Apple just reported its results for the quarter, and all those concerns on Wall Street about the possibility of lackluster iPhone sales appear to have been misguided.

The company reported unit sales of 35.1 million iPhones for the quarter ended March 31, an increase of 88 percent, surpassing the expectations of analysts who had been looking for something more in the range of 32 million units. Lighter-than-expected iPhone sales figures from AT&T and Verizon had caused some analysts to second-guess their expectations.

Sales of the iPad were 11.8 million units, up 151 percent. Mac sales were 4 million units, up 7 percent.

Revenue was $39.2 billion, up from $24.7 billion a year ago, and earnings per share were $12.30, from $6.40 a year ago.

Apple’s conference call with analysts is coming up at 2 p.m., and it’s available here.

Comments

  • Guest

    Congratulations to Apple on a great quarter!

  • Guest

    And Apple once again leaves everyone else in the dust.

  • Guest

    MS: 6% growth
    Apple: 57% growth

    And Apple is more than 2X larger now. Anybody still want to defend Ballmer and his  “strategy”?

    • Guest

      I like a strategy of consistent growth from a wide spectrum of products, not just those that were trendy when my CEO was alive.

      • Guest

        Don’t let the smorgasbord of segments that MS has entered into fool you. Most of their growth and more than 100% of their profit comes from a handful of product families, exactly like Apple’s. Apple has just done a much better job of limiting “hobbies” and been far more successful in establishing new, faster growing businesses, many of them head-to-head against MS and at their expense (iPod, iPhone, iPad). Also, Steve died a while back. And as this report confirms, their core products remain just as “trendy” as ever.

        • Guest

          Steve died six months ago. We have not yet begun to see how poorly his successor “invents” new products. We’ve already seen iPhone 4S (when everyone was expecting iPhone 5), Apple TV 3.0 as a standalone box (when everyone was expecting an integrated television), and iBooks Author as a way to improve the iBookstore’s anaemic market share.

          Meanwhile, Microsoft has already leapfrogged Apple in visual design, has expanded its domination of the living room, and is still the platform of choice in well over 90% of U.S. homes and businesses.

          I like that strategy. The board likes that strategy.

          • Guest

            Even MS’s main PR mouthpiece is content to simply point out that news of MS’s death has been exaggerated. But in your fanciful view they’re actually winning against Apple? LOL.

            MS’s board has liked the strategy since MS used to be the most important and valuable tech company. They’re in obvious denial. What’s your excuse?

          • Guest

            Microsoft is hugely profitable, hugely influential, and continues to outsell its competitors by multiples so high I’m surprised they’re legal.

            Are they the highest-valued company by market cap? No. Do they get the most TechCrunch stories? Of course not. Trend-chasers are always looking for the next big thing.

            I eagerly anticipate Microsoft’s future and I celebrate the company’s successes. I do not apologise for this. From where do your cynicism and lament come?

          • Guest

            What’s to anticipate? Their strategy for the future is just more of the same. Continued near-total reliance on successes that date back to the 1990’s (or earlier) and re-invest the money from that failing at virtually everything new. The only anticipation is determining the precise slope of the decline in relevance, growth, and valuation, and whether that will be even more acute than over the past decade.

          • Guest

            What would you have Microsoft do, Eugene?

          • Guest

            The obvious start would be to replace the person who has led this failed strategy and the board that has supported him. After that you have to do what Jobs did at Apple, namely decide what’s core and what isn’t, as well as where your best chances for future success lie. Then you’d have to chart a new course where 100% of your focus goes into winning those and failure is not an option. That would at least give MS a chance as a future resurgence, as opposed to the present one which guarantees a continued slow decline in relevance, valuation, growth, and eventually revenue and profit too.

      • Bob

        Please tell me you’re not seriously debating the relative success of Ballmer’s strategy for MS versus Jobs for Apple? Whether you look at it over the last few years or the last decade, the numbers leave no doubt which has been more effective.

        • Guest

          Steve Jobs is dead, Bob. We’re debating the future success of Ballmer’s strategy for MS versus Tim Cook’s (hahahaha) strategy for Apple.

          Sorry, couldn’t hold it together.

          • Bob

            That wasn’t at all clear from your statement. But I’m glad you’re not debating the past record, because that would be ridiculous.

            What I don’t understand is why you’re so quick to write off Cook and his strategy for Apple’s future? Do we even know what that is yet? The only obvious departure from the Jobs era that I’ve seen so far is the decision to pay a dividend. And Jobs refusal to do that made little sense given the rate at which Apple is accumulating cash.

            It seems like you’re picking the guy who proved he could take the most dominant, valuable, cash-rich, and profitable technology company and lose all those titles inside a single decade (Ballmer) over the guy who has yet to (Cook). Maybe Cook will end up doing even worse, but doesn’t he deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point? He has already accomplished what Ballmer never has, namely a dramatic increase in the stock price vs when he became CEO.

          • Guest

            Bob, there’s no such thing as “the benefit of the doubt” in business. I judge men by what they’ve done. Aside from his embarrassing PR trips to factories in China, Mr. Cook has done nothing but ride the coattails of his predecessor’s corpse. Heck, Mr. Cook is so devoid of ideas that his solution to Apple’s record cash pile was to give it away! I will praise him for his accomplishments once he has some.

            There’s no “benefit” in entrusting Mr. Cook with the keys to one of America’s most important companies, Bob. There is only doubt.

          • Bob

            Of course there is. For example, a new CEO’s is usually accorded it until they prove it’s undeserved. Which is one of the reasons I’m finding your position so difficult to understand. Cook could make a hundred embarrassing PR trips to China without coming close to matching the embarrassment Ballmer has amassed over the past decade, or even just since his more recent “IPhone won’t succeed” and “iPad is a toy” pronouncements. And why would Cook not ride the coattails of his predecessor, at least initially, when that CEO put strategies in place which allowed Apple to best MS and become the most successful company in the industry? Do you know what new things he’s working privately? I don’t, and I’m not aware that anybody else is either. Why assume there aren’t any?

            On the one hand you say you judge men on what they’ve done. On the other you say he hasn’t done anything. Yet you’re already judging him harshly. What gives?

            As I said, Cook had already done what Ballmer never did: increase the stock price after becoming CEO, and substantially so. If ten years from now the worst you can say is Cook didn’t lose the position he inherited, that would already be superior to Ballmer.

          • Guest

            Bob,

            First of all, thank you for such a calm and measured response. It’s rare to meet someone on GeekWire who can honestly and forthrightly communicate without resorting to childish name-calling.

            I’ve been following Mr. Cook since he became Apple’s heir apparent. He’s a numbers guy, Bob. I’d strongly recommend picking up Walter Isaacson’s “Steve Jobs” and reading the many chapters on John Sculley, the man who nearly killed Apple Computer as it was then known. The man pursued all sorts of products that went outside Apple’s core business in the interest of bolstering sales. When Steve returned to the CEO position, he immediately axed dozens of products that underperformed and focused on a few key areas.

            Now, let’s look at Mr. Cook’s record so far. Apple TV, which should appear in my dictionary beside “underperforming,” has not been transformed nor axed; rather, Mr. Cook has decided to continue the unsuccessful set-top box strategy that has doomed Apple TV to niche status. Likewise, iPhone and iPad have received more models but no transformative visionary improvements. The forthcoming iPad mini, something the late Mr. Jobs expressly forbade, is another case of Mr. Cook valuing quantity over quality.

            Mr. Cook is a numbers guy, Bob, and the next John Sculley. Do you want to drink Champagne, Bob, or do you want to drink sugar water?

          • Bob

            Well, that gives me a bit more insight into your rationale. So thank you for that. I still think you’re judging Cook prematurely though. And I did read Isaacson’s book. It’s worth remembering that while Sculley is now universally vilified for almost destroying Apple, he also increased revenue from $800M to $8 billion. Perhaps a better analog for Sculley is Ballmer, not Cook?

Job Listings on GeekWork