or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple reclaims title of world's largest smartphone maker after blowout quarter
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple reclaims title of world's largest smartphone maker after blowout quarter

post #1 of 40
Thread Starter 
Apple overtook Samsung in the fourth quarter of 2011 to grab the top spot among global smartphone makers, earning 23.9 percent of the market with sales of 37 million iPhones, according to one set of estimates.

Shortly after rival Samsung officially reported its quarterly results on Thursday, market research firm Strategy Analytics released a report proclaiming Apple the victor in the latest round of the smartphone wars. Apple's win was supported by just a narrow lead, however, as Samsung shipped an estimated 36.5 million units worldwide in the fourth quarter.

The South Korean consumer electronics maker declined to say how many smartphones it shipped last quarter, but it did note 30 percent growth, roughly in line with analyst expectations. As such, Samsung managed to capture its first crown for annual smartphone shipments with an estimated 97.4 million units, compared to Apple's 93 million iPhones in 2011.

"With global smartphone shipments nearing half a billion units in 2011, Samsung is now well positioned alongside Apple in a two-horse race at the forefront of one of the world’s largest and most valuable consumer electronics markets,” said Strategy Analytics Executive Director Neil Mawston.

Nokia took third place with estimated quarterly shipments of 19.6 million, enough for a 12.6 percent market share. The Finnish handset maker has seen its market share plunge during its transition from Symbian to Windows Phone. In the year ago quarter, Nokia shipped 28.3 million smartphones.



Numbers are rounded. | Source: Strategy Analytics


Total smartphone shipments for the quarter grew 55 percent year over year to reach a record 155 million, while annual shipments were an estimated 488.5 million units.

Apple first took the top spot among worldwide smartphone makers last June, but without its usual iPhone refresh last summer, it conceded the title to Samsung in the third quarter.

The Cupertino, Calif., company more than made up for the September quarter when it announced on Tuesday impressive results for the December quarter. Apple reported record quarterly revenue of $46.33 billion and profits of $13.06 billion, driven largely by sales of 37.04 million iPhones.

As Apple and Samsung have become the new smartphone powerhouses, their rivalry has extended to the courtroom. The two are locked in a complicated legal battle with multiple complaints spanning several different countries.
post #2 of 40
Too bad they discuss shipments vs sell through.
post #3 of 40
Baloney.. Samsung refuses to say how many they sold, yet you accept a made up figure from analysts. This is classic, taken from Bezos playbook. If you were fair, you would refuse to put up numbers that. Cannot be verified. Two months ago the estimate was 35 million Samsung smartphones. A month ago it jumped to 35 million when it seemed apple may report slightly over 30. Now it is 36.5?

Are you deliberately lying? Look at the transcript on seeking alpha for Verizon. VZ clearly states that they sold 4.3 million iPhones and 1.4 million 4g smartphones. iPhone's make up 70 percent (4.3 / (4.3 + 1.4). On att apple had 80 percent. Where are these 36.5 million. Baloney and you are shameless repeating a lie.
post #4 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

Baloney.. Samsung refuses to say how many they sold, yet you accept a made up figure from analysts. This is classic, taken from Bezos playbook. If you were fair, you would refuse to put up numbers that. Cannot be verified. Two months ago the estimate was 35 million Samsung smartphones. A month ago it jumped to 35 million when it seemed apple may report slightly over 30. Now it is 36.5?

Are you deliberately lying? Look at the transcript on seeking alpha for Verizon. VZ clearly states that they sold 4.3 million iPhones and 1.4 million 4g smartphones. iPhone's make up 70 percent (4.3 / (4.3 + 1.4). On att apple had 80 percent. Where are these 36.5 million. Baloney and you are shameless repeating a lie.

This is the same post you made in another thread. So which is it?

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 #5 of 40
What is your point? Apple insider is repeating the same lie, and I aim to refute it every time .
post #6 of 40
This kind of news shouldn't matter. Nokia used to sell the most smartphones for years, look where that took them.

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #7 of 40
Samsung is growing fast, too bad they don't have the profits to support it. I expect Samsung to best Apple in stated units every quarter going forward but still languish far behind in actual profits.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

What is your point? Apple insider is repeating the same lie, and I aim to refute it every time .

The point is it doesn't make sense and it's off topic. There is no reason for you to be bringing up Verizon in this thread at this time.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #8 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

This kind of news shouldn't matter. Nokia used to sell the most smartphones for years, look where that took them.

Exactly. The article is based on an utterly irrelevant metric.
post #9 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

Baloney.. Samsung refuses to say how many they sold, yet you accept a made up figure from analysts. This is classic, taken from Bezos playbook. If you were fair, you would refuse to put up numbers that. Cannot be verified. Two months ago the estimate was 35 million Samsung smartphones. A month ago it jumped to 35 million when it seemed apple may report slightly over 30. Now it is 36.5?

Are you deliberately lying? Look at the transcript on seeking alpha for Verizon. VZ clearly states that they sold 4.3 million iPhones and 1.4 million 4g smartphones. iPhone's make up 70 percent (4.3 / (4.3 + 1.4). On att apple had 80 percent. Where are these 36.5 million. Baloney and you are shameless repeating a lie.

It's a good point to ask where are all these phones. It appears the total US Android sales in Q4 were less than 5 million. Counting ALL manufacturers, not just Samsung. Either the Samsung estimate is way off or Apple international market share is substantially less than the US (by orders of magnitude)

The Samsung numbers probably include the POS Bada crap. Samsung will whore themselves out to any OS. Next is Windows Mobile

I think this research firm are morons, but glad AI is reporting what's being put out there

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #10 of 40
Whoa. When I saw the headline "blowout quarter" I immediately assumed the article was written by DED. But then I remembered that DED would find a way to reference Android in the headline.

"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 #11 of 40
More meaningless numbers. The media will get people thinking that Samsung is selling a mess of high-end smartphones like the Galaxy S II when in reality it will probably be more like Samsung selling millions of $50 Bada-based low-end smartphones. Next quarter it will be Samsung taking back the title because they're probably selling to all the third-world countries those low-end phones. Samsung would probably have to sell 3X the amount of smartphones that Apple does to make the profit that Apple makes. Good for Samsung that its business is doing well but it's mobile division is hardly in a position to go head to head with Apple. Apple will likely never produce low-end smartphones for anyone and personally, I'm glad they don't even consider it. Amazon's coming smartphone will probably go after that cheapskate market but I can't imagine them using a forked version of Android for that smartphone. If they do, then I really don't know what to say except "dayamn!".

I suppose when iPhone 5 goes on sale, the iPhone 4 (8 GBs???) will take the 3GS's place as the low-end freebie smartphone and that should be a pretty good deal for those busting to use an iPhone on the cheap. Apple has the best marketing strategy ever by selling old smartphones since they hold their value pretty well and are just older high-quality devices. Three year-old devices that are still useful and run the latest iOS is a great deal for Apple and consumers.
post #12 of 40
Important word: "in the 4th quarter"

Data proves that Apple hasnt broken the official title yet.

Way to go AI with your skewed logic.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #13 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

It's a good point to ask where are all these phones. It appears the total US Android sales in Q4 were less than 5 million. Counting ALL manufacturers, not just Samsung. Either the Samsung estimate is way off or Apple international market share is substantially less than the US (by orders of magnitude)

The Samsung numbers probably include the POS Bada crap. Samsung will whore themselves out to any OS. Next is Windows Mobile

I think this research firm are morons, but glad AI is reporting what's being put out there

I bet you havent even used a Bada phone or know what makes it tick.

Dont knock it till you try it.

It's in fact much more efficient than either iOS or Android as it uses native C++ code for development.

You dont need to relearn another language for developers to jump over.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #14 of 40
My point is, given the sales of AT&T and VZ, there is no way samsungs sales of smartphones are anywhere near 15 million much less 36.5 million. The fraudsters are making it appear that Samsung is selling close to apple numbers. Baloney.

If these carbon elements are fair, they should not make up numbers to prop up Samsung and instead demand that Samsung declare their unit numbers. This is plain baloney. Apple insider should not be reporting fairytales. They are pawns for the hedge funds. This the game Bezos plays and Samsung has been advised to go the same route. Bezos and Samsung can claim they never claimed those numbers.

This is what the spirit of sarbanes oxley was all about, that everything was fully vetted. Apple insider, macnn, MDN, 9to5mac should be all above the likes of the shysters of CNBC.
post #15 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

My point is, given the sales of AT&T and VZ, there is no way samsungs sales of smartphones are anywhere near 15 million much less 36.5 million. The fraudsters are making it appear that Samsung is selling close to apple numbers. Baloney.

If these carbon elements are fair, they should not make up numbers to prop up Samsung and instead demand that Samsung declare their unit numbers. This is plain baloney. Apple insider should not be reporting fairytales. They are pawns for the hedge funds. This the game Bezos plays and Samsung has been advised to go the same route. Bezos and Samsung can claim they never claimed those numbers.

This is what the spirit of sarbanes oxley was all about, that everything was fully vetted. Apple insider, macnn, MDN, 9to5mac should be all above the likes of the shysters of CNBC.

On behalf of everyone....shut up.

You're...annoying...and your ranting is really baseless because at the end of the day Apple is winning...you act as if Samsung having good quarters (and a nice profit) is bad for Apple.

This isn't the NFL Playoffs...more than one team can succeed at a time.
post #16 of 40
This is Amazing. Remember Samsung sell all kinds of smartphones, from premium to extremely cheap. A few months ago my friend wanted a new smartphone and iPhone ain't cheap enough for her (even a used 3GS is still too expensive). What did she get? A Samsung Galaxy something. It's amazing with this portfolio Samsung still can't be no.1.
post #17 of 40
A lie is a lie is a lie.

Remember what jobs said, "they are out to destroy the iPhone".

Why do you want fictitious numbers? Why do you not demand that the likes of strategy analytics come up with proof on their data?

Already, apple insider has another thread, repeating the strategy analytics divined stats. Almost remind one of the german propaganda machine under goebbels. What was it they said, repeat a lie often enough ...
post #18 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

A lie is a lie is a lie.

Remember what jobs said, "they are out to destroy the iPhone".

Why do you want fictitious numbers? Why do you not demand that the likes of strategy analytics come up with proof on their data?

Already, apple insider has another thread, repeating the strategy analytics divined stats. Almost remind one of the german propaganda machine under goebbels. What was it they said, repeat a lie often enough ...

Seems like this war on the iPhone was in Steve's head...as great a man as he was he was still a man, and thus often wrong...he was also vindictive, vengeful, rude, demeaning, didactic...pretty much at times a bad person (Depending on the side you are on) But he was also a great man, wise, intelligent, focused...driven...don't let one side cloud you of the other...he was one of the most well rounded individuals in the tech world...understood through and through. He hid nothing from anyone, and that was his charm.

Point is he could be wrong.

And logic, observation, etc...shows that Android is not out to destroy the iPhone, nor are any OEMs...don't be so guided by advertisement from Verizon, Motorola, and Samsung...all they are doing is competing...you know, that thing people do in the free market. Companies are allowed to compete with the iPhone...

and yes, Samsung may have had Apple on a quarter or two...who gives a fuck.

Apple = Premium devices...one model, select carriers (formerly), set price ranges throughout its cycle until an upgrade comes along (not always as some overseas - non US - carriers alter prices)

Samsung = Premium through dirt cheap "OMG WTF IS THIS SHIT" devices...many models...all carriers...all price ranges...prices changing to lower prices throught a device cycle...

With those facts it should be a shock Apple is even 1 or 2 on the list considering every Android OEM has the same song and dance (and thankfully they seem to be willing to change tune into a more premium less devices a year strategy many Fandroids have been asking for for years).

Also Apple walks away with most of the profits in the entire category even besting Google's own Android when it comes to ad revenue.

1, 2 or 3...Apple is winning...it is very very utterly clear.

The fact that this upsets you that they aren't always king of a rather meaningless mountain proves you may have some issues to work out.

Chill the fuck out.
post #19 of 40
Samsung don't publish smartphone sales figures so Apple will always be top until proved otherwise.
post #20 of 40
All this Samsung hate is just too funny to behold. Srsly. Try reviewing a real sport for once.
post #21 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

This is Amazing. Remember Samsung sell all kinds of smartphones, from premium to extremely cheap. A few months ago my friend wanted a new smartphone and iPhone ain't cheap enough for her (even a used 3GS is still too expensive). What did she get? A Samsung Galaxy something. It's amazing with this portfolio Samsung still can't be no.1.



Hmmm, I'm not so sure. Given that Samsung entered the market as late as 2010, I'm amazed they've come this far. Apple had since 2007. That's 3 more years for a total of 5 years. Also, notice how Samsung more than doubled its sales from 2010. Apple didn't get any such growth whatsoever. If anything, Apple just barely squeaked ahead. That's the equivalent of a pro sprinter with a midlife crisis just managing to beat a younger guy at a race who started training last week. With Samsung's phenomenal growth sales each year, Apple won't have an easy time staying on top.


Of course, a successful lawsuit (if they can even get one) might do some wonders. But given their recent track record, I think Apple has bigger problems than just worrying about Samsung.


Oh, and one last thing. We can keep on bleating the same, tired "sales vs shipments" line, but let's face the reality. New smartphone wholesalers and retailers aren't setting up shop everyday. Anyone who's worked in retail knows that store managers are likely to stock only what they at least believe they'll sell. With the way Samsung probably derived a good chunk of its 2011 sales from the same retailers that sold its phones in 2010, I think there's a very safe assumption most of its phones are selling out quite well. Unless, of course, we want to bake up a conspiracy about how Apple has begun setting up fake retailers that buy Samsung's phones so that it can trick Samsung into having a blowout year in 2012 only to set up Samsung for failure in 2013.

But if we do that, we venture out of the realm of the probable and into the realm of the implausible.

post #22 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Hmmm, I'm not so sure. Given that Samsung entered the market as late as 2010, I'm amazed they've come this far. Apple had since 2007. That's 3 more years for a total of 5 years. Also, notice how Samsung more than doubled its sales from 2010. Apple didn't get any such growth whatsoever. If anything, Apple just barely squeaked ahead. That's the equivalent of a pro sprinter with a midlife crisis just managing to beat a younger guy at a race who started training last week. With Samsung's phenomenal sales each year, Apple won't have an easy time staying on top.

Your argument is flawed. It has nothing to do with how long you're in the market. It's all about how many carriers you have and Samsung always release phones on more carriers than Apple at the time.
And who said Apple should be on top. I said it's amazing with Samsung portfolio Apple even managed to beat it this quarter.

And no, Samsung didn't enter the market "as late as 2010" either. You're a delusional fan boy.
post #23 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Your argument is flawed. It has nothing to do with how long you're in the market. It's all about how many carriers you have and Samsung always release phones on more carriers than Apple at the time.


Oh, no. I think time is very much important. It plays a large part in developing a company's brand reputation among customers. You see, many customers won't just buy from a brand that they've never heard of. I think that should've been obvious. Brand loyalty is also what has contributed to Apple's success, something you of all people should know.

Plus the additional years spent in a market allows the company to go through its own tried and true scenarios and to learn from past mistakes while coming up with successful formulas for the next business practices of tomorrow. Time is crucial in giving companies to establish themselves also as a safe place for investment. When you actually get a real, full-time job and start investing in stocks or hiring some hedge fund to do it for you'll know what I mean.

I could go on. But I think the rest is pretty self-evident.

Again, we can keep lying to ourselves that the continuity between the present and the future is definitive and that history will always repeat itself. But I'd be skeptical. I've watched Samsung's management for the past 15 years. I watched them grow from a so-so, middle-running appliances and tv company into a full-fledged conglomerate that knows how to capitalize on synergies and learn from its mistakes.
post #24 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Oh, no. I think time is very much important. It plays a large part in developing a company's brand reputation among customers. You see, many customers won't just buy from a brand that they've never heard of. I think that should've been obvious. Brand loyalty is also what has contributed to Apple's success, something you of all people should know.

Plus the additional years spent in a market allows the company to go through its own tried and true scenarios and to learn from past mistakes while coming up with successful formulas for the next business practices of tomorrow. Time is crucial in giving companies to establish themselves also as a safe place for investment. When you actually get a real, full-time job and start investing in stocks or hiring some hedge fund to do it for you'll know what I mean.

I could go on. But I think the rest is pretty self-evident.

Again, we can keep lying to ourselves that the continuity between the present and the future is definitive and that history will always repeat itself. But I'd be skeptical. I've watched Samsung's management for the past 15 years. I watched them grow from a so-so, middle-running appliances and tv company into a full-fledged conglomerate that knows how to capitalize on synergies and learn from its mistakes.

:blah blah blah: :grasping at straws: (from someone who don't understand marketing even a bit, I might say)
How long Samsung on the phone market? How many carriers around the world they have good relationship with? Compares that to Apple?
post #25 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

And no, Samsung didn't enter the market "as late as 2010" either. You're a delusional fan boy.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_cal...e_kettle_black


post #26 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

:blah blah blah: :grasping at straws: (from someone who don't understand marketing even a bit, I might say)
How long Samsung on the phone market? How many carriers around the world they have good relationship with? Compares that to Apple?


Common Apple fanboy tactic is to repeat the same line over and over. Let's see. I was off by, what? Less than a year? And carriers are just one factor among many that contribute to sales.


There's really no need to get so angry on an internet board of all things. And branding yourself an expert of all things business and marketing? Really? I'm going to bet you haven't even graduated from high school. Not with that level of argumentation. Srsly.

Thought I'd add. I've noticed people like you have grown, how should I put it? Angrier? Upset? Ever since Samsung established its foothold in the market? I wonder why. It must be because even fanboys are aware of the threat Samsung poses. It's starting to look like the 1990s all over again, but it's not Microsoft taking the lead.
post #27 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post



2010? You were saying?
post #28 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Common Apple fanboy tactic is to repeat the same line over and over.



Now I know.
post #29 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

Are you deliberately lying? Look at the transcript on seeking alpha for Verizon. VZ clearly states that they sold 4.3 million iPhones and 1.4 million 4g smartphones. iPhone's make up 70 percent (4.3 / (4.3 + 1.4). On att apple had 80 percent. Where are these 36.5 million. Baloney and you are shameless repeating a lie.

You are forgetting that the US is only a small portion of world wide smartphone sales. There are other nations where Android performed more strongly. And the iPhone launch was staggered over different countries. Once announced, there was a predictable drop in iPhone sales for countries waiting for the release. Dont forget the iPhone 4S was not available in China and some other places in Q4 2011.

With production backlog solved and 4S being available world wide, Q1 of 2012 will give a better indication of relative sales between manufacturers.

Will the post release rush die down allowing Samsung to take back the crown, or will its wide availability see iPhone crush Samsung. Time will tell.
post #30 of 40
Apple figures are based on sales and samsung on shipments..big difference...i would have thought.
post #31 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by nairb View Post

you are forgetting that the us is only a small portion of world wide smartphone sales. There are other nations where android performed more strongly. And the iphone launch was staggered over different countries. Once announced, there was a predictable drop in iphone sales for countries waiting for the release. Dont forget the iphone 4s was not available in china and some other places in q4 2011.

With production backlog solved and 4s being available world wide, q1 of 2012 will give a better indication of relative sales between manufacturers.

Will the post release rush die down allowing samsung to take back the crown, or will its wide availability see iphone crush samsung. Time will tell.

like most things samsung are even trying to copy apple's sales figures...cant we get the truth...ha
post #32 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack99 View Post

common apple fanboy tactic is to repeat the same line over and over. Let's see. I was off by, what? Less than a year? And carriers are just one factor among many that contribute to sales.


There's really no need to get so angry on an internet board of all things. And branding yourself an expert of all things business and marketing? Really? I'm going to bet you haven't even graduated from high school. Not with that level of argumentation. Srsly.

Thought i'd add. I've noticed people like you have grown, how should i put it? Angrier? Upset? Ever since samsung established its foothold in the market? I wonder why. It must be because even fanboys are aware of the threat samsung poses. It's starting to look like the 1990s all over again, but it's not microsoft taking the lead.

people want samsung to create there own products and marketing ideas...noone has it in for samsung...but noone likes a thief.
post #33 of 40
In the 3rd quarter of 2011, with one month left before reporting of the quarterly results, Samsung had announced that it had shipped(or sold?) 10 million smartphones. At the end of the quarter (just one month later), Samsung reported they shipped 27 million smartphones for the entire quarter. That is 17 million more phone in just one month (a rate of 51 million per quarter in a non-holiday period). That made me think there was something wrong with their reporting or may be they widened the definition of smartphones (possibly to make Apple look bad in the face of lawsuits).
post #34 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Oh, and one last thing. We can keep on bleating the same, tired "sales vs shipments" line, but let's face the reality. New smartphone wholesalers and retailers aren't setting up shop everyday. Anyone who's worked in retail knows that store managers are likely to stock only what they at least believe they'll sell.

Tell that to RIM and the half-billion dollar (485 Million, to be more precise) charge they took on shipped inventory that couldn't be sold.

You're right, if the manufacturer can sell the product, then a sale is a sale, no matter who it's sold to. But sales that come with the real possibility of a forced buyback of significant numbers of units - or worse, product that doesn't get paid for until the unit(s) get sold to consumers - because they're hoping they'll be able to sell them though is something that does need consideration. In the end though, shipped units is irrelevant, it's only the ones that stay in consumer's hands that matter. Those are the units that generate actual cash-flow (and if you're inclined to follow them, actual market share numbers). If (just as a 'for example') a wireless carrier takes delivery of an extra million handsets in anticipation of a holiday buying spree, but they only actually sell 100K units, then the manufacturer may be faced with a buyback (or return of unsold product) in the next quarter. Do they then subtract that excess 900K units from the previous quarter, in the next quarter's 'shipped units' metric? No, that gets lost in the balance sheets as charges on inventory, but they still claim the previous 'shipped' number for PR purposes. It's creative bookkeeping at best to play it fast and loose with the "shipped units" metric, unless you're guaranteed that it's not going to boomerang on you (i.e your vendor agreements stipulate no buybacks, and inventory is paid for on delivery rather than sale).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Hmmm, Given that Samsung entered the market as late as 2010, I'm amazed they've come this far.

Some sources seem to think Samsung started making car phones in 1986, handheld mobile (cell) phones in 1988, and as far as I can tell, the earliest Android-based samsung phone was the i7500 in 2009. They leaked information on it in January 2009 (which means planning and/or development had already started), announced it in April of 2009, and it was apparently on sale in August of 2009. Samsung has been in the cell phone business waaay longer than Apple. They may not have had a "smartphone" until 2009, but they've been in the market for a lot longer than that.

Now, what were you saying about:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

And how does that change the fact that Apple still had years of lead?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Oh, no. I think time is very much important. It plays a large part in developing a company's brand reputation among customers. You see, many customers won't just buy from a brand that they've never heard of. I think that should've been obvious. Brand loyalty is also what has contributed to Apple's success, something you of all people should know.

I guess that 19 years of doing business in the handheld mobile phone business (before the iPhone) didn't get them any recognition or reputation (lol, or maybe it did )? Or the fact that Samsung Electronics has been a global brand doing business since 1969. Or that the parent Samsung group (that they get their name from) has been a brand and operating since 1938.
post #35 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjose1929 View Post

Are you deliberately lying? Look at the transcript on seeking alpha for Verizon. VZ clearly states that they sold 4.3 million iPhones and 1.4 million 4g smartphones. iPhone's make up 70 percent (4.3 / (4.3 + 1.4). On att apple had 80 percent. Where are these 36.5 million. Baloney and you are shameless repeating a lie.

First, a strictly personal observation; most of the people I know that have purchased iPhones in recent years, did so through the Apple stores - not carriers' stores. A lot of iPhone sales may actually be going through Apple directly, not the corporate carrier stores. Think on it, every time there's a new iPhone released, there's huge lineups - not so much at AT&T or Verizon sores, but at APPLE stores. The other thing to consider (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), but the carriers only report on sales though their corporate retail outlets (and direct online sales), but those mall kiosks and other 3rd-party resellers don't get counted in with the corporate sales (since they're not actually the companies sales).

EDIT: And one other thing - you mention Verizon & AT&T, those are just two U.S. carriers. That 37 million units sold is global. It's silly to call someone a liar because you can't be bothered to check facts or even to think something through logically.
post #36 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Important word: "in the 4th quarter"

Data proves that Apple hasnt broken the official title yet.

Way to go AI with your skewed logic.

I don't get it. The 4th qtr of the calendar year is oct-dec. That corresponds to Apple's first qtr of its fiscal year.
post #37 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

It's a good point to ask where are all these phones. It appears the total US Android sales in Q4 were less than 5 million.

Know what? There's a whole world outside the USA with billions of people. And lots of them are buying Andoid phones.

It is astonishing how narrow-minded some people are.
post #38 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheers777 View Post

In the 3rd quarter of 2011, with one month left before reporting of the quarterly results, Samsung had announced that it had shipped(or sold?) 10 million smartphones. At the end of the quarter (just one month later), Samsung reported they shipped 27 million smartphones for the entire quarter. That is 17 million more phone in just one month (a rate of 51 million per quarter in a non-holiday period). That made me think there was something wrong with their reporting or may be they widened the definition of smartphones (possibly to make Apple look bad in the face of lawsuits).


Can you cite any credible sources at least pointing in the direction of Samsung deliberately expanding the definition of a smartphone?
post #39 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Seems like this war on the iPhone was in Steve's head...as great a man as he was he was still a man, and thus often wrong...he was also vindictive, vengeful, rude, demeaning, didactic...pretty much at times a bad person (Depending on the side you are on) But he was also a great man, wise, intelligent, focused...driven...don't let one side cloud you of the other...he was one of the most well rounded individuals in the tech world...understood through and through. He hid nothing from anyone, and that was his charm.

Point is he could be wrong.

And logic, observation, etc...shows that Android is not out to destroy the iPhone, nor are any OEMs...don't be so guided by advertisement from Verizon, Motorola, and Samsung...all they are doing is competing...you know, that thing people do in the free market. Companies are allowed to compete with the iPhone...

and yes, Samsung may have had Apple on a quarter or two...who gives a fuck.

Apple = Premium devices...one model, select carriers (formerly), set price ranges throughout its cycle until an upgrade comes along (not always as some overseas - non US - carriers alter prices)

Samsung = Premium through dirt cheap "OMG WTF IS THIS SHIT" devices...many models...all carriers...all price ranges...prices changing to lower prices throught a device cycle...

With those facts it should be a shock Apple is even 1 or 2 on the list considering every Android OEM has the same song and dance (and thankfully they seem to be willing to change tune into a more premium less devices a year strategy many Fandroids have been asking for for years).

Also Apple walks away with most of the profits in the entire category even besting Google's own Android when it comes to ad revenue.

1, 2 or 3...Apple is winning...it is very very utterly clear.

The fact that this upsets you that they aren't always king of a rather meaningless mountain proves you may have some issues to work out.

Chill the fuck out.

AbsoluteDesignz, you've made some valid points which you then totally undermine with your last two abusive paragraphs.

The fact is that fjose1929 is making some very valid points namely that Android and Windows in general and Samsung in particular are hyped up by outrageously exaggerated claims by analysts and others.

For example IDC, Gartner and Strategy Analytics repeatedly publish pure fantasy projections that Windows Mobile is going to overtake the iPhone in sales by 2015. They keep publishing such bizarre projections despite the fact Windows market share has persistently declined to a barely measurable less than 2% smartphone market share? Why do these analysts make such exaggerated claims. Possibly because Microsoft are spending many hundreds of millions bribing developers to produce apps for Windows mobile and these false projections help their salesmen persuade Apps developers.

Similarly Android is supported by the most amazing hype and obsfucation, possibly financed by Google's generosity. Whereas Apple provide accurate and verifiable unit sales figures for the iPhone and iPad, Android's and other OEMs figures are routinely exaggerated by quoting "shipments" which often include large numbers of units channels stuffing and sitting unsold on warehouse shelves. Samsung refuse to publish actual sales figures, which only make the figures for smartphone sales suspect and totally unreliable (Korean accounting standards leave a lot be desired).

Amazon are equally shy about publishing their figures both for sales and returns, for which there is a lot of anecdotal evidence have been quite significant.

Amazon use a forked version of Android (for smartphones not tablets?) in the Fire, so that Android Apps cannot be downloaded and Google have no means of monetising advertising (the entire aim of the "free" Android as far as Google is concerned). Even so Strategy Analytics incorporate their guess at Kindle Fire shipments to come up with fantasy estimates (wishful guesses more like) that Android has somehow managed to take 39% of the tablet market in 2011?

Anybody who believes Strategy Analytics numbers is naive beyond compare, and anybody who supports or does not criticise their incorrigible hyping is equally guilty of hyping.

As fjose1929 rightly says "A lie is a lie is a lie"

The fact of the matter is that it is not a zero sum game between Apple and Android. Apple are taking the cream, and making most of the profits, and Android is making do with the dregs. Samesung, the arch copyists, are doing well for the time being but they are crushing other Android OEMs like HTC, LG and Motorola, but not Apple, who reign supremely above them all.
post #40 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack99 View Post

Can you cite any credible sources at least pointing in the direction of Samsung deliberately expanding the definition of a smartphone?

He never said Samsung did change their definition of smartphone. He clearly stated that the atypical growth rate in a non-holiday quarter made him wonder if they could have changed the definition.

On top of that, there is no legal definition of a smartphone so Samsung can change the definition as they see fit just as you can categorize the iPhone as a "toy" and not a smartphone because it's not "open". You have that right.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple reclaims title of world's largest smartphone maker after blowout quarter
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple reclaims title of world's largest smartphone maker after blowout quarter