If being upside down $3B on a first year product that undersold 8 million units and is not broken out on the balance sheets isn’t a disaster, what in your opinion WOULD be???
What ARE you blithering about, Up Yours Marxists? "Upside down?" Who is "upside down?" Apple? Who says they are upside down? YOU? Where is your evidence of such an assertion? "Undersold 8 million"? Didn't you READ the article? The total was 12 million, not 8 million.
Are you subtracting that 12 million from the ESTIMATE of 20 million Apple Watches to be sold for the first YEAR on the market which will not be over until April 23, 2016???? If so, you are not as bright as you think? This 12 million was counted from April 23, 2015, the day Apple started shipping the Apple Watch, until December 31, 2015. That certainly is NOT an entire year, you're delusional if you think seven months and a few days is a twelve month year!
"Cupertino is on track to sell 21 million watches and rake in about $8.4 billion in revenue in the first 12 months of the Apple Watch, according to one of the hottest Apple analysts around. Not bad for a company that entered the wearables game late.The projections come from Asymco analyst Horace Dediu, who presented his findings at the Glance conference in San Francisco. The conference is headlined by a number of speakers, Dediu included, with observations on the impact of the Apple Watch.
Dediu's remarks were reported on Twitter by Philip Elmer-DeWitt, an editor at Fortune who is attending the conference. Cult of Mac attempted to reach Dediu, who was not immediately available for comment. Source: "http://www.cultofmac.com/401299/apple-watch-sales-21-million-first-year/" - by David Pierini, Cult of Mac, December 10, 2015
(Note that Horace Dediu was using a per unit cost of only $400 in his estimated revenue, assuming that the then current $100 off BestBuy sale pricing would continue which is more 20% less than Apple's reported $505 per unit cost as stated. Those sale prices have not continued. The Apple Watch pricing has returned to normal. Philip Elmer-DeWitt editorially reduced Dediu's 21 million to a mere 20 million when he reported the estimate in Forute Magazine. That's where you got your 20 million figure, but YOU want to squeeze that TWELVE MONTH total into a mere SEVEN MONTHS! And then you want to claim it's a disaster? You are delusional. -- Swordmaker)
You are entitled to your own delusional opinion, Up Yours Marxists, you are NOT entitled to make up your own facts or to distort the established time lines of those facts.
Apple's 10K is not a just a "balance sheet," Up Yours. It's a publicly available Financial Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for a specific purpose. I would bet you've never read one and are just parroting what you've heard from the anti-Apple echo chamber.
The SEC 10K and 10Q requirement rules state that a company is not required to break out any specific product line until it's annual revenue goes over $10 billion. In many instances, such information is considered a proprietary secret because it would provide too much information to the competition. For example, in the 10K and 10Q, Apple does not break out the revenue amounts for each various model of Macintosh computer, or even the break out of desktop to notebooks, or the various models of iPads, or even the various models of iPhones, even though there are specific models of iPhones that DO have revenues over $10 billion each, but it is permissible to combine like products under a general category. As long as the revenues are reported, there is no problem. This is a generally accepted practice. There are the rules that are being correctly observed. Sorry, there's no disaster here.
Just because YOUR curiosity is not being assuaged, there is still no reason that Apple has to satisfy you.