Rumor: iPhone made up 66% of sales at AT&T corporate stores, Android 9%
A new report claims Apple's iPhone comprised 66 percent of all device sales at AT&T's corporate retail stores in December, while Android is said to have taken an 8.5 percent share.
The Mac Observer cited a source inside AT&T on Friday as indicating that the company's stores sold 981,000 iPhones between Dec. 1 and Dec. 27. By comparison, 126,000 Android devices were reportedly sold during the same period.
Basic feature phones apparently performed better than Android at the stores, as 128,000 units were sold during December. Research in Motion's BlackBerry devices continued to languish, with just 74,000 sold this month. Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 fared even worse.
According to the report, the numbers only include AT&T's corporate retail stores, not authorized resellers, online sales, telephone sales or other retail outlets.
Of course, the iPhone's performance at AT&T corporate stores doesn't on its own reflect the device's overall market share. Given that AT&T was the original partner for the iPhone, Apple's handset has long been the best-selling phone on the network.
Recent third-quarter figures from comScore reveal that Android has reached a 46.9 percent share of the smartphone market, compared to Apple's 28.7 percent.
Credit: The Mac Observer.
The publication was unable to confirm with Apple's PR department the numbers provided by its source, as the company declined to comment. AT&T did, however, reveal earlier this month that it expected to have its best quarter ever for smartphone sales because of "strong" performance of the iPhone 4S. The wireless operator sold six million smartphones in the first two months of the fourth quarter and is expected to handily beat its previous quarterly sales record of 6.1 million smartphones.
The iPhone accounted for 56 percent of AT&T's smartphone activations in the third quarter of calendar 2011, even as some customers held out for the iPhone 4S.
Apple CEO TIm Cook said last quarter that he is confident the company will "set an all-time record for iPhones" during the December quarter. The iPhone maker has guided for $37 billion in revenue during the period and is expected by some analysts to surpass the $40 billion mark.
The Mac Observer cited a source inside AT&T on Friday as indicating that the company's stores sold 981,000 iPhones between Dec. 1 and Dec. 27. By comparison, 126,000 Android devices were reportedly sold during the same period.
Basic feature phones apparently performed better than Android at the stores, as 128,000 units were sold during December. Research in Motion's BlackBerry devices continued to languish, with just 74,000 sold this month. Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 fared even worse.
According to the report, the numbers only include AT&T's corporate retail stores, not authorized resellers, online sales, telephone sales or other retail outlets.
Of course, the iPhone's performance at AT&T corporate stores doesn't on its own reflect the device's overall market share. Given that AT&T was the original partner for the iPhone, Apple's handset has long been the best-selling phone on the network.
Recent third-quarter figures from comScore reveal that Android has reached a 46.9 percent share of the smartphone market, compared to Apple's 28.7 percent.
Credit: The Mac Observer.
The publication was unable to confirm with Apple's PR department the numbers provided by its source, as the company declined to comment. AT&T did, however, reveal earlier this month that it expected to have its best quarter ever for smartphone sales because of "strong" performance of the iPhone 4S. The wireless operator sold six million smartphones in the first two months of the fourth quarter and is expected to handily beat its previous quarterly sales record of 6.1 million smartphones.
The iPhone accounted for 56 percent of AT&T's smartphone activations in the third quarter of calendar 2011, even as some customers held out for the iPhone 4S.
Apple CEO TIm Cook said last quarter that he is confident the company will "set an all-time record for iPhones" during the December quarter. The iPhone maker has guided for $37 billion in revenue during the period and is expected by some analysts to surpass the $40 billion mark.
Comments
So what gives, Android fans? Are you finally willing to admit the iPhone is the most popular phone or are still holding out to find so quasi-statisitic that pegs iPhone iOS against all Android OS activations for a very specific timeframe?
AT&T now have decent Android-based phones so the excuse regarding only crappy Android phones are on AT&T can't be used. And we obviously can't use the mass exodus from AT&T once other US carriers get the iPhone excuse.
So what gives, Android fans? Are you finally willing to admit the iPhone is the most popular phone or are still holding out to find so quasi-statisitic that pegs iPhone iOS against all Android OS activations for a very specific timeframe?
Who has denied that the iPhone was the most popular single phone?
Are you inventing arguments?
Who has denied that the iPhone was the most popular single phone?
Slapppy. He'll say that the numbers in the title are actually reversed. Or, at least, will be shocked if they're not by 2012.
So what gives, Android fans? Are you finally willing to admit the iPhone is the most popular phone or are still holding out to find so quasi-statisitic that pegs iPhone iOS against all Android OS activations for a very specific timeframe?
A strawman fallacy?! Who saw that one coming?
Jesus, that is 4 times the revenue of Google, and slightly more than 1/4 all of Samsung, not just Samsungs mobile division! Or is my math nerfed?
Well, your math is bad for two reasons. First, sales do not equate to revenue. Apple gets roughly a $400 subsidy per phone, while other makers get smaller ones, $200-300 generally. So while both may sell for $200 subsidized, the amount going to the maker is higher for Apple generally.
Secondly though, in the other direction, there's no reason to drool over the revenue implications of this report since it is such a small sliver of total sales, not to mention the fact that it's from "unnamed sources" and thus there's no reason to actually believe it. Plus the fact that the giggle test tells you it's not a correct story.
Stunning if true! The other shoe is that Apple's customer satisfaction and retention is far higher than Android's (which therefore must be getting its sales from the non-iOs sector). So, in theory, Android will soon or later be squeezed out at AT&T.
I would expect Android-based device sales to grow at AT&T. They simply offer too many options to customers and are quickly becoming tomorrow's "dumb phone" OS as they get gutted, lucked down and made to work on any device a vendor think will turn them a buck.
I'm more interested to see how the iPhone will affect Verizon and Sprint after this quarter with the 4S running strong, not just an iPhone 4 with CMDA innards.
Slapppy. He'll say that the numbers in the title are actually reversed. Or, at least, will be shocked if they're not by 2012.
I'm inclined to believe that slapppy is a Poe.
Well, your math is bad for two reasons. First, sales do not equate to revenue. Apple gets roughly a $400 subsidy per phone, while other makers get smaller ones, $200-300 generally. So while both may sell for $200 subsidized, the amount going to the maker is higher for Apple generally.
The subsidy happens between the carrier and their customer.
Apple get the full retail price for each phone... to the tune of $649-$849 for the iPhone 4S
The subsidy happens between the carrier and their customer.
Apple get the full retail price for each phone... to the tune of $649-$849 for the iPhone 4S
Read my post again - that was my point. The poster I was replying to was talking about revenue to the manufacturer. 4X the sales for Apple equals more than 4X the revenue because Apple's wholesale price is higher. However the 4X number is BS because this is a tiny section of the market.
I'm inclined to believe that slapppy is a Poe.
From? the Legend of Zelda? A stuffed doll? Edgar Allen?
From? the Legend of Zelda? A stuffed doll? Edgar Allen?
He's referring to "a person who writes a parody of a Fundamentalist that is mistaken for the real thing."
It's another way of referring to people who enjoy Apple products as people who take their religion so literally and to such extremes that they contradict the very basis of their faith.
Surprised?
AT&T now have decent Android-based phones so the excuse regarding only crappy Android phones are on AT&T can't be used. And we obviously can't use the mass exodus from AT&T once other US carriers get the iPhone excuse.
So what gives, Android fans? Are you finally willing to admit the iPhone is the most popular phone or are still holding out to find so quasi-statisitic that pegs iPhone iOS against all Android OS activations for a very specific timeframe?
1. The quasi-statistic in this article does peg "iPhone iOS against all Android OS activations for a very specific timeframe." Why do you find it worth defending?
2. The real question is if Apple wouldn't have dicked around with AT&T for so long, would Verizon and the other networks in the US show similar statistics. Apple foolishly gave Android a strong foothold at Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile. That's where the Android activations are occurring - and that is what Apple should have stopped in 2008, before the platform took off.
... there's no reason to drool over the revenue implications of this report since it is such a small sliver of total sales, not to mention the fact that it's from "unnamed sources" and thus there's no reason to actually believe it. Plus the fact that the giggle test tells you it's not a correct story.
I was stuck in an AT&T store for about an hour earlier this week. I saw several interesting things. Yes, it was only an hour, but I saw about 8 phones purchased and all but one were iPhones.
The most interesting thing, though, was when someone brought in a Samsung phone. She was unhappy with it for some reason, but it turns out that she bought it (when out of town visiting grandparents) at an AT&T authorized reseller--not a corporate AT&T store. They couldn't do the return for her and she was pissed--not understanding the difference between a corporate store and an authorized reseller. Anyway, the interesting part was when the woman behind the counter came out and told her, point blank [in quotes for clarity, but this is paraphrased]: "I would have sold you an iPhone--they do not have the issue you describe and people never bring them back unhappy. But the resellers work on commission and so they push other phones."
I do not know if this is true, but the implication is that the corporate stores mostly want activations and customers who will be happy and loyal to AT&T so they push iPhones. Resellers, OTOH, don't care about the long term and only want the sale and whatever commission they can get so they push other phones.
This would seem to fit with this story. But you are right, AT&T corporate sales are only a tiny sliver of phone sales in the US, and reseller sales tending to non iPhones would counterbalance them.
He's referring to "a person who writes a parody of a Fundamentalist that is mistaken for the real thing."
It's another way of referring to people who enjoy Apple products as people who take their religion so literally and to such extremes that they contradict the very basis of their faith.
Surprised?
It's a parody. Pretty much. Like at times I feel Apple ][ must be a Poe because he's TOO pro-Apple to the point if Apple was a political party he'd be the fundamentalist right or loony left.
2. The real question is if Apple wouldn't have dicked around with AT&T for so long, would Verizon and the other networks in the US show similar statistics. Apple foolishly gave Android a strong foothold at Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile. That's where the Android activations are occurring - and that is what Apple should have stopped in 2008, before the platform took off.
It is my understanding that Apple had a contract with AT&T that guaranteed them exclusivity for a time period. I'm sure they would have loved to jumped to other carriers earlier, but it may not have been an option.
Sure, in hindsight, Apple left a door wide open for Android. Of course, Apple thought they would be dealing with Palm, Nokia, Windows Phones and Blackberry as their main competition in the smartphone arena--how were they to expect a full blown competitor to rise up from Android so quickly? It is almost as if Google had inside information on Apple's phone plans...
I was stuck in an AT&T store for about an hour earlier this week. I saw several interesting things. Yes, it was only an hour, but I saw about 8 phones purchased and all but one were iPhones.
The most interesting thing, though, was when someone brought in a Samsung phone. She was unhappy with it for some reason, but it turns out that she bought it (when out of town visiting grandparents) at an AT&T authorized reseller--not a corporate AT&T store. They couldn't do the return for her and she was pissed--not understanding the difference between a corporate store and an authorized reseller. Anyway, the interesting part was when the woman behind the counter came out and told her, point blank [in quotes for clarity, but this is paraphrased]: "I would have sold you an iPhone--they do not have the issue you describe and people never bring them back unhappy. But the resellers work on commission and so they push other phones."
I do not know if this is true, but the implication is that the corporate stores mostly want activations and customers who will be happy and loyal to AT&T so they push iPhones. Resellers, OTOH, don't care about the long term and only want the sale and whatever commission they can get so they push other phones.
This would seem to fit with this story. But you are right, AT&T corporate sales are only a tiny sliver of phone sales in the US, and reseller sales tending to non iPhones would counterbalance them.
This brings up a very good point that has been mentioned on this forum before.
When you see a person on the street using a smartphone, it's generally an iPhone.
Where are the 700,000 Android devices per day that are being sold?
It makes you curious.
/snip... it turns out that she bought it (when out of town visiting grandparents) at an AT&T authorized reseller--not a corporate AT&T store. They couldn't do the return for her and she was pissed--not understanding the difference between a corporate store and an authorized reseller. Anyway, the interesting part was when the woman behind the counter came out and told her, point blank [in quotes for clarity, but this is paraphrased]: "I would have sold you an iPhone--they do not have the issue you describe and people never bring them back unhappy. But the resellers work on commission and so they push other phones...
The probable reason is that they were out of stock, at the time.
It's a parody. Pretty much. Like at times I feel Apple ][ must be a Poe because he's TOO pro-Apple to the point if Apple was a political party he'd be the fundamentalist right or loony left.
Cool. I always thought there should be a term for this. I'm glad to know there is one.
FWIW, I have had the same suspicions about Apple][...
Poe's law, named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the fact that without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between sincere extremism and an exaggerated parody of extremism.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law