Letter from Tim Cook to Apple investors

[arlen holder]

Letter from Tim Cook says "Lower than anticipated iPhone revenue..."
<https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/01/letter-from-tim-cook-to-apple-investors/>

"Apple warned [today] it will badly miss its quarterly sales forecast..."
<https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/03/investing/stock-market-today-apple-dow-jones/index.html>

""The global market for +$700 phones has clearly topped out," Nicholas
Colas, co-founder of DataTrek Research, wrote to clients on Thursday."

"Apple says it could miss $9 billion in iPhone sales ..."
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/2/18165804/apple-iphone-sales-weak-demand-tim-cook-letter-revised-q1-estimate>

*What did Apple expect* given two key but very basic factors:
o All of last years' phones have severe un-fixed design flaws, and,
o This years' replacement to the flawed phones are essentially a thousand bucks.

Of course, Apple never was about phones.
Apple is all about M-A-R-K-E-T-I-N-G.

I have to give the MARKETING org credit even if they sell a _single_
thousand-dollar phone. It's amazing that they sell those things.
o All iPhones have far less functionality than even old Android phones
o And yet, (some) people pay over a thousand bucks for iOS phones!

Luckily, they come in pretty colors.
<https://www.apple.com/iphone/>
*Choose (RED). Give life. Your purchase helps fund the fight against AIDS.*

*Now _that's_ MARKETING!*

[News]

$AAPL past its sell-by date. Time for Cook and Ahrendts to go.

[Your Name]

On 2019-01-03 21:52:15 +0000, News said:
>
> $AAPL past its sell-by date. Time for Cook and Ahrendts to go.

The one who needs to go is Johnny Ive with his idiotic obsession for
ever thinner and his stupidity of making the hardware non-upgradable
(partly linked to the thinness), not to mention his complete
incompetence when it comes to software.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 14:54:23 +1300, Your Name wrote:

> The one who needs to go is Johnny Ive

Following are direct quotes ... explain.... the future for Apple...

"Apple went upmarket with higher average selling prices and boring,
iterative devices. I explained this losing strategy back in mid-November in
this column, entitled "Apple Raising Prices to Offset Unit Sales Growth
Decline Is a Red Flag."

"For a long time, investors placed the power of brand above all else. They
assumed consumers would pay higher average selling prices, and that
software developers and content providers would fall in line with any
guidelines Cupertino dictated."

"But customers are not buying. And Netflix is cutting Apple out of its
subscription business"

"Apple Has No One to Blame but Itself for Its Current Troubles
I hate to beat a dead horse but it makes me cringe to hear Apple blaming
Chinese consumers for its woes."

<https://www.thestreet.com/investing/stocks/apple-needs-to-shoulder-the-blame-for-mistakes-14824558>

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 16:52:15 -0500, News wrote:

> Time for Cook and Ahrendts to go.

A problem is that Apple admitted _all_ the iPhones of last year are flawed.
*Now the evidence is mounting that the _new_ $1000 phones are also flawed!*

Everything below this line is verbatim from this article:
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/do-all-new-iphones-suffer-from-a-hardware-design-flaw-it-sure-seems-like-it/>

"Did the iPhone suffer from a design flaw that Apple is now compensating
for? It sounds like it from what Apple has stated"

"The iPhone suffers from a simple design flaw. The battery is too small and
requires recharging too often. A bigger battery would have a greater
capacity, and therefore need charging less often."

"When you consider that this means that a $1,000 iPhone might have a
lifespan of only about 18 months before needing to be replaced ... it
certainly makes me question whether the iPhone represents the sort of value
for money that I expect from such an expensive bit of kit"

"And given that Apple doesn't seem to have bumped up the battery capacity
on the newer iPhone XS and iPhone XR models, this seems to be a problem
that will be affecting these devices in a year's time."

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 21:39:27 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> Letter from Tim Cook says "Lower than anticipated iPhone revenue..."

More evidence that the battery fiasco finally wizened up Apple consumers!
<https://www.wired.com/story/silver-lining-apples-very-bad-iphone-news/>

Everything below this line is a verbatim quote.

"Apple on Wednesday warned investors that its revenue for the last three
months of 2018 would not live up to previous estimates, or even come
particularly close"

"[Tim Cook] neglected to mention the simple fact that an iPhone can perform
capably for years - and consumers are finally getting wise"

"People are holding onto their iPhones longer"

"As of the fourth quarter of last year, [average mobile phone ownership
time] had jumped to at least 35 months [from 24 months in 2015]"

"What [the battery fiasco] really did more than anything else was remind
you that the battery on your phone really can be replaced. Apple
successfully brainwashing the public into thinking the battery was
something they never needed to think about"

"it¢s terrific news for consumers, who have apparently realized that a
smartphone does not have a two-year expiration date. "

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-01-04 16:07, arlen holder wrote:

> "And given that Apple doesn't seem to have bumped up the battery capacity
> on the newer iPhone XS and iPhone XR models, this seems to be a problem
> that will be affecting these devices in a year's time."

mAh alone isn't enough.


It its *possible* that a battery has same storage camacity, but greater
discharge capacity, which means that after a year, it can still feed
current at sufficient amperage to run the CPU without a
shutdown/throttling. All in the way the battery is designed.
(so a bigger battery can have same mAh rating but greater discharge
capacity for instance).

Not saying Apple did that. But it is possible. Especially for this
year's crop of phones where Apple has had enough time to thinker with
the design after the 6s "battery gate".

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 17:34:32 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

> mAh alone isn't enough.

I agree that amp hours aren't the only measure of "battery performance".
(I've long been on record, for example, discussing the impedance.)

What value I add is that I bring up the "concern" that the new phones
"might" be flawed.

Whether or not the new phones _are_ flawed, is for us to figure out.

What that article did was ask this question, verbatim:
*Q: Do all new iPhones suffer from a hardware design flaw?*

And then, the article argued this answer to that question, again verbatim:
*A: It sure seems like it.*

The "evidence" in that article, is, essentially, AFAICT...
o The article says Apple blames the problem on the number of cycles
o The article says that the too-thin battery required more cycles
o The article extrapolates that too-thin "problem" to the new iPhones

I'm just reporting the facts of what the article said.
The article says the new batteries "appear" to be similar to the old ones.

And we _know_ the old design was highly flawed (of that there is no doubt).
The question is whether, overall, the XS/XR designs are similarly flawed.

I don't know.
All I know is that the article concluded: "It sure seems like it".

And, I do know that Apple cannot be trusted.
For example, these are direct quotes from a similar article

"Apple's controversial performance-management feature to
prevent unexpected iPhone shutdowns has been expanded to
2017's iPhone X, iPhone 8, and iPhone 8 Plus"

[Yet]"Apple told US senators in February the iPhone 8 and iPhone X
had "hardware updates" that meant CPU throttling isn't as necessary"

[Yet, the facts are that] "the battery on all iPhone models can be
degraded ... as soon as 18 months after initial use"
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-x-gets-speed-throttling-months-after-apple-said-it-probably-doesnt-need-it/>

So there you have it.
Apple admits that the entire line of last years' phones is being throttled,
even as the throttling wasn't "as necessary".

Who is to say how "necessary" it will be for Apple to conclude that the new
XS and XR phones won't also need such not "as necessary" throttling?

Me?
Given that these phones are astronomically expensive, and given that they
have nothing over the current spate of phones (at least those with new
batteries in them), I would look askance at anyone who purchases them.

IMHO, only a fool would buy the XR & XS phones given these facts.
The good news for Apple is that a fool is born every single day.

And yet, Apple has, for the first time since 2002, had to change guidance.
o Apple Pre-Announces Negative Guidance For The First Time Since 2002
<https://theotrade.com/apple-pre-announces-negative-guidance-for-the-first-time-since-2002/>

Clearly that is a warning knell of some sort.
But of what?

Personally, I'm going to step away from hard facts to offer softer opinions
o Apple screwed their loyal customers with the previous line of phones
o Apple got caught - and continued to screw their loyal customers
o That didn't go unnoticed by all customers

At the same time as Apple screwed their loyal customers...
o Apple raised the price of new iPhones to astronomical levels
o Without adding any value of any import
o At the same time that Android phones have been dropping in price

Worse, at the same time as all of the above was happening...
o People slowly changed their buying habits (e.g., fewer carrier subsidies)
o People are holding onto phones longer (24 months --> 35 months)
o And, the TAM may be approaching saturation (I'm not sure, but it might)

Am I right?
I don't know. But that's what I "think" is happening to iPhone sales.
It's my "opinion", so please take it as such (and not as cold hard fact).

[Alan Browne]

On 2019-01-04 17:34, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2019-01-04 16:07, arlen holder wrote:
>
>> "And given that Apple doesn't seem to have bumped up the battery capacity
>> on the newer iPhone XS and iPhone XR models, this seems to be a problem
>> that will be affecting these devices in a year's time."
>
> mAh alone isn't enough.
>
>
> It its *possible* that a battery has same storage camacity, but greater
> discharge capacity, which means that after a year, it can still feed

No it is not.

> current at sufficient amperage to run the CPU without a
> shutdown/throttling. All in the way the battery is designed.

There is no magic design. You can trade current for capacity, or
capacity for current.

> (so a bigger battery can have same mAh rating but greater discharge
> capacity for instance).

Yes. (for the last two lines).

For a Li-ion battery of a given volume to have a higher maximum
discharge rate, its capacity will be less. This is just physics: in a
given volume, higher current requires more surface area (internal
structures) to chemically generate the current. Also fatter paths to
the battery terminals to handle the current w/o resistance..

Li-ion battery characteristics that change over time / use:

Voltage. With use and time, the output voltage when fully charged
diminishes.

Charge. With use and time, the available maximum charge decreases.

Current. With use and time, the maximum output current decreases (which
follows given the lowered fully charged voltage).

As all of these go with age, the "envelope" of energy availability
decreases geometrically.

--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester

[Alan Browne]

+10

[sms]

On 1/4/2019 12:32 PM, arlen holder wrote:

<snip>

> I hate to beat a dead horse but it makes me cringe to hear Apple blaming
> Chinese consumers for its woes."

"Blame" is the wrong word. It's many issues in China all coming together
which have led to Chinese consumers buying fewer iPhones. Many of these
issues are beyond Apple's control. Some issues have been addressed, but
only very recently, such as the introduction of "phablets" and of
dual-SIM iPhones (China-only).

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 01:02:21 -0800, sms wrote:

> "Blame" is the wrong word. It's many issues in China all coming together
> which have led to Chinese consumers buying fewer iPhones. Many of these
> issues are beyond Apple's control. Some issues have been addressed, but
> only very recently, such as the introduction of "phablets" and of
> dual-SIM iPhones (China-only).

Hi sms,
Something "changed" that Apple didn't take into account.

Fact is, Apple missed its guidance for the first time since 2002.
Tim Cook mostly blamed it on China but most others I've read don't.

Tim Cook himself said, for example, the cheap batteries had an effect.
Whose fault is that?

IMHO, you can't follow up on an entire line of expensive flawed phones with
yet another line of super expensive phones - that aren't any better - and
then expect the fish to still bite.

*Apple hubris is shocking.*

In addition to Apple's shockingly blatant chutzpah, add the fact that Apple
recently denied the street granularity on the sales units sold, and then
subtract much of the Netflix subscription revenues (plus whatever other
company follows suit) - and that's not a whole lot of good coming out of
Apple moving forward.

Still ... everything I've mentioned "could" have been easily foreseen, so,
there must be "something" that Apple didn't take into account when
providing earlier guidance.

Personally, I think an entire line of thousand-dollar-plus phones, with
absolutely nothing in them to distinguish them from the recent entire line
of shockingly flawed already-super-expensive phones ... is not a way to
garner new business in the developing world.

IMHO, Apple simply ran out of fools

But, still ... nobody knows those fools like Apple ... and even Apple seems
to have been caught flat footed in their forecasts - so - that means
"something" changed that Apple didn't account for in their previous
guidance.

What changed that caused Apple to restate their guidance?
I don't know.

What do you think it was?

[sms]

On 1/6/2019 2:22 AM, arlen holder wrote:

> What changed that caused Apple to restate their guidance?
> I don't know.
>
> What do you think it was?

Many things, but here are four:

1. Unexpected significant lengthening of the replacement cycle. Partly
caused by the discounted battery replacement, partly caused by the high
price of the flagship Xs phones
<https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2018/the-average-upgrade-cycle-of-a-smartphone-in-the-u-s--is-32-months---according-to-npd-connected-intelligence/>.

2. WeChat.
<https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/03/apple-iphone-china-trouble-wechat/>

3. 400+ Android app stores in China
<https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/google-misses-out-on-billions-in-china.html>.
A great many apps in China are Android only.

4. Late with dual-SIM phones, Xr and Xs Max. Dual-SIM phones are
ubiquitous in China
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/09/12/why-china-and-hong-kong-are-getting-unique-new-iphones-the-rest-of-the-world-isnt-getting/#3286ad176a43>.
In China, even the lower-end phones are dual-SIM.

Not easy to fix any of this. Where is the sweet spot of price versus
volume? Would price cuts, and lower margins, make a positive difference
in overall profit?

[sms]

On 1/6/2019 2:22 AM, arlen holder wrote:

> What do you think it was?

One other big issue is that Chinese tech companies willingly accept much
lower margins.

Xiaomi says that they are capping margins on hardware at 5%, but it's
unlikely that they have ever even reached 5%. Huawei is well under 10%.
Apple is at about 38% and that's considered low for them. There is no
way a U.S. company, Apple or other, could operate at the kinds of
margins the Chinese companies operate at. When I worked for a Taiwanese
motherboard company we operated at about an 8% margin on boards.

When the products from China were really poor it didn't matter much
because Apple, Samsung, etc., provided a much higher quality product and
could command premium prices. But now that's all changed as the quality
of the Chinese brands has dramatically improved. A Chinese user, that
spends most of their screen time on WeChat, doesn't really care much
about the advantages of iOS over Android.

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 11:36:51 -0800, sms wrote:

> Many things, but here are four:

Thanks for offering an explanation, as it's risky to try to guess why one
of the most successful companies on the planet grossly faltered in
guidance.

> 1. Unexpected significant lengthening of the replacement cycle.

I can mostly easily agree - in that Apple thought they'd get away with the
throttling, which backfired on them. Apple also thought they'd get away
with the astronomically high pricing of new phones - which is pure hubris -
IMHO - coming on the heels of getting caught with the prior faulty phones.

However, it's no secret that replacement periods for all mobile devices
were lengthening as the mobile phones hit their plateau in functionality
(it's now 35 months, on average, based on a cite I provided elsewhere, and
32 months for your cite, both of which are appreciably over the 24 months
it may have been previously).

Nobody in their right mind is going to replace a $1000 piece of electronics
every two years UNLESS there's something appreciable in the next
generation. And, no, emojis don't count because we're talking hardware.
Neither do bold "RED" colors - except for very few style-conscious souls.

Hence, I agree with you that people didn't drop their old phones as soon as
Apple had forecast, but, that's Apple's own fault and, even if it wasn't
Apple's own fault, Apple _should_ have been able to forecast ownership
cycles better - IMHO.

> 2. WeChat.
> <https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/03/apple-iphone-china-trouble-wechat/>

Hmmmmmm....
WeChat? Really? WTF is that?
Unlike Alan, let me read your cite first before I respond...

o Apple┬ troubles in China grow as WeChat undermines iPhone┬ appeal
<https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/03/apple-iphone-china-trouble-wechat/>
o "WeChat serves as a de facto operating system in China. "
o "WeChat functions the same on Android and iOS"
o "WeChat is most often compared to chat apps"
o "WeChat is the undisputed heavyweight in the Chinese [mainland]"
o WeChat has photo sharing, video chats, emoji, stickers, etc.
o WeChat has instant translation Chinese<->English
o WeChat has a convenient & culturally sound cash-transfer mechanism
o WeChat has a Facebook-like news feed (apparently)
o WeChat has a Tinder-like discovery system (apparently)
o WeChat pay is "massive" in China (which seems to be a big deal)
o WeChat apparently is its own "OS within an OS" for Android/iOS apps
o WeChat apparently does investing and hailing of taxis, etc.
o WeChat apparently pays all sorts of bills, tickets, hotels, etc.
etc.

Wow. It's a big deal in China, where, what it means, I think, is that
Apple's walled garden is, essentially, replaced by WeChat ... is that
right?

BTW, THANK YOU for bringing up WeChat as I had no idea it existed!

> 3. 400+ Android app stores in China
> <https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/google-misses-out-on-billions-in-china.html>.

Of all people, you'll never have to worry about convincing me that Android
kills iOS on app functionality. Reading that cite though, I was surprised
as I was unaware that Google Play doesn't work in China. Who knew? Not me.

OK. But how does that affect Apple revenue in a way that is a "surprise"?

> A great many apps in China are Android only.

Yes. But.
That isn't something that Apple would be "surprised" about, is it?

Reading your cite, I was confused WHERE the money is going if it's not
going to Google. I guess it goes DIRECTLY to the app developers in China?

> 4. Late with dual-SIM phones, Xr and Xs Max. Dual-SIM phones are
> ubiquitous in China
> <https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/09/12/why-china-and-hong-kong-are-getting-unique-new-iphones-the-rest-of-the-world-isnt-getting/#3286ad176a43>.

Dual SIM is one of those things, like women with blonde hair & big boobs.
Some people go bonkers for it, which I understand.
Many others don't go bonkers for it - which I also understand.

Reading your cite,
Why China And Hong Kong Are Getting Unique New iPhones The Rest Of The World Isn't Getting
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/09/12/why-china-and-hong-kong-are-getting-unique-new-iphones-the-rest-of-the-world-isnt-getting/#3286ad176a43>
o Apparently in Hong Kong, it's common to want dual-SIM phones
o Apparently, in China, there is resistance to e-SIMs
o People swap SIMs a lot more often, apparently, in China

While this is interesting, the fact Apple makes dual-SIM phones for China
should indicate that it's not any surprise to Apple, right?

So, while dual-SIM technology is interesting, I don't see how it has a
material effect on guidance for this upcoming quarter. Do you?

> Not easy to fix any of this. Where is the sweet spot of price versus
> volume? Would price cuts, and lower margins, make a positive difference
> in overall profit?

This is, I think, really the elephant in the room.
I think there's a one-two punch that Apple just failed twice on.
1. They released an entire line of expensive but flawed phones, and then
2. They followed up with super expensive phones, that don't seem better.

Where's the incentive to ditch the current (admittedly flawed) $1000 phone
for the new who-knows-if-its-flawed $1,500 phone, when a $30 battery brings
the current phone back to where it was when it was born?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 11:58:48 -0800, sms wrote:

> One other big issue is that Chinese tech companies willingly accept much
> lower margins.

But is that a "surprise" to Apple?

Remember, Apple is one of the most successful companies on the planet.
They MARKET like you can't believe.

Don't ever doubt that I believe Apple is GREAT at MARKETING.
They're the best of the best of the best of the best, IMHO - at MARKETING.

The entire product line is a marketing sham, IMHO.
And yet, millions upon millions of people LOVE and ADORE their iPhones!

I know that.
They know that.

Something CHANGED that they didn't know.
The question is "What changed?".

Tim Cook said squarely it was the China uncertanties.
OK. I'd expect him to say that because that's out of his control.

Maybe it _is_ the China uncertainties.
But maybe it's not.

Remember, they make money in the _rest_ of the world too.
Presumably, in the rest of the world, sales are faltering just as much.
Right?

It's risky for me, a noob, to say definitively what Apple screwed up on.
But I did read a few of the reports where my personal take is this:
1. They released an entire line of expensive flawed phones.
2. They never made good on them, IMHO.
3. Instead, they release yet another line of super expensive phones.
4. That nobody knows if they're similarly flawed.

Would YOU ditch your $1000 (admittedly flawed) phone, just to buy a $1500
maybe-flawed phone?

I wouldn't.
I think _that_ is what happened which Apple didn't expect.

I think Apple expected the sheep to come grazing in their Cupertino loop.
And I think the sheep are spooked by the 1-2 punch that Apple delivered
1. Apple delivered an entire line of expensive highly flawed phones; then,
2. Apple simply raised the price on MORE EXPENSIVE (maybe flawed) phones.

*I think Apple may have simply misjudged how many fools are out there.*
(If so, it's their first since 2002 - which is a pretty good track record!)

DISCLAIMER: This is opinion, based on facts - but still opinion.

[sms]

On 1/6/2019 3:53 PM, arlen holder wrote:

<snip>

> Wow. It's a big deal in China, where, what it means, I think, is that
> Apple's walled garden is, essentially, replaced by WeChat ... is that
> right?

What you give up with WeChat, and with Android to some extent, is
privacy and security. But in China there is not much of an expectation
of privacy to begin with.
<https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2156297/how-growing-privacy-fears-china-are-driving-wechat-users-away>.
As the article states, it would be difficult to function in China
without using WeChat. Last time I was in China in September 2018, the
city hosting me did most communications via WeChat.

[arlen holder]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 01:04:41 -0800, sms wrote:

> What you give up with WeChat, and with Android to some extent, is
> privacy and security. But in China there is not much of an expectation
> of privacy to begin with.
> <https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2156297/how-growing-privacy-fears-china-are-driving-wechat-users-away>.
> As the article states, it would be difficult to function in China
> without using WeChat. Last time I was in China in September 2018, the
> city hosting me did most communications via WeChat.

I thank you again for both your advice & your cites, where this one:
<https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2156297/how-growing-privacy-fears-china-are-driving-wechat-users-away>
o Why China˘s tech-savvy millennials are quitting WeChat
Disillusioned users are leaving China˘s most popular social network over
growing privacy fears, but doing so comes at a cost

"Wang returned to Beijing last summer after four years at university in the
United States to find that WeChat, used by his friends at school, had
suddenly morphed into an all-consuming tool that was indispensable in his
home country."

"In China, its most saturated market, WeChat˘s penetration rate is 83 per
cent among all smartphone users, reaching up to a staggering 92 per cent in
first-tier cities,"

"The social network is part of almost every aspect of people˘s lives,
merging the personal with the political apparatus of the state."

The bottom line is, likely...
"Unlike its Western counterparts WhatsApp and Telegram, WeChat does not
provide end-to-end encryption,"

Back to the topic, I guess what you're saying is that Apple unexpectedly
lost business because WeChat has supplanted the walled garden in China,
which Apple didn't forecast into their revenue expectations.

While I can comprehend that suggestion, I suspect the reason Apple screwed
up on revenue projections was simply that Apple ran out of sheep willing to
replace a $1000 highly flawed phone with a $1500 maybe-just-as-flawed phone
(with no visible benefit between them other than a new phone comes with a
new battery).

Their own hubris is what I think tripped up Apple's revenue projections.

[arlen holder]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 11:12:22 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

> There is no magic design. You can trade current for capacity, or
> capacity for current.

What your response omits, Alan Browne, is the FACT that the entire line of
iPhones from last year are clearly and universally decried as "flawed".

Even Apple admits this - although in a very clever way - where the
"solution" to the design flaw is the unnatural enforced choice of
o Unacceptable stability, or,
o Unacceptable performance.
(Pick one.)

So, while you may claim there is no "magic design", the more apropos
argument is that there are plenty of "bad designs", which nobody
intelligent would dispute.

Last years' line of phones are, by all intelligent accounts, "bad design".

Moving forward, the point is that Tim Cook "blamed" (partially), the
battery fiasco on people buying fewer "new" iPhones.

This blame is certainly true, but not only in the way that Tim Cook meant.
o It has been said that the Apple consumer 'wizened up' from the fiasco
o A $30 battery for a $1,000 phone beats a new battery in a $1,500 phone
o Nobody knows whether the new phones are similarly flawed as the old
etc.

Personally, I think blaming China is a copout by Tim Cook, since what
happened to Apple has to be, by definition, a SURPRISE.

I think the "surprise" was that sheep stopped grazing at 1 Infinite Loop.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-01-09 13:19, arlen holder wrote:

> What your response omits, Alan Browne, is the FACT that the entire line of
> iPhones from last year are clearly and universally decried as "flawed".

Really? what was flawed about the iPhone 8 and X ?

[nospam]

In article <yvrZD.6362$QQ5....@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei

nothing whatsoever. he's trolling as usual.

[Elden]

I'm very sure that you're asking the wrong person.

--
-=Elden=-

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 09 Jan 2019 13:49:42 -0600, Elden wrote:

>>> What your response omits, Alan Browne, is the FACT that the entire
>>> line of iPhones from last year are clearly and universally decried as
>>> "flawed".
>>
>> Really? what was flawed about the iPhone 8 and X ?
>
> I'm very sure that you're asking the wrong person.

Jesus Christ Elden.

*All you Apple Apologists appear _incredibly_ stupid, or mis informed.*

Shit. Even Apple admitted _all_ the phones from that line are flawed!
Every single one for Christs' sake.

*How freaking _STUPID_ (or misinformed) can you Apologists actually be?*

The mere fact that NONE of you Apple Apologists are apparently aware of
these most basic of facts about the iPhones should be utterly astounding.

But, by now, I've learned, you're all ill-educated clueless morons.

The fact I know so much more about iOS than ALL of you, is scary.
Really really really scary.

*You Apologists NEVER cease to amaze me how incredibly stupid you are!*

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 09 Jan 2019 14:05:17 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Really? what was flawed about the iPhone 8 and X ?
>
> nothing whatsoever. he's trolling as usual.

This is proof that you, nospam, are either
o Stupid or perhaps simply ill educated, or,
o Trolling (as usual)

I don't expect JF Mezei to be aware of basic Apple facts.
But I do expect you, nospam, to be aware of the facts.

That you claim to be unaware of what everyone knows, proves:
a. You're either incredibly stupid (or naive), or
b. You're just trolling, as usual.

Hint: Even Apple admitted _all_ the phones from that line are flawed!

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 13:58:38 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

> Really? what was flawed about the iPhone 8 and X ?

You're joking, right?

Are you Apple users _really_ that clueless?

Really?

Tell me you are just joking. Please.

[arlen holder]

Hi sms,
Unlike the Apple Apologists, I expect you to be reasonably intelligent.
That means you can most likely easily comprehend what I write below.

There has to be, by definition, a "surprise".
My well-educated opinion is that the surprise was the following one-two punch.

Punch 1:
o Apple released an _entire line_ (every single iPhone!) of expensive flawed phones
o Then Apple screwed _all owners_ of that entire line of expensive flawed iPhones

Punch 2:
o Then Apple releases an entire new line of (perhaps, and likely) flawed iPhones!
o Where the price of this new line of (likely flawed) phones, is utterly astronomical

Since you're intelligent, sms, I expect you to listen to what Tim Cook actually said:
<https://youtu.be/qvR3PEPqX9A?t=98>
"The story on iPhone is in addition to the emerging market weakness which is
primarily in China, there's not as many subsidies as their used to be from a carrier
point of view *where that didn't all happen yesterday*, if you've been out of the
market for two or three years, it looks like that to you."

WTF?
Where's the freaking "surprise"?

"FX was a big challenge in the quarter. As interest rates hikes have started in
the United States, there's more foreign capital coming in. That makes the dollar
much stronger. *We knew that was going to be a factor.* It affected us by about
200 basis points."

WTF?
o *Where that didn't all happen yesterday*
o *We knew that was going to be a factor*
Where's the freaking surprise, Tim Cook?
Yeah, _that_ surprise!

Then, Rim Cook _begins_ to scrape the surface of the "surprise"...
"In addition to those two things, we started a program world wide where we
dramatically lowered the battery replacement price."

Duh!
*Why not mention that you fucked every single iPhone owner, Tim Cook?*
And, that you _secretly_ tried to fuck them too!

Which iPhone owner, Tim Cook?
HINT: Every single one who bought the _entire line_ of iPhones!

Yeah. _That_ iPhone owner. Your loyal customer.
The one who paid $1000 for an iPhone X where you now give him the choice of
o Unacceptable performance, or
o Unacceptable stability.
(Pick one!)

Hey Tim Cook?
*Those loyal customers paid $1000 for that flawed iPhone X!*
And now, they're spooked.

Fancy that.
Same with the iPhone 8 owners.

They're _all_ spooked, Tim Cook.
Rightly so, IMHO.

You blame the price of the $30 battery for Christs' sake!
(Yeah, so it was $80 before you lowered the price. So freaking what, Tim Cook.)

How about admitting in the interview what you've already admitted to Congress?
The _entire_ line of phones (yes, every single model) you've already said is flawed!

Going forward, Tim Cook said...
"We had sort of a collection of items going on. Some that are macro economics,
and some that are Apple specific."

Yeah, Tim Cook.
How about _this_ for the explanation of the "surprise"?
o You screwed every single loyal buyer (yes, iPhone 8 & iPhone X included).
o Then, you raised the price astronomically, for your _next_ line of phones.

That's not gonna work, Tim Cook.
Even I can see that - and I only have a minor in Economics for Christs' sake.

IMHO, the simple reason for the Apple surprise, was simply this 1-2 punch:
o Apple screwed EVERY iPhone owner with an entire line of expensive flawed phones
o Apple followed up with an even more expensive line of (perhaps flawed) phones

Surprise. Surprise.
"The sheep slowed down their grazing at 1 Infinite Loop".

--
Disclaimer: That the entire old line is flawed is a fact admitted by Apple.
The new line being flawed is in the news based on battery size comparisons.

[arlen holder]

> Surprise. Surprise.
> "The sheep slowed down their grazing at 1 Infinite Loop".

*Keep in mind that the "problem" has to be, by definition, a "surprise".*

<https://youtu.be/qvR3PEPqX9A>
Tim Cook:
"If you look at our results, our shortfall is over 100% from iPhones, and
it's primarily in Greater China. As we look at what is going on in China,
it's clear that the economy begins to slow there for the second half, and
what I believe to be the case is the trade tensions between the United
States and China put additional pressure on their economy. So we saw as the
quarter went on it seems like the traffic in our retail stores, traffic in
our channel partner stores, the reports of the smartphone industry
contracting, particularly bad in November (I haven't seen the December
number yet but I would guess that would not be good either). So that's what
we're seeing."

Ummm... where's the "surprise", particularly when he hasn't even *seen* the
December numbers yet?

HINT: The "surprise" is not where Tim Cook says it is (it's not in China).
DOUBLEHINT: The surprise is the sheep didn't graze on $1000-$1500 iPhones!
--
Disclaimer: There are FACTS above - but the hints are my educated opinion.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-01-09 16:35, arlen holder wrote:

>> Really? what was flawed about the iPhone 8 and X ?
>
> You're joking, right?
>
> Are you Apple users _really_ that clueless?

You've replied many times to this issue, yet were unable to provide one
thing that was wrong with the 8 or the X.

If you want intelligent conversations, when you accuse phones to be
flawed and say you have evidence and even Apple admitted it, then the
onus is on you to at least list of few things that Apple allegedly
admittted were flawed.

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 14:38:16 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

> You've replied many times to this issue, yet were unable to provide one
> thing that was wrong with the 8 or the X.

This information has been known since at least November 1st, 2018:
o iPhone X gets speed throttling, months after Apple said it probably doesn't need it
o iPhone X, released November 3, 2017, now has Apple's CPU-throttling feature.
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-x-gets-speed-throttling-months-after-apple-said-it-probably-doesnt-need-it/>

"iOS 11.3 throttled performance on iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s,
iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone SE, iPhone 7, and iPhone 7 Plus ... Starting with
iOS 12.1, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X include this feature"

This is really scary that _none_ of you Apple users seem to know anything.
Very scary.

I respect(ed) you J.F. Mezei.
I respect you because I think that you're _not_ an Apple Apologists.

But... if you don't know that Apple admitted the _entire_ line is flawed,
then, um, then you don't even know the _first_ thing about the iPhone.

I never say I know much, but I know far more than _any_ of you
seem to know. That's really scary.

You're iOS owners are so clueless, that it's fantastically scary.
I didn't realize you, of all people, were also _that_ dumb.

Seriously.
What is really scary, is how fantastically ignorant you iOS users are.

I respect you JF Mezei - but that doesn't change the fact that _all_ of you
Apple users constantly prove to be so ignorant that I can't imagine how any
of you can debate anything that adults can debate.

Clearly the _entire_ line of iPhones, including the 8, and 8Plus and X are
now being throttled. Apple admitted it themselves for Christs' sake.

I thought it was only the Apple Apologists who deny even what Apple admits.

Every time I deal with you Apple users, I get scared.
I didn't know people could have such strong opinions, based on 0 facts.

> If you want intelligent conversations, when you accuse phones to be
> flawed and say you have evidence and even Apple admitted it, then the
> onus is on you to at least list of few things that Apple allegedly
> admittted were flawed.

It's ungodly how ignorant you iOS users are.
Ungodly.

I thought you, JF Mezei, weren't one of "them".
Where I expect nospam to be utterly ignorant, and lewis, and BK, and Jolly
Roger, and Alan Baker, etc.

They're all both
o Ignorant, and,
o Apple Apologists

But you, JF Mezei ... I didn't expect you to be so ignorant as they are.
It's really scary that I know so much more about iOS than any of you.

And I know nothing about it.
That's how little YOU Apple users know.

[arlen holder]

Facts... that any sentient adult can comprehend...
(even as it's clear these facts leave the Apple Apologists in the dust...)

"In a public letter released on Jan. 2, Apple CEO Tim Cook blamed
the slowing Chinese economy and rising trade tensions with the U.S.
as one of the key reasons for lowering first quarter sales guidance.
Experts, however, told CNBC that much of the iPhone˙s China problem
*comes down to the company setting the wrong prices*"

"The trade war is background noise and more of a scapegoat excuse
with *the real issues being iPhone XR demand and a mispriced product*
in a competitive Chinese market,Ą Daniel Ives, managing director of
equity research at Wedbush Securities, told CNBC"

Duh.
That's the surprise, Tim Cook.
o Sheep suddenly stopped grazing on the expensive lawn at Infinite Loop!

Facts.
o Retailers are slashing iPhone prices across China as consumers
say the phones aren't worth the cost
<https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/11/apple-iphone-retailers-are-slashing-prices-across-china.html>

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 21:35:44 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> This is proof that you, nospam, are either
> o Stupid or perhaps simply ill educated, or,
> o Trolling (as usual)

*You, nospam, always call facts you don't like, trolls.*

I only speak facts.
<https://www.cnet.com/news/apples-battery-throttling-comes-to-iphone-x-8-and-8-plus-with-ios-12-1/>
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2018/10/31/apple-iphone-8-iphone-x-iphone-8-plus-battery-throttle-problems/#6978dec9e3d6>
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-x-gets-speed-throttling-months-after-apple-said-it-probably-doesnt-need-it/>
etc.

It's no surprise that nospam calls all facts he doesn't like, "trolls".

Since nospam has never been exposed to a rigorous education,
nospam has no other response to facts than to flatly deny them.

Sans any facts of his own (since nospam just makes everything up).

This outright flat denials of facts simply means nospam is always wrong.
As a result, nospam's record on facts is worse than that of the monkey.

REFERENCE:
o Is there a single expensive flawed iPhone from last year that is NOT currently being throttled as of iOS 12.1?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wbCbVX48E5M>