AppleInsider StaffThe results will be made public following the close of the stock market, and Apple executives will field questions from analysts and members of media in a subsequent conference call at approximately 5:00 p.m. Eastern time.
Historically, Apple's second quarter has be its weakest of the year due to seasonal trends. The three-month period spanning January through March falls between the traditionally lucrative holiday shopping frenzy and the early back-to-school buying season.
On average, Wall Street analysts are expecting the Cupertino-based company to report per-share earnings of $1.05 on revenues of $6.92 billion, fueled by sales of approximately 10.8 million iPods, 1.95 million Macs, and 1.6 - 2.0 million iPhones.
During its fiscal first quarter conference call in January, Apple management guided conservatively towards per-share earnings of $0.94 on revenues of $6.8 billion.
In recent weeks, several analysts have increased their forecast for the March quarter beyond consensus and guidance figures, saying they expect the company to benefit from continued momentum in Mac sales and favorable commodity prices.
Charles Martin
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
Andrew Orr
11 Comments
I'm assuming they are at least meeting market predictions with respect to income growth.
A few things which may hurt them:
1.) The rumors of the 3G iPhone hurting current iPhone sales
2.) They have been cutting corners on some "budget" items when Mac is supposed to be the upper echelon of computing. For example the use of 6-bit TN TFT panels in the 20" iMac when the old iMac was 8-bit S-IPS.
3.) The "Newer & Slower" Macbooks and MBPs.
For the premium we pay for the Mac name, we should be getting 120Hz 10-bit LCD Panels. Oh well, Money is king and Profit is his Prophet.
More important than the Mac name....the Mac OS. But yeah, I agree with the cheaping out.
For the premium we pay for the Mac name, we should be getting 120Hz 10-bit LCD Panels.
The "Newer & Slower" Macbooks and MBPs.
The new MB/MBPs aren't slower than the previous generation at the same price point.
Apple will post gross revenue between $6.95 and $7.05 Billions.
They will beat consensus and they will guide nearly 30% growth year over year for their third quarter. MSNBC and other sucky financial news sources will report that "Apple warns of a slowdown". The next day, their stock will plummet a minimum of 10 points on the news. People will sell their stock and people associated with the news sources will buy stock rebounding the stock's losses within 5 days.
The new MB/MBPs aren't slower than the previous generation at the same price point.
From the benchmarks I saw, some are and some aren't. The biggest problem was the drop in cache on the lower end MBP's and the MB's. The higher end processors increased the cache from the previous iteration. With no real price change (with the exception of the remote debacle) its actually half-true and half-false. While the lower end processors suffered in some areas (and had some gains as well) the higher-ends saw some nice gains but nothing dramatic. Albeit the true power of the Penryns won't be noticed until the platform gets the upgrade. I have an older 17" MBP and then I bought the latest 17" MBP and with the exception that I got 4Gb of ram on the new one and my old one has only 2GB - they didn't get *that* much of a bump. It's basically what you do with it, which will dictate any increase or decrease in speed. However, overall it almost evens out. The main benefit s of the new MBP were the LED backlit 1920x1200 screen and the true multi-touch pad. The screen makes it worth it. It's really beautiful to watch 1080p videos on. I really like the new screen.
More important than the Mac name....the Mac OS. But yeah, I agree with the cheaping out.
The OS is supposedly cheaper than the "Microsoft tax" on PC's. Not that I own a 20" iMac or anything. I have two Mac minis and two MBPs.