Financial expert: 2 million lost iPhone and iPad sales thanks to Samsung

Financial expert: 2 million lost iPhone and iPad sales thanks to SamsungA few days ago, I was saying that Apple was looking for a whopping $2.45 billion from Samsung in the ongoing stateside trial.

Now, Apple has wheeled out its team of financial experts in an attempt to convince the jury that South Korean Samsung is the Satan of the smartphone world.

CPA Terry Musika took the jury through some figures, including Samsung’s profits, “reasonable royalty fees”, and Apple’s potential lost profits.

Ultimately, Musika concluded that Apple had lost 2 million in sales, totalling $488.8 million, while Samsung’s $8.16 billion revenue yielded an estimated $2.241 billion proft.

Incidentally, Apple paid its team of financial experts somewhere in the region of $1.75 million to come up with those figures. Just saying.

Samsung’s Bill Price proceeded to rip Musika to shreds, forcing him to concede that there were many ways to tote up the various figures, and many potential pictures to be painted. Er, metaphorically speaking.

Price also pointed out that the iPhone 4 was incredibly elusive when it was first released, with Apple apparently struggling to meet demand – something Samsung can hardly be blamed for.

After a spot of moaning at the end of the day, Judge Lucy Koh allowed the international Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Ace to leave the courtroom. Cripes knows why they were there in the first place.

We’ll inevitably have more on this later in the week. Stay tuned!

via: The Verge

Add a comment
10 comments

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:13

After a spot of moaning at the end of the day, Judge Lucy Koh allowed the international Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Ace to leave the courtroom. Cripes knows why they were there in the first place.
I don't have time to read what actually happened at the trial, it'll be too long. What did you mean by the part I've quoted? Those phones are off the hook?

lcurdie / MOD  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:19

The international versions, yup.

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:39

Judge Lucy Koh allowed the international Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Ace to leave the courtroom. What does that mean?

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:40

Judge Lucy Koh allowed the international Galaxy S, Galaxy S II and Galaxy Ace to leave the courtroom. What does that mean?

Anyhoo...

barrybarryk  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:51

Yeah they're irrelevant since the models Apple were talking about weren't on direct sale in the US

matt101101 / MOD  Aug. 14, 2012 at 11:55

The international versions, yup.
Good to hear (not the the international versions were ever officially on sale in the US, AFAIK). If anything, the US specific models are less like the iPhone as they have no central home button, instead having four capacitive, illuminating touch buttons along the bottom of the device.

The software is almost exactly the same (give or take some carrier specific apps) between the intl. versions of Samsung phones and the US carrier versions.

mrew42  Aug. 14, 2012 at 12:55

What a load of rubbish.
Lost profits?
Such an argument is surely capricious at best and down right scraping the bottom of the barrel at worst.

Pondlife  Aug. 14, 2012 at 13:16

No wonder they wanted them out of the case then. If they'd paid me 1.75 million I'd have come up with a much larger figure for sales losses. :)

socialjeebus  Aug. 14, 2012 at 15:59

It's worth pointing out gents, that it seems that Musika's figures got massacred in cross-examination, as he not only included Samsung's sales when the iPhone was either out of stock or simply not available, but he also neglected to account for the fact that it was AT & T exclusive (and research showed that many consumers didn't want to switch networks) but also his figures were based on the assumption that there was only the iPhone and the Samsung phones that violated the Apple patents (completely discounting HTC, Blackberry , Motorola and Nokia, etc).

The case also revealed that many of Apple's claimed innovations were simply "stolen" or "inspired" from elsewhere - even the snap-back motion.

Decent link here:

http://www.informationweek.com/hardware/handheld/samsung-hammers-apples-damage-claims/240005422?pgno=1

JanSt / MOD  Aug. 15, 2012 at 09:17

socialjebus,
yeah. But most of all this case shows just how flawed patent systems are, and how easily the court system can be abused.
There really is no point to handing out colourful rocks when all parties maneuver a glass maze of ****.
Apple has borrowed heavily...hey, call it 'stolen'. They came late to the mobile game, so where's the surprise?
Androids notification bar, the swipe left/right homescreens, the app drawer...all stolen. Ooops, "stolen".
Etc etc etc....
Fact is though: Look at Samsung's phones and mobile media devices pre- and post-iPhone.
And tablet-specific: look at Acer's Iconia tabs and the Bell Packard variants; look at the AT100, Sony's tabs, Archos' etc etc... NONE of them look anything at all like the iPad.

I'm just stating the facts. I'm not for this lawsuit as it drains tax payers' resources. 'We' pay for those judges and courtrooms. People with real issues and non-bottomless pockets have their cases delayed, moved etc.... Meanwhile, the people who pay for all those things and then go out to buy the products can hardly sue any corporation anymore. Certain types of law suits are illegal now in the US, and near impossible to pull off elsewhere.

The notion that one corporation is better than the other, and plays fairer is just ridiculous.
If you wanna play by their rules and fall into the defence role, be my guest. Ultimately though, lets face it: they don't give a rat's a*s about you or me. Use the product you like, but don't flatter yourself: they didn't make it for you. They made it for your and your kids' money.

Anyway.
Your comment had merit, of course. But in my honest opinion we'd be fools to cheerlead for either team.
But we needn't agree, of course.

Email:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

Comment: