Apple 2022 Earnings Report Goes Live, Shows Strong Cashflow Despite Economic Slowdown

[AleksandarK]

Apple today announced financial results for its fiscal 2023 first quarter ended December 31, 2022. The Company posted quarterly revenue of $117.2 billion, down 5 percent year over year, and quarterly earnings per diluted share of $1.88.

"As we all continue to navigate a challenging environment, we are proud to have our best lineup of products and services ever, and as always, we remain focused on the long term and are leading with our values in everything we do," said Tim Cook, Apple's CEO. "During the December quarter, we achieved a major milestone and are excited to report that we now have more than 2 billion active devices as part of our growing installed base."




"We set an all-time revenue record of $20.8 billion in our Services business, and in spite of a difficult macroeconomic environment and significant supply constraints, we grew total company revenue on a constant currency basis," said Luca Maestri, Apple's CFO. "We generated $34 billion in operating cash flow and returned over $25 billion to shareholders during the quarter while continuing to invest in our long-term growth plans."

Apple's board of directors has declared a cash dividend of $0.23 per share of the Company's common stock. The dividend is payable on February 16, 2023 to shareholders of record as of the close of business on February 13, 2023.

Apple will provide live streaming of its Q1 2023 financial results conference call beginning at 2:00 p.m. PT on February 2, 2023 at apple.com/investor/earnings-call. This webcast will be available for replay for approximately two weeks thereafter.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Daven]

The news stories are trying to make out the earnings report as a big loss. Apple made $117 billion in one quarter!! That is a crazy amount and only down from $125 billion in the year ago quarter which is only a slightly more insane amount!!

 

[Wirko]

The news stories are trying to make out the earnings report as a big loss. Apple made $117 billion in one quarter!! That is a crazy amount and only down from $125 billion in the year ago quarter which is only a slightly more insane amount!!

Yeah. I didn't check right now but the figure is probably close to all other tech companies that we TPU readers are interested in ... combined! Well, excluding Samsung Electronics.

 

[bonehead123]

Oh hell yea, mo mony, mo mony, mo mony 4 me !

 

[AnotherReader]

The news stories are trying to make out the earnings report as a big loss. Apple made $117 billion in one quarter!! That is a crazy amount and only down from $125 billion in the year ago quarter which is only a slightly more insane amount!!

While I agree with your general sentiment, it's interesting that Mac sales dipped a lot more than the rest of the company. ArsTechnica comments that

iPhone revenue was $65.78 billion for the quarter, down 8.17 percent year over year. Similarly, "Other Products"—which includes the Watch, AirPods, and some other outliers—was down 8.3 percent year over year at $13.48 billion. The real underperformer was the Mac, which was down almost 30 percent at $7.74 billion.

 

[Daven]

While I agree with your general sentiment, it's interesting that Mac sales dipped a lot more than the rest of the company. ArsTechnica comments that

When it comes down to it, in the end, its all plastic, metal and silicon with a price tag.

 

[AnotherReader]

When it comes down to it, in the end, its all plastic, metal and silicon with a price tag.

In the case of Apple, there's the additional cost of software and support. Moreover, all chip designers have R&D costs though in Apple's case they're amortized over the roughly 300 million iPhones that they sell every year.

 

[Garrus]

While I agree with your general sentiment, it's interesting that Mac sales dipped a lot more than the rest of the company. ArsTechnica comments that

Apple has decent hardware. They refuse to listen or fix basic issues with Mac OS which severely limits adoption. Their prices are high, so as the PC market declined in price, Apple declined in sales instead.

ARM was supposed to allow better pricing.

Instead the Mac Mini with a real laptop chip starts at $1300 which is absurd. Apple can't even make a decent Mini for less than $999. That's worrying. At this point I'd rather have a Ryzen 7940HS Mac Mini for $999 than what we are getting for $1300.

One reason why Mac sales are so poor is prices outside the US are criminal. Sure you might stretch for $1300 in the US, but wait until you see the prices outside the US.

 

[AnotherReader]

Apple has decent hardware. ARM was supposed to allow better pricing.

ARM was about better prices for Apple, but even more than that, they were frustrated with Intel's lack of progress after Skylake, and let's not forget that this allows Apple to control the whole stack.

 

[Ravenas]

Apple has decent hardware. They refuse to listen or fix basic issues with Mac OS which severely limits adoption. Their prices are high, so as the PC market declined in price, Apple declined in sales instead.

ARM was supposed to allow better pricing.

Instead the Mac Mini with a real laptop chip starts at $1300 which is absurd. Apple can't even make a decent Mini for less than $999. That's worrying. At this point I'd rather have a Ryzen 7940HS Mac Mini for $999 than what we are getting for $1300.

One reason why Mac sales are so poor is prices outside the US are criminal. Sure you might stretch for $1300 in the US, but wait until you see the prices outside the US.

ARM was supposed to allow better pricing to the consumer? ARM was supposed to allow Apple to control THEIR pricing, versus using Intel who controlled their pricing.

Apple has literally developed almost every major component in the iPhone in house, and has yet to pass along saving to the consumer. It's to increase their profits and control their cost. Why would shareholders like to see Apple make an investment in house development and then turn around and reduce their pricing / ROI? Makes no sense.

 

[mechtech]

Not hard with the margins on their products.

 

[claes]

that and they’re a super conservative company, one of the few that didn’t see the covid boom as sustainable and hire a bunch of people assuming growth

Edit: actually I looked it up and they only had 30% last quarter, compared to Intel at 40%, amd at 50%, 23% for Dell. Surprising. Couldn’t find 4th quarter for Samsung.

 

[Rob94hawk]

We need the Tesla phone.

 

[Easy Rhino]

As long as Apple continues to make products that last years longer than their competitors they will always have strong cash flow. Let's face it, those crap AMD and Intel laptops are useless after 2 years. The build quality is so awful on them. Yet all Apple products are made to last which is why you see so many on the secondary market still running strong even after 8-9 years. And don't forget Apple supports their products for much longer than the competition. The vast majority of people want their computer to be an appliance that just works and they don't have to fix or replace it for 5-6 years.

 

[Garrus]

ARM was supposed to allow better pricing to the consumer? ARM was supposed to allow Apple to control THEIR pricing, versus using Intel who controlled their pricing.

Apple has literally developed almost every major component in the iPhone in house, and has yet to pass along saving to the consumer. It's to increase their profits and control their cost. Why would shareholders like to see Apple make an investment in house development and then turn around and reduce their pricing / ROI? Makes no sense.

Every business is looking for ways to make better products at lower prices. Sure they might keep more of that for themselves with higher profit margins. But no transition without lower cost of production makes sense. That's what every business is doing. Lowering cost of production.

 

[Ravenas]

Every business is looking for ways to make better products at lower prices. Sure they might keep more of that for themselves with higher profit margins. But no transition without lower cost of production makes sense. That's what every business is doing. Lowering cost of production.

Yes, that is the point of them going in-house as I was explaining.

You stated they were doing it because they wanted to lower the cost for you.

 

[Hecate91]

The claim of apple making better laptops than the competition just isn't true, especially if you've ever seen Louis Rossmann's repair videos, macbooks can fail from a tiny spec of dust, or apple's ridiculous design decisions like making the display cable too short, the charging chip failing and only apple can buy the chip, or the charger chip failing and sending 13V to the SSD.
And it seems like apple is trying to get rid of third party resellers by not allowing used macbooks to be unlocked and wiped, which only encourages more ewaste.
Also the support isn't even as long as a windows laptop, apple ended support for the 2016 macbooks. Yet I could go buy a used Lenovo Thinkpad or Dell Latitude for significantly less and install Windows 11 on it.
I realize a lot of average users want their laptop to be an appliance but I don't want a soldered on everything locked down appliance that is ewaste after the warranty expires.

 

[Garrus]

Yes, that is the point of them going in-house as I was explaining.

You stated they were doing it because they wanted to lower the cost for you.

Well hopefully we see an advantage one day. Apple laptops are better value than Google or Microsoft ones. But the Chinese and Taiwanese products are superior value. Asus etc.