Amazon just reported its Q4 2011 results, and while sales grew 35 percent to $17.43 billion, the company's increased operating costs means overall profit fell over 50 percent to $177 million, compared to $416 million in Q4 of 2010. Total sales and profit for the year followed suit, with net sales growing 41 percent over 2010 to $48.08 billion but profit falling by 45 percent: Amazon took home $631 million last year, compared to $1.15 billion in 2010. We're guessing that the loss Amazon's taking on each Kindle Fire is driving that equation as well — Kindle sales were triple from a year ago — but Amazon's operating costs have also gone up in every category, especially fulfillment (packing and shipping) and sales costs.
Of course, these numbers will turn around dramatically if all those Kindle Fire owners buy a lot of content, but for now Amazon's balance sheet is definitely showing the results of a big bet on its digital media strategy. And earnings aren't expected to improve in the first quarter of 2012 — Amazon is projecting that profits will decline between 162% and 69% compared to Q1 2011, meaning that the company could actually be losing money early this year.
Amazon, meanwhile, has refused to answer questions about its profits. When asked about decreasing shareholder value at the earnings press conference, CFO Tom Szkutak said "I'm not sure how to answer that, or exactly what you mean," adding that although there had been "pockets of softness" in Amazon's performance, some attributed to the Thailand floods, he was "incredibly optimistic about the opportunity that we have." Some more relatively specific questions, like whether Amazon was planning to split video streaming into a separate service from Prime or if the Kindle Fire was cannibalizing the rest of the Kindle base, were left unanswered as well. We'll certainly see how and if Amazon can make up its spending this year, but so far the company hasn't given us much to go on.

There are 69 Comments. Add yours.
Well when they ship me a binder that I bought for $2.50 with free 2 day shipping of course profits are going to go down.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:04 PM EST reply Recommend (10) Flag actions
Using Android is the kiss of death for every company except Samsung.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:19 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Why?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:49 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I am just stating observations about the other major Android device sellers. Samsung is the only one that is doing well.
January 7, 2012:
“HTC, the world’s No. 4 smartphone brand, yesterday said its quarterly net profit fell 25.55 percent from a year earlier on lower-than-expected revenue because of intense market competition.”
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2012/01/07/2003522599
January 19, 2012:
“Sony Ericsson reports losing €207M ($266.9M USD) in Q4 2011 and €247M ($318.4M USD) for the total fiscal year.”
http://www.dailytech.com/Android+Phonemaker+Sony+Ericssons+Earnings+Plunge+as+it+Cuts+its+Ranks/article23823.htm
January 25, 2012:
“Motorola Solutions Inc.‘s (MSI) fourth-quarter earnings fell 37% as charges masked the company’s stronger-than-expected revenue growth.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120125-706914.html
And today, Amazon.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:27 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Good points. But I think that Android is not the root cause of Amazon’s losses. They are aware, and have been planning to, sell the Fire at a loss. The goal is to make the money back up in ebook, music, and movie purchases.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:54 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Android is the root. They need to sell their tablet at a loss in order to compete with all the android tablets.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 12:14 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Your analysis is simplistic and misguided. Simply using Android does not lead to lost revenue just as it does not guarantee profit. The business practices and vision of the company is determines that. Regardless, even if one were to use your reasoning, HTC has seen massive growth and profit with Android until the recent quarter just as Motorola Mobility saw it first profits in three years when it adopted Android. I guess its easy to make a point when you pick and choose only the historical date that supports it, while ignoring the whole picture.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:27 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
How am I “picking and choosing” data points? I’m just stating the facts from these companies’ earnings report from this month.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:39 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Correlation != causation. Especially in this case, where Amazon is using Android in a very different way than the smartphone manufacturers are.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 11:51 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
They all make android tablets as well and due to the race to the bottom, all manufactures need to take less and less of a profit magian in order to compete. Its not android its self that causes it. It is the fact that there are hundreds of android tablets that are competing.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 12:17 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
By your reasoning using any OS except iOS would be kiss of death. Just look at PalmOS, Blackberry, Windows, Symbian. I think the companies that use Android are doing much better that the ones that decided not to use it – the other companies are basically dying. Windows might work for Nokia, but it’s a long shot.
If Motorola didn’t use Android it wouldn’t exist now, they were at a point when the company was going to shut down the mobile division, and look – they got acquired for 11bn.
Also, you missed the LG from your analysis, it became profitable in the last quarter.
Competition is tough, but Android is a great OS, phone makers need to compete a lot to differentiate, but building own OS could be even harder then just differentiating with the phone.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 12:05 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
yeah, there’s a lot of things that are incredibly stupid and inefficient when it comes to the way amazon runs their business. the free 2 day shipping isn’t a big thing, because that’s what makes their business attractive. for a lot of people, if that 2 day shipping wasn’t available, they’d skip amazon all together and get it locally.
but i think their customer service, for example, needs a big overall. Recently i bought an i7-2700k, SSD, and Mobo…and the price, of course, dropped maybe 2 days after purchase. I asked them to do a price adjustment, and told the CSR that if they didn’t adjust it, i was just going to return it, then rebuy it again. She said there was nothing to be done, an i should just return it and rebuy it. So of course they had to foot the bill for the return shipment, then to 2 day ship it out to me again. I’m sure they lost at least 60-70 bucks due to just shipping alone, because of their inflexible policy. But i have to agree the way they implement their shipping is killing them.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 10:10 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
So what? Amazon is amazing! I do the VAST majority of my online shopping through their site. So incredibly convenient, with good prices and fast shipping. What’s not to like?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:10 PM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions
I use them a lot too.
I guess the “what’s not to like” is the destruction of our cities shops and, particularly, bookshops.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:15 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Do you blame amazon for that destruction or the consumers who are moving their money to amazon?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:33 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Both and neither, it’s consumer evolution. Adapt or die.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:59 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
Amazon or Walmart make your pick.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:47 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
For the record I choose Amazon.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:47 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Destruction of our cities’ shops and bookshops == loss of jobs, loss of common culture, loss of local tax, loss of complementary businesses (e.g. coffee shops near a bookstore)
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:05 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Online commerce is radically changing the retail landscape of cities and towns, but shopping malls and big-box stores had changed it radically already from anything that might fit with your quaint idealistic vision.
Downtown retail had already adapted by moving away from selling “basic stuff” and developing into places to enjoy yourself (and spend money doing so) : restaurants, pubs, coffee shops, fashion, boutiques of all kinds. The internet is just cementing that shift.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:23 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m already talking about closures of big-box stores like Borders and Circuit City.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:33 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Borders died because of a technology change (switching from text to ebooks). Like how the ice business disappeared when refrigerators came out.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 12:19 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well for investors the 9% drop in the stock price in after hours trading is probably not to like.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:17 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
But for a company looking to buy its own stock back—like Amazon has been doing lately—this is a good thing. Hmmm. Yeah, Jeff Bezos seems to be that smart. All this drama could be no more than a play within a play.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:27 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
“All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
…but Steve Ballmer is always the clown.”
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:41 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
So what? What if they can’t continue to operate in its current state, ie, they raise costs on the customer?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:05 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
This is their flood the market moment… once they have everyone, just watch those profits soar in 2nd half 2012 and 2013
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:12 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Not going to happen once they have to start paying their fair share of taxes.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:16 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This is the 800lb Gorilla that everyone is happy to ignore.
How much tax does ebay, paypal, google, apple, amazon and the rest pay? Outside of payroll, I suspect less than their fair share.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:26 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
If you file your income taxes and claim a deduction to reduce your tax burden, are you paying less than your fair share?
Companies take advantage of allowances in tax law to reduce their tax rate, just like millions of Americans do when they file their personal income tax.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
In the case of Amazon it’s more serious because they aren’t charging sales taxes in much of America, which can make a huge difference not only to profits but to revenues. When that changes, and it inevitably will when the law catches up to the internet, Amazon’s business will be significantly reduced.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 1:53 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Yes, collecting sales tax will impact Amazon, however, these guys are saying Amazon isn’t paying it fair share of tax. Two different issues.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 1:05 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
From Apple’s most recent 10Q:
“The Company’s effective tax rate during the first quarter of 2012 was approximately 25.3% compared with approximately 24.6% for the first quarter of 2011.”
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 10:28 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Is the market being flooded? No one even knows if the fire is selling well, they won’t release the numbers.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:41 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Even Motorola and RIM proudly displayed their tablet numbers. What’s Amazon afraid of?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:42 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
this is nothing new. they never show kindle numbers
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:43 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Not the point.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:48 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Samsung doesnt give units sold either. so, what is the point???
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
There is no point. It’s all smoooooth.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:22 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Who says it has to be the Kindle? They are making themselves the obvious choice for 95% (not a real stat) of people’s online shopping needs, while putting lots of capital into new services to get those people invested in what Amazon is offering… once those capital expenditures leave the balance sheet, and they have people created brand loyalty, then they can pay those taxes no sweat while raising their profit margin.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:50 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Unlikely. They still have their 10" Kindle to launch, which will be another loss leader. I don’t doubt they’ll land on their feet, but it ain’t gonna happen this year.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 10:04 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
All hail the Undroid !!
Things are going to get interesting in the media world in 2012.
Will Apple drop the iPad price to compete?
Will Google launch their £150 “quality” ad-subsidised Tablet built by Motorola’s chinese factory?
Will Samsung jump into bed with someone else (B&N?)
“These questions—and many others—
willmay be answered in the next episode of…SoapThe Verge.”Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:14 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
No, no, maybe…
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:18 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
maybe apple will adjust down the line, but right now they’re basking in the glory of having the best quarter in the history of the company and becoming the most valuable public company in the world.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:19 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The only move that Apple can make price-wise with the iPad will be to continue offering the iPad 2 at a reduced price (299$ or 399$) when they will launch the iPad 3. This way the new iPad will still be offered starting from 499$ but they can still offer an iPad cheaper than that. My guess is that we will know more within the next 2 months.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:23 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Why would Apple drop iPad price after the quarter they just had? If it’s hurting the iPad, it’s minimal compared to what it’s doing to everyone else.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:18 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I’m not seeing how low end tablet buyers are the Prime™ candidates for selling stacks of content to.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:15 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (6) Flag actions
I’ve never really seen it as a low-end tablet. It’s just smaller. In most respects, it’s as good as any other 7 inch tablet and better when it comes to content consumption.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:03 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I guess they’re not too proud of their Kindle sales numbers. Again.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:18 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Sales increased 177%. It’s a headline stat, they seem pretty proud.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:21 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
So how many did they sell last year?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:24 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I don’t know but the fact that it (the Fire) is the highest selling thing on Amazon and I can’t get on the Tube or DLR during rush hour without seeing a regular Kindle shows they’re shifting some units.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:56 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
So why can’t they tell us how many?
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:11 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Maybe because they don’t want to give competitors/suppliers any information.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:48 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Is Jeff Bezos normally not on the conference call? The dudes on there right now sound so depressed.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:19 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Maybe that was the depressed Jeff?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 2:44 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Take a loss on every Fire and most other Kindles and your profit goes down. Gotta hope those software sales make up for it. 1% margins suck, even for a retailer. Even Walmart gets 3%
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 5:23 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Interesting figure: On average, Apple made around the same amount of $ in 1 day than Amazon made the entire quarter (Apple = $145,000,000/day vs Amazon $175,000,000/quarter) Just some food for thought.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:10 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Retail is a bitch. Once you have to compete on price, that is. Apple competes by doing what the do better than everyone else.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 6:30 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Agree wholeheartedly. Too many companies try to manufacture value by charging less, whereas Apple creates value by making a better product.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:10 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
You mean by overcharging their product so only cool “bartista” buys them? I see many products that offer better value than Apple through better products. Apple just creates this ecosystem of mindless zombies. Apple is to Electronic as Snookie is to Entertainment. Both set of people can’t think.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Value is in the eye of the beholder, and is a lot more complex than simply cost. Besides, an iPad is the same price or cheaper than similar tablets. The iPhone is cheaper than similar Android phones.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 7:45 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I believe that the 64GB 4s is the most expensive smartphone there is, unlocked of course. I may be mistaken, too lazy to search for prices.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:11 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The iPhone 4S costs $200 on contract. The flagship Android device, the Galaxy Nexus, is $300. Sure, the Nexus has 32GB of storage, so you could say the similarly spec’d iPhone is also $300, but you can still get Apple’s marquee phone for $100 less than you can get a Flagship Android. In any either case, you aren’t paying more to get an Apple product.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 1:03 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The real cost is the unlocked cost, regardless of your contract based semantics that only mean something in the States.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:44 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Is the 32GB Galaxy Nexus available now? The early adopters got stuck with the 16GB version, but I heard a 32GB version was rumored. The $300 Galaxy Nexus is 16GB, not 32GB to my knowledge. My brother-in-law and his wife each have one.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 5:17 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Must be a lot of barristas in the world these days.
Posted on Jan 31, 2012 | 9:55 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
I like Amazon as a company better, but it definitely seems like Apple would be a better investment than Amazon right now. Amazon’s P/E ration is incredibly inflated, where Apple’s is right about average.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:58 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Having prime makes me Amazon’s worst enemy… I buy something small that i decide i need every few days and use prime so they end up sending me like 50+ packages a year via 2 day shipping, and I haven’t even paid for it yet cuz i got it as a student. No wonder they aren’t profiting enough.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 1:45 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.