Apple's Profit Share Versus Android's Market Share
Forbes has a great look at the difference in importance between market share and profit share. Apple is dominating Android in terms of profits.
The most recent data from IDC shows that for Q3 of 2013 Android made up 81 percent of devices shipped. You read that right—four out of every five smartphones shipped in Q3 were built on Android. Meanwhile, Apple’s iOS scraped by with a sad and distant second place figure of only 12.9 percent.
The reality is that Apple is quite comfortable with the market share data, because the profit numbers are all Apple. Data from Canaccord Genuity shows that during that same period—Q3 of 2013—Apple made more money than all of its competitors combined, taking in 56 percent of the profit in the mobile device market.More at Forbes
None of this surprised me. It's very easy to understand if you know that Apple is a premium brand that people aspire to own. Apple has never gone for the low end of the market, that's not where the money is in mobile devices.
I am surprised though by the various sites and publications (and the analysts on Wall Street) who continually bleat on endlessly about market share. How many more years will it take for these people to get a clue about Apple's business model?
If a company is in business to make money (and how many aren't?) then profit share is certainly better than market share. A very high market share number looks impressive, but it's pointless if there aren't enough profits being made from it.
So I call Apple the winner on the market share versus profit share issue.
Steve Jobs Bet the Company On the iPhone
The iPhone is Apple's biggest money maker these days. But Steve Jobs took a huge risk when he bet the entire company on its success, according to CNet.
Schiller took the stand in a damages retrial against Samsung with only 11 minutes left in the session. That gave him just enough time to introduce himself and talk briefly about his role at Apple, the development of the iPhone, and the event introducing the product.
"There were huge risks [with the first iPhone]," he said. "We had a saying inside the company that it was a 'bet the company' product...We were starting to do well again in iPod...Then here we're going to invest all these resources, financial as well as people, in creating this product."More at CNet
Jobs' bet paid off, big time. Still, can you imagine what would have happened if the iPhone had failed? It might have ended with him being fired again as CEO.
PCMag Reviews the iPad mini
PC Magazine has a full review of the new iPad mini with retina. Their take on it is quite positive.
The new Apple iPad mini With Retina display ($399 to $829) is just a shrunken iPad Air. It's so similar to Apple's flagship tablet that your decision will pretty much be completely based on size and price. Like the Air, this is one of the slimmest and best-built tablets you'll find anywhere. It's an absolute pleasure to use.
But unlike the large-screen Air, the iPad mini has many viable small-tablet competitors that are much less expensive, making it less of a must-buy and more of a luxury purchase.More at PC Magazine
PC Magazine is making a mistake by focusing on cheaper competitors to the iPad mini. The folks who want an iPad mini with retina are not going to opt for a cheaper Android product. They want Apple's quality, design and form factors, and they most definitely want to be a part of the iOS app ecosystem.
So price is not going to stop them from getting an iPad mini. They know already that Apple's tablet will cost more than its Android counterparts, and they are fine with that.
What's your take on all this? Tell me in the comments below.