or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung sold about 32 million smartphones in record holiday quarter
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung sold about 32 million smartphones in record holiday quarter - Page 3

post #81 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

you're thinking of HTC

samsung has their galaxy branded phone that is the same all around the world except in the US. and a few other cheaper models

Really? Cause a quick look at the Samsung phone site seems to show several dozen smart phones, most of which are Android, plus what appears to be a slew of "Galaxy" branded phones with distinct form factors and feature sets.
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 #82 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShepherd View Post

The other phone sites are quoting 35 million. Where does AI get their 32 million. Did Oliver get it from d.e.d.?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...rom-apple.html

The issue is Samsung no longer reports the break down like they used to. The quarter that happened, they had something like a 200% growth in "smartphone" shipments. This growth did not show up in any increased activation numbers of Android or WP7 so many think that 50%-60% of Samsung's smartphones are BADA and other simplified low end phones. Samsung just reclassified what they call a "smartphone".

But Sammy is not talking so no one really knows.
post #83 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

The numbers are close. Samsung will beat out Apple for 2011. This is only one company. Imagine the rest of the industry with Android phones sold worldwide. This will be a difficult year for Apple in 2012. Again, Apple is doing exactly what they have done with Mac back in the 80's. Its not sustainable, and will relegate Apple back to small niche market...again.


http://gigaom.com/apple/2011-smartph...msung-v-apple/

But Slappy, Samsung's fastest growing smartphone OS is BADA. Might represent 50% of their smartphone sales.
post #84 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post

But Slappy, Samsung's fastest growing smartphone OS is BADA. Might represent 50% of their smartphone sales.

Half? Really?

They reportedly sold 2M Bada OS smartphones in the 2nd qtr.
http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/11/ba...windows-phone/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #85 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

It's pretty disingenuous to claim that iPhone and iPad are NeXT-based technologies. They are based on OS X - which is a clear hybrid of NeXT and Apple.

Really. Where is Carbon in iOS? Where is it? Oh. Not there. Copland? Nope. Not there. OpenDoc? Nope. Not there. CodeWarrior to develop with? Nope.

Like it or not, iOS is a direct descendent of NextStep->OpenStep->OS Server 1.0-> OS X->iOS.

Along the way, some tech to ease transitions were put in like Rosetta and Carbon, but they are fully gone from iOS and mostly from OS X.

XCode? A Cocoa based tool. For years using the same GCC from

[QUOTE=jragosta;2020883]I really love how you claim OS X is 'NeXT based tech with added goodness'. Essentially, it's a pure hybrid. The core is heavily NeXT and the UI is heavily Apple. Neither company by itself could have produced OS X.
[QUOTE]

Dock? NextStep. The Preferences Icon is almost unchanged.
Column view? NextStep.
File Extensions? NextStep.
Bash Shell? NextStep.
Menu? Both had a single menu system but the status bar is from OS 9.xish.
TextEdit? NextStep.
Mail? NextStep.
Intel based OS? NestStep.
Dictionary? NextStep. Darn it is nice for it to be back.
Services? NextStep.
Hide? NextStep.

As my friend Governor Tarkin once said:

"The last remnants of the old Republic have been swept away."

Did teams of both companies accomplish this? Yes. Did most of the vision come from what Apple picked up from NeXT? Absolutely. Is Apple more NeXT to day than Apple from 1995? With no question.
post #86 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Half? Really?

They reportedly sold 2M Bada OS smartphones in the 2nd qtr.
http://venturebeat.com/2011/08/11/ba...windows-phone/

But no one knows.

NOTE: I trust Horace's math and logic.

From 6 months back:
http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/PG.Bi...ws.asp?c=32049
Maths matters

"The number of Bada phones shipped last quarter is not public, however some assumptions can be made that lead to plausible estimates," writes asymco founder Horace Dediu.

"First, we know that Samsung shipped about 3.2 million smartphones in Q2 2010 and that total included Bada and Android (and perhaps even some Windows Mobile). Second, we know that there were about 19.9 million smartphones in Q2 2011.

"Third, Canalys published an estimate that Bada grew by 355 percent year on year. So if we knew how many Bada phones shipped in Q2 2010 we could derive the current Bada shipments and also realize how many of the nearly 20 million smartphones from Samsung were actually Android."


My theory this is why Samsung stopped reporting break downs of OSes. They are building up BADA quietly. It explains their 100% QoQ smartphone growth. You build it up the market share without many people seeing it and then you can start pushing it as a platform with a built in user base.
post #87 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Funny how many imaginary battles were created in these previous posts to needlessly defend one of the most valuable companies in existence...

odd.

Yeah? Why are those posts trying so hard to support Samsung who has one of the largest equipment capitalizations in industry, yet a relatively tiny profit margin?

Or were you showing an inability to read with comprehension and thought those posts were supporting Apple?
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #88 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

If $560 is 1.33 times the current price (and also the same s/p on October 18th) and the forward p/e for the last quarter was 10.77 and Tim Cook said that rev* for the holiday quarter would be $37 million / $28 million (last quarter) = 1.32; then couldn't it theoretically climb to $560 (or close to it) if they didn't compress the forward p/e (or trailing) even more.

Two things make AAPL lags
1. Its size (market cap). Is AAPL too big to still growth?
2. SJ death. Can Apple still be great without SJ?

You are right, the math is correct, Apple now rise only if there is growth at earnings. A P/E of 15 or less is in line with a revenue stock, not a growth stock. The thing is growth funds are all cap in AAPL (for the right reasons, because its still growing). The revenue funds see the cash and profits and would like to get in, but they can't because there is no Yield. Apple is so big it need massive amount of new cash to rise. No amount of individuals investors thinking Apple is great is going to matter when hedge funds are selling and buying billions worth of shares.

Apple need to add a dividend to bring new cash. A yield will help AAPL not get too much undervalue because the lower the price gets, the higher the yield. If AAPL stop growing (for whatever reasons) and are still not paying a dividend, the stock is going to tank because hedge fund are going to be massively selling and there would be no revenue fund on the buying side.
post #89 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

It was very similar to buying porn...

So buying Apple products is like buying Porn? LOL
post #90 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Samsung has ALWAYS sold more phones than Apple ever since Apple entered the market.

Which brings us to the obvious:-

your point?

Then my point is correct. Samsung/Android spanked Apple again.
post #91 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

Then my point is correct. Samsung/Android spanked Apple again.

I think the Android / Apple war is pretty easy to figure out. Apple targets wealty customer with high quality (but expensive) products. Cheap android phones are gaining traction with budget concern folks and even high end Android phones are cheaper than the top Apple phone. So, Android is gaining market shares and will continue to do so.

Same thing goes for the tablet market. Cheap tablets with continue to gain market shares. The android top dog (Samsung) will beat (in volume) Apple at some point.

That being said, some may think Apple is untouchable has long has it make good profits and remain the top dog at the high end of the market. WRONG. At some point market share DOES matter. Apple need to avoid getting into a niche market, because its going to start having trouble offering apps and content will roll out first on the "standard" OS before it gets into the niche ones (if at all). Apple need to offer lower prices point hardware to keep a MINIMUM market share of at least 20%.

I do NOT like the fact Android is on a dominating trend. For Apple to thrive, its markets need to be segmented. For example, I can't wait for Microsoft to enter the tablet and smartphone market with windows 8. Android and Windows are going to fight it over for market shares and hardware manufacturers while Apple remains unaffected. No one is going to be the "standard" OS.

New markets are also important. The next one is the living room with smartTV's. All players need to get in: Google, Microsoft and Apple. All players need to offer an extension of there ecosystem in whatever new market opens up.
post #92 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I think the Android / Apple war is pretty easy to figure out. Apple targets wealty customer with high quality (but expensive) products. Cheap android phones are gaining traction with budget concern folks and even high end Android phones are cheaper than the top Apple phone. So, Android is gaining market shares and will continue to do so.

Same thing goes for the tablet market. Cheap tablets with continue to gain market shares.

It's wealthy, $99, $199 isn't an exorbitant amount. Many Android phones cost more.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #93 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

It's wealthy, $99, $199 isn't an exorbitant amount. Many Android phones cost more.

Not where I live. Because of 3 years plans lots of android phones are free. Apple does have a free 3GS but that thing is 2 years old and the free android phones are more modern. Android phone are also more often "on sales" than Apple one.
post #94 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

So buying Apple products is like buying Porn? LOL

Hey, we all know why they call you Slappy so I wouldn't get too far into this if I were you.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #95 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Last time I checked, people dont audit sales, they audit financial statements.

Last time I checked, anything that a serious, publicly-traded company reports in its public disclosure in a serious disclosure system is audited. I.e., you'd better be able to back it up if someone like the SEC shows up. Period.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

One of my relatives works for one of the biggest firms there.

Given all that the chaebols - such as Samsung - have been able to get away with in Korea in the past few decades, I would not boast about this if I were you.
post #96 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

Not where I live. Because of 3 years plans lots of android phones are free. Apple does have a free 3GS but that thing is 2 years old and the free android phones are more modern. Android phone are also more often "on sales" than Apple one.

Where I live, I can get an iPhone 4s for free.

Must mean its cheap.
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 #97 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Where I live, I can get an iPhone 4s for free.

Must mean its cheap.

paying at least 1500 $ for a phone = free? wow.
post #98 of 106
Ah, you're awake. Good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Kool View Post

this stupid site

It begs the question why you're here at all, then, if this is your position.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #99 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Hey, we all know why they call you Slappy so I wouldn't get too far into this if I were you.

Ok that was actually funny.
post #100 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

Then my point is correct. Samsung/Android spanked Apple again.

I think it's funny to compare a manufacturer that (by their own website) sells 144 models of mobile phones to Apple's 3, then brag about their marketshare. That would be like Ford bragging about outselling Zonda.

The bottom line is that Apple makes more money per unit sold, and when you're selling the numbers Apple is selling, that's a LOT of money. Apple isn't having to pay Microsoft to use iOS, they aren't having to reskin an OS that someone else made, and they have the confidence to announce 'sold' numbers at their quarterly reports, rather than 'shipped' numbers.

Keep in mind that if 'shipped' numbers meant anything AOL should still be flourishing, considering all the cds they 'shipped' with their software to potential customers from 2000-2005.
post #101 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

Yeah? Why are those posts trying so hard to support Samsung who has one of the largest equipment capitalizations in industry, yet a relatively tiny profit margin?

Or were you showing an inability to read with comprehension and thought those posts were supporting Apple?

Japanese companies like Sony and Honda are doing so much better than Samsung profit-wise. Uh-huh.
post #102 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post

I think it's funny to compare a manufacturer that (by their own website) sells 144 models of mobile phones to Apple's 3, then brag about their marketshare. That would be like Ford bragging about outselling Zonda.

The bottom line is that Apple makes more money per unit sold, and when you're selling the numbers Apple is selling, that's a LOT of money. Apple isn't having to pay Microsoft to use iOS, they aren't having to reskin an OS that someone else made, and they have the confidence to announce 'sold' numbers at their quarterly reports, rather than 'shipped' numbers.

Keep in mind that if 'shipped' numbers meant anything AOL should still be flourishing, considering all the cds they 'shipped' with their software to potential customers from 2000-2005.

When Samsung reports their revenue numbers it's based on sold, not just shipped. Same with Apple. The only real difference is when Apple reports channel sales then many here assume them all to be in consumer's hands (which isn't factual). With anyone else's revenue reports some assume most will never be purchased by a consumer, yet with no evidence that it's a regular occurrence. Outside of a couple of early tablet releases, I don't recall any claims that Android phones in general are sitting around warehouses all over the world for months unsold. Perhaps you have a citation or two you can link to?

In any case the revenue was realized for both Apple and Samsung when they were paid for, no matter if it was money from Walmart, Orange, ATT or direct from an end-user. The attempt to make a distinction between shipped and sold is bogus in most cases. A channel sale is just what it sounds like.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #103 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Given all that the chaebols - such as Samsung - have been able to get away with in Korea in the past few decades, I would not boast about this if I were you.

Wall Street firms get away with a lot of stuff too. The scale of corruption in other countries cannot bring about a world recession like Wall Street can (and did). Before you judge illegal and corrupt practices in other countries take a look in your own backyard.
post #104 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

When Samsung reports their revenue numbers it's based on sold, not just shipped. Same with Apple. The only real difference is when Apple reports channel sales then many here assume them all to be in consumer's hands (which isn't factual). With anyone else's revenue reports some assume most will never be purchased by a consumer, yet with no evidence that it's a regular occurrence. Outside of a couple of early tablet releases, I don't recall any claims that Android phones in general are sitting around warehouses all over the world for months unsold. Perhaps you have a citation or two you can link to?

In any case the revenue was realized for both Apple and Samsung when they were paid for, no matter if it was money from Walmart, Orange, ATT or direct from an end-user. The attempt to make a distinction between shipped and sold is bogus in most cases. A channel sale is just what it sounds like.

Where has Apple specifically noted their sales are 'channel' sales? I've never heard that clarification mentioned in their quarterly conference calls. Their wording is 'sales', not 'channel sales'. There is a differentiation between sales to end users and sales to retailers, I'll agree, but that isn't implied in Apple's wording. As for stored Android phones, and this is only anecdotal, but I have never heard of a retailer being sold out of the 'newest and latest' Android phone. However, Apple is still having to take reservations for iPhone 4S purchases going on 3 months after it's release in the US. Apparently, keeping 144 varieties of phone stocked to various retailers is far easier than keeping 3 iPhones in stock.

If an item is sold on on terms of Net 30 (or longer, as is common with super-retailers such as WalMart), when does Apple and Samsung consider it 'sold' for their recording? When WalMart takes delivery? Did HP consider their TouchPads 'sold' to Best Buy before BB returned 90% of the stock?

Since Apple is selling every iPhone 4S (and probably nearly every 4, and most all 3Gs) it can currently manufacturer, I stick to my argument that Apple reporting 'sold' numbers are far more of an accurate representation of the market than Samsung's 'shipped' numbers. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone having to reserve a Galaxy phone months after release. That is where 'shipped' and 'sold' make the difference.
post #105 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post

Since Apple is selling every iPhone 4S (and probably nearly every 4, and most all 3Gs) it can currently manufacturer, I stick to my argument that Apple reporting 'sold' numbers are far more of an accurate representation of the market than Samsung's 'shipped' numbers. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone having to reserve a Galaxy phone months after release. That is where 'shipped' and 'sold' make the difference.

They'd be different only if the shipments weren't paid for. Apple doesn't earn any more for the hardware once the retailer sells it to an end-user. The sale happened when the wholesaler( or whoever) paid for the shipment, just the same as Samsung counts a sale. And those sales/revenue's claimed in the quarterly results are audited for both Apple and Samsung.

EDIT: I noticed your additional question about when the revenue is counted when product is shipped to Walmart as an example. Their stated terms to me were 90 days, prompting me to dump them as a client 4 or 5 years ago. Anyway, both Samsung and Apple are allowed to claim revenue once title has been transferred, a price is determined and collection of the bill for that product is very likely. That doesn't mean money has necessarily changed hands yet for either company in the period the revenue is claimed, but chances of not getting would be slim. That's part of the rules that govern recognition of a sale for each of them, as well as all the other big guys.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #106 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Kool View Post

Why are you guys so worried about how many smartphones Samsung sold. If you really love Apple unconditionally and are willing to buy all of their products without a second thought what do you care how many people like Samsung better? Sometimes I think Apple fans are the most insecure people on the planet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Why are you guys worried about what Apple fans are supposedly worried about? If you really aren't one of us, why do you care how Apple fans think? Sometimes you fantasize that Apple fans are the most insecure people on the planet.

Nice try at deflection, but he poses a good question, to which I'd like to add my own. Why do Apple fanboys need to always bash Android products in the comments section anytime one is mentioned?




And FYI, here's an update:

Quote:
The consensus is that Samsung likely moved 35 million smartphones, at least, over the last quarter, maintaining its global lead.

Quote:
[I]t appears that the latest and greatest iPhone hardly made a ding in Samsung's sales, and likely failed to give Apple the spark it needed to catch up in sales.

Quote:
UBS predicts 30 million iPhone 4S were sold in Oct.-Dec. 2011.

Suck on that!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung sold about 32 million smartphones in record holiday quarter