[pie420]

units sold dont matter when the competition is selling $100 smartphones at a loss. The fact that one company is making 85% of the profits in an entire industry as massive as SMARTPHONES should be terrifying, but i guess we don't care about monopolism for some reason

[icehawk]

Do smartphones that get sold at $100 not have chips in them?

Because the article is talking about semiconductor manufacturing, and the total numbers of semiconductors purchased.

Profits and monopolies are a different article.

[SllX]

Monopolies are measured according to market share, not profit share.

[yowzadave]

Apple really is an unusual phenomenon--in most other industries, the bulk of the profit is made on mass-market products, while high-end products are able to cater to a niche that is willing to spend much more. In smartphones, however, the highest-end product you can buy is actually quasi-mass-market--there is no Ferrari or Rolex of smartphones, an iPhone is legitimately the best product you can get, and it's within reach of a substantial portion of the buyer's market.

Not sure if this is good or bad, but it's certainly unusual, and it's part of the reason that this "monopoly" question is sometimes confusing--Apple makes by far the most profit despite also selling the highest-end product, and their unit sales, despite being somewhat less than Android, are still in the same ballpark.

[throwaway290]

> when the competition is selling $100 smartphones at a loss

That is actually terrifying, because logic dictates they make up profit in other ways. I can imagine how an ad company or nation state can go about it.

[chasil]

I would like nothing better than watching the FTC take a scalpel to Apple.

The vivisection of the PC division, the semiconductors, iOS, iPhone, and iPad into separate companies would be deeply satisfying.

Shareholders might actually applaud the results in the end.