Mr Gruener, does market saturation and sluggish growth alter the definition of "crash"?
The PC market as a whole isn't going to grow much more in the developed world. That's the natural progression of technology, when a technology becomes ubiquitous growth slows. Aside from manipulating the market there isn't a way to avoid the basic rules of economics.
Apple is seeing explosive growth, but it's unsustainable, and there are likely going to be a lot of people who lose a lot of money when that bubble bursts. They make fine machines, but ask your broker if he'd risk his personal IRA to bet on AAPL. The AAPL price is a fluke like QCOM in 2000, and is in no way related to their actual revenue dividends or profitability.
Gross Profit 2010 MSFT 54.37B 2010 DELL 11.40B HPQ 8.76B Lenovo Goup 2.36B. I concede other factors help those numbers a large amount, but even with 3% growth the PC market from the 2010 350.9 million units that's still an increase of over 10.5 million units sold. The cost of parts is decreasing, as is the cost of production. The margins should get higher for both ODMs and OEMs in the next few years, so there is no need to even mention four letter words.
Here are the numbers in long form I gave earlier.
$54,370,000,000
$11,400,000,000
$8,760,000,000
$2,360,000,000
There were roughtly 350,900,000 PCs sold in 201o, and with a 3% growth
roughly 360,417,000 PCs would be sold.
Mr Gruener, take a few steps back, breath, and think about just how large those numbers are in comparison to the numbers you see around you daily. It's forgetting that the market is tad finicky at times which causes most crashes.
The PC market isn't real estate c.2007 or telecom c.2000. 3% market growth in an economy with 9% US unemployment, US real personal income down 0.1% and US GNP up less than 1.5% so far is pretty impressive. The stats for other large economies like the UK aren't too different. 3% growth is the sign of a resilient industry in times like these, not of impending doom or perilous futures.