Inside Apple’s numbers

On Monday last week we hear Steve Jobs is taking another medical leave of absence and, on Tuesday, we get a look at Apple’s numbers for Q1 2011 (which is actually the last quarter of 2010).

Brian Hall provides this crisp summary:

• Sales: $26.74 billion, up 70.5% year over year
• Profits: $6 billion, up 77.7%
• EPS: $6.43, up 75.2%
• iPhone: 16.24 million units, up 85.8%
• iPad: 7.33 million units, compared with Wall St. consensus of 6.15 million
• Mac: 4.13 million units, up 23%
• iPod: 19.45 million units, down 7.3%
• iPod touch: More than 50% of total iPod sales
• Gross margin: 38.5%, compared with guidance of 36%
• Revenue guidance for Q2: $22 billion
• EPS guidance for Q2: $4.90
• Gross margin guidance: 38.5%
• Apple stores: $12 million average revenue per store, up 69% from Q4
• Cash and marketable securities: $59.7 billion, up from $51 billion in Q4.

MacWorld put together a more detailed but still digestible review that includes a history of quarterly profits since 2007, as well as units and revenue numbers by product line. Very well done.

For the official word from the mother ship, we have Seeking Alpha’s transcript of the earnings call where Tim Cook, Apple’s COO, and Peter Oppenheimer, CFO, read prepared remarks and answer carefully choreographed questions from analysts.

And if you’re ready for some long form reading, we have SEC filings. For the quarter just ended, there’s the Form 10-Q (55 pages). For the entire fiscal year 2010 ending last September, Form 10-K (116 pages…).

You don’t have to read them all–or at all, it’s an acquired taste–but if you decide to indulge, take a moment to feast your legal eyes on the faux handwringing in the Risk Factors section (a.k.a CYA Central). Then head for the good stuff, the Management’s Discussion and Analysis section starting on page 28 in the 10-K, and page 20 in the 10-Q. Company execs use the MD&A to walk us through the key elements of the business.

From that sea of words and numbers, I’ll extract three trains of thoughts.

First, the significance of the iPad business.

14.8M iPads were shipped in just nine months. This in a previously marginalized or verticalized category: Tablets. By comparison, the first iPhone didn’t reach 10M until it was a year old.

Looking at quarterly iPad unit sales:

• 3.3M units for the launch quarter ending in June
• 4.3M for the following three months
• 7.3M units for the period just reported.

At last year’s D9 conference Steve Ballmer dismissed the iPad as “just another PC”. (This is standard Microsoft decorum. In 2007, he scoffed at the iPhone.) Well, then, if the iPad must be counted as a PC, it just captured 7% of the global PC market last quarter.

This explains why Acer and Asus, leading netbook makers, are rushing tablets to the market and why Lenovo, another PC titan, is starting a mobile division. All in all, 80 tablets were announced at CES a few weeks ago. The iPad is about to get some serious competition but, based on the 7.3 million units shipped last quarter, most forecasters feel confident in predicting 30 million iPads or more for the year.

Deloitte, the large accounting and consulting firm, now calls 2011 The Year Of The Tablet. They, and other market research firms, don’t agree with Ballmer. They put the iPad in a new category: Media tablets, and they see Apple’s share as somewhere between 87.5% (where do they find that .5%?) and 90% of the market. (I’m not sure the media tablet moniker will stick. These devices already let you do much more than “consume” media.)

Last quarter’s iPad revenue, $4.6B, is almost as large as the Mac’s $5.4B… and this is after only nine months while the Mac will soon be 27 years old. (For another Monday Note: the Mac business, growing by 22% last year, versus 14% for the entire PC industry, with a closer look at the MacBook Air’s impact, present and future.)

The 10-Q also gives us revenue-per-unit:

• $629 for each iPad
• $649 per iPhone

(Company execs quote ASPs of $600 and $625 in the call transcript but they’re probably excluding ancillary services and accessories.)

The iPad’s lower ASP may seem counterintuitive, but recall the iPad’s introduction last January when the $499 base price took everyone by surprise. Pre-launch speculation pegged it somewhere between $800 and $1,000. It felt like a turning point, it looked like Apple wanted to remove price as an excuse for not buying, that they wanted to occupy as much terrain as quickly as possible. And they did, with a barrage of ads that started soon after the launch and are still going on.

This was followed by two more aggressive price moves, the $99 Apple TV and, more important, the $999 MacBook Air.

Apple’s overall Gross Margin has declined from 39.4% last year to 38.5% last quarter, but that’s better than the 36% level the company had predicted in October. In other words, the more assertive prices seem to have worked: Revenue grew 70% year-to-year without harming profits, which grew by 77%.

(Again, we’ll leave the iPhone’s $649 ASP for another Monday Note, probably around the time of the Mobile World Congress, next month in Barcelona. If we are to believe Apple Insider, Apple has become the world’s largest mobile phone manufacturer — by revenue. As Apple execs “neglected” to brag about beating the incumbent, we’ll wait for Nokia’s quarterly numbers coming out in a few days, January 27th.)

The second point: The Apple Stores.

In FY 2010, revenue across all Apple Stores was $9.8B. This is 15% of Apple’s total sales, with 317 stores open at the end of the reporting period, 44 more than the year before.

But I want to know the revenue per employee. Obligingly, the 10-K mentions 26,500 “full-time equivalent” employees by the end of FY 2010. A simple division yields $370K per employee. There were significantly fewer employees at the beginning of the year so we can safely assume a full-time employee brings in about $400K/year, a ratio that must be the envy of the entire retail industry.

While I’m at it, I also want to get an idea of the Gross Margin for Apple’s retail business. I have a French peasant view of the world: Forget the revenue numbers, its the Gross Margin that really matters, those are the dollars that feed you. We know the operating profit–the 10-K says it was $2.4B, 24%–but what about the Gross Margin?

It’s moderately complicated. If this isn’t your cup of numbers, please skip to the result.

We know Apple’s overall Gross Margin, 39.4% last year; we have numbers for indirect sales and retail, $55.4B and $9.8B respectively. How do we extract retail’s GM? We’re facing one linear equation with two unknowns: the GM for indirect (non-retail) sales and the GM for retail sales. Weighted by their respective sales volumes, they compound to the known 39.4% total Gross Margin number.

I use a simple trick: I assume two components for the retail GM. First I apply a “standard” retail discount. For this exercise, I use 30%. Once I’ve done that, the discounted number becomes of the same nature as indirect sales. The second margin component of the retail GM is therefore equal to the (unknown) indirect GM.
Having “fixed” one variable, the retail discount, we now have one linear equation with one unknown, the indirect Gross Margin, x:

Retail Sales * (30% + 70% * x) + Indirect Sales * x = Total Sales * 39.4%

or, with actual sales numbers, in billions:

9.8 * (30% + 70% * x) + 55.4 * x = 65.2 * 39.4%

Now, copy the line above and paste it into WolframAlpha:

and you’re done:


Isn’t this fun?

The result: 36.5% GM for Apple’s indirect $55.4B sales and, after compounding the assumed 30% retail discount, we arrive at an approximate 56% GM for Apple’s retail stores.
(No warranties expressed or implied.)

Thus, each Apple Store employee can dine on 56% of $400K. That’s $224K. Probably enough to pay salaries, rent and HVAC…and leave change for the shareholders.

That was last year. In the quarter just reported, Apple’s retail business grew 95% year-to-year to $3.9B. Using Apple’s historic seasonality (4xQ1 for the full year; 5xQ4 for the following year) we can project at least $16B for Apple retail in FY 2011.

That’s 16% of the $100B revenue number Apple could approach this year…

Much has been said about the Apple Store as a sterling example of everything that can go right in retail: record sales volume per square foot, traffic numbers, profitability, aesthetics (more at Apple’s architecture firm: Bohlin Cywinski Jackson), and customer service.

Most important, the Apple Store proves Apple’s ability to execute on a global scale.

Which leads me to my last point: The Silence of the Lambs. Wall Street Analysts.

If you go back to the earnings call transcript, there’s a conspicuous absence. There’s no mention of Steve Jobs.

The supposedly aggressive Wall Street analysts didn’t ask a single question about Steve’s medical leave of absence, its nature, duration, Apple’s contingency plans. How come?

The answer in a single word: Access.

A few years ago I asked a journalist friend about a sycophantically fellatious piece that a colleague of his had written for a respected business daily. The writer had followed a key software executive as he toured the company’s R&D offices around the world. In dulcet, reverent tones, the journalist reported how the missus dominicus spread the gospel, blessed projects, and occasionally, but rightfully, disciplined errant local chieftains.

‘How come?’, I asked. ‘This isn’t reporting, this is simply disgorging the party line!’

His response: ‘It’s all about access. This is a huge company that’s an important source of news, great fodder for the paper and its journos. It’s a quid pro quo. In order to get access to the top execs, to get the juicy tidbits, sometimes you have to strap the kneepads on…’

Before its earnings call, a company decides which analysts will be allowed to ask questions. The opportunity comes with an understanding. If you don’t do your part, your conference call line will never open again, you’ll have lost access.

And we can’t blame Apple: All companies do it. At least the ones that bestow enough prestige.

Nonetheless, I don’t buy the criticism of Apple’s decision to keep a tight lid on Jobs’ medical condition. In the first place, no less than ex-SEC commissioner Arthur Levitt believes Apple has met its legal disclosure obligations.

Further, Apple’s behavior is consistent. Critics might find it unpleasant, but they shouldn’t be surprised. Fault-finders would lead a happier and more productive life if they recognized that this is the way it was, is, and always will be.

Speaking of which, of modus operandi, one of Steve’s signal achievements is the management team and culture he’s installed since he took the reins in 1997 and engineered Apple 2.0. The vision, the panache, the demanding aesthetics, the (more than) occasional swish of his rhetoric rapier could obscure the fact that he’s built one of the best–perhaps the best–business machines this industry has ever seen, run by a uniquely competent and cohesive management team.

But yes, there is only one Steve. We all hope to see him soon on stage or driving around Palo Alto. (Don’t ask about the license plate.)

JLG@mondaynote.com

PS: Thanks to John Gruber, I found this advertising executive’s insightful homage to Jobs and Apple, saying things like:

‘Yeah, it’s just some metal, plastic and silicon. And, yes, Apple makes a lot of money. But those two observations miss completely the point of Apple. It’s about inspiration, hope and an embrace of the future and humanity’s place within it.’

The full text is here.

—-

Be Sociable, Share!

Related columns:

  1. Inside Apple’s Q2 Numbers TweetThis last week, Apple announced their 2011 Q2 numbers. Philip Elmer-DeWitt, whose Fortune Tech Apple 2.0 blog I enjoy and recommend, provides a crisp summary: • Sales: $24.67 billion, up 82.8% year over year • Profits: $5.99 billion, up 95% • EPS: $6.40, up 92% • iPhone: 18.65 million units, up 113% (!) • iPhone [...]...
  2. Apple: Three Intriguing Numbers TweetNo Monday Note last week: I was in The Country of Sin, enjoying pleasures such as TGV trips across a landscape of old villages, Romanesque churches, Rhône vineyards — and a couple of nuclear power plants. All this without our friendly TSA. Back in the Valley, Apple just released their latest quarterly numbers. They weren’t [...]...
  3. War in the Valley: Apple vs. Google TweetIt was long overdue: Eric Schmidt (Google’s CEO) finally resigned from Apple’s Board of Directors. Usually, these resignations are handled in the smoothest of ways: Thanks for the distinguished service and the like. This time, Steve Jobs issued a pointed statement: “Unfortunately, as Google enters more of Apple’s core businesses, with Android and now Chrome [...]...
  4. Apple Phlebotomy TweetThe treatment for the blood disease called Polycythemia Vera (the name means “too many red cells”) goes back to the Dark Ages: Lance a vein and relieve the patient of a pint of blood. Phlebotomy treats the symptom but not the condition. There is no known cure; the blood-letting must be repeated indefinitely. This is [...]...
  5. Apple: The End Is Nigh TweetThe end of iPhone/iPad One Size Fits All, that is. So far, Apple has managed to sell more than 300M iOS devices using only a single size for the iPhone and another for the iPad. I’m becoming convinced this can’t last much longer. Soon, I believe, we’ll see a range of physically distinct iPhone and [...]...

11 Comments

  1. Posted January 24, 2011 at 5:53 am | Permalink

    JLG, I think only your site can make me eager for Mondays to arrive;-).

    There are several great analyses here so I will focus on iPad. I think the iPad is amazing. That said, at its current price, form factor and considering that iPad crosses multiple user types, media and boundaries (e.g. work, play), I am repeatedly astounded that Apple can sell so many! Your review of Apple Stores helps explain this tremendous feat.

    Lastly, huge bonus points for the phrase “sycophantically fellatious”. That is perfect.

  2. Posted January 24, 2011 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    I too was tempted by “sycophantically fellatious” but chose another gem to tweet: polit2k Inside Apple’s numbers | Monday Note “sometimes you have to strap the kneepads on…’” http://t.co/Qy… #browsings @scobleizer

    Best post blog I’ve read this week so far:-)

  3. Walt French
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 1:21 am | Permalink

    There’s another reason besides “access.”

    I can’t think how, if I were an analyst on that call, I could have phrased a question about Jobs’s health so as to elicit any other answer than, “we have no new information to provide (since, ahem!, yesterday).”

    Now THAT’S a waste of my 10 seconds of fame.

  4. Jean-Louis Gassée
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 1:34 am | Permalink

    @Walt French. You’re right, it would be a waste of those minutes of fame. That is if the ananlyst asked a _direct question about Stev’s health. As I wrote, the SEC ex-commish, Arthur Levitt, a straight arrow if there is one, thinks Apple did enough disclosur to meet its legal obligations. But asking indirect questions about management culture, bench strength, contigency planning if Tim Cook himself is incapacitated or decides to join Cirque du Soleil as a juggler. “Who would replace you and how the decision would be made?”
    This said, IMO, you’d be right again if you thought the WS crowd just shrugs Apple’s MO off. As you say in English: C’est la vie…

  5. Jean-Louis Gassée
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 1:49 am | Permalink

    Correction! Philip Elmer-DeWitt brought the follwing to my attention: the “crisp summary” I referred to at the beinning of this Monday Note originaly came from his blog, Apple 2.0 (http://bit.ly/pedwaapl), not from Brian Hall’s. My apologies to Philip Elmer-Witt and to our readers. JLG

  6. kizedek
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

    Huh, I thought that Wall Street consensus for iPad units (6.15 million) was the high-end of the consensus for the WHOLE of 2010, not just last quarter. It must have been revised upwards drastically, many, many times in the last year.

    I guess Wall Street has an institutional duty not to listen to bloggers or people who actually know Apple. Just sayin’.

  7. flyingdutch18
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

    In the Q&A, Piper Jeffrey analyst Gene Munster asked a question that came close to asking how Apple could do without Steve Jobs. It was an intelligent question, and Tim Cook answered it in an awesome way, paying full tribute to all the talents of Steve Jobs and what he has instilled into the company. I share the author’s view that he has built a formidable team.

  8. KenC
    Posted January 25, 2011 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

    Well-written analysis as always. And, thank you for all the embedded links for further reading.

    I would just point out that the last time Steve took a medical leave, Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray asked 4x about Steve from Tim and Peter, and he got ignored 3x before Peter said they looked forward to Steve’s return in June.

    I think Gene and the other analysts were smart enough to know that their one or two questions would be wasted on asking about Steve this time.

  9. Posted January 27, 2011 at 11:50 pm | Permalink

    thanks !! very useful article!

  10. Posted February 27, 2011 at 4:13 am | Permalink

    I feel like you could probably teach a class on how to make a great blog. This is fantastic! I have to say, what really got me was your design. You certainly know how to make your blog more than just a rant about an issue. Youve made it possible for people to connect. Good for you, because not that many people know what theyre doing.

  11. Posted May 5, 2011 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

    Really compeling information, thanks!

9 Trackbacks

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mike Repass, cedric naux, John Brissenden, Alex Drahon, Lessien and others. Lessien said: Gassée's Monday Note: "Inside Apple's numbers." http://bit.ly/h09osl [...]

  2. [...] call. In an analysis that mixes financial figures with excellent insight, Gassée outlines three areas of Apple's financials that are worthy of a closer [...]

  3. [...] excellent insight, Gassée outlines three areas of Apple’s financials that are worthy of a closer [...]

  4. By Wednesday Review: The week in Full Swing on January 26, 2011 at 4:01 am

    [...] Apple executive, and one who did Steve Jobs no favours at the time Sculley pushed him out, is Jean-Louis Gass$eacute;e who this week has a really close look at the numbers from the recent financial report and focuses [...]

  5. [...] Inside Apple’s numbers [...]

  6. [...] 原文地址:http://www.mondaynote.com/2011/01/23/inside-apple%E2%80%99s-numbers/ [...]

  7. [...] call. In an analysis that mixes financial figures with excellent insight, Gassée outlines three areas of Apple’s financials that are worthy of a closer [...]

  8. By Inside Apple’s Q2 Numbers | Monday Note on April 24, 2011 at 6:06 pm

    [...] For more Apple Stores margins kremlinology, see this January 23rd, 2011 Monday Note. [...]

  9. [...] Gassée / Monday Note:Inside Apple’s numbers  —  On Monday last week we hear Steve Jobs is taking [...]

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*