Apple's financials vs. other tech financials…

  • Posted: 23 April 2002 06:22 AM

    I find it interesting to compare Apple’s quarterly financial announcement with other big computer makers.

    Apple:  Revenue 1.5 Bill, Profit 40 Mill (11? per share)
    GateWay:  Revenue .99 Bill, Profit -.39? per share loss (didn’t see a number here)
    Compaq:  Revenue 7.7 Bill, Profit 44 Mill (3? per share)
    HP:  Couldn’t find
    Dell: Couldn’t find

    Does anyone have the info for these two?

    What I find interesting is that Apple has the highest profit per share, and almost the same overall profit as Compaq on 1/6th the revenue.  Someone’s doing something right I think…

    Info on the other two would be nice if any one can find it, I looked, but couldn’t find them.

    The one that disgusts me however is MicroShaft.  2.5 Billion Profit, for one quarter.  That’s just sickening.


    Jon

    Signature


    Jon

    a computer without windows is like a cake without ketchup.

         
  • Posted: 19 April 2002 09:40 AM #1

    maybe i am mis-reading part of this article , but c/net is reporting that today the m$ share prices have fallen from yesterday.

    Signature

    Mac OSX. I’ve upped my standards. Up yours.

    “Sort of? Sort of the end of the world? You mean we won’t be certain? We’ll look around and say ‘Pardon me, did you hear something?’?”

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 20 April 2002 08:25 AM #2

    Here’s Dell’s latest filing .

    February Quarter:

    Revenue: US$8,061 billion
    Profit: US$456 million
    Per share: US$.18 (US$.17 diluted)

    In gross terms, they are spanking Apple and everyone else in the PC market.

    Signature

    Editor - The Mac Observer

    Favorite (but less relevant than it used to be) Quote: Microsoft’s tyranny lies not in its success, but in the way it achieved and maintains that success.

         
  • Posted: 22 April 2002 10:53 PM #3

    On 2002-04-20 11:25, Bryan wrote:
    Here’s Dell’s latest filing .

    February Quarter:

    Revenue: US$8,061 billion
    Profit: US$456 million
    Per share: US$.18 (US$.17 diluted)

    In gross terms, they are spanking Apple and everyone else in the PC market.

    Dell is continuing to overpower its competitors in the PC market. But sustaining the same level of profit growth into higher-end markets may be problematic. Outside of the share that may be ceded by HP/Compaq as they merge and trim operations, I don’t see new areas of growth that will provide the same level of return that they can squeeze from the PC business.

     

         
  • Posted: 23 April 2002 06:22 AM #4

    Dell should soon face the same problem that other mass-marketers have faced. Their strategy is to make money through volume, which is one of the most effective ways to do it. (That also puts the product in the price range of more people because of economies of scale, and the pressure to eliminate inefficiencies.) And this works while there are new places to conquer for that market. This is why you see Wal-Mart expanding to places that no American mass-merchendiser has ever gone before. (Western Argentina, for example.)

    However, once all that competition is gone, you get in the position that Ford and GM (and Sears and RCA and many others) were in before. Their business infrastructures were designed in such a way to allow expansion, in fact, the better they handle expansion, the more these structures require expansion to pay for the infrastructure. Therefore, they must expand into new areas or die.

    In fact, this has been proven, at least as much as these things are ever proven. During WWII, the British navy comissioned a study to reduce the cost of doing business. They discovered that, if a bureaucracy does nothing new and does not change the way it does things, paperwork increases by 3% a year. Thus, the inherent costs of a bureaucracy increase exponentially.

    There are two ways to deal with this: 1) reduce the costs of a bureaucracy, and/or 2) expand to new areas for revenue.

    1) is rare. Bureaucrats do not reduce their budgets voluntarily. Only geek innovations like computing and demands for cost reduction from above, keep these as under control as they are. (A couple weeks ago, I heard US Rep. Steve Buyer on the radio. He said that, in his duties as part of the budget committee, he has talked with the heads of many bureaucracies in DC. All of them were asking for at least 7% increases in budgets; most wanted double-digit increases.)

    That leaves 2), expansion. One approach is to leverage what you have to take business away from competitors with lower costs (the Dell approach). The other is to create a new market (Quicktime) or provide the market with a newer, better product (iPod).

    The problem Dell faces is that the PC market has/had a lot of different manufacturers. Dell could take its time and did not have a lot of entrenched enemies. Also, it was entering a consumer market where people can be easily convinced to change.

    The server market is different. Businesses are, by nature, conservative. (I still see job openings for COBOL programmers, for God’s sake.) They know of IBM, they know of Sun, they know of HP, they know of What’s Been Done Before, they know of What Others Are Doing. Dell does have a brand name and could leverage that into other areas, but there is a big difference in convincing an IT bureaucrat from changing from IBM than convincing consumers by offering (what is perceived as) the same commodity for $40 less.

    Thor Heyerdahl said that it is easy to manipulate the opinions of many, but convincing an individual is tough. Dell is moving from a market of many to a market of individuals ... well, more individual-like people.

     

     

    Signature

    Work is the curse of the drinking classes.
    - Oscar Wilde