Originally Posted by Sil_liS
Actually they are not saying that. If you read what Andrew H. quoted in post #14, they weren't convinced that Apple would have been able to manufacture the extra smartphones.
That was the reason that they didn't go with the full damages figure proposed by Apple. But the reason they went for the $1.05 billion figure was due to their taking Samsung's profit margin figure as I described.
, for example.
Here's the jury foreman, Hogan, speaking in his televised interview:
In the evidence, Apple had declared that Samsung had cost them in profits 35% of their revenue. On the other hand, Samsung said that it is because they took out operating costs and the value is 12%. Three of us had been through the process in our careers of dealing with financial documents. I understood P&L statements as well as the other to. What we did was look at it against our matrix of what infringed and what did not. We determined that in our experience, the percentage was not 12%, and it certainly was not 35%. It should be closer between 13% to 15%. We zeroed in on 14%. That became the magic number. Then we did our own calculations for each of the areas, adding those up with royalties that were entitled for some of the items. And we cut that value in half. When we added them together and tallied them up, that is the number we came up with.
This was based on Samsung's sales figures for the accused devices of about $8 billion. Apple claimed that Samsung's profit margin was 35%, Samsung said it was nearer 12%.