or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Motorola's Android 3.0 Honeycomb Xoom sales forecast slashed to 100,000 units
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Motorola's Android 3.0 Honeycomb Xoom sales forecast slashed to 100,000 units - Page 4

post #121 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

I'm always bemused that people like YOU don't take the TCO into account.

Congrats, you bought a iPhone sans contract and how much did you save on the TCO? ZERO.

Check this out according to the costs we here in New Zealand have to pay on the Vodafone network.

iPhone 4 32GB on Smart3 contract:

3GB data free
120 minutes free
600 texts free

Total: $81.75 + $379 for iPhone = $460.75

iPhone 4 32GB without contract based on Smart3 rates:

3GB data @ $0.11/MB = $337.92
120 minutes @ $0.71/minute = $85.20
600 texts @ $0.20/txt = $120.00

Total: $543.12 + $1328 for iPhone = $1817.12

iPhone 4 32GB without contract:

3GB data @ $0.20/MB = $614.40
120 minutes @ $0.91/minute = $109.20
600 texts @ $0.20/txt = $120.00

Total: $843.6 + $1328 for iPhone = $2171.60

Recap, the prices are as follows:

On Smart3 Contract = $460.75
Smart3 Contract with Full Price iPhone = $1817.12
Off Contract Full Price iPhone = $2171.60

That's based on one month with the phone included, let's total it for two years shall we?

On Smart3 Contract = $2341.00
Smart3 Contract with Full Price iPhone = $14362.00
Off Contract Full Price iPhone = $21574.40

Hmm, I'm failing to see how you save more money by buying the phone outright rather than going on a fixed 2 year contract.


14,362.00 ??? wtf?

nobody who is paying outright for their iphone are paying vodafone nz's retarded fees for anything.

You are only showing 600txts, but 3gb of data. The official quantites of gb and txts are 0.25 adn 600 respectively. The current is 3gb and 1000txts 'until further notice" - which basiclaly means 'until we hook enough people onto the 24month plan'
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #122 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archos View Post

It's a flop when you develop a product chasing the taillights of last year's product, end up blindsided by this year's product, and end up losing money. Look at MMI earnings: already back in the red after a brief year of profitability when it didn't have to compete against Apple, segregated briefly by Verizon's wing.

The Xoom flopped, the Asterix flopped, Motorola is now in big trouble. That's why they're scrambling to come up with their own proprietary blend of Linux. Google's Android was half the reason both products flopped.

You do realize that Motorola Mobility is in it's first year of being it's own company right? It just spun off. This means it's revenues will be a lot lower, and it's struggling to find it's center again. Spin offs like this are always shaky, even in the best of times.

As for Xoom and Atrix sales numbers. We have no idea what they are because Verizon, Motorola, and ATT are not releasing numbers. Also Motorola still makes a ton of cheap handsets, and the Droidx/Droid2 are still two very well selling devices.

Quote:
As for BGR, if you want to cry about DED being an Apple fanboy, well the "better commentary" you point to is simply laughable. Choice lines:

Zach uses an ATT iPhone as his primary device as does EVERY single member of BGR. In fact, outside of the "news" site AI, they're one of the biggest Apple-leaning blogs out there.

Quote:
"The tablet market is barely a year old and its dominated by a single device Apples iPad."

No, the iPad market is a year old. Tablet market has been around since the early 90s, but nobody has figured it out until now. It's people like BGR's Zach who predicted that the Xoom was going to fare better. They were wrong.

Tablet PC's and tablets like the ipad are two totally different styles of devices. That's like saying a iphone is basically the same thing as a Palm Pilot.

Secondly, Please provide me ANY link where ANYONE on BGR predicted that the Xoom would be a hit.

Quote:
"Motorola has sold 100,000 XOOM tablets in less than a month and a half, which is an average of over 75,000 units per month. Thats a flop?"

Yes, 75,000 * 12 = less than a million units a year. That's worse than the Zune. A flop by any measure, especially for the headlined, ultra hyped, Google-touted flagship Honeycomb tablet. It's a massive flop, bad enough to kill Android 3.0 as dead as the Zune OS. Never mind that 100/2=50 and not 75.

First, some basic math. 41 days (amount of time the Xoom was out) is 1 month and 11 days (assuming a 30 day month) NOT two months. Which is why he said month and a half. while realistically it's more like 1 and 1/3 months. 30/41 is Approximately 73,000. Now, sales of devices of this nature are typically higher at launch, which is why he most likely used the 75,000 number.

Next, for all but FIVE DAYS of these estimated numbers, the ONLY option available for purchase was the VERIZON 3g version. This means NO international sales, no wifi only sales, nothing. THe only people who thought this would be a blowout success were people who don't understand the industry (analysts and rabid fans) ANYONE who understands American consumers, especially Verizon customers, knows that an $800 device will not have run away sales, and I'm positive Motorola planned accordingly.

And no, this isn't "Bad enough to kill Honeycomb dead." Not even close. If you think that you don't understand Android adoption, at all.

Quote:
You think that article is "better" because it says what you want to hear. But it is childishly wrong, as are you. Motorola isn't bouncing back or organically growing Xoom sales. It's canceling production orders! It's going to pull the plug 5x faster than Microsoft killed the Zune. It'll be gone before the next wave of Honeycomb tablets begin their drumbeat/dismal/doubt/death cycle.

1. Please link to a VERIFIED report that Motorola is cancelling production orders. Not a rumor, not some trash from an analyst but a press release or an authenticated leak. There are none. If you got your android news from a site other than AI you might know this.

2. This is a Dev device. Remember the G1? Or the Nexus One? Neither device was a "runaway" success, but both devices made their company money and more importantly, both devices helped guide future development. I don't know how long the Xoom will be around. But you can't call something a failure 5 days after the actual Entry level model enters the market.

3. The article is Better because it wasn't written by someone who cannot say a SINGLE positive thing about the device he is writing about. DED is an Apple Fanboy who couldn't admit a non iDevice is superior even if it gave him a gold brick an hour and all his iDevice did was spit out straw. Zach (and BGR) are STILL Apple Fans who STILL consider it by far the best system out there, but they don't feel the need to justify their choice by attacking the competition like DED does. But they understand one big concept: What's considered a positive sale is different for different companies. You (and most people on this site) don't get that. Believe it or not, Apple's one of the only companies in the world that is able to pull off the insane margins they do while still having high volume. A company does NOT have to meet that level in order not to be called a failure.
post #123 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

The 100k number was based off of an ESTIMATION based on a graph posted by Google on Android OS adoption. The only way to have a registered device there is if the device is active and connected with a gmail account at the time the survey was taken.

So it could actually be LESS than 100,000, right? Yeah, thought so. It's true, we haven't taken into account international sales, which will happen when exactly? Perhaps when they actually finish making the Xoom?
post #124 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

You do realize that ...

Damn, Archos, you hit a nerve!

Low revenues + low expectations + low sales + a dash of "but wait, it's a dev device!" = ???

Yep, that would still be a flop.
post #125 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

Exactly, which makes your defining it as a success already pretty funny.



Oh, I didn't either.



Not so much. Given that it's slower than the iPad2 out of the blocks (uh, hardware, though cetainly sales too...) and running a half-finished OS, expecting higher sales numbers would be crazy - as you yourself are now saying, even as you try to spin that as success. This tablet has run into the wall of the iPad and will get taken down by the upcoming Samsung devices***. If Moto is already cutting off the orders, it's going to end up being an unsupported .9-gen Android tablet that couldn't win on specs, price, or software on day 1. It's not a huge amount if you expect support from developers or the company itself even if the number is higher than you could personally produce in your basement.

Of course, if Xoom hasn't been launched globally yet, then they still have a... no, they really don't have a shot. Sorry.

*** And it's not likely that Samsung is going to be any sort of winner there either, just that people looking for a sleeker tablet running Android won't be lining up to pick up the Xoom so it will undercut Motorola even further.



Given your general lack of insight, I can't say that surprises me.

I didn't say it was a success, I just said it wasn't a failure. As we don't know the margins, initial costs, or ANYTHING, you can't call something a failure based on volume alone. Which you would agree with if you weren't so helbent on defending Apple like it was some abused puppy.

Again, no other product will EVER have the Initial sales rush that Apple does for their devices (with the possible exception of Game consoles). This is (in part) because of the user experience, but also because they're some of the most heavily advertised products in history. Not only do you have the thousands of commercials, but you have Apple spending a ton of money to get their devices placed in EVERY primetime show.

Apple has the best marketing department in the world, and they've been developing the brand aggressively for 20+ years. (and developing it for even longer).

Again, just because a device doesn't live up to Apple's sales numbers doesn't mean it's a failure.

Before you respond please remember: You know NOTHING of Motorola's internal numbers, profitability, or expectations. I am NOT saying the Xoom was a success, I am just saying it wasn't a failure.

*awaits you to miss the point, again*
post #126 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

...it's nothing like the Samusung 7" Galaxy tablet fiasco. 2.1 million shipped! how many sold - 10%? 20%? what a massive blunder! the losses on that utter total flop will be in the $ hundreds of millions. some head at Samsung is gonna roll ....

At least it will roll smoothly. (Yup, this joke is never going to get old)
post #127 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

Damn, Archos, you hit a nerve!

Low revenues + low expectations + low sales + a dash of "but wait, it's a dev device!" = ???

Yep, that would still be a flop.

-We don't know revenues. Even IF the 100k number is accurate we don't know Revenue OR Profit Margin. In fact we don't know anything about the numbers, just the word of an analyst who thought Motorola would sell a couple MILLION of a $800 Verizon Locked device. Again, If a moron makes a prediction, even if they're a well-dressed moron, you still don't take that prediction (or subsequent adjustments) seriously.
-Realistic expectations =! Low expectations. NO ONE thought this would have anywhere near the sale volume of an iPad. This doesn't make them low expectations, this is them understanding the market.
-We don't know sales numbers.
-People said it was a dev device since CES. This is nothing new.

And he didn't hit a nerve. Just typical American Economic Ignorance.
post #128 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

So it could actually be LESS than 100,000, right? Yeah, thought so. It's true, we haven't taken into account international sales, which will happen when exactly? Perhaps when they actually finish making the Xoom?

It could be 0 it would be 1 million. The point is we don't know.

Fun Fact: If you want to try and have witty replies, it actually requires you understand the product.
post #129 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post

You must mean DaHarder. We're all aware he bought 3 for each family member.

Actually I thought he accounted for 50,000 units of those 100,000.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Has anyone ever seen DED, Steve Jobs, and quinney in the same room at the same time?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunabku View Post

Please know that us apple fans, especially the ones who have been around for a while, are wounded from our past of being MS underdogs.

Now we're relishing in our market dominance and feel good when other companies product sales suck compared to apple's. Logically, there is little threat to apples position - at least for a good while. However apple fans are so wounded that some of us want to completely crush anyone who "might" threaten our dominance - even though lots of us say we like competition - and we do.

We just can't stand the thought of being marginalized again. For me i just want apple to keep their dominance long enough to remain the 1st choice platform of developers for years to come. All they have to do NOW is preload the market with enough powerful machines and that will provide years of a solid (non-fragmented) base market for developers to launch first on apple.

If apple also keeps pushing out APIs/development environments and couples innovative hardware with those APIs etc, it will encourage the creation of one-of-kind, first to apple platform apps that will allow us fans to deservedly puff out our chests and continue to smile down upon lesser brands.

"Apple fans" WANT competition for the most part because that pushes everything forward. What's happening now from the "competition" is just so pathetic is nothing to be happy about even if you are a "chest puffing Apple fan". Android gave the iPhone some fire under its butt. But in tablet-land, no such thing seems to be happening even after a year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Someone whose birthday is uncomfortably close to Queen Elizabeth II's birthday, which is why we in Australia, celebrate the Queen's birthday with a holiday in June.

Which IIRC during my time in Australia was just another excuse not to go to work and get blind drunk instead. Except for those annoying monarchists, they're still taking this "royalty" stuff seriously.
post #130 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

It could be 0 it would be 1 million. The point is we don't know.
Fun Fact: If you want to try and have witty replies, it actually requires you understand the product.

Fun Fact: I doubt it would be 1 million...
post #131 of 173
When Apple decided to get into the mobile phone business, many said Apple would fail because it doesn't know the telcom business. I find it interesting that no one is saying the same thing about the telcom business getting into the PC market. Apple is going to crush the telcom business in the tablet market if the telcom business operates like a telcom rather than a PC vender.

The tablet market is very different from the phone market. Phones are used primarily for making calls and the features of the OS are primarily seen as a bonus (i.e., a way to attract customers). However, the decision to buy is mostly based on the need for phone service. The selection of a particular phone is based on cost and features.
The tablet market is completely different. Customers only buy if they want the particular device. Using a cell phone provider as a marketer is actually a hindrance because 2/3 of the market doesn't want a contract. The people that traffic the cell phone store are usually looking for phone service, not a tablet. Cell phone providers have completely different marketing and sales tactics and completely different contractual arrangements between themselves and their customers (as compared to retailers like Walmart, Best Buy, or an outlet like the Apple Store). In addition, handset makers like Motorola are used to selling through cell phone providers and for the most part don't have their own distribution channels.

Obviously Motorola is trying. They are selling the wifi version through Best Buy. However, they did it backwards. They advertised and released the 3g version on Verizon before going to Best Buy. What they should have done was established in the minds of their customers that Motorola is sold at Best Buy and other retail outlets. Then and only then should they release the 3G version at Verizon for those that want data.
I don't think it was a coincidence that Apple sold the 3G version a month late. Apple didn't want consumers associating the iPad with ATT. Apple wanted the lines at its own stores, not ATT.

Everyone likes to say that Apple is successful because of hype. I call bullshit. Motorola was the one paying for Superbowl ads making fun of Apple. Who's the one hyping their products??? Apple doesn't even anounce their products until they are ready to ship. There's no hype in that. The Xoom was hyped for months and wasn't ready to ship even when it shipped. That's what I call hype. We shouldn't confuse consumer demand with hype. Consumer demand is the antithesis of hype.

I think it boils down to the fact that cell phone carriers make bad PC vendors. The marketing of the Xoom is proof of that. Apple schooled these handset makers back in 2007 when it played ball on their court by selling a successful handset. Based on the attempts of Samsung and Motorola, it doesn't appear that handset makers can hang with Apple in its backyard (the PC market). The handset makers are now 0 for 2. We'll have to see how the rest do. Personally I think HP is the bigger threat. HP has sold a lot of PCs. You won't see them paying for Super Bowl ads announcing the sale of their devices at Verizon. (how stupid can you be).
post #132 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Fun Fact: I doubt it would be 1 million...

I doubt it as well. The point of the post you quoted was the point out that this ENTIRE article is based off of the estimation of someone trying to put numbers to a graph.

Not Sales Figures, not even Estimations from sale numbers at a sampling of locations.

Again, these are Verizon customers we're talking about. They're not going to jump at the chance of dropping 800 on a device, or 600 and still having to sign a 2 year contract. Heck, the number of Verizon ipad sales was pathetic when it launched as well. (and most consumers had no clue about release cycles, so I doubt ipad2 rumors hindered those sales at all)

This is a consumer that expects phones to be free and netbooks to be $25 (or free if you get a smartphone too).
post #133 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

This is (in part) because of the user experience, but also because they're some of the most heavily advertised products in history. Not only do you have the thousands of commercials, but you have Apple spending a ton of money to get their devices placed in EVERY primetime show.

You're still spreading this ridiculous bullshit? Apple doesn't pay for product placement. Prop guys use Apple equipment because it looks better than other brands. In primetime shows the last three years or so, every Apple computer has a sticker over the Apple logo to reduce right-wing hate mail, and if they turn them around so you can see the screen only, you'll notice it's Windows. I guarantee you Apple is not paying to have their computers shown with the logo hidden and running windows.
post #134 of 173
Now we know we have at least 100,000 die hard Android fans in the world. How about the return rate btw?
post #135 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

I didn't say it was a success, I just said it wasn't a failure. As we don't know the margins, initial costs, or ANYTHING, you can't call something a failure based on volume alone. Which you would agree with if you weren't so helbent on defending Apple like it was some abused puppy.

Again, no other product will EVER have the Initial sales rush that Apple does for their devices (with the possible exception of Game consoles). This is (in part) because of the user experience, but also because they're some of the most heavily advertised products in history. Not only do you have the thousands of commercials, but you have Apple spending a ton of money to get their devices placed in EVERY primetime show.

Apple has the best marketing department in the world, and they've been developing the brand aggressively for 20+ years. (and developing it for even longer).

Again, just because a device doesn't live up to Apple's sales numbers doesn't mean it's a failure.

Before you respond please remember: You know NOTHING of Motorola's internal numbers, profitability, or expectations. I am NOT saying the Xoom was a success, I am just saying it wasn't a failure.

*awaits you to miss the point, again*

I disagree. The mobile PC isn't all that new. There is a certain volume of units where companies start to make money. A company amortizes costs of designing, manufacturing, and marketing across a certain number of units. They have to predict that number and if they are wrong, they will lose money (and yield a flop). Motorola was touting this at CES and paying for Super Bowl ads. Those are not the kinds of things you do for products that you expect to sell 100,000 units for. No we don't have the numbers, but the circumstantial evidence suggests a flop.

You seriously think that Motorola didn't succeed because they didn't pay enough movie makers to put their products in their movies? Get real. The device hadn't been in a single movie when millions of units were sold. If anything, Motorola is the one that blew the budget on advertising and hype. Last time I checked Super Bowl ads aren't cheap.

Apple hasn't built their brand by advertising. They built their brand by making products that people want, which is something Motorola needs to spend more time doing. If you ask Motorola, they can testify to you that advertising alone doesn't sell millions of units.

With regard to your reminder that we know "nothing about Motorola's internal number," I'll just point out that neither do you and therefore you have no basis to say that it wasn't a failure. The circumstantial evidence provides a lot more support for "failure" than it does for not being a failure.
post #136 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

I disagree. The mobile PC isn't all that new. There is a certain volume of units where companies start to make money. A company amortizes costs of designing, manufacturing, and marketing across a certain number of units. They have to predict that number and if they are wrong, they will lose money (and yield a flop). Motorola was touting this at CES and paying for Super Bowl ads. Those are not the kinds of things you do for products that you expect to sell 100,000 units for. No we don't have the numbers, but the circumstantial evidence suggests a flop.

You seriously think that Motorola didn't succeed because they didn't pay enough movie makers to put their products in their movies? Get real. The device hadn't been in a single movie when millions of units were sold. If anything, Motorola is the one that blew the budget on advertising and hype. Last time I checked Super Bowl ads aren't cheap.

Apple hasn't built their brand by advertising. They built their brand by making products that people want, which is something Motorola needs to spend more time doing. If you ask Motorola, they can testify to you that advertising alone doesn't sell millions of units.

With regard to your reminder that we know "nothing about Motorola's internal number," I'll just point out that neither do you and therefore you have no basis to say that it wasn't a failure. The circumstantial evidence provides a lot more support for "failure" than it does for not being a failure.

RE: Super Bowl ads, CES touting: Please look at Nexus One. By Google and HTC's accounts, the NExus one was a success even though analysts called it a failure because of sales. There are more reasons than volume to market a product.

Re: Paid TV spots: That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm talking about Mindshare. Apple has it, no other company in tech currently does.

And if you think that Apple's marketing department didn't have a SIGNIFICANT role in their current position you're fooling yourself. Look at Apple in the early 90's compared to today.

You're right, I don't have the internal numbers. But I'm also not the idiot that went and made a press release touting Motorola's sale numbers and if I thought they were good or not.

-we don't know sale number
-we don't know revenue numbers
-we don't know what Motorola's expectations were
-we don't know profit margins

As we don't know any of those things, it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to call it a failure. We also cannot call it a success. That is what I'm saying.
post #137 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post


-we don't know sale number
-we don't know revenue numbers
-we don't know what Motorola's expectations were
-we don't know profit margins

As we don't know any of those things, it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to call it a failure. We also cannot call it a success. That is what I'm saying.

If they sold 100 units, would you still say it is IMPOSSILBE for us to call it a failure? What about 5 units? or 1 unit? You are fundamentally wrong to say that units sold cannot serve as an indicator of success or failure. There are many that work in this industry that have a very good feel for what Motorola would have hoped/expected/and planned for in this product launch. I'm no expert, but I can still narrow it down to something. I would bet you any amount of money that Motorola planned for something between 10 thousand units and 10 billion units. An expert could obvious narrow it down a lot closer. I don't think experts in this field need to audit the books to know whether 100,000 units is a failure. Samsung shipped 2M units of the Tab before it even knew what demand would be like. It seems reasonable to me that a 100K launch is a disaster. I suppose if Motorola gave us the actual numbers you would argue "wait a minute, we don't know if it was a failure because what if Motorola added the numbers wrong."
post #138 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

As we don't know any of those things, it is IMPOSSIBLE for us to call it a failure. We also cannot call it a success. That is what I'm saying.

I'll help you out there... it's a failure.

I know it for a fact and you'll know how right I am very soon.

There... now you can go back to your dream world.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #139 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

"experimental support for Flash is still not able to deliver reasonable performance even for web videos"

You mean the final version of Flash, available on Android Market that delivers video perfectly as the below example shows?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gq6xzyxVYg0

I watched the video, I guess you missed the part where he said flash won't play 720p video because it doesn't support hardware decoding? It only has to run on 1 device right now, and they can't even figure out how to decode 720p encoded H.264 video on there? Is there any wonder Apple won't use it?

Did you watch the video you posted on a Xoom? If so, you probably couldn't see the big Apple logo reflecting off the screen as he filmed it in 720p on his iPhone. I saw it, because i watched in in 720p in my iPad. I didn't need flash to watch that video or the video the videos he showed.

Somehow there's an odd perception that you somehow need Flash to watch H.264 video.
post #140 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

And if you think that Apple's marketing department didn't have a SIGNIFICANT role in their current position you're fooling yourself. Look at Apple in the early 90's compared to today.

Yes let's look at the difference between Apple in the early 90's compared to today. Apple was advertising back then and they are advertising now. The difference I see is that now they sell the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, and lots of people want those products because they like using them. Apple's marketing and the mindset that goes with it is circular. Apple builds a product that people wants and then tells everyone that people want it. Motorola builds a product and tells people they will want it, but no one buys it because no one wants it.

Contrast that with the iPad 1. The media told all of us that the iPad was a big dissapointment and that only the Apple fans would buy it. Turns out that the media was wrong and most people want an iPad. I would argue Apple's success is 90% product development and 10% marketing. (I know you like numbers). In other words, had they not marketed the iPad, they may have only sold 12.6M iPads instead of 14M last year.
post #141 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

iPhone is available on 5 carriers in my country and for free from many of them:

http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iph...hone/index.htm
http://shop.o2.co.uk/mobile_phone/pa...e_4_16GB_Black
http://shop.orange.co.uk/iphone/choose-your-4g-plan

Yet I know more people with an Android phone than an iPhone. I think your reasons are a bit out, or at least don't consider any markets outside USA.

you perhaps need to get out more

http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_br...-201101-201103
post #142 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

If they sold 100 units, would you still say it is IMPOSSILBE for us to call it a failure? What about 5 units? or 1 unit? You are fundamentally wrong to say that units sold cannot serve as an indicator of success or failure. There are many that work in this industry that have a very good feel for what Motorola would have hoped/expected/and planned for in this product launch. I'm no expert, but I can still narrow it down to something. I would bet you any amount of money that Motorola planned for something between 10 thousand units and 10 billion units. An expert could obvious narrow it down a lot closer. I don't think experts in this field need to audit the books to know whether 100,000 units is a failure. Samsung shipped 2M units of the Tab before it even knew what demand would be like. It seems reasonable to me that a 100K launch is a disaster. I suppose if Motorola gave us the actual numbers you would argue "wait a minute, we don't know if it was a failure because what if Motorola added the numbers wrong."

Motorola didn't give us numbers. No one did. What we have is an estimation based off of a graph. If you can't see the difference between that and someone (anyone) actually publishing numbers, it's not worth responding to you.

And this analyst isn't an expert. See their initial predictions. Actually, see any tech analyst predictions for the past 5 years. They've either been way too conservative, or so optimistic as to be laughable.

The Samsung Tab was also available on EVERY major US carrier, on SEVERAL international carriers, and available internationally unlocked. It also supported voice. IT's a completely different type of launch.

You seem to be missing the point where I am saying since we don't know the numbers, it's impossible to call it a failure. Continue making up numbers if you wish. The point I'm making is we don't know them, and by making them up, you're agreeing with me.
post #143 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

So a device that more than likely made Motorola $70 million in revenue in 42 days (minimum) is a flop?

Yes, the ipad sold more. Who gives a crap? You don't need to have iOS numbers to escape being called a "Flop."

Any analyst that predicted several million sales this year when all they knew of was a Verizon xoom and possibly a wifi model was stupid. Full Stop. Just like the "analysts" that predicted a FULL RETAIL phone, sold only online, one that required a data plan, would sell millions a quarter (aka N1 launch).

It's clear that Analysts don't understand the tech market. They've had to "significantly" adjust their figures for EVERY tech product launch in the past few years. Why are you listening to them again?


Much better commentary on this news story can be found here:
http://www.bgr.com/2011/04/06/the-mo...nius+Report%29

when they were building 400k of them a month, it's certainly a flop.
post #144 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

Yes let's look at the difference between Apple in the early 90's compared to today. Apple was advertising back then and they are advertising now. The difference I see is that now they sell the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, and lots of people want those products because they like using them. Apple's marketing and the mindset that goes with it is circular. Apple builds a product that people wants and then tells everyone that people want it. Motorola builds a product and tells people they will want it, but no one buys it because no one wants it.

Contrast that with the iPad 1. The media told all of us that the iPad was a big dissapointment and that only the Apple fans would buy it. Turns out that the media was wrong and most people want an iPad. I would argue Apple's success is 90% product development and 10% marketing. (I know you like numbers). In other words, had they not marketed the iPad, they may have only sold 12.6M iPads instead of 14M last year.

You missed the point entirely. There is a HUGE difference between "Advertising" and Advertising well.

And all sales are, AT MINIMUM 60% Marketing/Branding, and with tech that number is most likely a lot higher.. A good example of this is WebOS. Most tech journalists, reviewers, and even Apple fanboys would argue that WebOS is Superior (by a wide margin) to Android when it comes to intuitiveness, and overall customer usability. Yet it failed to gain any signifigant marketshare, even being on three of the major 4 US carriers and with dozens of positive reviews to back it. The devices were also some of the cheapest you could get (on or off contract). So why such poor marketshare? The marketing was poor. Customers don't buy a "quality product" unless they know about it.

How do you think they find out about a product? Oh yeah, marketing.



You're also confusing Tech Media with Mainstream media. I'll give you a hint. Only one of them has significant impact with real world sales. Mainstream media talked the Heck out of the ipad.
post #145 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

when they were building 400k of them a month, it's certainly a flop.

1. Post a link showing that Motorola is making 400k a month. Acceptable links: Anything that is Verified. This means actual press releases or confirmed reports. Not rumors, not "sources in the know" No bullshit like you're most likely quoting.

(note this is different than having 400k ready to ship for launch, or making an initial run of 400k)

Again, you're basing your position on rumors and speculation, most of it un-sourced.

AKA. You're trying to make a claim about a product you have NO HARD EVIDENCE ON.
post #146 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

So a device that more than likely made Motorola $70 million in revenue in 42 days (minimum) is a flop?

Yes, the ipad sold more. Who gives a crap? You don't need to have iOS numbers to escape being called a "Flop."

Any analyst that predicted several million sales this year when all they knew of was a Verizon xoom and possibly a wifi model was stupid. Full Stop. Just like the "analysts" that predicted a FULL RETAIL phone, sold only online, one that required a data plan, would sell millions a quarter (aka N1 launch).

It's clear that Analysts don't understand the tech market. They've had to "significantly" adjust their figures for EVERY tech product launch in the past few years. Why are you listening to them again?


Much better commentary on this news story can be found here:
http://www.bgr.com/2011/04/06/the-mo...nius+Report%29

just read the article and found this in the conclusion.

Quote:
its obviously true that Apple has created a behemoth that will likely own the tablet market for years to come. But to call a device a flop simply because its sales dont measure up to the astronomical numbers recorded by the original iPad is anything but productive. The iPad is the winner, without question
post #147 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

just read the article and found this in the conclusion.

No shit. I NEVER SAID THE XOOM WAS A SUCCESS. I just said it was impossible to call it a failure.

BGR is a very Pro Apple Blog. ALL their writers swear by their iphones. It's one of the main reasons I linked that article instead of one from an Android blog. That way you couldn't accuse the writer of being a Fandroid (though some people here still tried)
post #148 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

1. Post a link showing that Motorola is making 400k a month. Acceptable links: Anything that is Verified. This means actual press releases or confirmed reports. Not rumors, not "sources in the know" No bullshit like you're most likely quoting.

(note this is different than having 400k ready to ship for launch, or making an initial run of 400k)

Again, you're basing your position on rumors and speculation, most of it un-sourced.

AKA. You're trying to make a claim about a product you have NO HARD EVIDENCE ON.

find a source that contradicts this

Quote:
Taiwan's shipments of Motorola Xoom in the first quarter of 2011 are expected to meet upstream component suppliers' forecast of 700,000-800,000 units, as Motorola already placed orders for about 200,000 units for the first half of March and shipments for the entire March should reach 400,000-500,000. Shipments reached 200,000 units in February, according to sources from upstream suppliers.

http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Ne...117&query=XOOM
post #149 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

No shit. I NEVER SAID THE XOOM WAS A SUCCESS. I just said it was impossible to call it a failure.

Xoom is a failure.

See? Not so impossible.

"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 #150 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Now if I could actually *get* an iPad 2, that would help. The situation in Australia is pretty insane, a friend of mine has been trying for two weeks to get one because he underestimated demand and did not queue up in time on launch day.

Believe me, I'm hanging out to get one, but I don't see the fuss about demand overwhelming supply. Just order online and wait.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #151 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by neiltc13 View Post

iPhone is available on 5 carriers in my country and for free from many of them:

http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iph...hone/index.htm
http://shop.o2.co.uk/mobile_phone/pa...e_4_16GB_Black
http://shop.orange.co.uk/iphone/choose-your-4g-plan

Yet I know more people with an Android phone than an iPhone. I think your reasons are a bit out, or at least don't consider any markets outside USA.

The iPhone is available from just any provider in my country. I know 10 out of hundreds that use an android. The iPhone is ubiquous here. And those 10 are all geeks.
post #152 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

14,362.00 ??? wtf?

nobody who is paying outright for their iphone are paying vodafone nz's retarded fees for anything.

You are only showing 600txts, but 3gb of data. The official quantites of gb and txts are 0.25 adn 600 respectively. The current is 3gb and 1000txts 'until further notice" - which basiclaly means 'until we hook enough people onto the 24month plan'

I'm basing everything on the Smart3 plan as this is the plan I am on and taking into account how much you would actually pay for the equivalent without a subsidised contract that's what you'd pay. So I'm 400 texts out which would actually make my comparison even more expensive off contract.

The point of my post was to show that being on a contract more often than not is far more advantageous and is more than just saving a few dollars on a phone.

But then you'd have realised that if you had not removed the context of my post.
post #153 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedone View Post

I just bought a WIFI Xoom and I had to go to several different stores to get one as all of the Best Buys in Dallas were sold out. Got it at Best Buy.

You couldn't give me an iPad because I don't want to be hemmed in by Steve's idea of what one can or can't do.

Talk about 1984!

Just bugger off with your emo-caricatures about 1984, nobody around here cares about your Xoom.

Next time you try to astroturf something you may or may not have bought, at least try to be orginal. I've been hearing this 1984/ walled-garden/ Steve Jobs is a fascist control freak BS a million times already. No need to post any of that another time, it's just a waste of bandwidth.
post #154 of 173
This whole android cult is largely based on hate for Apple because Apple represents (in the droid mindset) all the things these guys despise.

For one droids want everything free, but most importantly talk is cheap! It's one thing to go to forums and proclaim your loyalty to andoid or endure beta quality on a free product, but when you have to peel out benjamins, things begin to change.

I guarantee you that many fandroids sat this Xoom thing out waiting to see if it will catch on, then maybe buy it. Despite the big talk, deep down they knew this thing is a turkey.
post #155 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno View Post

You missed the point entirely. There is a HUGE difference between "Advertising" and Advertising well.

There is a Universal difference between advertising, advertising well and actually having costumers dry run your product before actual purchase. You see, advertising well only works when your product performs as advertised and people who are using it noticed it. If I want to buy a Xoom, do you really think I would be happy to hear that Flash for Xoom is still a work on progress, that it's micro SD interface is disabled until the software upgrade is available someday?

Apple advertising is simple, here's my ad, go to the Apple store and check the iPad out and play with it. In fact, you can spend some time at the Apple store, play with the iPad models there and have actual people answer your questions. You want to see how the garage band app do work with the iPad 2, go ahead. How about Infinity Blade on the iPad 2 , hey knock yourself out. Watch a movie using the iPad 2? It's fine. That is Advertising WELL. In contrast , Motorola bought air time during the last Super Bowl for the Xoom , during the commercial, it showed what the Xoom can do if things go as planned. Real life happened. Flash is not ready , software hardware interface needs some more work and where are the apps? That is the reason why Apple is selling iPads by the thousands each day worldwide while Motorola is planning to axe Xoom after June.
post #156 of 173
Look at Xoom hardware compared to iPad hardware side by side.

Look at Xoom software compared to iPad software side by side.

But importantly, when you watch a Xoom commercial and compare it to iPad commercials, who would ever buy a Xoom?

Apple is all about the user.

Xoom is all about ... well, hard to say really ... Motorola ... are you listening?
post #157 of 173
Who would buy a Xoom?
Well I don't have a clue, but Wal-mart is sold out and only 3 Best Buy stores in the state of WI still have any WiFi Xooms left in stock, so apparently people are buying them.
post #158 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by axual View Post

Look at Xoom hardware compared to iPad hardware side by side.

Look at Xoom software compared to iPad software side by side.

But importantly, when you watch a Xoom commercial and compare it to iPad commercials, who would ever buy a Xoom?

Apple is all about the user.

Xoom is all about ... well, hard to say really ... Motorola ... are you listening?

The user who may be a programmer or a 2 year child or a grandfather or a doctor or a scientist or a Deejay or a florist or a cook or a CEO or a salesman or an engineer or a student or a teacher or a stay at home parent or a politician and everyone else. The secret of Apple is this, Technology is for all users not for Tech geeks only.
post #159 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

find a source that contradicts this



http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Ne...117&query=XOOM

It's behind a paywall. Can't contradict Sources I can't verify.

Wording in the quote you gave is vague. Do we actually know Motorola placed those orders or are they going off of "Sources"
post #160 of 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wil View Post

There is a Universal difference between advertising, advertising well and actually having costumers dry run your product before actual purchase. You see, advertising well only works when your product performs as advertised and people who are using it noticed it. If I want to buy a Xoom, do you really think I would be happy to hear that Flash for Xoom is still a work on progress, that it's micro SD interface is disabled until the software upgrade is available someday?

Apple advertising is simple, here's my ad, go to the Apple store and check the iPad out and play with it. In fact, you can spend some time at the Apple store, play with the iPad models there and have actual people answer your questions. You want to see how the garage band app do work with the iPad 2, go ahead. How about Infinity Blade on the iPad 2 , hey knock yourself out. Watch a movie using the iPad 2? It's fine. That is Advertising WELL. In contrast , Motorola bought air time during the last Super Bowl for the Xoom , during the commercial, it showed what the Xoom can do if things go as planned. Real life happened. Flash is not ready , software hardware interface needs some more work and where are the apps? That is the reason why Apple is selling iPads by the thousands each day worldwide while Motorola is planning to axe Xoom after June.

No, it's not just that. Mainstream media hyped the ipad (and ipad2 release) You barely heard a peep about the xoom, or any other tablet for that matter.

I'm not arguing that the ipad is an effective device, or that it does what the commercials say it does. I'm arguing that Apple is where it is today in large part for having one of the best marketing and branding teams in the world. A great product gets you NOWHERE unless you can market it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Motorola's Android 3.0 Honeycomb Xoom sales forecast slashed to 100,000 units
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Motorola's Android 3.0 Honeycomb Xoom sales forecast slashed to 100,000 units