Apple Announces Q2 FY 2017 Earningsby Brett Howse on May 2, 2017 11:00 PM EST
- Posted in
- Financial Results
This afternoon, Apple announced their earnings for the second quarter of their 2017 fiscal year. Revenue was up 5% year-over-year to $52.896 billion. Operating income for the quarter was up 6.6% to $14.097 billion, and net income was up just under 5% to $11.029 billion. This resulted in diluted earnings per share of $2.10.
Apple is also announcing they are expanding their capital return program, and the board has increased the capital return to shareholders another $50 billion, making the total program worth $300 billion in dividends and share repurchases by the time it wraps up in March 2019.
|Apple Q2 2017 Financial Results (GAAP)|
|Revenue (in Billions USD)||$52.896||$78.351||$50.557|
|Gross Margin (in Billions USD)||$20.591||$30.176||$19.921|
|Operating Income (in Billions USD)||$14.097||$23.359||$13.987|
|Net Income (in Billions USD)||$11.029||$17.891||$10.516|
|Earnings per Share (in USD)||$2.10||$3.36||$1.90|
iPhone is still far and away the biggest part of Apple, but sales for this quarter were relatively flat compared to the same period a year ago. For the quarter, Apple sold 50.763 million iPhones, down 1% from a year ago, but with higher average selling prices, revenue was up 1% to $33.249 billion for the quarter. Of course, last quarter was the iPhone refresh, and they sold 78.29 million iPhones last quarter, so the business isn’t exactly doing poorly, but iPhone is the device that has transformed Apple, so we’ll have to see how sales go over this calendar year.
Mac sales were strong though, considering the PC market. Mac had an increase in device sales of 4%, to 4.199 million units. With a new Mac Pro refresh, this is perhaps not as strong as expected, but revenue for the unit was up 14% to $5.844 billion, so they are making more per Mac sale.
Services seem to be the next big growth area for Apple, and with an install base of iPhones as high as it is, this is arguably a good way to capitalize on that base. Apple’s services segment, which includes revenue for digital content, AppleCare Apple Pay, licensing, and other services, had revenue growth of 18% to $7.041 billion. The difference with services compared to iPhone sales is that there isn’t the massive swing quarter to quarter either, with services only dropping 2% from Q1, compared to iPhone which dropped 39% from the holiday quarter.
The iPad continues its drop, and nothing Apple has done yet seems to have had any impact on this trend. iPad was down 12% in revenue year-over-year to $3.889 billion, and of course that’s still a huge amount of revenue, but when it has to compete against the iPhone it seems poorer than it is. In terms of device sales, Apple sold 8.922 million iPads this quarter, down 13% from a year ago where they sold 10.251 million.
|Apple Q2 2017 Device Sales (thousands)|
|Q2'2017||Q1'2017||Q2'2016||Seq Change||Year/Year Change|
Other products, which is where Apple puts Apple TV, Apple Watch, Beats, iPod, and accessories, actually had a solid quarter, with revenue up 31% to $2.873 billion. Apple never breaks down the individual parts of this though, which is understandable, but unfortunate.
Apple is forecasting revenue for Q3 to be between $43.5 and $45.5 billion, with a gross margin of 38% plus or minus 0.5%.
Source: Apple Investor Relations
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
name99 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkIf you bothered to look at the actual Apple numbers you would see that there IS interesting information there.
For example look at the size of Services. That is HUGE! Put that in the context of an environment that insists that "people won't pay for anything digital, so we have to advertise". Apparently this claim (like so much else in the digital world) is just BS --- people are happy to pay for digital services (whether they're content-like services or curation-like services) WHEN they believe that the services are well-managed, easy to use, and provide good value.
You would have thought people would have learned this from the iPod experience almost 20 years ago (same thing "people won't pay for digital music when they can download it") but people don't want to learn --- they'd rather bitch that "the cost of iCloud is too expensive compared to Dropbox | OneDrive | Box | whatever" than investigate whether people who're actually PAYING for iCloud consider it worth paying for.
Likewise look at the size of Other. Just seeing these numbers as percentages does not give you a sense of scale. Just the Apple Watch business is big enough to be a Fortune 500 company. Put that in the context of people who insisted that Apple Watch was (and is) "a failure". And of course we are seeing the same thing now with AirPods, the other, rapidly growing, part of Other. Again the usual crowd of no-nothings insisting that they were a failure. Meanwhile, in the real world, phenomenal popularity, and STILL SOLD OUT! Today there is STILL a six-week lag time between order and delivery --- Apple literally cannot make them fast enough.
The basic problem for people like you is that Apple operates like Gauss, with the motto "few but ripe". They don't ship quarterly (or even annual) trivial updates of products, and so they don't generate a stream of the minimum publishable fragment of news. They update products when they believe they've accumulated enough new "value" to justify a new product.
This can be frustrating, especially if you're now in the market for an iPad or aWatch or whatever and want to buy "the new one", but overall it probably generates a lot more value for their customers. Money is not spent on trivial redesigns that represent just a few percent improvement over the old thing, rather by making each redesign substantial, and amortizing the costs of the redesign over a huge number of units, prices can be kept lower. (And yeah, Apple tax, we've heard it all, but turns out that whenever you compare like with like, that tax doesn't really exist. People can't find AirPod replacements, or aWatch equivalents, or flagship smartphones that offer Apple level hardware at substantially cheaper prices. Whenever you look at the details, that cheaper hardware comes at a loss of something.)
goatfajitas - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkI don't disagree with your logic but, your assertion that each yearly iteration of product is a substantial improvement over the previous is pretty far out there. Anyhow, as for the topic at hand, it's Anandtech's site. They can post a detailed report on the history of eggplants and their effect on human gastro intestinal health over the centuries if they want to... I just find it odd how non-tech related it is. It used to be about products and technology in general. Now its about profit. Its obvious why companies are concerned with profits, but tech sites? /shrug.
name99 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkThe only Apple product that (so far) has a more or less guaranteed annual update is the iPhone. Everything else has a somewhat flexible schedule.
So tell me which annual iPhone update do you think was not a substantial improvement. (Even bearing in mind that iPhone is on that annual update track because it was the one product where Apple couldn't unilaterally set the rules, it was severely constrained by the need to work with the carriers and their enforced two-year contracts.
Much of the carrier's malign influence is thankfully no longer that important, but it is still the case that most phones are bought tied to a fixed-duration carrier plan, which still constrains Apple's flexibility and more or less forces the September updates because a large pool of people reach a particular point in the year where their contract runs out and they're psychologically primed to buy a new phone. In an ideal world, more and more people will move to decent alternatives that are month-to-month contracts, like Ting, but right now Apple has to live in the world that is.
Even so, and bearing in mind that, even more so than with other products, the target buyer is the consumer from TWO years ago, I can think of significant updates with every annual iPhone release.)
goatfajitas - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkIf you think the the 6 to 6s or 6s to 7 (or 4,4s,5,5s for that matter) were "significant" then I think you and I have very different definitions of significant. Apple is severely lacking on the features and development of new ones, but whatever. Sounds like you you are in love and can hear no wrong so... Enjoy it.
name99 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link6S had a CPU 50% faster than the 6, a much faster fingerprint sensor (which makes a HUGE difference in usability, trivial though it may seem to a non-iPhone user), likewise the M9 supports wake-on-raise, another huge (though apparently trivial) usability change.
5S was the transition from 32 to 64 bit which, apart from being important to developers, meant another huge performance leap. 5S, of course, also introduced TouchID.
4S was the transition to dual core. Again a huge, noticeable performance leap.
You seem to suffer from the same delusion as the other Apple haters --- that the only significant change to an iPhone consists of a change in the styling. (Of course these are the same people who sneer that "sheeple" only buy iPhones because of fashion. The patterns seems basically the same as the homophobic politician later caught in a gay scandal --- accuse everyone else aggressively of that which you fear most in yourself.)
goatfajitas - Thursday, May 4, 2017 - linkLike I said. It sounds like you you are in love and can hear no wrong so... Enjoy it.
Kvaern1 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkThey also report Intel, AMD, NVidia and MS earnings every quarter, and they've done it for a long time.
Newsjunkie58 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - linkApple's service revenue will be the most interesting number in the recent quarter. It's up 18% yoy. https://alphastreet.com/b4f24949