Dissecting an Apple Bear
From my AAPL 4Q11 recap posted last night:
"Earnings misses are not the end of the world. They can be healthy, serving as a foundation for further gains. Misses act as a reset for increasingly lofty expectations. Problems arise though when people look for answers to an earnings miss and are quick to make incorrect assumptions…. Apple bears are getting louder. People are wondering. People are asking.”
It wasn’t too hard to find an Apple bear (or a “trader” with provocative thought questions as they often want to be thought of) with a good list of questions for AAPL shareholders. Today it’s courtesy of Doug Kass writing for the Street. I think his questions are a good summary of the main bearish arguments that are being floated against Apple.
(my comments in bold).
Kass: If I were an Apple shareholder, I would be asking myself the following eight questions this morning (I don’t have the answers, and I didn’t have the foresight to buy the shares at lower levels!):
- Valuation is rarely a market catalyst. Who doesn’t know that Apple’s valuation, excluding its cash position, appears inexpensive?
Since when was Apple’s valuation looked at as a catalyst for the shares? I actually have Apple’s P/E multiple declining through 2013. If you ask me; iPhone, iPad, iOS, and Apple management & culture isn’t too shabby of a catalyst list.
- In reading the analysts’ earnings post mortem and explanation of why the company missed on the bottom line, why is it only now so obvious to analysts that Apple has been impacted by iPhone purchase deferrals ahead of the introduction of the iPhone 4S? Why wasn’t that included in analysts’ estimates?
My post from last night pretty much answers this question. We still don’t know how people buy phones.
- In my few decades of investing experience, when companies cite the impact of weather, seasonality or product transitions (as was the case with Apple) as reasons for a profit miss, it is usually a sign of a company’s maturing (sales and earnings) growth cycle. Have we seen a peak in growth rates at Apple, and beyond the quarter catch-up, might we begin to see decelerating growth at Apple in 2012-2014?
If Apple actually missed its guidance, this question would make a lot more sense.
- Size matters. Should investors be surprised that, with annual revenue having risen (fiscal 2011 September year just completed) to over $108 billion, sales and profit growth will become more difficult going forward? Fiscal 2014 sales are projected to approach $200 billion. Have the outlook and expectations for Apple grown too optimistic?
Is he suggesting to buy smaller companies with weaker fundamentals because they have a smaller market capitalization?
- A 3 million unit shortfall in iPhone sales and slightly weaker iPad numbers (11.1 million vs. consensus of 11.6 million, but there were estimates for 13 million units!) resulted in the profit miss. Are investors overestimating the short-term growth prospects for the overall tablet market? And what about the weakening trend in iPod unit sales (down 27% year over year) that signal a secular decline in the product category? Doesn’t this place more pressure on the success of future new products?
His iPad question, addressed in my piece last night, contains some validity, however, its funny that these same people will then tout how other tablets - without an Apple logo - will do just fine. If the tablet market is not as big as initially thought (11 million iPads/quarter doesn’t seem too small to me), that doesn’t just spell trouble for Apple, it will mean Amazon, Google, and any other player looking to actually gain a footing in tablets will have a tough time.
- Apple’s corporate and product success are well known. Are these success too well known as manifested in a near unanimity of bullishness on the part of Wall Street’s sell side?
Is he suggesting to buy a company with more corporate and product failures because less people will be bullish on the stock?
- The ownership of Apple shares is broad, and institutional sentiment toward the company appears to be approaching a positive extreme. One could argue that the long side in Apple is crowded. Doesn’t everyone own the stock? Who will be the next investor in Apple’s shares that will catapult the valuation and shares toward the next and higher level)?
I thought everyone who wanted to own Apple already owned shares back at $250? Institutional owners aren’t allowed to add to their positions?
- Most recognize that Steve Jobs has already thought about and has contributed to another few years of new product innovation. But will the miss last night revive the issue whether the remarkable disruptive innovation instituted by Jobs (in the past) can be continued into the future after his imprint is removed?
Would this question have been asked if analysts’ expectations weren’t high and Apple instead blew consensus numbers out of the park?
Doug Kass did a good job at asking the obvious bearish questions, from a traders’ perspective. There is a bear argument to be made for every company (including Apple), but Kass’s arguments are largely irrelevant, focused on short-term stock movements. The actual long-term Apple bear argument centers around the scenario where Apple products become stale (see RIMM) and people begin to move away from iOS, iPhones and iPads. Additional Apple problems would center around conflict within Apple’s management team post Steve Jobs or post Tim Cook.
The best part about this post is I am only writing it - answering these bearish AAPL questions - because Apple is executing on all cylinders.
Final Thoughts on Apple's 4Q11
iPhone. We Still Don’t Know How People Buy Phones.
While everyone has been quick to blame unrealistic expectations for Apple’s 4Q11 “miss”, I think the rare earnings disappointment was partially due to a lack of understanding on how iPhone demand fluctuates and how people buy phones. Apple just became a much harder company to model.
It is incorrect to say that analysts never considered people waiting to buy iPhones ahead of a rumored iPhone refresh. Almost every analyst note published in the past three months mentioned an iPhone refresh and the tendency for pent-up demand to build as consumers wait on iPhone purchases. Apple management forewarned the same scenario on Apple’s 3Q11 earnings call. People were expecting it. Even my analysis was based on the idea that a slowdown in iPhone 4 sales in countries that typically get the new iPhone on launch would be offset by continued strong iPhone 4 sales in countries where the new iPhone would take months to reach. That didn’t happen.
Instead, the world pretty much stopped buying iPhones in September. I don’t think it’s much of an exaggeration to say that iPhone sales almost came to a screeching halt towards the end of September. Apple specifically mentioned that sales slowed further in the second half of the quarter. Running rough calculations, I estimate iPhone sales may have been tracking down 20-40% yoy in the U.S. towards the end of September. Pretty remarkable. I wonder if Apple retail stores saw this noticeable decline in demand? Analysts underestimated how many people were aware of iPhone rumors and were waiting to buy. Apple was surprised too, with both Tim Cook and Peter Oppenheimer mentioning “rumors” as one cause for weak iPhone sales. Anecdotally, I talked with quite a few BlackBerry and Android users over the summer, all of whom were well aware of a new iPhone coming out sometime in the fall. I assumed there were other people still buying iPhones.
The iPhone miss (and let me be clear, the iPhone number was pretty negative at only 21% yoy growth) came as a huge surprise with analysts and the investment community thinking the iPhone demand cycle had become independent of product transitions. We thought that sequential quarterly iPhone growth is the new normal, regardless of how a new iPhone impacts deferred sales. Apple’s significant 3Q11 iPhone beat cemented the idea of sequential quarterly growth. Ironically, many analysts thought the new iPhone was going to be unveiled at WWDC and had modeled for declining iPhone sales in 3Q11 due to deferred sales (people waiting). Instead, Apple beat everyone’s iPhone estimate by a mile as iPhone rumors really didn’t grow until August. Independent Apple analysts (including myself) concluded it would be unlikely that Apple would report a sequential quarterly decline in iPhone shipments in 4Q, which meant Apple would sell more than 20.3 million iPhones (their 3Q11 total). We weren’t necessary making a call on growth assumptions, or at least I wasn’t. Some analysts did get it right. Goldman Sachs modeled 16.9 million iPhones – essentially spot on. Still wondering why Goldman was picked first for Apple’s earnings Q&A?
I don’t think our iPhone expectations were overly optimistic though as our previous demand forecasts have now shifted to 1Q12. Our annual iPhone sales estimates remain largely unchanged. Instead, our timing was wrong. I think iPhone’s increasing demand complexity was the main culprit for the iPhone miss. Even Apple management thought they would sell more iPhones in 4Q11.* We still don’t understand how consumers buy phones. For many, buying a phone is categorized as “the big purchase” even though the actual cost of the phone is spread over 2 years. A $110 monthly cell phone bill 17 months from now is not as important as the difference between a free subsidized phone and a $199 subsidized phone today. People wait to buy phones until their contract is up and - this is key - they are willing to wait after their contract is up to take advantage of the carrier’s subsidy and buy a phone that they really want, even if it means holding off on a new cellphone for an extra 4 or 5 months. This trend will only grow as smart phones flourish.
Reports of record iPhone 4 sales over opening weekend (including positive commentary from AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint) are evidence that iPhone demand is back. Going forward, analysts should model a slowdown in iPhone sales during product transitions. If a new iPhone is rumored for October 2012, one should assume people will stop buying iPhones in September. Seems obvious now, but many got it wrong. In addition, a new form factor will also lead to difficultly in meeting initial supply, which could hurt early sales.
iPad. The Wild West.
Apple sold 11.1 million iPads in 4Q11. I expected 11.7 million and I had originally expected 11.1 million, so iPad is performing near my expectations. Unfortunately, many independent analysts have been running with extremely aggressive iPad expectations. I do think these expectations need to come down. Apple noted iPad supply and demand is now in balance. Apple sold every iPad that consumers desired; 11.1 million/quarter. I still get nervous with iPad because it is such a young product. What if demand really isn’t as good as we think? It doesn’t mean the product is a failure, instead maybe people just haven’t yet become comfortable with tablet computing. Sales fluctuations will occur and people need to plan for it. I found it interesting that Tim Cook made the claim that iPad could turn out to be larger than the PC market. In the past, Apple’s remarks were more vague and general. Apple wants to set the tone for iPad. This is the bet. This is the future.
Mac. Steady as She Goes.
Apple’s forgotten child (at least in many investor’s eyes) continues to do well, taking market share from Windows with both hands. Strong 37% yoy growth in portables (thank you Macbook Air) speaks well of Apple’s growing brand in the traditional PC market. Yet compared to iPad and iPhone, Mac’s influence is just too small to impact earnings to any large degree.
iPod. Out to Pasture.
Declining iPod sales are now normal and to be expected. In fact, iPod declines are accelerating. Sure, the “newer” iPods might change this trend a bit in the near term, but when excluding iPod Touch, the iPod is only a fraction of its former self.
Guidance. Strong.
Apple’s 1Q12 guidance was very strong, near current consensus (which is very rare). Management indicated they will sell a record number of iPhones and iPads during the holiday quarter (not that shocking). Since Apple “missed” earnings, analysts will be more conservative with their forward expectations, unsure of how much cushion Apple built into its guidance. Many analysts were already running with conservative assumptions so the 4Q11 “miss” should not weigh much on forward EPS estimates.
Thoughts on Apple. Quarterly Results Rarely Matter For Superior Management Teams
Earnings misses are not the end of the world. They can be healthy, serving as a foundation for further gains. Misses act as a reset for increasingly lofty expectations. Problems arise though when people look for answers to an earnings miss and are quick to make incorrect assumptions. A prime example is Apple’s retail store trends. Same store sales were down approximately 10% (which means that your local Apple store reported 10% less revenue, on average, this past quarter vs. last year – a pretty sizable decline). Well, hello, iPhone sales were miserable. With an ASP of over $600 and a concentration of Apple retail stores in the U.S., a slowdown in iPhone sales (maybe as much as 30-40% in September in the U.S.) will have an impact on total retail store revenue. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
Apple will get penalized in the near-term because of its earnings “miss”. People will remain more cautious on iPhone and iPad growth. Expectations are being reduced (especially among the independents). Apple bears are getting louder. People are wondering. People are asking. Earlier this week, the biggest question was how high the stock would gap up after earnings. Now people are thinking of the “what ifs”, what if people stop buying iPhones, what if iPad sales slow down. While such questions might seem silly to think given the technicalities of Apple’s “miss”, its nevertheless happening.
Good companies sometimes have “bad” earnings reports (who would have thought 50% EPS growth would be considered bad). In such circumstances, time is your friend. For long-term investors, quarterly results shouldn’t even matter much, instead attention should be given to the current management team and its ability to innovate.
*UPDATE: Thanks to @adamthompson32 for pointing out that Apple actually said 4Q11 iPhone sales were better than expected. Tim Cook: “And as we have predicted…(iPhone) sell-through decline did occur in the quarter, but not nearly to the extent that we thought and therefore, we significantly beat our guidance.”
My Idol, Steve
Steve was one my idols, not because he helped build Apple Inc., but rather for his ability to turn Apple into a set of beliefs.
That technology is too powerful of a force to enjoy without acquired perception and natural intelligence.
That product design has the power to momentarily satisfy the never-ending search for order and reason.
Many are asking themselves why they feel so much sadness over Steve’s death even though they never knew him on a personal level. Steve became a symbol for many of us, representing how technology can push society forward. Edison advanced society in the late 19th and early 20th century, Disney in the early and mid-20th century, and Steve in the late 20th and early 21st century. Many tears are being shed over Steve’s death because deep down we know it’s unlikely we will see another visionary like Steve in our lifetime.
AAPL 4Q11 Earnings Cheat Sheet
AAPL Orchard Estimates (change from previous estimate in italics)
Revenue: $32.6 billion (up $600 million) (guidance: $25.0 billion/consensus: $29.0 billion)
GM: 40.5% (down 40 basis points) (guidance: 38.0%/consensus 39.6%).
EPS: $8.55 (up $0.10) (guidance: $5.50/consensus: $7.16).
Product Unit Sales Estimates
Macs: 4.8 million (up 100,000)
iPad: 11.8 million (up 700,000)
iPod: 7.2 million (unchanged)
iPhone: 23.3 million (unchanged)
I remain confident in my initial quarterly estimates, published July 26, making only modest tweaks to a few variables. I raised my iPad sales estimate 700,000 units to reflect a higher production yield. I am maintaining my iPhone sales estimate (which I initially thought was too high) as the iPhone 4S is pushed out to 1Q12 and iPhone 4 supply draw-down did not occur to any major extent in 4Q.
Things to look for:
iPad Sales. Apple may provide an iPad sales update at next week’s iPhone event. Apple was successful in increasing iPad production in 3Q11 and many will look for continued gains in 4Q11. While my estimate calls for 11.8 million iPads, Street consensus may actually be slightly higher. I think iPad sales greater than 10 million will be deemed okay by the Street, while more than 13 million iPads will be considered strong.
iPhone Sales. With the iPhone 4S launch pushed out to 1Q12, I don’t think we will see too much of a drop-off in iPhone 4 demand, especially considering iPhone 4 was recently brought to new carriers and countries. Apple may still get a pass if iPhone sales are on the weak side as analysts will simply blame iPhone 4S ramifications such as pent-up demand. iPhone sales greater than 20 million will be deemed good, while more than 25 million will be considered strong. iPhone 4S launch weekend sales figures may also be shared on the call (although it is just as possible that the iPhone launch will occur after October 18 or Apple will choose to not disclose initial sales).
Guidance. Similar to previous quarters, investors will look for Apple’s 1Q12 guidance for evidence of any economic impact or weaker iPad/iPhone production plans. Unfortunately, management’s conservative nature will make it very difficult to reach solid conclusions. My initial 1Q12 EPS estimate is $10.00 (Street consensus is $8.83) on $39.7 billion of revenue. I would consider EPS guidance around $7.00, with revenue in high $20s billion, as solid.
Two other scenarios may occur: 1) Apple may announce extra conservative EPS guidance due to economic concerns or 2) iPhone supply concerns related to the iPhone 4S launch. I think extra conservative EPS guidance would be something like $5.50, which compares to Apple’s reported $6.43 in 1Q11 (one could make the argument that Apple will put guidance at least above last year’s $6.43 EPS).
If Apple delivers a blow out 4Q11 quarter, chances are good Apple may run with extra conservative 1Q12 guidance as analysts won’t necessarily increase 1Q12 estimates, but would still maintain Apple target prices due to the 4Q11 beat. Accordingly, expectations wouldn’t be raised too high and Apple will be in a good position for another solid holiday quarter.
Thoughts on Facebook F8
1) Replacing the World Wide Web. Facebook is focused on replacing large swaths of the web. We got to see Facebook’s plan for sharing media, and I suspect we will hear Facebook’s take on other web functions, such as commerce, search, and utility, in the future.
2) Facebook Hates Privacy. Privacy remains Facebook’s major roadblock as web-replacement initiatives don’t look as appealing if Facebook users flock to high privacy safeguards. Although society has grown more comfortable with sharing information on the web; users’ ability and willingness to share will only strengthen Facebook’s intentions.
3) An Alternative. Facebook is presenting an alternative to Apple’s app model in terms of how users access and use third-party content. By no means is Facebook’s app model guaranteed to succeed, but it is clear that Apple’s native app model will have some form of competition. Apple has made an effort to point out the billions of dollars in app revenue returned to developers and I think Apple will reinforce this point, arguing app innovation should continue to flock to the iOS platform because developers actually get paid.
4) Changing Landscape. We are in the beginning stages of a changing tech landscape where the hardware battle will be won by economies of scale and uniformity, while the software battle is won by seamless integration between the social network and third-party content. Apple is in a prime position to reap competitive advantages from its manufacturing and supply chain economics of scale, while iPhone and iPad popularity may soon result in 100s of millions of iDevices in the wild. Meanwhile, I believe Facebook has already won the social network race and will now work on increasing and improving third-party content utilization. Apple and Facebook are in prime position to control the tech landscape.
Anchoring Bias Impacting Wall Street's View on Apple
Predicting tech trends beyond 6-12 months is somewhat of a futile endeavor, but two groups of analysts attempt the feat: paid and non-paid. Paid analysts largely encompass sell-side analysts - think along the lines of Goldman Sachs and Piper Jaffray. Non-paid analysts include everyone else and seem to have acquired the “independent” nomenclature. There remains another group - buy-side (think hedge funds and mutual funds) - who don’t actually publish Apple forecasts, instead utilizing paid (and independent) analysts forecasts.
Modeling Apple’s business (and earnings) involves two parts:
1) Knowing how to model a company’s financials. This is the easy part. Setting up an excel sheet to model revenues, expenses, and earnings going forward. Financial modeling is essentially Finance 101 (ironically many students have no clue what they are doing when they take intro Finance classes since the field is so disorganized academically in primary and high school).
2) Knowing how to model a company’s performance. This is the hard part. This is the part of modeling that is more art than science. How many iPads will Apple sell next year? How about iPhones? Experience, intelligence, and a clear mind separate the amateurs from the professionals.
I’ve discovered that looking at someone’s forward Apple projections reveals a lot about what they think of Apple and this is where things get interesting. Sell-side consensus for Apple earnings per share currently stands at $32.35 for fiscal year 2012 and $36.94 for fiscal year 2013. From a stock valuation standpoint, these numbers are important, but converting these numbers into growth, Wall Street believes Apple will grow 18% in 2012 and 14% in 2013.
In order to put these numbers in context, I compare Apple’s projected earnings growth to other technology companies:
2012 2013
GOOG: 19% 17%
IBM: 11% 11%
MSFT: 6% 9%
HPQ: -1% 2%
RIMM: -20% 2%
DELL: 26% -2%
Average: 7% 7%
AAPL: 18% 14%
(consensus data from FactSet and current as of 9/10/11)
Now we are getting a better picture of how Wall Street views Apple. Tim Cook and company are expected to outperform the overall technology sector, growing earnings 14% in 2013, versus a peer average of 7%. However, Apple’s 14% projected growth in 2013 pails in comparison to current 70% growth. What is going on here?
Instead of sell-side analysts “not getting it” - as some independent Apple analysts say, I think anchoring bias is the main culprit.
I thought Wikipedia did a good job at trying to define anchoring in a few sentences:
Anchoring and adjustment is a psychological heuristic that influences the way people intuitively assess probabilities. According to this heuristic, people start with an implicitly suggested reference point (the “anchor”) and make adjustments to it to reach their estimate. A person begins with a first approximation (anchor) and then makes incremental adjustments based on additional information.
Sell-side analysts are comparing Apple to its peers too much. Although analysts still believe Apple will outperform, many are modeling Apple with a 5-10% technology industry growth rate in mind. Apple’s growth is then pegged above this range, albeit by only a small margin. Apple is being anchored to its peers and corresponding lower growth rates.
Sell-side analysts may think Apple will sell a ton of iPhone and iPads, but end up with much lower Apple growth rates because Apple’s peers are performing so poorly. To make matters worse, much of this comparing, and anchoring, is occurring on a subconscious level, making it that much harder to acknowledge and correct.
Meanwhile, independent Apple analysts aren’t subjected to anchoring bias since they are only modeling Apple. In a way, they are able to put Apple in a valuation bubble. If independent analysts began to model Apple peers on a regular basis, I would suspect anchoring would become a bigger issue among the group.
As an independent Apple analyst, how fast do I think Apple will grow earnings?
2012: 40%+
2013: 35%+
My 2012 earnings growth estimate is twice the pace of Wall Street’s 18% growth estimate.
RIMM’s troubles, HPQ’s reorganization, MSFT’s status quo, and GOOG’s continuing mystery are causing Wall Street to view Apple with a more conservative eye. What is the solution? Unfortunately, I don’t expect Wall Street’s anchoring bias to end anytime soon. Apple will continue reporting large quarterly earnings beats, while Wall Street continues to gush over Apple’s growth.
Tim Cook. The Architect.
While some have responded to Steve’s resignation as Apple CEO by recalling personal stories involving Steve or Apple, others have focused on how Apple’s culture will handle a different leader. Let’s take a step back and reassess Apple’s current situation.
Current Products
I have extreme confidence that Apple will successfully update its flagship products in the near-term. As I previously wrote, Apple’s start-up structure assures resources are allocated to a product in the months leading up to a refresh; breaking down the “walls” between executives and workers - the same walls that often destroy other technology companies. Having executives involved in seemingly detailed and mundane aspects of a product is the difference between having a product be “magical” or “good”. Tim Cook will continue to hash out aggressive business contracts with Apple friends and foes. Apple’s expanding supply and distribution channels will continue to be run with the dedication and intelligence that have put competitors to shame. As a prime example of how much confidence I have in Apple’s ability to execute in the near-term, I have no intention in lowering my forecasts for Mac, iPod, iPhone, or iPad sales in my AAPL earnings model following Steve’s resignation.
Future Products
Apple will continue to innovate and brainstorm ideas that will change the world. While it is difficult to pinpoint why the iPod, iPhone, and iPad have been so successful, it is important for Apple to continue to make similar industry-changing strides. I think this is where Apple will face its first significant challenge with Steve no longer at the helm. What makes Apple so great is its willingness to take abnormally large risks and essentially bet the farm on those risks. Apple is able to translate a big idea (big bet) into reality with very little friction and inefficiency. The biggest risk enters the equation on the demand side - whether consumers want the product. Steve made bets. Big ones. Will Tim be able, or willing, to take similar big risks?
At this time, I do think Tim is capable of such responsibility. Tim isn’t some young gun who has been thrown into the game. Observing how the world has changed (and where it will go) is an art not a science, and while Steve mastered that art so successfully, Tim was in a perfect position to watch the master perfect his art, giving him a significant advantage over everyone else in Silicon Valley. Apple will lose on some bets, but will still be able to strive to new heights if more is wagered on winning bets.
Face of Apple
Apple is Steve and Steve is Apple and that will not change. However, there is now a debate as to who will become the new face of Apple or if Apple even needs a singular public representative given Apple’s size and power. I do think the entire Apple executive team will gain more exposure with some SVPs acquiring new affiliations with consumers. Forstall as Mr. iPhone and iPad, Jony as Mr. Apple Design, Schiller as Mr. Apple Brand, while Tim remains the “Big Dad”. Great brands create emotional connections between users and products. People will want to connect with Apple and its leadership in new ways. When Apple is ready to unveil its next big thing, we will most likely have a few members of the Apple team explain why the world needs this new product, whereas up to now, only Steve has had the honor.
AAPL
Concerning financials and other AAPL stock decisions, I would expect no significant changes or speed bumps with Tim as CEO. In addition, an internal CEO promotion often results in minimal changes to prevailing capital philosophies concerning dividends and share buybacks.
The Architect
At the end of the day, Steve built the foundation for a magnificent castle and Tim is a great architect. As I wrote back in December: "As long as most of the risk variables are monitored and marginalized to a certain extent by upper management (and Steve Tim) - the consumer is left as the biggest risks. Apple can then rely on its brand power to turn the odds in its favor.”
Inflection Point: HP webOS
HP’s decision to discontinue webOS devices and look for strategic alternatives, including the outright sale of webOS, marks a significant inflection point for the mobile industry. The barriers of entry are now too high for a new mobile OS. For the next 5-10 years, iOS, Android, (and Windows) will shape the future of mobile.
While there are still questions as to what value is left in webOS and rather patents/IP may still be of interest to potential bidders, the era of being able to grow an integrated ecosystem from scratch is over.
AAPL Orchard's AAPL 4Q11 Estimate
Overall Quarter Metrics
I expect iPad and iPhone to represent nearly 70% of Apple’s quarterly revenue. Remarkable.
Apple’s margin in 2011 has ranged from 38.5% to 41.7%. Management explained the 41.7% margin experienced in 3Q11 included some one-time warranty benefits and guidance of 38% for 4Q11 is primarily driven by the product mix. I don’t buy it. I don’t see many reasons for Apple’s margin to set a new low for 2011 in 4Q due to more iPhones (mostly iPhone 4 and 3GS) and iPads being sold. I expect attractive component pricing trends will offset any modest impact from back-to-school promotions (Macs and certain iPods are discounted). Timing issues surrounding the next iPhone may very well push margin pressure out to 1Q12. I would expect more bullish estimates to have GM closer to 41.5%.
I expect Apple to report 82% yoy earnings growth. While 82% growth is down from 122% yoy growth seen in 3Q11, I would not make much of this decline. Most of the difference is related to the ramp up in iPhone unit sales in 2010.
Product Unit Sales and Commentary
I expect MacBook Air and Mac mini updates to contribute to another solid Mac quarter. Apple will continue to take market share from Windows (early stages of 5-10+ year trend). As the PC market struggles to grow (thanks in part to the proliferation of smartphones and iPad), I view Mac growth greater than a range of 10%-15% as very respectable.
With iPad supply/demand still out of balance in a number of countries, I expect Apple to continue to expand the iPad channel during the quarter. While it remains to be seen if back-to-school purchases will include iPad, I don’t see many hiccups to stellar iPad demand during 4Q. Rumors of a possible iPad Pro have been very sporadic and I don’t expect such rumors to impact mainstream consumer purchasing habits. As seen with 3Q iPad growth of 183%, Apple has expanded iPad production nicely and is capable of greater than 100% year-over-year unit shipment growth.
I expect strong iPod touch sales to be offset by the continued decline in Apple’s other iPod models. Going by historical trends, Apple will refresh the iPod line up near the end of 4Q11, possibly at the same time as the expected iPhone refresh. I would not necessarily expect a large move in iPod shipments one way or another because of this refresh event, unless Apple moves forward with a plan for a low cost iPhone that includes changes to the iPod touch.
I expect Apple to unveil the new iPhone in September. Traditionally, I would include a significant supply drawdown of the old iPhone model, followed by a slow ramp up of the new iPhone model to go along with an iPhone refresh, but last quarter’s amazing iPhone sales lead me to believe Apple will continue to post sequential quarterly iPhone unit growth. I expect Apple will continue to sell iPhone 4 (and possibly iPhone 3GS) into 2012, therefore I am not expecting a significant drawdown in iPhone shipments in the weeks leading up to the iPhone refresh as iPhone 4 roll-out continues to new carriers and countries. Additionally, I would expect pent-up iPhone (4s or 5) demand will continue to grow during the quarter. Similar to the iPad 2 supply debacle, I expect the next iPhone to experience the same craziness and supply shortages in its first few months of sale, which will only help Apple’s 1Q12 iPhone numbers.
Similar to other sell-side analysts, I will most likely be revisiting my estimates following the end of the quarter. At this point, I would attribute any significant differences to my EPS estimate to differences in iPhone unit shipments. Questions can be addressed to me through twitter.
Apple CEO Succession 101
Daring Fireball’s thoughts on Apple’s CEO succession: click here.
My thoughts?
Issues like Apple CEO succession show how little people understand Apple.
This is Apple’s next CEO: Tim Cook
From Apple:
"Cook is responsible for all of the company’s worldwide sales and operations, including end-to-end management of Apple’s supply chain, sales activities, and service and support in all markets and countries. He also heads Apple’s Macintosh division and plays a key role in the continued development of strategic reseller and supplier relationships, ensuring flexibility in response to an increasingly demanding marketplace."
This is Apple’s backup CEO: Jeff Williams
From Apple:
"Jeff Williams is Apple’s senior vice president of Operations, reporting to COO Tim Cook. Jeff leads a team of people around the world responsible for end-to-end supply chain management and dedicated to ensuring that Apple products meet the highest standards of quality.
Jeff joined Apple in 1998 as head of worldwide procurement and in 2004 he was named vice president of Operations. In 2007, Jeff played a significant role in Apple’s entry into the mobile phone market with the launch of the iPhone, and he has led worldwide operations for iPod and iPhone since that time.”
I have my reasons supporting this Apple CEO succession hypothesis. Stay tuned to AAPL Orchard for more commentary on this issue in the future.
I publish a daily email about Apple called AAPL Orchard. Click here for more information and to subscribe.
Great Use for Apple's Cash
City Urban Core Population # of Apple Stores
Shanghai, China 9,495,701 2
Beijing, China 7,296,962 2
Hong Kong, China 6,780,000 0
Tianjin, China 5,066,129 0
Wuhan, China 4,488,892 0
Guangzhou, China 4,154,808 0
Shenyang, China 3,981,023 0
Chongqing, China 3,934,239 0
Nanjing, China 2,822,117 0
Fuzhou, China 2,710,000 0
Harbin, China 2,672,069 0
Xi’an, China 2,588,987 0
Chengdu, China 2,341,203 0
Changchun, China 2,223,170 0
Dalian, China 2,118,087 0
Hangzhou, China 1,932,612 0
Jinan, China 1,917,204 0
Taiyuan, China 1,905,403 0
Qingdao, China 1,867,365 0
Zhengzhou, China 1,688,681 0
Shijiazhuang, China 1,632,271 0
Kunming, China 1,549,593 0
Lanzhou, China 1,527,383 0
Zibo, China 1,514,070 0
Changsha, China 1,489,259 0
Nanchang, China 1,386,454 0
Urumqi, China 1,358,986 0
Guiyang, China 1,341,243 0
Anshan, China 1,287,136 0
Tangshan, China 1,279,226 0
Wuxi, China 1,245,129 0
Jilin City, China 1,244,725 0
Fushun, China 1,244,144 0
Suzhou, China 1,170,618 0
Baotou, China 1,146,506 0
Qiqihar, China 1,125,948 0
Xuzhou, China 1,120,534 0
Hefei, China 1,107,143 0
Handan, China 1,069,146 0
Shenzhen, China 1,058,531 0
Luoyang, China 1,043,243 0
Nanning, China 1,016,013 0
West Des Moines, Iowa 46,403 1
Newark, Delaware 28,547 1
Leawood, Kansas 27,656 1
Tukwila, Washington 17,392 1
Buford, Georgia 10,668 1
Emeryville, California 9,859 1
Apple expects to utilize $650 million for retail store facilities in 2011, opening 40 new stores worldwide, 70% to be located outside the U.S.
And people wonder what Apple will spend its cash on…
A New AAPL Era
Apple reported its most recent quarterly earnings this evening. Impressive would be an understatement.
Here are some talking points:
1) Emerging Market Growth. Skewed perspective is making it hard to understand how fast Apple is growing. Many tech analysts are situated in developed countries and economies where the Apple brand is well established, and accordingly have a harder time conceptualizing how Apple can maintain dramatic growth rates. The combination of rising standards of living and the increasing availability of lower-priced Apple products is a new trend for emerging markets, and it is reasonable to expect this scenario to drive Apple’s growth in the future.
2) Product Line Diversification. Similar to the iPod, we are seeing the emergence of the iPhone product line: a series of iPhones with a sliding scale of features and capabilities. By the end of 2011, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, and iPhone (4S or 5) will most likely round out Apple’s iPhone line. Importantly, each iPhone utilizes iOS apps and has access to the iTunes store. I see the same trend happening with the iPad in due time; multiple versions sold simultaneous at different price points. Apple will rely on this product line diversification to cater to different market segments using price as a key differentiator. Emerging markets will have iPhone 3GS, mainstream will be content with iPhone 4, and early adopters will go crazy over iPhone (4s or 5). In addition, Apple’s overall margin benefits from the continued sale of “older” products as component pricing generally declines over time.
3) Big Losers and Winners. Apple management was very clear on the earnings conference call: iPads are eating away at Windows PC sales and iPhone continues to grow like a wild weed. Companies focused on selling consumer hardware (Dell, HP, RIMM, Motorola, and Samsung) are in a very difficult position as each is starting to understand that having good software is just as important as selling sexy hardware. Big winners (besides Apple) include companies who luckily aren’t competing in the consumer market, and are instead focusing on selling enterprise services or infrastructure needed to foster commerce and further innovation (IBM and Oracle come to mind). It is no coincidence that Dell, HP, RIMM, Motorola, and Samsung have indicated (or will indicate) an interest in entering the enterprise services market.
Random Bytes:
-) Look for Android activation numbers to become less relevant as time goes on. I have this growing feeling that Google is nervous that Android is becoming nothing more than a large void, taking up mobile space, and is relying on activation numbers to impress app developers to dedicate resources to the platform. It’s not working. iOS reached critical mass a few quarters ago and Android will not stop iOS momentum.
-) While I will keep AAPL stock thoughts to myself (at this time), it is important to remember that the large institutional holders control Apple stock and many of these entities are not interested in quick 5-10% stock moves, but instead the attractiveness of AAPL 5-10 years out. Potential AAPL dividend payout ratios, cash flows, and cash holdings will begin to matter just as much as iOS market share, iOS user statistics, or other random Apple product data points. The big boys will continue to support AAPL as long as they feel confident they will receive an annual return that beats other asset classes (fixed income, real estate, etc.) over an extended period of time.
Facebook Gets It
While Facebook’s presentation skills were lacking during today’s new features event, I thought there were some interesting tidbits that came out of Zuckerberg’s ramblings.
1) Facebook gets it. Over the past few years, Facebook has unveiled incremental design changes and new features, which by themselves aren’t earth-shaking, but collectively have served to move the platform forward and give Facebook the freshness users demand. Doesn’t this strategy sound familiar? I was also pleased to hear Facebook’s goal to make the Skype integration and video calling “stupidly easy”. As seen with Apple’s current success, if your business is built around scale, new features and products must be easy enough to use that even people who don’t like dealing with technology will have a blast using your product. Facebook gets it.
2) Facebook wants to redefine how we use the web. Zuckerberg is a believer of apps and while a ton of people at Apple HQ agree with him that apps are the way to go over the next 3-5 years, Zuckerberg wants those apps to run on the Facebook OS, whereas Apple wants to keep the curated app garden on Apple soil. While Facebook’s primary goal has been to increase its user base (and I suspect this will remain a top priority until 1-1.5 billion people are on Facebook), eventually Facebook will shift its attention on third party apps and webpage connectivity (and I am not just talking about Zynga games). Down the road, the Facebook OS can be expanded outward, with the help of mobile devices, so that Facebook serves as a bridge between our daily lives and our always changing social network (re: how your social network may impact the way you perform mundane chores around town, shop for birthday gifts, or even get a new haircut). We will look at the web in a much different light.
3) I doubt Facebook cares about competitive pressures from Google+ (if there are any), Twitter, or any other social networking platform. Facebook’s biggest competitor isn’t another company, but instead user’s quest for privacy. Facebook’s success depends on people sharing information, privacy be damned. Twitter and other social features are helping people get use to the idea of sharing ideas and thoughts. If Google+ catches on in some way or form, Facebook would hope users will become only more willing to loosen their privacy setting because “everyone else is doing it”, or “it’s becoming the norm”. Only a few years ago, it was taboo to have a public Facebook profile due to concerns over employers or family peeking into one’s life. Now its common to share mundane photos or interesting posts from the web with strangers. As time goes on, people will continue to lower their privacy walls and not even realize it.
Facebook is quietly hovering over its targets, not yet ready to attack. Showing little outward aggression and more secrecy and obscurity than clarity and straight forwardness, Facebook is content with expanding its reach and building its army. Eventually, the time will come for Facebook to attack with its foot soldiers being you and me (assuming you are on Facebook). With a current valuation in the neighborhood of $50-$75 billion, investors are betting Facebook has its sights on quite the large battle.
Will Your Mom Love Google+?
Normal consumers are more likely to try out a new product if they hear their children raving about it, or watch Diane Sawyer report on it during the evening news. Normal consumers are more likely to try out a new product when they feel left out by their reluctance to “join the movement”. Grandparents and parents are joining Facebook because all they hear from their children and grandchildren is “it’s on Facebook” or “go on Facebook to see it”.
I suspect Google realizes how popular Facebook has become with the masses and will rely on what it does best to get people to use Google+; force users (Gmail, YouTube, search) into interacting with Google+ in one form or another.
Force is the wrong word. I mean coerce.
RIMM Observations
After the market close, RIMM reported fiscal 1Q12 earnings. A few things stood out to me.
1) RIMM will begin a headcount reduction. As millions of consumers switch to smart phones from feature phones, RIMM is cutting back. While it is understandable for a company to remove redundancies and waste, the writing is on the wall; RIMM had invested for a much bigger company compared to what it now sees itself as going forward. Can things change? Sure. Will things change? Not likely. Fixed costs can sure be a killer when your products sit on store shelves.
2) RIMM shipped 500,000 Playbook tablets. Keyword being shipped. The difference between shipped and sold? When a product leaves the factory (in a boat, plane, car, truck, mule), the product is characterized as “shipped”. No consumer has purchased the unit. RIMM’s 500,000 Playbook number is largely related to RIMM filling the Playbook inventory channel (the location between factory and consumer). It’s one thing when you ship a product that people are buying (iPad), but when you are shipping a product that no one is buying, you have the classic channel stuff.
3) Management wants to buyback RIMM stock. While RIMM’s business is falling apart on all sides, management wants to spend part of its precious cash chest ($2.9 billion) on buying back its tanking stock. While buying back stock can carry a lot of different meanings, largely depending on which industry a company is operating in, stock buyback in the technology industry does not carry a positive connotation. Instead of using money to better your position to innovate, buying back a stock that finds itself on a slippery slope screams desperation and a ploy to show Wall Street that management holds confidence in the future (Wall Street rarely cares - quickly seeing through the action like swiss cheese).
4) Guidance gives perspective. In the matter of a few weeks, RIMM cut its annual guidance by 30%. Given RIMM’s size, cutting guidance by 30% in such short order is not caused by one bad product launch, or by economic concerns impacting your consumer base. A 30% guidance cut is evidence of stuffing the inventory channel with a ton of product and finding out that no one was actually buying your product. A 30% guidance cut is evidence that your fixed cost base is quickly eroding profits as your new product lineup is delayed and your old product line up is stagnant. A 30% guidance cut for a mobile phone company during the age of the mobile revolution should speak volumes for the amount of trouble RIMM is facing.
Going forward, look for liquidity to be a front and center issue for RIMM. For management to have any chance of a comeback, it needs ample cash, and a $2.9 billion war chest contains only limited opportunities.
Snapshots
While surfing the web this morning, I could only laugh at the amount of optimism given to Windows 8. Posts on how Windows 8 will truly revolutionize Microsoft (they said the same thing about Windows 7) were the cherry on top. Commenters rushed in with Microsoft support throwing around such figures as 350 million Windows 7 licenses sold to date or some other funny math that supports their claims. If I wanted to live like it was still 2004, I could go along with these individuals and drink the Microsoft kool-aid, but its time to wake up.
People are making a fundamental error. Rather than looking at tech trends, many are looking at snapshots of the current technology landscape and then extrapolating what they see into the future. Snapshots do nothing but reinforce the dying status quo.
June 2011 technology snapshots would show:
1) Nokia is still selling plenty of phones.
2) Microsoft is crushing it with Windows 7 licenses.
3) Research in Motion is still selling a boatload of blackberries.
All snapshots; singular moments in time that won’t show:
1) Mac sales are gaining market share every quarter and will soon surpass 15% of the consumer computer market.
2) iOS is becoming ever-more vibrant as a growing number of developers are now earning a honest living from iOS app revenue.
3) iPad power.
4) Android is largely becoming the non-Apple destination for anything mobile.
While Windows 8 may have its attractive points, interesting features don’t change consumer technology trends. Instead, years of successful product launches and value-added services help turn a loyal consumer base into an army of brand enthusiasts. The tech industry is still in the early stages of working through the death of a monopoly. Industries take years, if not decades, to work though such an industry-changing event. Certain brands are dying a slow death, while at the same time, being replaced by up and coming brands. Taking snapshots will never give the true picture.
Want to Beat iPad? Hire a Psychologist
When unveiled in 2010, Apple didn’t know why iPad would be a major hit.* After spending most of the keynote explaining some of iPad’s basic features, such as email, reading books, and surfing the web, Apple left the fundamental question of why iPad would become popular to the marketplace to answer.
One year, and 19.5 million iPads, later, the marketplace has spoken. While users have a variety of reasons for liking iPad, I attribute its success primarily to its ability to transfer innovation to the user. Apple’s curated iOS ecosystem allows iPad to bring app innovation, and functionality, into users’ lives, all the while sustaining a satisfaction level that is unmatched in Silicon Valley. When selling technology to consumers, initial satisfaction is good, but being able to deliver continued satisfaction and enjoyment is even better.
When putting iPad in this context, it’s easier to see the uphill battle facing competitors. The competition is having a hard time beating iPad because they don’t understand why people are actually buying iPad. To beat iPad, you can’t look at it as some piece of hardware that runs apps; you can’t look at it as “an iPad”, but instead as “iPad”. You have to understand the emotional connection between iPad and its user, which a psychologist could analyze at a steep price. A cheaper option to see the connection between iPad and its user is to walk into an Apple store and hover around the iPad table. After a minute or two, you will see the connection when looking at people’s faces.
Competitors need to aim for users’ hearts and minds and not assume that consumers are buying iPads just because they have $499 lying around the house. I have little confidence that competitors can successfully appeal to consumers in the same way that Apple does. Instead, competitors have two options for fighting iPad: low price commoditization with little emotional appeal, or reliance on innovation to beat Apple at its own game.
1) From a financial perspective, removing the emotion out of a product does not bode well as competition will lead to hardware commoditization and the ensuing margin collapse. Profits and brand power will quickly evaporate. Nevertheless, competitors need to convince users that some level of satisfaction can be received from a tablet form factor at a much lower cost than iPad. Apple understands this alternative strategy (some say due to its PC war history) and is relying on its massive $66 billion cash position to secure device components at prices that help lower iPad’s cost to a price point that is very difficult for the competition to slide under, while at the same time maintaining attractive margins. If you are curious what the tablet market would look like if iPad competitors choose the route of hardware commoditization and low cost, instead of appealing to consumer’s emotion, look no further than the MP3 player market, where Apple’s iPod and iTunes ecosystem maintains 70% market and emotion share.
2) You can only rely on apps and services to such a extent before poor financials, low product margins, and a lack of cash become too much to bear and competitors exit the market. If low-priced commoditization sounds unappealing, a better strategy for competing against iPad is to innovate and come up with something completely different. Once this new product is developed, control the emotional connection to your consumer and strive for increasing functionality and user satisfaction. Let iPad have its user base, while your product entice others with unique features and attributes. Try to beat Apple at its own game.
One year, and 19.5 million iPads, later, the marketplace has spoken, but competitors have spent more time talking instead of listening and watching.
*I didn’t write “if iPad would be a major hit”, but instead, “why iPad would be a major hit”. Apple has a history of releasing major products only after it knows it is worthy of becoming a hit.
iOS App Innovation and iPad 2 Design Lead to Magic
After my attempt to pick up iPad 2 on opening day failed miserably, I had to settle for ordering one online and waiting four weeks. On Wednesday, my wait ended. My initial iPad 2 thoughts focus on two themes; app innovation and iPad design.
After connecting iPad to iTunes (using the iOS umbilical chord) and running through the obligatory setup process, I was ready to take my iPad 2 for a spin. My first stop; the app store. Instead of searching for a specific app, I found myself scrolling through the Featured and Top Charts lists. After one hour, I had installed 15 apps, 14 of which were free*.
Apps. Apps. Apps. Without apps, iPad 2 would feel empty. I’m intrigued by the ongoing debate as to how to judge an application ecosystem’s health and popularity. Does it mean anything if Android reports more apps than iOS? Should I look at the number of app developers, or the growth rate of application submissions? Can I go by how quick a developers conference sells out as some indication of ecosystem success?
The most critical aspect of an app ecosystem (iOS, Android, HP webOS, Windows Phone 7) is app innovation. Every time I check the Featured app list, I want to see new apps. When I check the Top Charts list, I want to see new apps. I want to see strong app circulation. This type of app innovation stands at odds against those who argue as long as an app platform has the 10-15 apps that I use most often, then the platform is healthy and I should be happy. I strongly believe this type of settling for the bare minimal will lead to stagnant app buyers that become disenfranchised with routinely searching and paying for apps.
With 15 apps downloaded and my iPad 2 in hand, I sat on my couch and it wasn’t long before I lost track of time.
After a few minutes of using iPad 2, I found myself forgetting that I was using iPad 2. My entire thought process was given to the app that I was using. While iPad looks and feels amazing, the iPad dissolves away when in use, exactly how Apple planned it. Remove the intermediary and let users interact directly with innovation. I don’t care what’s inside or isn’t inside iPad 2, as long as iPad 2 has the ability to run the highest quality apps possible. iPad 2 meets this goal. When I see iPad competitors spend precious commercial space discussing product specifications, similar to the laptop wars of the early 2000s, I can only laugh.
Random bytes: Although iPad 2’s Safari is adequate for web surfing, I’m having a much better experience using apps to access website content. I always think back to a Wired article published a few months back, titled “The Web is Dead. Long Live the Internet”. While the author was somewhat off with the concept of “The Web” , I agree with some of his general ideas; primarily that Apps are changing the way we use the Web. I find myself turning to apps instead of surfing the Web through a search engine.
Drawbacks: Overall, I did find it somewhat hard to type on iPad 2. The onscreen keyboard is not wide enough for normal typing, even with iPad 2 turned horizontally on its side. I also found having the onscreen keyboard displayed horizontally was subpar because of the amount of screen real estate that it took up. I’ve been finding myself using one finger to type (similar to the iPhone) and this can make certain tasks difficult.
I also have a number of questions on transporting iPad 2 safely. Should I put iPad 2 in a backpack, briefcase, or carry it in hand? I don’t have a smart cover (yet), but what about the back of the iPad and possible scratches or scuffs? I am leaning towards buying some type of pouch to put it in (which then can go in another bag), but it’s the first time that I actually felt the need to buy some type of protection for an iOS device, which I’m not thrilled about. I would hate to cover something up that was meant to be seen.
Overall, my iPad 2 has exceeded my lofty expectations. Interestingly, I am finding specific and distinct uses for my three primary Apple products (Macbook - typing, iPhone 3GS - continuous communication, iPad 2 - apps and entertainment). I believe the iOS ecosystem has reached an inflection point where app innovation now has enough momentum to self-sustain itself (given continuous product innovation from Cupertino). In the coming weeks, I will lay out my argument for why I think the iOS ecosystem is in a solid position compared to other mobile platforms and how app innovation will ultimately decide the winners and losers in this ongoing technology revolution. Stay tuned.
*I am still hesitant to pay for applications without knowing how often I will utilize the app. As I have said for months, a better app store with the ability to preview and test drive paid apps would be beneficial.
Amazon Cloud
1) While I applaud Amazon’s willingness to adapt its business model to the changing technology environment, I am left wondering if cloud music storage is the answer to Amazon’s quest for mobile content relevancy. While digital music was a hot topic a few years ago, services such as Pandora, last.fm, and Rhapsody have been gaining in popularity and serve as a viable alternative to digital music downloads. I also question Amazon’s seemingly eagerness to compete directly with Apple and its accompanying competitive advantages on more than one front.
2) I worry that Amazon’s relationship with Android and the relative ho-hum introductions of these new features (appstore and now Cloud storage) could backfire and turn into Amazon’s achilles heel. One of Google’s perceived weaknesses (but actually looked at as a strength within Google) is unveiling countless features and services with the goal of seeing what sticks, if anything. Is Amazon playing the leader or the follower with Amazon Cloud Drive? Will Amazon need to kick up its advertising campaign to put these new initiatives in front of potential users? As it stands now, mainstream media, and most of America, are unaware of Amazon Cloud Drive and probably will never use it due to this unawareness. Amazon has a had a healthy success rate in new features, but if new services are deemed unready or incomplete for prime time, Amazon’s reputation could take a hit.
3) How is Amazon’s new music storage initiative intertwined with the music labels? According to several news sources, Apple has been stuck in music label negotiations as to how to adapt iTunes to the changing times. Amazon apparently didn’t seek any licenses or music label agreements and went ahead with its plans for storing purchased music in the Cloud. Does the music label’s support actually mean anything anymore?
4) Similar to Amazon’s recently unveiled appstore, the financial impact from Amazon Cloud Drive is murky and I suspect the long-term goal is once again to reiterate the “Amazon is Web Commerce” mental connection.
5) My gut tells me Apple is looking at these digital music initiatives, but from an industry changing perspective. As the music labels remain extra conservative in negotiations for fear of losing even more power at the hand of Apple, I am a believer that music labels will eventually cave and iTunes will adapt to changing consumer habits. It remains to be seen if Amazon will be at a position capable of competing with the new and improved iTunes. As it stands now, I still see Amazon’s digital music initiatives at a huge disadvantage against the iTunes/iOS ecosystem.
Amazon Appstore
1) Amazon is a Retailer. Retail DNA. Retail Brains. Retail Ambitions.
2) Amazon’s brand is the most powerful thing it owns. Similar to how people now associate “Google” with Search, “Amazon” holds the power to be associated with Retail - at the expense of the current retail brick and mortar giants.
3) Amazon’s strategy for sustaining its brand is buying out (or killing) competing online retailers that have shown success in gaining name recognition and appeal (Zappos is a prime example). Buy or kill the competition before it becomes too big to buy or kill.
4) Amazon cannot buy or kill iTunes/App Store and Amazon sees the writing on the wall. An ecosystem such as Apple’s iTunes/App Store is in a prime position to expand its reach into online commerce - at Amazon’s expense. iTunes/App Store represents danger to Amazon’s long-term sustainability and strategy of becoming the unanimous destination for online retail and commerce.
5) Amazon now has its own mobile application marketplace, using Android apps to fill the shelves. Revenues and profits will largely be a non-factor, similar to the black box surrounding the Kindle/eBooks ecosystem. Amazon’s prime goal in creating a curated appstore is to compete against Apple, remain relevant, and stay on track to becoming the Walmart of the Web - the first and only destination for online retail.