谷歌超微软成全球市值第二大科技公司， 之我感

holyplague

来来回回讨论市场额。。。冒个头说份额其实是个很巧妙的词。 如果我没记错对比近期报表的话， MAC一直卖不过PC， 现在好像才10%？ 但利润额让PC厂家羡慕不已， 貌似几乎是其它家的总和？移动这方面苹果出货量是越来越高， 并没有因为android而导致买卖下降， 市场额降低主要因为苹果就如你说的走精品路线，不争取中低端市场所以从占有率来说肯定不断下滑， 毕竟任何市场里高端用户远没中低端多。 这里引个forbes的资料，高端的移动市场大约只占总市场的20－25%， 而苹果份额是在15－20%之间， 年出货量是150－200mils iphone。。。不过下个 ios版本如果没大动作的话估计会开始流失最赚钱的iphone用户， 毕竟近期ios已经feel stagnated。 至于你说的google多样化这个的确比其它两家好， 但最近卖nexus4的表现显示google本身远没准备好diverse业务， 一个以communication出名的公司把这次发布弄得如此糟糕， 对用户也没一丁点交代， 说白了骨子里跟微软苹果一样。大家没必要过度粉某家， 那家产品好用就用那家咯

garyyang

holyplague 发表于 2012-12-4 12:07
来来回回讨论市场额。。。冒个头说份额其实是个很巧妙的词。 如果我没记错对比近期报表的话， MAC一直卖不 ...

呵呵， 这个话题的确很难讨论出一个共识， 毕竟就像不同的宗教信仰一样谁都很难服谁。

我自己不是任何粉，如果一定要帮一家公司的话我可能会选微软因为职业规划和它有关，所以在评论的时候尽量不拿它去比较， 这样才能做到客观。 这3家公司都曾经改变过我们的生活， 都是当今的强者， 从不同的角度都能找到一家比另两家强的理由， 而我的角度就是谁能再次改变我们的生活。

把这贴放个3-5年， 我已经把自己的观点表达了， 以后回来看看今天的观点会不会太过幼稚， 拭目以待吧。

garyyang

今天一个众人结婚的日子12/12/12, Android 第一次在澳洲智能手机市场领先IOS。 文章称， 在澳洲1千多万的智能手机用户中， Android 以44%的占有率超过IOS一个百分点。 要知道在2010， Android只有6%的占有率。

分析师指出Android成功的原因

Lower prices, faster product cycles and carrier support has helped Android become the leading platform.

的确， 有两点很重要
1） 抓住大众市场， 不走伪高端
2） 实施一种双赢的商业模式才能得到更大的carrier support

http://www.theage.com.au/digital ... 20121212-2b8q2.html

iamiii

打工的命，操的总统的心。。。

鱼羊鲜

呵呵 用户受益，不挺好的么

iami

lingyang 发表于 2012-11-29 17:41
可以让我纳闷的是google总是在创新怎么股价没在动呢， 是不是可以理解创新和股价没关系？ ...

yes or no. its more relevant to how an innovation can turn into business opportunities.

apple was one of the junkies however once its got the chance of offering more refined products to the market, it's able to attract more attentions on the market, and its able to sell more products even its only cosmetically good not necessary technologily advanced, hence the share price goes up. money flows into the shares that can make money. this is the ultimate purpose of investment

an analog could help you understand more is the growth of chinese economy, in early 80, annual growth is approx. 15%, however once She's passed a certain stage, the growth started to slow down, like right now sits only around 7 or 8 per cent.
and at the same time japan, uk, the states only have had a growth around two or three per cent. as you can see, even China has passed japan uk but still trails behind the states in terms of the scale of economy. if you make yourself a chart, china has an exponentially growth line whereas the states sits on a flat or even dropping down line. So which country has the stronger strength on economy, innovations, dominance etc etc in the world? i think you might have the answer already even the charts attempted to convince you in an opposite way.

so thats why we dont make our judgement based on a single chart. this is "too simple sometimes naive"

garyyang

iamiii 发表于 2012-12-12 11:59
打工的命，操的总统的心。。。

说对了， 我宁愿自命不凡， 也好过任由天命。
小身材， 大味道

iamiii

garyyang 发表于 2012-12-12 15:40
说对了， 我宁愿自命不凡， 也好过任由天命。
小身材， 大味道

心比天高，命比纸薄

这个好像是形容林妹妹的。

garyyang

iamiii 发表于 2012-12-12 16:52
心比天高，命比纸薄

这个好像是形容林妹妹的。

那不贾GG来点实在点的分析， 别管会耍嘴皮子。

否定别人的看法很容易， 不用交税， 这坛子里面比比皆是。

lingyang

iami 发表于 2012-12-12 13:31
yes or no. its more relevant to how an innovation can turn into business opportunities.

apple wa ...

Very interesting comment.

First of all, I am very curious why the "chance" was not discovered by the "most innovation company" in the tech industry but Apple. Those many "it's able to" are not as easy as the way you described. And the word  "refined" should be changed to "re-defined"

To push share price higher business model and innovation are equally important, if not more. Every innovation is driven by a business problem. Pure innovation maybe only exist in Universities, not to mention those Uni professors are desperately seeking funding everyday for their projects, which means only ideas that can solve business challenges will be funded in most cases :-). Innovation without business model support is just like pie in the air. Where is SUN Microsystems today?

Google had its premium time years ago, the business model and innovation was just about right so share price soared from below 85 to 600 within several years. Since then competition has been fierce, its core business margin is dropping, share price has been quiet in recent years. The same story is repeating itself on Apple since 2006.

Growth in China is driven by completely different reasons. The US and China story is fundamentally different from every aspect of the fact. Moreover,  it also does not support the point you were trying to make. Say CSCO or MS is the "USA" in late 1990s to early 2000s, compare to them Google("China") also had an exponentially growth then dropped then flatted. Does this mean Google is not a innovation company？I guess lifecycle is the only similarity between your China-USA story and the Apple-Goggle story.

Bottom line here is the cycle you described is just a normal life cycle for a thing, not even just for a company. It has nothing to do with innovation at all :-).

Gladly Google still values innovation not like other big companies shifting to an operational excellence business model. If you read the interview Larry Page did with Fortune recently you will get an idea why Google is touching so many areas.

lastly, I guess if you think our judgement are only based on a single 5-yr or 10-yr chart from Google finance, that is "too simple sometimes native"

iami

lingyang 发表于 2012-12-12 22:40
Very interesting comment.

First of all, I am very curious why the "chance" was not discovered by ...

well, we all know you are a fanboi that wouldnt even hesitate to sell your kidney for an i-something. its understandable why you accuse an educated adult's comments is wrong here wrong there, remaking the words rather than providing valid arguments as much as you want. i wouldnt expect too much from a fan boi so be relaxed, and i shall try my best to explain some common sense even with your very exceptional fanboi-mindset

to make an opportunity an opportunity you need an array of factors coming all at the same time. say the slate/tablet pc which has been done by ms in early 2000. there's no reason to credit stev or apple for the first company of producing tablet or slate if you do have some common sensen isnt it?  stev didnt invent the wheel but re-invented the wheel. he was lucky the time was right when he was re-doing the same thing. its painful to ask a fanboi to accept such a truth isnt it   

and the so-called "chance" was simply offering a cosmetically good looking product to the market as i have stated in my previous reply. apple was successful back then, it did make a good looking UI (stole from a poor uni professor thou), google is more of a firm concentrating on funding fun and innovative projects rather than making fancy looking UI like apples always done. hence the so-called "chance" would have very low possibilities "be discovered" by google, but more likely would be caught by apple. you cant expect a hair dresser to design an Enzo like a pro engineer dont ya?

keep one thing in your fanboi mindset. apple has a unique business model but no innovation. hence the rest of your reply is not worth replying.

oh thanks for your reply to the analog example. it only serves the sole purpose of helping you understand a chart doesnt tell you the whole story, when you say "CSCO or MS is the "USA" in late 1990s to early 2000s, compare to them Google("China") bla bla" you have already shown yourself lost the track of discussing. you can't compare an apple wiht an orange. and this is the fundamental rule of reasoning.

so thank you very much for your clear demo of lacking of reasoning skills. now i see why your are 2 simple sometimes naive

such  a prestige fanboi mindset.

lingyang

iami 发表于 2012-12-12 23:01
well, we all know you are a fanboi that wouldnt even hesitate to sell your kidney for an i-somethi ...

Another interesting lengthy comment, and an expected type of response. :-) Well done.

Words like "cosmetically", "lucky", "re-doing" "chance" "more likely"etc are full of your comments. So in short your common sense is Apple is just lucky. lucky to do the right thing at the right time. Your common sense is Apple products are only good looking and nothing else. I can clearly tell from your comments that bias is rooted in your mindset. well educated.

In addition, if an educated adult can not understand the relationship between innovation and business model, well, I'd first question your definition of "educated adult", maybe just an adult, simple like that . Can not understand other ppl's arguments properly, another issue.

The third paragraph is just a perfect example of your broken logic. . Typical your type of mindset, shallow understanding of Apple, but I like your Enzo metaphor

I guess my previous reply already mentioned that making the assumption that ppl's judgement is based on a single chart itself is naive. Illustrating an inappropriate example was naive 2 . Tried to help you defend your example but if you can not understand the implication of CSCO, MS and Google story that's absolutely fine. As I don't have unrealistic expectation to some type of "educated adults". These ppl, such as You are 2 simple sometimes naive.

So thank you very much for clearly picturing a biased "educated adult" using yourself as an example.

Also don't take me wrong, Google is a good company with excellent reputation, just you are 2 naive to blindly anti-apple without many valid points.  

such a prestige fanboi mindset.

garyyang

欢迎lingyang 和 iami继续百家争鸣。

我今天来分享一篇文章， 重点我已经加粗

乔布斯17年前曾预言：毁灭苹果的将是贪婪

导语：美国《福布斯》杂志网络版周二发表署名里奇•卡尔加德(Rich Karlgaard)的文章指出，乔布斯在17年前曾说过，毁灭苹果的不是增长，而是贪婪。如今，苹果过度从“摇钱树”iPhone中榨取利润，乔布斯的这番警告似乎正在应验。
　　以下为文章概要：
　　1995年，乔布斯在接受采访时曾说：“毁灭苹果的不是增长，而是他们变得非常贪婪。”
　　他说：“苹果并没有沿着初始愿景的原始轨道走下去，即将某件产品打造成家用电器，并让尽可能多的人使用，而是去追逐利润。在四年左右的时间里，他们攫取了高额的利润，但也为此付出了代价，那就是他们的未来。他们本应该做的事情是，努力实现合理的利润，同时寻求扩大市场份额。”
　　这次采访被称为“遗失的访谈2”(The Lost Interview 2)，乔布斯在采访中抱怨苹果从Mac机中榨取利润，一旦遭遇颠覆性行业变革，市场份额暴跌，将伤及自身。乔布斯的这番话最终得到了验证。
　　乔布斯对继任者约翰•斯卡利(John Sculley)的要求似乎有些苛刻。1985年，乔布斯强迫苹果董事会做出一个“二选一”的决定，但后者最终选择了斯卡利，乔布斯也愤而离开。
　　作为当代最伟大的CEO，乔布斯只是在重返苹果以后才铸就辉煌。换句话说，虽然乔布斯的聪慧和感召力与生俱来，但也是在经历了痛苦磨难与自我反省以后，才最终走向成熟。
　　我的话有些离题了。今天这篇博文的核心观点是，苹果再次面临从其“摇钱树”(现在是iPhone)中榨取利润过度的危险。一旦市场份额增长陷入停滞，苹果又将不堪一击。
　　2012年，iPhone的毛利率接近55%，这真是太惊人了，但也是难以长久的，现在Android和Windows 8两大阵营正在联手行动，向苹果发起连番冲击。iPhone的利润如今占到苹果总利润的65%。
　　依赖iPhone的问题令人担忧。苹果难以从一股不可持续的力量中挣脱出来，其近三分之二的利润来自于一款利润高得离谱的产品。这种模式注定无法持久。对于这一点，投资者的头脑正日益清醒。这也就是全球市值最高公司的市盈率只有区区11倍的原因，即使苹果最近派发了1.9%的股息。
　　如果你不同意我的看法，那么在过去10周股价下跌22%的苹果股票，现在应该说已经够低了，低到似乎令人无法抗拒的地步。那就尽你最大努力买进吧。不过，乔布斯的预言有可能再一次成真。
　　我给苹果的建议是：投资者已经不再因iPhone高额利润率而让你们获得巨大回报，所以应该改变原有的模式。请听从乔布斯在1995年给出的建议，更积极地去拓展全球市场份额


======================================================================
这篇文章和我的观点不谋而合。
1）苹果过度依赖iPhone而给自己挖了一个大坑， 验证了我一再强调的“产品多样性”的重要性。
2）文中对市场占有率的注重也和我的分析大致一样
3）文章还反驳了有些朋友提出的苹果是走高端小众路线的观点， 因为乔布斯的初衷是走大众路线。 个人也非常纳闷苹果的产品除了价格， 能比别家的高端到哪去？ 实为伪高端， 是董事会的贪婪和短视

以上三大忌google全没有沾到， 微软第一条做得也不够好。

garyyang

。

garyyang

建议lingyang 和 iami最好用中文交流， 这样方便更多的朋友加入讨论。

改天会把标题改为一个专门讨论谷歌， 苹果， 微软将来的帖子。
这种帖子肯定会看到不同的阵营对立的观点， 真心希望这贴能在5年后给大家带来足够的养分。

欢迎大家百家争鸣

rayki

帖子不错。。 mark一下。。

lingyang

garyyang 发表于 2012-12-13 12:22
欢迎lingyang 和 iami继续百家争鸣。

我今天来分享一篇文章， 重点我已经加粗

看到市盈率那部分我忍不住笑了 ， 想起了几年前看的一本彼得林奇的书

gifox

iamiii 发表于 2012-12-12 10:59
打工的命，操的总统的心。。。

我也是这样看，看财经杂志文章看多了就发现，其实什么观点都有。总有某个人说中的时候，不过基本上大家都是乱枪打鸟。
预测都是基于一对预设条件做的判断，但是事实是变数太多了，基本上跟蒙的准确率差不多。

gifox

holyplague 发表于 2012-12-4 11:07
来来回回讨论市场额。。。冒个头说份额其实是个很巧妙的词。 如果我没记错对比近期报表的话， MAC一直卖不 ...

所以这就是产品差异化的重要性，虽然只有低占有率的市场。但是那个市场就完全是自己的。利润全部进自己口袋，可以实现搞的利润率。
pc那边还要拼成本，和其他n多厂家分享利润。
现在手机这块绝大部分利润都入了苹果＋3星的口袋。另外那点剩下的由众多厂家竞争， 头破血流。
android 卖的再好，大部分android厂家还是日子过得苦。

由此看来苹果一直关起门搞自己的也不无道理。

iamiii

garyyang 发表于 2012-12-13 13:22
欢迎lingyang 和 iami继续百家争鸣。

我今天来分享一篇文章， 重点我已经加粗

1）苹果过度依赖iPhone而给自己挖了一个大坑， 验证了我一再强调的“产品多样性”的重要性。

乔布斯回归苹果之前，那个产品多样性才叫强啊。。。 苹果有衣服卖，有打印机卖，有水杯卖.

下面这个当年苹果的促销广告里面，非常时尚非常牛B的苹果衣，男装女装都有，穿出去倍有面子。

workflow

我觉得这个楼里好多人全是搞技术的，甚至连售前都没做过

garyyang

gifox 发表于 2012-12-14 08:42
我也是这样看，看财经杂志文章看多了就发现，其实什么观点都有。总有某个人说中的时候，不过基本上大家都 ...

我可没说财经啊，比如他们3家以后股价多少不关心。我关心的是对他们未来的比较和前景的分析， 这个的确有很多变数， 就比如说Nokia现在好像快要倒闭了， 也许以后变数可以让它东山再起谁知道呢。 但是如果你抱着“谁知道呢”这种态度， 这贴可能不适合你。 我开贴是想讨论这三家科技公司， 是因为他们的产品都曾经改变过我的生活， 如今也是三国鼎立， 就当做品三国吧。

garyyang

gifox 发表于 2012-12-14 08:51
所以这就是产品差异化的重要性，虽然只有低占有率的市场。但是那个市场就完全是自己的。利润全部进自己口 ...

三星也卖android， 不是挺好。 如果其他卖android厂家日子像你说的过得不好， 会不会是他们自己产品本身的问题？
你的评论太主观， 缺少事实依据。

garyyang

iamiii 发表于 2012-12-14 10:02
1）苹果过度依赖iPhone而给自己挖了一个大坑， 验证了我一再强调的“产品多样性”的重要性。

乔布斯回归 ...

这衣服真是不好看

多样性主要指拳头产品。 衣服杯子最多算是纪念品

garyyang

workflow 发表于 2012-12-14 10:37
我觉得这个楼里好多人全是搞技术的，甚至连售前都没做过

想说什么可以直接点， 本来就是各抒己见。

workflow

garyyang 发表于 2012-12-14 13:17
想说什么可以直接点， 本来就是各抒己见。

直接点就是你完全是从技术人员的视角来讨论问题，如果你做过pre－sale或者sales，就明白技术创新和市场价值（或用户接受度）很多时候根本没关系

garyyang

workflow 发表于 2012-12-14 13:19
直接点就是你完全是从技术人员的视角来讨论问题，如果你做过pre－sale或者sales，就明白技术创新和市场价 ...

见#78

lingyang

workflow 发表于 2012-12-14 12:19
直接点就是你完全是从技术人员的视角来讨论问题，如果你做过pre－sale或者sales，就明白技术创新和市场价 ...

通俗点说就是东西好卖还是不好卖

从销售的角度来说东西好卖是王道，有没有创新他们并不关心而且也没有必要关心，毕竟这和commission没关系。

再说开去好卖的东西一定是某种程度上解决了一个特定市场的需求，创新就是用来回答怎么解决。 有了怎么解决还不完全够还得有一个可持续的模式，否则最终用户也是不会买单的。 FB就是一个典型的例子，创造了一个新的社交模式但是没有很好解决商业模式，要不华尔街也不会有想让Mark下台的想法。 从这个方面来说施密特于google的贡献不比两位年轻的创始人小。

另外销售有销售具体产品的，也有销售服务的。 我觉得这个帖子可能大家讨论最多的是产品的创新，至于服务的创新也许因为坛子里大多数人都是搞技术的所以没有被过多的讨论。Tangible VS Intangible而已。 比如苹果实体店就是一个服务创新的典型。 IBM的转型也是一个服务创新的典范。

梦呓人

bulaohu 发表于 2012-10-26 22:31
创新本身就是冒险，这是为什么大公司的创新能力往往会越来越弱，因为上层逐渐都被一些职业CXO之类的蛀虫把 ...

虎哥，去申请CAO的职业吧！

lingyang

garyyang 发表于 2012-12-13 12:22
欢迎lingyang 和 iami继续百家争鸣。

我今天来分享一篇文章， 重点我已经加粗

我觉得google也有第一点的问题 广告收入占了90%的利润来源，而且已经显现颓势了

2012 CY Q3的财报：
1. Google 在上个季度中收入高达27.4亿美元，低于预期，也低于去年同期
2. Google 总收入比去年同期上涨了45%，利润却下降了，约19%，换句话说google 规模变大了利润缩水了。你买这样的股票嘛
3. 单次点击成本，包括包括 Google 协作平台上的相关广告点击，与2011年第三季度相比下降了约15%，与2012年第二季度相比下降了约3%。

Google Q3 CY12 earning:
http://investor.google.com/earnings/2012/Q3_google_earnings.html


接下来1-2年唯一的可看点是google怎么整合moto，还是只是吸收其IP(intellectual property)然后把moto从这个世界上抹掉。