Originally Posted by jragosta
As stated earlier, the methodology is questionable because they really don't define the market and each surveyor is free to use a different definition. I just came across an article which explains another reason why these results are not valid - they do not use a representative sample:http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/02/winning-in-neither-name-nor-spirit/
This article is about phones, but it applies equally well to surveys like these. If Samsung were selling as many millions of tablets as these analysts suggest, don't you think they'd be bragging about it?
And that's the problem. Each company has its own formulas, metrics, and people they talk to at whichever companies they can get people to talk to them from. They have their own set of people who take part in surveys, etc. it's difficult to know what to believe.
In addition, we keep talking about shipped vs sold numbers. When it comes to shipped, we don't hear that it includes returns from customers, or returns from retail for unsold units.
With Apple, at least we get what they consider to be sold device numbers, plus how many days or weeks in the channel, which we can get an approximate number for having been given the sold figures. But I never see that total number being used in marketshare for Apple, whereas it is what's being used elsewhere. That is, where we are even being given shipped (in the channel) numbers at all, which we haven't been given for Samsung for almost a year now.
Then, we read numbers of tablets shipped for Acer and Asus. What hasn't been broadcast was that last winter, both companies quietly sold their stock in the EU at well below normal sales prices to dump unsold stock.
Normally, when stock is sold at overstock outlets, those sales aren't included in the normal sales figures in regards to marketshare (or much of anything else), as those sales aren't considered to be "real" due to their nature. Yet, they're included in phone and tablet marketshare.
And then we get the hype for new Android products, which assumes that those products will sell well. A good example is the Asus Transformer Prime. This product has been hyped at pretty much every website I've seen it mentioned, as the latest iPad killer. But thanks to the lawsuit from Hasboro over the name, we know more exactly what these numbers are.
Some here might remember that due to the expectation that this wonderful tablet would sell so well that they might run out of stock the way Apple does, they heavily promoted a Pre-sales period.
So, how did they do? Well, according to the legal filings they had to make in the trial, they pre-sold an entire 2,000 tablets. Yup, that's 2,000. Not exactly a high flier.
And the other figures that were given is how many were ordered by retailers around the world. This is all of the retailers around the world that sell their products that wanted to sell the Prime. So what was that large number? 80,000. Again, 80,000. And remember, this is how many were ordered. In other words, how many retailers thought they could sell, not how many Asus could make, which surely could be far more than that small number.
Then, earlier last year, Lenovo states that of the over one million 7" "tablets" Samsung shipped, they only sold 20,000. Now, while its a competitor stating that, we could at least look to Samsung for some clarification, and a defense of their numbers. But we got none! Samsung didn't respond at all. Why would that be? Probably because Lenovo wasn't that far off. And then, more recently, Samsung said that their tablet sales were doing "poorly", and they are supposed to be the biggest Android tablet seller.
So how are these other tablets doing? Apparently not very well.