View Single Post
Old 08-30-2012, 10:40 AM   #38
Sil_liS
Wizard
Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,888
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
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.
[...]
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%.

No, if Apple wouldn't have been able to make the extra smartphones, then they didn't lose as much revenue, so the value should have been less than the percentage that is accepted. For example if Apple would have been able to make only half of the devices, than the compensation should be 50% of 12% (if they take Samsung's figure), so only 6% of the revenues.
Sil_liS is offline   Reply With Quote