Apple, Samsung Control 106% of Handset Industry's Profits

Status
Not open for further replies.

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,391
19
19,795
1
[citation][nom]dthx[/nom]Oh ... and I thought that Jean-Claude Van Damme was insane with his 1+1= 11 theory ;-)[/citation]
Then there's McDonald's 2+2=2 theory. Or was that Burger King? I forget.
 

ronch79

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2010
181
0
18,680
0
I'm not accepting the explanation that the reason why it's 106% is because of other companies' losses. 100% makes up the profits of all earnings, not counting losses, that's why we say 'earnings'. There's no way you could put other companies' losses on top of Samsung's and Apple's earnings and call it 106%.
 

dthx

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2010
183
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]ronch79[/nom]I'm not accepting the explanation that the reason why it's 106% is because of other companies' losses. 100% makes up the profits of all earnings, not counting losses, that's why we say 'earnings'. There's no way you could put other companies' losses on top of Samsung's and Apple's earnings and call it 106%.[/citation]
It fits perfectly in the Apple way of presenting things:
Processors are always 2x or 4x faster than their predecessors (so the iPad 4 must now be like 128x faster than the first one ;-) ) The new screen is 75% less reflective (how do you measure that? less reflective than what?), and so on... but there needs to be 5 iSomething articles per day on THG.


 
G

Guest

Guest
this author need to stop writing all this apple stuff... and should be beaten every time time he starts doing it again
 

wemakeourfuture

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2011
601
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]dthx[/nom]Oh ... and I thought that Jean-Claude Van Damme was insane with his 1+1= 11 theory ;-)[/citation]

1+1 can be 11, + represents concatenation
 

Azimuth01

Distinguished
Mar 14, 2009
73
0
18,630
0
Samsung is just baiting Apple into a false scene of security. Just when Apple thinks things are going great, Samsung will stop selling Apple their displays. There's 4 suppliers in the world of flat screen panels? And 2 of them suck so bad that the screens are only found in Chinese rip offs....the other two are Samsung and Sharp.
Good luck getting a retina display from Sharp.....
 

halcyon

Splendid
Dec 4, 2004
5,566
0
25,810
40
[citation][nom]tictictic[/nom]this author need to stop writing all this apple stuff... and should be beaten every time time he starts doing it again[/citation]
I'd imagine he was hired to do the Apple reporting. ...and because the teens here don't like Apple doesn't mean that there is something flawed with his journalism.
 

greghome

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2009
477
0
18,810
6
[citation][nom]dthx[/nom]Oh ... and I thought that Jean-Claude Van Damme was insane with his 1+1= 11 theory ;-)[/citation]

Base 2 numbers?
1+1 = 10 :p
 

canesin

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2010
5
0
18,510
0
This means that they are earning a piece of the debt generated with the loss of other competitors, such as Nokia and Motorola. This is perfectly possible, economy is not high school math.
 

spookie

Distinguished
Nov 11, 2010
132
0
18,680
0
samsung sold more smartphones than Apple and yet they didn't make as much profits...Apple products are clearly over priced
 
G

Guest

Guest
more then 100 %. Hey u this is not cpu or gpu performance chart.
 

gfg

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2005
84
10
18,645
1
Example of a scenario
$Millions % entry (+/-) % entry (+)
samsung 10 44% 44%
apple 15 67% 67%
htc -0.5 -2% 0%
sony -0.2 -1% 0%
other… -1.0 -4% 0%
23.2 100% 107%
 

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
2,019
0
19,780
0
[citation][nom]rebturtle[/nom]106% = Math fail[/citation]
Nope.
4 companies profits...

a $120
b $80
c -$20 ( a loss)
d -$30 ( also a loss)

Total profit of the 4 companies = $150 ( 120 + 80 minus the $50 losses)

A therefore has 80% of the total profits ($120 of $150)
B has 53% of the profits ( $80 of $150)

So A and B combined generated 133% of the total profits in this example.

See, it works :)

 

thecolorblue

Honorable
Jun 5, 2012
548
0
10,980
0
[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]Nope.4 companies profits...a $120b $80c -$20 ( a loss)d -$30 ( also a loss)Total profit of the 4 companies = $150 ( 120 + 80 minus the $50 losses)A therefore has 80% of the total profits ($120 of $150)B has 53% of the profits ( $80 of $150)So A and B combined generated 133% of the total profits in this example.See, it works :)[/citation]
no
 

cknobman

Distinguished
May 2, 2006
1,011
65
19,360
0
[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]Nope.4 companies profits...a $120b $80c -$20 ( a loss)d -$30 ( also a loss)Total profit of the 4 companies = $150 ( 120 + 80 minus the $50 losses)A therefore has 80% of the total profits ($120 of $150)B has 53% of the profits ( $80 of $150)So A and B combined generated 133% of the total profits in this example.See, it works :)[/citation]

Sorry but if you loose money then you cant use that as a calculation in determining total profit. The fact that you LOST MONEY means you have no profit and therefore are not used in calculating PROFIT.
 

djscribbles

Honorable
Apr 6, 2012
1,212
0
11,460
61
[citation][nom]dthx[/nom]/* Oh ... and I thought that Jean-Claude Van Damme was insane with his */ "1" + "1" == "11"; // theory ;-)[/citation]

Fixed, should compile fine now.
 

ivanto

Honorable
Oct 11, 2012
78
0
10,630
0
[citation][nom]rebturtle[/nom]106% = Math fail[/citation]


Reading fail

.
On another note, love how Samsung manages to get 47% of all profits but have consumer perception of an "underdog". Great brand management. Apple should hire whoever manages Samsung's brand.
-IvanTO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY