ways at certain percentages... The GS3 isnt on the top of that list, but isnt on the bottom either.


RE: Profiting off of fragile phones
By rob19478 on 4/29/2013 6:11:21 AM , Rating: 2
Only smartphone I had so far is the Nokia 710 which falled twice but is still as new. All of my friends and colleagues have smart phones, most of them are cheap android phones mostly samsung/htc none ever had a broken screens. The couple friends I have with an Iphone had no broken screen either. Actually I know no one with a broken screen, even the users with sg3. Thus i really think that OP of this thread is just a fat liar and invented the whole anecdote to troll.


By retrospooty on 4/29/2013 8:19:33 AM , Rating: 2
LOL... Well, I am not going to say he is lying, but his sample size is rediculous... Well, I know 8 people with GS3's and zero have broken so therefore it is the most stursy phone ever built?

Snd if any One person broke 3 phones and lost another in less than 1 year (The GS3 came out last May) they have a problem. FFS 3 phones broken in a year? He mentioned getting things done before "Hurricane season" above so I am thinking these people are in some type of job that may be a better fit for a ruggedized phone with a smaller screen. Less surface area will always be less brittle... Science man!


dailytech?
By BRB29 on 4/26/2013 12:28:28 PM , Rating: 2
Dailytech should be named Dailyfinancials or Dailypolitics.




RE: dailytech?
By messele on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: dailytech?
By retrospooty on 4/26/2013 1:51:50 PM , Rating: 4
Yet here you are, you keep clicking.


RE: dailytech?
By messele on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: dailytech?
By Cheesew1z69 on 4/26/2013 7:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, we know you are a troll...


RE: dailytech?
By messele on 4/27/2013 3:37:02 PM , Rating: 1
Oh Cheesedick how could you? That hurts man...


RE: dailytech?
By xti on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: dailytech?
By cyberguyz on 4/28/2013 7:24:11 AM , Rating: 2
Don't like it? You know what to do.


Run, Suzy! It's a giant phone!
By rountad on 4/26/2013 5:55:54 PM , Rating: 3
Those girls look like they are trying to escape




By retrospooty on 4/26/2013 6:09:28 PM , Rating: 3
I would be too if giant 6 foot tall phones were after me.


Article title is inaccurate...
By TEAMSWITCHER on 4/29/2013 8:24:56 AM , Rating: 1
Samsung didn't outsell Apple...they out-shipped them. This would explain the lower profits despite higher revenues. And the iHaters are so eager to pounce on bad Apple news they will jump at this contrived data. Until Samsung reports ACTUAL smart phone numbers sold, this is merely an accounting trick, and not a sign that Apple's market strength is fading. Think about it, Apple just had a great quarter, and Mac Sales were down. The iPhone and iPad made up the difference. Yes, profits were down, but they are spending billions on new facilities, products in development, and semi-conductors to replace Samsung. Don't read too much into this, Apple still has the lead and for them...it's only half-time.




By TakinYourPoints on 4/29/2013 5:29:50 PM , Rating: 3
Reporting shipped vs sold is one reason, the other is that Samsung mostly ships low end devices. Flagship phones make up only about a quarter of Samsung's sales, while most of what Apple sells are high end. If Samsung sold a similar percentage of high end devices as Apple then you'd see much closer overall profit margins. There is only so much to be made on cheap/giveaway low end devices.

Samsung does ship more high end Android phones by a very wide margin though. HTC/LG/Moto aren't even close.


That table...
By txDrum on 4/26/2013 12:37:52 PM , Rating: 2
You mixed up a few of the values. Definitely smartphones shipped.




By retrospooty on 4/26/2013 1:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
The 2 most profitable companies in tech... Both notorious for blatantly copying other companies tech and building very popular products from that copied tech. It goes to show you, it pays to make products that people want to buy, period at any cost. To hell with lawsuits and who copied who. just release better and better products and people will buy them. Let the best product at the best price win, not the best team of lawyers.




good for the whole market
By jmerk on 4/27/2013 5:23:17 AM , Rating: 2
I see this as a good thing for not only Samsung but also apple. Apple is has been resting on its butt too long now and hasn't come out with anything that really shakes the market since the ipad came out. I hope that competition will continue to force both companies to higher heights. In the end the consumer is the winner from lower prices and better products.




LMAO @ J Mick
By BSMonitor on 4/26/13, Rating: -1
"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki