The iPhones did way better than expected, a bit over 1,500 sold every
minute in the 3rd Quarter. 270,000 sold in just 30 hours! That's 14
times faster than ATT has ever sold any cell phone.
iPhones go in to Europe (England, Germany, France) next quarter... Asia
in 08...
CUPERTINO, California‹July 25, 2007‹Apple today announced financial
results for its fiscal 2007 third quarter ended June 30, 2007. The
Company posted revenue of $5.41 billion and net quarterly profit of $818
million, or $.92 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of
$4.37 billion and net quarterly profit of $472 million, or $.54 per
diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 36.9 percent,
up from 30.3 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales
accounted for 40 percent of the quarter¹s revenue.
Apple shipped 1,764,000 Macintosh® computers, representing 33 percent
growth over the year-ago quarter and exceeding the previous company
record for quarterly Mac® shipments by over 150,000. The Company also
sold 9,815,000 iPods during the quarter, representing 21 percent growth
over the year-ago quarter.
³We¹re thrilled to report the highest June quarter revenue and profit in
Apple¹s history, along with the highest quarterly Mac sales ever,² said
Steve Jobs, Apple¹s CEO. ³iPhone is off to a great start‹we hope to sell
our one-millionth iPhone by the end of its first full quarter of
sales‹and our new product pipeline is very strong.²
³We are very pleased to report strong financial results including cash
flow from operations exceeding $1.2 billion for the quarter,² said Peter
Oppenheimer, Apple¹s CFO. ³Looking ahead to the fourth fiscal quarter of
2007, we expect revenue of about $5.7 billion and earnings per diluted
share of about $.65.²
Apple will provide live streaming of its Q3 2007 financial results
conference call utilizing QuickTime®, Apple¹s standards-based technology
for live and on-demand audio and video streaming. The live webcast will
begin at 2:00 p.m. PDT on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq307/ and will also be available for
replay. (it's now up and running)
> The great news continues to roll in...
>
> Apple is now more valuable than Hewlett Packard!
>
> The iPhones did way better than expected, a bit over 1,500 sold every
> minute in the 3rd Quarter. 270,000 sold in just 30 hours! That's 14
> times faster than ATT has ever sold any cell phone.
>
> iPhones go in to Europe (England, Germany, France) next quarter... Asia
> in 08...
>
> Apple Stock is up 11.50 points as of this post!
>
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL
>
> All the facts are here:
>
> Apple Reports Third Quarter Results
>
> Record June Quarter Revenue and Profit
>
> Mac Sales Set New Record
>
<snip>
So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
Scott <how...@you.do> wrote:
> Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
> speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
"We¹re thrilled to report the highest June quarter revenue and profit
in
Apple¹s history, along with the highest quarterly Mac sales ever,²
said
Steve Jobs, Apple¹s CEO. ³iPhone is off to a great start..."
Paragaph 3, third line: "iPhone is off to a great start..."
An honest mistake, right?
FYI, Paragraph 4 says that they expect to increase their gross revenue
by $300M for next quarter. YMMV to what degree that speakes to
contributions of what.
> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That
certainly
> speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
To be fair, the iPhone was available for only two out of the quarter's 91
days. If it had been the quarter's biggest news they'd have had a crappy
quarter!
--
Todd Allcock
"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures or double
as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for all the bells and whistles,
but I could communicate better with ACTUAL bells and whistles."
-Bill Maher 9/25/2003
> > So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That
> certainly
> > speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
>
> To be fair, the iPhone was available for only two out of the quarter's 91
> days. If it had been the quarter's biggest news they'd have had a crappy
> quarter!
and to be perfectly clear. it was really only 1.5 days.
they didn't start selling them until 6pm on Friday June 29th.
then all day saturday.
-
then a new quarter began.
(so technically... 6pm-12am the first night and 9 to 9 (roughly) on
saturday. so 18 hours of sales. (except the 1 nyc 24hr store) (not sure
about ATT hours) but no Apple Online iphone orders were activated during
that time since they didn't start arriving until later that first week.
so 18 hours to sell 270,000 units is way off the charts for any
electronic device. ranks up there even with iPods during christmas.
----
but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a full
quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they would have
hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we wouldn't have seen
the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then a 12 point jump after
afters today.
Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in
news:colalovesmacs-FD265E.19045125072007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net:
> Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That
>> certainly speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
>
> do the math scott. 270,000 times $200 profit per unit, $54,000,000 out
> of $818,000,000 and so while not "tiny", it's only 15% of Apple's Q3
> profits.
You aren't real smart, are you? And you obviously didn't read the
financial report, either. If you're trying to look stupid, success has
been acheived.
"The iPhone went on sale in the United States on June 29, but its impact on
Apple's results was limited because it was available only in the last two
days of the quarter and sales will be booked as subscription revenue over
two years."
The figures that I saw were in the order of $14 per phone booked for the
second quarter, not $200.
>
> The big gains with the Mac was the biggest news, then continued strong
> iPod sales (even though they haven't been updated in about a year
>
> Apple will hit 180 easy by christmas. Save your pennies Scott!
>
Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in
news:colalovesmacs-B7055E.19494725072007@mpls-nnrp-05.inet.qwest.net:
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>
>> > So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That
>> certainly
>> > speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
>>
>> To be fair, the iPhone was available for only two out of the
>> quarter's 91 days. If it had been the quarter's biggest news they'd
>> have had a crappy quarter!
>
> and to be perfectly clear. it was really only 1.5 days.
>
> they didn't start selling them until 6pm on Friday June 29th.
>
> then all day saturday.
>
> -
>
> then a new quarter began.
>
> (so technically... 6pm-12am the first night and 9 to 9 (roughly) on
> saturday. so 18 hours of sales. (except the 1 nyc 24hr store) (not
> sure about ATT hours) but no Apple Online iphone orders were activated
> during that time since they didn't start arriving until later that
> first week.
>
> so 18 hours to sell 270,000 units is way off the charts for any
> electronic device. ranks up there even with iPods during christmas.
>
> ----
>
> but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a
> full quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they
> would have hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we
> wouldn't have seen the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then
> a 12 point jump after afters today.
>
In article <_72dneSlq49CcTrbnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@adelphia.com>, Scott
<how.do@you.do> wrote:
> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
> speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
Huh?
It's in the third paragraph, the very first place the CEO is quoted.
The first paragraph is for the meat of the release, anyway -- can't put
it there.
The second gives changes in the major lines, and yes, Macs and iPods
are most important.
How could anyone expect iPhone to be mentioned above the two most
critical lines of the company? Especially when it was sold for such a
short time! It's only the part many people were interested to read;
it's not the most important data they had to share.
> The great news continues to roll in...
>
> Apple is now more valuable than Hewlett Packard!
>
(snip)
None of this drivel has anything to do with Linux. Please post your
cheerleading in Mac related groups.
In article <_72dneSlq49CcTrbnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@adelphia.com>,
Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
> Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in news:colalovesmacs-
> 958EC3.18130025072007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net:
>
> > The great news continues to roll in...
> >
> > Apple is now more valuable than Hewlett Packard!
> >
> > The iPhones did way better than expected, a bit over 1,500 sold every
> > minute in the 3rd Quarter. 270,000 sold in just 30 hours! That's 14
> > times faster than ATT has ever sold any cell phone.
> >
> > iPhones go in to Europe (England, Germany, France) next quarter... Asia
> > in 08...
> >
> > Apple Stock is up 11.50 points as of this post!
> >
> > http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL
> >
> > All the facts are here:
> >
> > Apple Reports Third Quarter Results
> >
> > Record June Quarter Revenue and Profit
> >
> > Mac Sales Set New Record
> >
> <snip>
>
> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
> speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
Yep. All of 30 hours contribution for the entire quarter...
> > but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a
> > full quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they
> > would have hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we
> > wouldn't have seen the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then
> > a 12 point jump after afters today.
>
> The ATT info was accurate.
but not for sales. and many of the news outlets picked it up as "slow
sales". when it was really "slow activation" because ATT couldn't handle
that much demand.
the funny news item from this morning, was a channel i was watching said:
microsoft iphone off to a slow start ///// then some commercials, then
they went back and said apple's iphone may not be as popular as first
thought, then they quoted the erroneous ATT "activation" numbers, but
implied they were "sales" numbers, so i had a laugh over that one!
that's why i always use facts, it's easier that way.
> > do the math scott. 270,000 times $200 profit per unit, $54,000,000 out
> > of $818,000,000 and so while not "tiny", it's only 15% of Apple's Q3
> > profits.
>
> You aren't real smart, are you? And you obviously didn't read the
> financial report, either. If you're trying to look stupid, success has
> been acheived.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/25/news....reut/index.ht
> m
>
> "The iPhone went on sale in the United States on June 29, but its impact on
> Apple's results was limited because it was available only in the last two
> days of the quarter and sales will be booked as subscription revenue over
> two years."
>
> The figures that I saw were in the order of $14 per phone booked for the
> second quarter, not $200.
but you are confused. you are talking about the "subscription" kickback
to apple from ATT for each iphone contract. ZERO of those funds were in
the 3rd quarter numbers. (listen to the conference call)
the $200 is the PROFIT of each iphone, which certainly does appear on
the 3rd quarter numbers.
you were trying to talk about something else, cnn didn't word it
correctly so that's why you got confused.
> > The big gains with the Mac was the biggest news, then continued strong
> > iPod sales (even though they haven't been updated in about a year
> >
> > Apple will hit 180 easy by christmas. Save your pennies Scott!
>
> Won't have to save many.
In article <_72dneSlq49CcTrbnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d@adelphia.com>,
Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
> Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote in news:colalovesmacs-
> 958EC3.18130025072007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net:
>
> > The great news continues to roll in...
> >
> > Apple is now more valuable than Hewlett Packard!
> >
> > The iPhones did way better than expected, a bit over 1,500 sold every
> > minute in the 3rd Quarter. 270,000 sold in just 30 hours! That's 14
> > times faster than ATT has ever sold any cell phone.
> >
> > iPhones go in to Europe (England, Germany, France) next quarter... Asia
> > in 08...
> >
> > Apple Stock is up 11.50 points as of this post!
> >
> > http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL
> >
> > All the facts are here:
> >
> > Apple Reports Third Quarter Results
> >
> > Record June Quarter Revenue and Profit
> >
> > Mac Sales Set New Record
> >
> <snip>
>
> So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
> speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
Yeah...
Because it was expected to do so much for a quarter where it had been on
sale for a grand total of 1.25 days out of 91.25...
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Oxford wrote:
> Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>>> but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a
>>> full quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they
>>> would have hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we
>>> wouldn't have seen the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then
>>> a 12 point jump after afters today.
>> The ATT info was accurate.
>
> but not for sales. and many of the news outlets picked it up as "slow
> sales". when it was really "slow activation" because ATT couldn't handle
> that much demand.
Both ATT and Apple said that only a small
percentage of people were affected by activation
issues.
On Jul 25, 5:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
> The great news continues to roll in...
Translation:
1) The iPhone bombed
2) They continue to milk the iPod, but it's dwindling.
3) In the absense of being able to report any good consumer electonics
news, they come up with a lame story about selling more Macs (oh,
yeah, that's in America only -- Macs don't sell worldwide).
Speaking of Road Hogs that should get out da' way (for Linux/OSS to
move on) on the Road Ahead, Microsoft is a now a sidelined 1959
streamliner RV that finally came to rest in a ditch. Apple is a big
chugging 18-wheeler that has yet to give way and admit total defeat --
even though it's driver is old and deluded.
> On Jul 25, 5:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>> The great news continues to roll in...
>
> Translation:
>
> 1) The iPhone bombed
,----
| http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6916672.stm
|
| Apple has made strong three-month profits, helped by Mac and iPhone
| sales, even though the phones were only available for two days of the
| quarter.
|
| Apple sold 270,000 iPhones on the first two days of their US launch.
|
| Net income was $818m between April and June, up 73% from
| the same period of 2006.
`----
> 2) They continue to milk the iPod, but it's dwindling.
> 3) In the absense of being able to report any good consumer electonics
> news, they come up with a lame story about selling more Macs (oh,
> yeah, that's in America only -- Macs don't sell worldwide).
>
> Speaking of Road Hogs that should get out da' way (for Linux/OSS to
> move on) on the Road Ahead, Microsoft is a now a sidelined 1959
> streamliner RV that finally came to rest in a ditch. Apple is a big
> chugging 18-wheeler that has yet to give way and admit total defeat --
> even though it's driver is old and deluded.
> Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>> > do the math scott. 270,000 times $200 profit per unit, $54,000,000
>> > out of $818,000,000 and so while not "tiny", it's only 15% of Apple's
>> > Q3 profits.
>>
>> You aren't real smart, are you? And you obviously didn't read the
>> financial report, either. If you're trying to look stupid, success has
>> been acheived.
>>
>> http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/25/news...earnings.reut/
index.ht
>> m
>>
>> "The iPhone went on sale in the United States on June 29, but its
>> impact on Apple's results was limited because it was available only in
>> the last two days of the quarter and sales will be booked as
>> subscription revenue over two years."
>>
>> The figures that I saw were in the order of $14 per phone booked for
>> the second quarter, not $200.
>
> but you are confused. you are talking about the "subscription" kickback
> to apple from ATT for each iphone contract. ZERO of those funds were in
> the 3rd quarter numbers. (listen to the conference call)
>
> the $200 is the PROFIT of each iphone, which certainly does appear on
> the 3rd quarter numbers.
>
> you were trying to talk about something else, cnn didn't word it
> correctly so that's why you got confused.
>
>
>> > The big gains with the Mac was the biggest news, then continued
>> > strong iPod sales (even though they haven't been updated in about a
>> > year
>> >
>> > Apple will hit 180 easy by christmas. Save your pennies Scott!
>>
>> Won't have to save many.
>
> great, then you are ready to invest in aapl.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:59:09 -0700, John Bailo, Texeme.Construct wrote:
> On Jul 25, 5:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>> The great news continues to roll in...
>
> Translation:
>
> 1) The iPhone bombed
The iPhone has not bombed by anyone's measure, but you.
> 2) They continue to milk the iPod, but it's dwindling.
They are not milking the iPhone.
> 3) In the absense
> of being able to report any good consumer electonics news, they come up
Just what do you consider good consumer electronics news?
> with a lame story about selling more Macs (oh, yeah, that's in America
> only -- Macs don't sell worldwide).
It doesn't matter where Macs do and don't sell, as long as they sell. And
apparently,Apple's selling more now then ever before.
>
> Speaking of Road Hogs that should get out da' way (for Linux/OSS to move
> on) on the Road Ahead,
OSS... you mean all those OSS projects Apple has either started, or
regularly contributes to?
<http://www.apple.com/opensource/>
And that includes Webkit.
> Microsoft is a now a sidelined 1959 streamliner
> RV that finally came to rest in a ditch.
Really? Then explain why the desktop market is still a Microsoft market.
> Apple is a big chugging
> 18-wheeler that has yet to give way and admit total defeat -- even
> though it's driver is old and deluded.
.... except that they continue to produce products that win new users and
win creative design awards.
Really, Bailo, you can find a lot of stuff to criticize Apple for without
having to create BS.
On Jul 26, 3:59 am, "John Bailo, Texeme.Construct"
<jaba...@texeme.com> wrote:
> On Jul 25, 5:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > The great news continues to roll in...
>
> Translation:
>
> 1) The iPhone bombed
270,000 units sold in 30 hours is considered bombing?
> 2) They continue to milk the iPod, but it's dwindling.
iPod sales increased compared to the same quarter a year ago.
> 3) In the absense of being able to report any good consumer electonics
> news, they come up with a lame story about selling more Macs (oh,
> yeah, that's in America only -- Macs don't sell worldwide).
So Apple sold more iPods, Macs, and iPhones (obviously) than the same
quarter a year ago, is more profitable than any other electronics/
computer reseller in the world besides HP.and has a higher market cap
than any other electronics company in the world, except for HP.
Scott's reading comprehension? (was: Apple hits record success once again!)
Mitch <mi...@hawaii.rr> wrote:
> Scott <how...@you.do> wrote:
> > So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That certainly
> > speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
>
> Huh?
> It's in the third paragraph, the very first place the CEO is quoted.
Mitch,
I caught that too, and posted it yesterday with an opportunity for
Scott to admit that he made an honest mistake.
Perhaps Scott has "missed it" again, but since my post was only an
hour before he returned to the thread, its possible that it somehow
didn't get disseminated across USENET.
You know - - its how all of those "technology things" sometimes get
hung up in the ether. The same utterly simple stuff that people are
getting hung up over in regards to Apple sales vs. AT&T Activations.
> How could anyone expect iPhone to be mentioned above the two most
> critical lines of the company? Especially when it was sold for such a
> short time!
It doesn't matter. Scott has now his own subject line to test how bad
his reading comprehension is. If he misses it again, it would no
longer be a credible "accident", but is more likely that he's trying
to avoid that he was wrong by trying to ignore it. If that's the
case, it would only the 14th time that such a thing has ever happened
on USENET
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>
> > > So, no mention of the iPhone in the first five paragraphs. That
> > certainly
> > > speakes to its contribution to the quarter.
> >
> > To be fair, the iPhone was available for only two out of the quarter's 91
> > days. If it had been the quarter's biggest news they'd have had a crappy
> > quarter!
>
> and to be perfectly clear. it was really only 1.5 days.
>
> they didn't start selling them until 6pm on Friday June 29th.
>
> then all day saturday.
>
> -
>
> then a new quarter began.
>
> (so technically... 6pm-12am the first night and 9 to 9 (roughly) on
> saturday. so 18 hours of sales. (except the 1 nyc 24hr store) (not sure
> about ATT hours) but no Apple Online iphone orders were activated during
> that time since they didn't start arriving until later that first week.
>
> so 18 hours to sell 270,000 units is way off the charts for any
> electronic device. ranks up there even with iPods during christmas.
"18 hours to sell 270,000 units" is a completely bogus statement and
bears no relationship to reality.
The 270,000 will be the number of mobiles despatched from Apple's
warehouse and therefore logged as "sales" by Apple. These phones will
obviously have been sent out prior to the 29th embargo so we don't know
over what time period Apple sold them. All we know is that they shipped
270,000 devices to dealers in Q3.
> but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a full
> quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they would have
> hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we wouldn't have seen
> the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then a 12 point jump after
> afters today.
NEW YORK - Apple Inc. stock fell 6 percent Tuesday on signs that
demand for the new iPhone could fail to meet investors' expectations.
Activations from AT&T Inc., the exclusive carrier for the iPhone, are
a "disappointment," Piper Jaffray & Co. analyst Gene Munster said.
AT&T said Tuesday that it activated 146,000 of the phones in the first
two days of the sales agreement.
CIBC World Markets said that demand for the iPhone has had a
"significant decline" in the past 10 days and that Apple and AT&T
might try to boost demand by increasing their marketing efforts. Apple
introduced the iPhone in the U.S. on June 29.
"We have noticed decent inventories at stores and thin demand at
best," CIBC analyst Ittai Kidron wrote in a note. "Among the stores we
visited, most visitors were not looking at the device, and only a very
small subset bought it."
Shares of Apple fell $8.81, or 6.1 percent, to $134.89, on the Nasdaq
stock market.
"While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
> > so 18 hours to sell 270,000 units is way off the charts for any
> > electronic device. ranks up there even with iPods during christmas.
>
> "18 hours to sell 270,000 units" is a completely bogus statement and
> bears no relationship to reality.
>
> The 270,000 will be the number of mobiles despatched from Apple's
> warehouse and therefore logged as "sales" by Apple. These phones will
> obviously have been sent out prior to the 29th embargo so we don't know
> over what time period Apple sold them. All we know is that they shipped
> 270,000 devices to dealers in Q3.
incorrect peter, apple does not "account" for a sale until it has been
sold and has left apple's property. so while the ATT iphones were likely
counted as "sold" since they left apple's inventory/property. an iphone
cannot be part of the 270K number unless it is "sold" and "shipped".
outside of ATT, "apple" was the only other "dealer" of the iphone.
> > but to be fair, apple did screw up by releasing it 2 days before a full
> > quarter ended. if they would have waited just one week, they would have
> > hit the 3-4 million number for the 4th quarter and we wouldn't have seen
> > the 8 point drop from the erroneous ATT info, then a 12 point jump after
> > afters today.
>
> But no headlines that the gullable can spin...
yeah, people in the know surely laughed at the news orgs for messing
that up, and you can be sure heads rolled at ATT because that number
should not have been allowed to be issued.
On Jul 26, 1:53 pm, Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> On Jul 25, 7:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > The great news continues to roll in...
>
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...725jul25,0,218...
>
> Shares fall on soft demand for iPhone
>
> Bloomberg News
> July 25, 2007
>
> NEW YORK - Apple Inc. stock fell 6 percent Tuesday on signs that
> demand for the new iPhone could fail to meet investors' expectations.
>
> Activations from AT&T Inc., the exclusive carrier for the iPhone, are
> a "disappointment," Piper Jaffray & Co. analyst Gene Munster said.
>
> AT&T said Tuesday that it activated 146,000 of the phones in the first
> two days of the sales agreement.
>
> CIBC World Markets said that demand for the iPhone has had a
> "significant decline" in the past 10 days and that Apple and AT&T
> might try to boost demand by increasing their marketing efforts. Apple
> introduced the iPhone in the U.S. on June 29.
>
> "We have noticed decent inventories at stores and thin demand at
> best," CIBC analyst Ittai Kidron wrote in a note. "Among the stores we
> visited, most visitors were not looking at the device, and only a very
> small subset bought it."
>
> Shares of Apple fell $8.81, or 6.1 percent, to $134.89, on the Nasdaq
> stock market.
>
> http://www.silvermac.com/2007/iphone-disappointment/
>
> "While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
> think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
> compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
> US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
> transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
> owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
Why are you posting old news, Edwin?
Apple's stock price is now at $143.71 -- right back to where it was
before the AT&T announcement. Apple also announced that they sold
270,000 as opposed to the 143,000 that AT&T said were activated.
On Jul 26, 1:23 pm, KDT <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 26, 1:53 pm, Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 25, 7:13 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > The great news continues to roll in...
>
> >http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...725jul25,0,218...
>
> > Shares fall on soft demand for iPhone
>
> > Bloomberg News
> > July 25, 2007
>
> > NEW YORK - Apple Inc. stock fell 6 percent Tuesday on signs that
> > demand for the new iPhone could fail to meet investors' expectations.
>
> > Activations from AT&T Inc., the exclusive carrier for the iPhone, are
> > a "disappointment," Piper Jaffray & Co. analyst Gene Munster said.
>
> > AT&T said Tuesday that it activated 146,000 of the phones in the first
> > two days of the sales agreement.
>
> > CIBC World Markets said that demand for the iPhone has had a
> > "significant decline" in the past 10 days and that Apple and AT&T
> > might try to boost demand by increasing their marketing efforts. Apple
> > introduced the iPhone in the U.S. on June 29.
>
> > "We have noticed decent inventories at stores and thin demand at
> > best," CIBC analyst Ittai Kidron wrote in a note. "Among the stores we
> > visited, most visitors were not looking at the device, and only a very
> > small subset bought it."
>
> > Shares of Apple fell $8.81, or 6.1 percent, to $134.89, on the Nasdaq
> > stock market.
>
> >http://www.silvermac.com/2007/iphone-disappointment/
>
> > "While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
> > think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
> > compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
> > US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
> > transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
> > owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
>
> Why are you posting old news, Edwin?
I'm not.
> Apple's stock price is now at $143.71 -- right back to where it was
> before the AT&T announcement. Apple also announced that they sold
> 270,000 as opposed to the 143,000 that AT&T said were activated.
In article <1185475761.173468.100980@57g2000hsv.googlegroups. com>,
Edwin <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.silvermac.com/2007/iphone-disappointment/
> >
> > > "While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
> > > think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
> > > compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
> > > US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
> > > transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
> > > owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
> >
> > Why are you posting old news, Edwin?
>
> I'm not.
Yeah, you are.
>
> > Apple's stock price is now at $143.71 -- right back to where it was
> > before the AT&T announcement. Apple also announced that they sold
> > 270,000 as opposed to the 143,000 that AT&T said were activated.
>
> It's the activation figure that counts.
Why?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
On Jul 26, 1:55 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article <1185475761.173468.100...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups. com>,
>
> Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > >http://www.silvermac.com/2007/iphone-disappointment/
>
> > > > "While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
> > > > think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
> > > > compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
> > > > US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
> > > > transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
> > > > owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
>
> > > Why are you posting old news, Edwin?
>
> > I'm not.
>
> Yeah, you are.
You're lying again.
>
> > > Apple's stock price is now at $143.71 -- right back to where it was
> > > before the AT&T announcement. Apple also announced that they sold
> > > 270,000 as opposed to the 143,000 that AT&T said were activated.
>
> > It's the activation figure that counts.
>
> Why?
In article <1185476330.611978.21860@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.c om>,
Edwin <thorne25@juno.com> wrote:
> On Jul 26, 1:55 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > In article <1185475761.173468.100...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups. com>,
> >
> > Edwin <thorn...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > >http://www.silvermac.com/2007/iphone-disappointment/
> >
> > > > > "While I find iPhone, the Apple's one, to be a very fine product, I
> > > > > think it will be out of reach of many due to its high price and the
> > > > > compulsory two years contract with the mobile carrier company. In the
> > > > > US this is Cingular, in Australia very likely to be Telstra. Data
> > > > > transfer via GSM network is very expensive in Australia and I think
> > > > > owning an iPhone down here will be a very costly luxury."
> >
> > > > Why are you posting old news, Edwin?
> >
> > > I'm not.
> >
> > Yeah, you are.
>
> You're lying again.
Nope. Tuesday's news is old news in the stock market.
>
> >
> > > > Apple's stock price is now at $143.71 -- right back to where it was
> > > > before the AT&T announcement. Apple also announced that they sold
> > > > 270,000 as opposed to the 143,000 that AT&T said were activated.
> >
> > > It's the activation figure that counts.
> >
> > Why?
>
> You need to be told why? Really?
Because you're making a claim. According to "netiquette" (in which you
put so much trust... ...until you want to abuse it), you should support
your claim.
If Apple were to sell 10 million iPhones and none ever got activated,
why would that matter?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Apple hits record success once again! 
Linear Mode
