SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: HerbVic who wrote (170254)6/3/2014 6:48:54 AM
From: Ryan Bartholomew  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 213176
 
What does the percentage of Apple's profits coming from Macs have to do with the Mac's success after an extended period of small market share?
I was agreeing with the argument that Apple has been able to maintain a profitable product line (Macs) for many years despite never holding a large market share in that segment. A common argument is "Apple doesn't need to worry about iPhone market share - the iPhone can carve out its niche and remain a profitable one even without being commonplace". This is true, but if you look at the Mac (or other premium-priced product lines with a loyal customer base), it's obvious that pricing is a major factor in restraining market share. Imagine if Apple sliced the price of Macs drastically while maintaining quality and everything else constant. Sales would climb and they'd have a larger share. If dramatic enough, this might lead to OS X attracting much more developer and tangential product interest, as it would become a more integral part of the scene. Apple hasn't and likely won't enact such a price cut because it would eliminate their profits from that line, which are largely dependent upon the hardware premium.
your line of reasoning is deeply entrenched in the belief that share trumps profits. It doesn't. To you, the Mac is trumped by the iPhone, and that tarnishes its success. It doesn't.
I haven't suggested share trumps profits. All else being equal, greater share feeds profits because the more prominent a product becomes, the more outside interest it attracts, the more ingrained it becomes, etc. For example, when automobile or home automation manufacturers look to the market to decide which platforms their products will support, they're unlikely to focus upon Blackberry or other platforms that occupy a tiny and dwindling segment of the market, even if that segment is profitable. They'll design for Apple and Android because they'll capture most users that way. However, they'll stick with them only to a point. If iOS or Android dropped to, say 10% market share, they'd probably be placed on the development backburner as well.

Ideally, a company wants to have substantial margins *and* substantial market share, but that's rarely possible. Apple certainly could become dominant in share by slashing prices (and profits, margins), but they've been more successful and sticky by focusing on their niche and not going after large share. The crux of my argument is that the same thing is going to happen with the iPhone, and it's already happening with the iPad. If I'm correct, it will be a marked change from the recent situation, where Apple has enjoyed both substantial market share (even dominant a few years back) and margins in the smartphone and tablet departments.

PS> RE: the graphics you provided - note that % of revenue and % of profits aren't the same.