or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's share of tablet market slides to 77%, Android rises to 22%
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's share of tablet market slides to 77%, Android rises to 22% - Page 3

post #81 of 108
Of course, the thing to keep in mind about the Galaxy Tab, in addition to its "quite small" sales, is that there will never be any significant number of apps written for it since even Android developers aren't gong to waste time writing for it as a platform, and chances are the current model will never get updated to honeycomb. I'd be surprised if even many hardcore Android fans would want one, unless they have money to throw away.
post #82 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

Actually Microsoft's numbers are even more off base than these. At least Samsung has actually shipped a product, Microsoft counts licenses sold. And that's all that really matters to Microsoft anyway.

It had better matter to MS. If phone sales are too poor, then those manufacturers will be making fewer models, and that will lead to questions about viability. That will lead to uncertainty amongst the public, which will lead to fewer sales, and the circle will be complete.

I've already got questions about the phone models. Originally, MS said there would be 11. Now, when they announced that 2 million number, they said there were 9.
post #83 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It had better matter to MS. If phone sales are too poor, then those manufacturers will be making fewer models, and that will lead to questions about viability. That will lead to uncertainty amongst the public, which will lead to fewer sales, and the circle will be complete.

I've already got questions about the phone models. Originally, MS said there would be 11. Now, when they announced that 2 million number, they said there were 9.

Well, those companies don't have a lot of options...WP7 or Android. Pick your option. Oddly, I trust MS more than Google.
post #84 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Well, those companies don't have a lot of options...WP7 or Android. Pick your option. Oddly, I trust MS more than Google.

Trust? In what sense? Companies care about sales and profits.
post #85 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by skipaq View Post

If you start out with 90 something share of a new market, it is not surprising that this will go down as others enter that market. .

That logic did not work for Windows. They have had over 90% for decades.
post #86 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Galaxy Tab sales figures are not to end-users.

http://www.electronista.com/articles...r.than.claims/

What took so long for this to come to light? This approach to inflating sales figures is old hat. Shame on the "news" media.

In fairness to Samsung, there is a restocking policy -- and the buyer returned it
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #87 of 108
Apparently (I say that because the article doesn't link to the original report) even those "small" numbers of Tabs sold are being returned at a prodigious rate....

Quote:
The Galaxy Tab, Samsung's answer to the iPad, might better be called the boomerang as one Wall Street firm has found that an eye-popping 15 percent of those sold are being returned. The Galaxy Tab is a slow-seller, as well, according to analysts.

The 15 percent return rate, which covers sales from its November debut through Jan. 16, compares to a 2 percent return rate for Apple's iPad. "Consumers aren't in love with the device," said Tony Berkman, a consumer tech analyst with ITG.

I'm sure subsequent Android tablets will do better, but I wonder how much damage Samsung has done to the Android tablet brand by rushing the Tab to market. Certainly I would expect consumers to be wary of the Tab 2, despite it no doubt running Honeycomb and being an all around better experience. But that wariness might taint other tablets as well.

It's kind of bizarre how Samsung handled this-- they trumpeted the million and two million "sales" records to drive the idea that the Tab was a huge hit, but now confess they were being (at least) deliberately misleading. Did they think they could slip the new info out there without anyone noticing? That if they got the "they're selling link gangbusters" story out first that it would become the default narrative, and the follow on caveat wouldn't stick? The story seems to be getting broad play, so the fiction that the Tab is a big hit is going to go away and might leave a bad taste in its place.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #88 of 108
Here's a snapshot of how some tech stocks performed today (end of day).

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #89 of 108
deleted
post #90 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Probably true, since Samsung doesn't sell tablets to end-users.

But if you feel their sales to resellers is somehow fraudulent, launch a class action suit and let us know how that works out for you.

Total straw man. If Samsung doesn't sell to end users, why didn't they make that clear when they were trumpeting strong sales? They didn't say "sales into the channel" (or I guess, in Samsung speak, "sell-in", they said "sales."

At any rate, it has nothing to do with fraud or litigation, it has to do with an abrupt 180º turn in the public perception of the Tab-- from (surprisingly) legit iPad competitor to laughing stock in about 30 seconds. As I say, I have no idea what Samsung thought they were doing in the way this story was handled-- it suggests the insanity of their recent CES dog an pony isn't limited to the art directors.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #91 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

It's kind of bizarre how Samsung handled this-- they trumpeted the million and two million "sales" records to drive the idea that the Tab was a huge hit, but now confess they were being (at least) deliberately misleading. Did they think they could slip the new info out there without anyone noticing? That if they got the "they're selling link gangbusters" story out first that it would become the default narrative, and the follow on caveat wouldn't stick? The story seems to be getting broad play, so the fiction that the Tab is a big hit is going to go away and might leave a bad taste in its place.

They are legally obligated to give factual numbers to investors. If the channel is full and the product isn't selling to customers, Samsung has to warn investors that next quarter's "sales" may not be so great.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #92 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Apparently (I say that because the article doesn't link to the original report) even those "small" numbers of Tabs sold are being returned at a prodigious rate....



I'm sure subsequent Android tablets will do better, but I wonder how much damage Samsung has done to the Android tablet brand by rushing the Tab to market. Certainly I would expect consumers to be wary of the Tab 2, despite it no doubt running Honeycomb and being an all around better experience. But that wariness might taint other tablets as well.

It's kind of bizarre how Samsung handled this-- they trumpeted the million and two million "sales" records to drive the idea that the Tab was a huge hit, but now confess they were being (at least) deliberately misleading. Did they think they could slip the new info out there without anyone noticing? That if they got the "they're selling link gangbusters" story out first that it would become the default narrative, and the follow on caveat wouldn't stick? The story seems to be getting broad play, so the fiction that the Tab is a big hit is going to go away and might leave a bad taste in its place.

I assume the 15% returns are end user returns to resellers.

If that is true, it is a major failure!

Next, likely, already started, are the returns from resellers to Samsung and/or large clearance price cuts, Overstock.com, etc.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....egories&ks=960

http://www.overstock.com/search?keyw...rchType=Header

Any way you look at it -- Samsung has learned how to conjugate the verb to Zune.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #93 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

They are legally obligated to give factual numbers to investors. If the channel is full and the product isn't selling to customers, Samsung has to warn investors that next quarter's "sales" may not be so great.

Right, but they knew that they would have to do this back when they were reporting channel sales as "sales."

All I can think is that they figured they could get a lot of buzz and momentum going by acting as if the Tab was a huge hit, and then they just crossed their fingers and hoped that would translate into actual sales before the quarterly.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #94 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

They are legally obligated to give factual numbers to investors. If the channel is full and the product isn't selling to customers, Samsung has to warn investors that next quarter's "sales" may not be so great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Right, but they knew that they would have to do this back when they were reporting channel sales as "sales."

All I can think is that they figured they could get a lot of buzz and momentum going by acting as if the Tab was a huge hit, and then they just crossed their fingers and hoped that would translate into actual sales before the quarterly.

Yes, but they don't need to give numbers down to the SKU (or even category). I don't know how Sammi is organized -- possibly they have a Consumer Electronics Group, Mobile Electronics Division -- consisting of phones, tablets, whatever.

They could show "returns" at the group or division level and essentially bury the hit.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #95 of 108
Make that analyst eat the paper he wrote the garbage on. Or better yet, the keyboard he typed it on. Or she as the case may be.

As I said, if you're such a great analyst, why are you sharing your 'analysis' instead of keeping it to yourself and making gazillions off it in the stock market? Eh, eh?
post #96 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turley Muller View Post

You missed his point. He is raising the issue of shipments versus sales to end-users, or sell-through. Samsung has never giving figures for sell-through, yet Apple gives both. In the case of Samsung, it's a very important point since all Samsung's sales are to resellers opposed to Apple's direct sales.

The Galaxy Tab is available in 100 countries on 200+ carriers. Therefore, most of the 2M units was just channel fill, no real evidence of strong-sell though. The resellers might have to take a bath if they can't sell off their stock. There is already evidence this might be happening due to the recent price cuts for the Samsung Tablet.

In short, Samsung could report 2M unit sales without a single one being purchased by a end consumer.

Just as i has said earlier, shipments don't equal end-demand- Samsung has now verified that very few of the 2M units have actually been sold through.
post #97 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Yes, but they don't need to give numbers down to the SKU (or even category). I don't know how Sammi is organized -- possibly they have a Consumer Electronics Group, Mobile Electronics Division -- consisting of phones, tablets, whatever.

They could show "returns" at the group or division level and essentially bury the hit.

You're absolutely right, but it is a fairly high profile product that Samsung themselves gloated about. Investor expectations were prematurely set to a level that Samsung is obviously not going to be able to meet. I would say, in this case, they should (and did) readjust expectations accordingly.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #98 of 108
deleted
post #99 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Right, but they knew that they would have to do this back when they were reporting channel sales as "sales."

Not necessarily. It was a new product. You have to get it in to the channel in order to get it into customer's hands. They could've only assumed that if it was in the channel, it would sell.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe they were being rather disingenuous with the sales numbers and gloated prematurely, but ALL companies make forecasts based off the of units in the channel and the number that can be manufactured. But you cannot claim that they knew they wouldn't sell, especially when they had no prior history of sales for this product category.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #100 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

If you feel this is a serious matter, that somehow masses of investors never noticed that Samsung doesn't sell to end-users so that any sales can only be to resellers, you may have an easy win in a class action suit.

Weird. You ignore the part where I say

Quote:
At any rate, it has nothing to do with fraud or litigation, it has to do with an abrupt 180º turn in the public perception of the Tab-- from (surprisingly) legit iPad competitor to laughing stock in about 30 seconds.

and just repeat the straw man. Again, you're pretending as if anything short of litigation makes it a non-issue, while in fact the sudden revelation that that Tab hasn't been selling well has ramifications for the Android Tablet market.


Quote:
We're agreed there. It doesn't really matter after all.

And, again, "doesn't rise to the level of a lawsuit" is not synonymous with "doesn't matter all."
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #101 of 108
deleted
post #102 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Since everyone else but apple sells to carriers it's rather hard to get sales from Samsung.

The tab is nice if there wasn't an ipad. All the upcoming tablets are also kinda hit or miss.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4138/t...nds-on-roundup

Asus Transformer is announced for release in April, alongside Asus Slider.

That will be the first Android tablet that I find worth checking out. If specs are correct (10.1" IPS panel, 1280x800 resolution, Tegra 2, 2 webcams, Android 3.0, 8 hours of battery life, 16 hours with add-on keyboard dock, USB and HDMI ports, 1GB RAM, 16 - 64GB SSD) this might be very nice device.

I will be looking at iPad 2 as well, but to be honest - for 10" screen size device, I'd like to have full web experience, including Flash. I'm still OK with not having Flash on my iPhone - screen is too small for almost anything but simple text browsing - but since I've seen how Flash rich site (like Subaru.co.nz) work on my colleague's Samsung Galaxy S phone with Android 2.2, I definitely want same functionality from my tablet; for me, iPad 2 would have to dramatically overshadow Asus Transformer in some ways in order to cover for (expected) lack of Flash.

End of March is my birthday, so I will be postponing my present until I check both Transformer and iPad 2. Exciting times.
post #103 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryszard View Post

Samsung just admitted during their quarterly report press onference that the December 1-million number and the January 2-million number did not represent actual "sales" but "shipments" to telcos and retailers. They even admitted that actual sales were "quite small."

So much for the basis for the entire analysis...

Yep. They can get away with the statement (sort of) because how the whole retrial game works is that the stores buy the product and then turn around and sell it to the end user, they have certain deals regarding prices etc. And then att the end of some preset time, the deal may or may not let the return the unsold product for a refund. At those were actual sales. But not at the same level as Apple since like 90% of Apple product sales are at their own stores and thus direct to the user.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #104 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Trust? In what sense? Companies care about sales and profits.

Trust as in:

"We indemnify our product doesn't contain IP someone is going to sue the hell out of you for".

and

"We have a defensive patent portfolio that neither Apple nor Oracle is about to mess with by coming after our handset makers"

and

"We just bought an assload of licenses for patents from various folks including PalmSource. We'll pay off the more substantial patent trolls so you don't have to"

This would give me more confidence that the boys aren't just swinging unprotected in the breeze even if they are made out of brass.

In any case, you ignored the primary point. Android handset makers have no choice except WP7 and Android. The only folks with options are RIM, Nokia and HP. Nokia is taking quite a beating from all sides though so their option sucks just as bad as going with WP7 or Android. RIM isn't looking all THAT much better and they gotta still be kicking themselves for screwing up the Palm purchase.
post #105 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by kube View Post

This is just stupid.

When you create a market, and have 100%, and the market is an overwhelming success because of your creation, of course your 'market share' is going to slide. That's not failure, its part of success.

Failure would be decreasing sales, not percent of market. As far as I can tell, Apple is selling every tablet they can produce.

Well said. Failure would be if nobody followed Apple's lead into the tablet market and Apple had 100% of the niche market to themselves. I particularly love how Microsoft has been saying, "but...but...we've been doing Windows tablets since Windows 3.1! Somebody pay attention to us!"

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #106 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Trust as in:

"We indemnify our product doesn't contain IP someone is going to sue the hell out of you for".

and

"We have a defensive patent portfolio that neither Apple nor Oracle is about to mess with by coming after our handset makers"

and

"We just bought an assload of licenses for patents from various folks including PalmSource. We'll pay off the more substantial patent trolls so you don't have to"

This would give me more confidence that the boys aren't just swinging unprotected in the breeze even if they are made out of brass.

In any case, you ignored the primary point. Android handset makers have no choice except WP7 and Android. The only folks with options are RIM, Nokia and HP. Nokia is taking quite a beating from all sides though so their option sucks just as bad as going with WP7 or Android. RIM isn't looking all THAT much better and they gotta still be kicking themselves for screwing up the Palm purchase.

So essentially no company can be trusted.
post #107 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

So essentially no company can be trusted.

Given that those examples are from MS vs Google I have no clue as to why you would make that statement other than to be deliberately thick.

You ask about my word choice and I explain it. Then you dismiss the explanation with a one liner. That's nice jackassery.

The fact remains that:

a) those companies have little to no choice but to use Android or MS since they are largely unable to develop their own mobile OS.
b) MS has gone out of it's way to protect handset makers from IP issues and Google has not.
post #108 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

That is called early adopters. There is no evidence that Android for tablets is taking off. They have yet to release a real tablet OS and we have yet to see if there will be developer support for the platform.

true, so if these early numbers are even close to being somewhat accurate, one can only assume once google releases it;s tablet OS that's when we'll really see it take off as it's android based smartphones has shown. There is indeed a large support from developers for it.

Things should get real interesting in the next 2 or so years, it'll be good for consumers though!
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple's share of tablet market slides to 77%, Android rises to 22%
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's share of tablet market slides to 77%, Android rises to 22%