or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Internal sales documents show Samsung has lost the war for tablet supremacy in the US
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Internal sales documents show Samsung has lost the war for tablet supremacy in the US - Page 2

post #41 of 116

"to quantify the extend of potential"

 

You guys need to prof reed!

post #42 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post

Frankly not entirely sure why Samsung is even bothering to make a table at all at this point -

 

They need the table to support the tablets that they have shipped but can't sell.

post #43 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmmx View Post

"to quantify the extend of potential"

 

You guys need to prof reed!


You need to proofread too.

post #44 of 116

The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.

post #45 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post

No big surprise here.  Since Apple got the iPad right on the first try and has such an awesome ecosystem for it, it was always going to dominate.  It's nice to have options, but they've got such a lead that they're never going to lose it (a la MS with OSes).  Frankly not entirely sure why Samsung is even bothering to make a table at all at this point - they're not going to make any inroads imo.  Just cut your losses and focus on smartphones, where you're actually doing well.

Focus is not in the competition's DNA. It runs counter to "throw everything, see what sticks" strategy.
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
post #46 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

So Galaxy Tab sales have been quite smoother since the 1st qtr they were available.


Smoother ... LOL

post #47 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

 

They need the table to support the tablets that they have shipped but can't sell.

HAH!  Good catch - thanks.

post #48 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by uguysrnuts View Post

Apple fans typically lead busy lives to be bothered to counter post. I left MR a long, long time ago (and never came back) since the site is obviously about inciting post counts, ad analytics and pleasing advertisers at the expense of its intended audience. It is the site for "Apple fans" such as Da Hard-on.
These days over at MR there are more defenders of Andorid and other companies than Apple. They really need to change their site name because the mix of posts isn't any different than what you'd see at Engadget or c|net.
post #49 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And it took just about the same amount of time for Apple to get 75% of all cell phone profits worldwide, having never made a phone before in the history of the company, and only making four models of phone ever.

It's not too early.

Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S
post #50 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.

Wonder no more.  

 

Partisans on all topics - political, technological, whateveral flood each other's sites with the usual superficial "your side is junk/we're great" keystroke littering.  Except not that politely.

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #51 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

iPads are just jumbo iPhones.

 

Yawn, this tired old counterproductive attack on the iPad.
 
Fundamentally a drinking glass, a bucket and a swimming pool are the same - containers of fluid.
By your logic a swimming pool is just a jumbo bucket and a bucket is just a jumbo drinking glass.
 
Yet it's unlikely Michael Phelps will be swimming in a drinking glass any time soon.
 
 
post #52 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Too early to make these claims.  It took 3 years for Samsung to really compete with Apple iPhone.

Should read 'copy'.

post #53 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.

SSSSHHHHH!!!

We're not supposed to think of that!

post #54 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiA View Post

 

Yawn, this tired old counterproductive attack on the iPad.
 
Fundamentally a drinking glass, a bucket and a swimming pool are the same - containers of fluid.
By your logic a swimming pool is just a jumbo bucket and a bucket is just a jumbo drinking glass.
 
Yet it's unlikely Michael Phelps will be swimming in a drinking glass any time soon.
 
 


You can pee in a swimming pool without anyone noticing (ask Phelps's buddy, Ryan Lochte). Not so with a glass or bucket.

post #55 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So there are three options here… 

Samsung lied about the first numbers and these are legit: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.
Samsung told the truth about the first numbers and these are a lie: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.
Samsung lied about the first numbers and is also lying about these: They'll be crucified 2x by their shareholders, an even larger inquiry will be raised, and there will be unimaginable trouble.

It really doesn't happen. It'll be one person with one post, something simple, "Apple rocks!", and that's that. Not like here. Not at all like here. These people are deranged.

Lately, he says… lol.gif

Or, option number four = reality.

Shipped and sold are NOT the same thing.

If Samsung shipped 1 million tablets to Best Buy, Radio Shack, Wal-Mart, etc., that means that those tablets are sitting on the sales floor at those retailers. However, Samsung doesn't get to count any of those tablets as a sale until an actual end customer walks in the door, buys one, and takes it home.

If Samsung only sells 10,000 of that million, the rest will eventually get shipped back to Samsung and Samsung would take (very simplified explanation:) some sort of write-down on inventory as an expense. Take a look at press coverage of RIM's tablet debacle.

Typically a manufacturer without any retailing operations (e.g., Samsung vs. Apple, which does have retail as well), would include units shipped in their financial reporting, disclosures, etc. but may not ever disclose the actual number of units that are sold -- in no small part, becuse they don't want a competitor to be able to back into the numbers to figure out their cost of goods sold, net profit per unit, etc. given that the company would probably consider that to be a proprietary trade secret.

There is also a financial reporting distinction that you expect between units sold and units shipped simply because of quarterly financial reporting. If a company records a unit as sold in Q2, it may have actually been shipped in Q1 or before. Similarly, units shipped in Q2, may not sell until a subsequent quarter (or never).

Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.

(Well, I guess they may have lied when they said they made great tablets that consumers would eagerly purchase...)
post #56 of 116
Originally Posted by tmhisey View Post
Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S

 

He mentioned three years; I used an 'about'. I had to throw just the 4 in there because Apple didn't hit that profit mark until its release, at least.


Originally Posted by tmhisey View Post
Or, option number four = reality.

 

So where'd those ~1.7 million tablets go?


Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.

 

Isn't that the definition? They don't get to count it as a sale until it's sold; you're absolutely right. So how'd they sell 1.7 million tablets to the rest of the world in that quarter? 

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #57 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

I wonder how the Android-apologist websites are spinning it.  lol.gif

Mostly in disbelief and stunned surprise. But very balanced
post #58 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

 

 Because samsung stole designs? Consumers don't give a crap. 

 

May be i should get me a fake Rolex, since technical support is any street corner watch repair mom and pop will do just fine. An added benefit is that instead of send money to Swiss i will support the local business and should be very proud!

post #59 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

This is a much better article than two of the previous ones dealing with the same general subject. At least it's not blatantly misleading and certainly livable enough for an Apple-enthusiast website.

This is what some of us were focusing on in the previous thread, when you were going on about smartphones. Incidentally, I am inclined to believe that, while their numbers for smartphones are not as dire, it is nowhere near what they (and their apologists) claim.

 

Samsung (and its acolytes) should simply put up the numbers or shut up.

post #60 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.

I think the difference is that Apple fans have a sense of shame that kicks in at some point, to proxy for decency.

 

Fandroids have neither shame nor decency.

post #61 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Too early to make these claims.  It took 3 years for Samsung to really compete with Apple iPhone.

Prove it with numbers.

post #62 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

He mentioned three years; I used an 'about'. I had to throw just the 4 in there because Apple didn't hit that profit mark until its release, at least.

So where'd those ~1.7 million tablets go?

Isn't that the definition? They don't get to count it as a sale until it's sold; you're absolutely right. So how'd they sell 1.7 million tablets to the rest of the world in that quarter? 

I'm sorry, I didn't see anything indicating that Samsung said they sold 1.7 million tables in any quarter. I saw IDC's crazy SWAG number but I didn't realize that anyone actually thought those numbers meant anything.

IIRC, Samsung has made statements in the past about how many units they've shipped but I'm pretty sure they never revealed the actual units sold (which is what makes these data so interesting).

Companies can also play with the numbers when they indulge in channel stuffing.
post #63 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Tab sales are surprisingly low. Isn't this the tablet was was supposed to unseat the iPad from supremacy? Thats what the blogosphere had me believe. 

 

No, no, no. It's the Google Nexus 7. Once that starts shipping in quantity, Apple will be in real trouble... (grin)

post #64 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post


You need to proofread too.

You probably missed the sarcasm in the post.

post #65 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

This is a much better article than two of the previous ones dealing with the same general subject. At least it's not blatantly misleading and certainly livable enough for an Apple-enthusiast website.

 

livable?

post #66 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

This is what some of us were focusing on in the previous thread, when you were going on about smartphones. Incidentally, I am inclined to believe that, while their numbers for smartphones are not as dire, it is nowhere near what they (and their apologists) claim.

 

Samsung (and its acolytes) should simply put up the numbers or shut up.

I'm not sure what you mean about "going on about smartphones" nor what specific thread you're referring to. Are you still having an issue with the clarifications I added to the "21 million sold' thread, clearing up some member's confusion on just what was being shown and claimed? Believe it or not, some members misunderstood the article. Who'da thunk?

 

I can't imagine you'd have a problem with anyone clearing up misunderstandings so I'm guessing it might be something else? Or perhaps nothing?

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #67 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by crawdad62 View Post


That's interesting. I'm fifty so I'm either as old as your parents or older probably and I wouldn't consider myself a Luddite by any means. I mean I held of until I could get an i7 iMac since it encodes a lot of video most days but right now I couldn't even tell you what the processor is in my iPad or my iPhone for that matter. They both do what I want them to do. In fact I've never heard any of my friends (in their 30's, 40's and 50's) say they're waiting for a specific processor to buy a device. They may wait or want a specific device but they have never said I wanting a Snapdragon or what have you.

My mom is 51 and my dad is 53, actually. They were interested in the HD displays (1920x1200) more so than the processor. My dad is tech savvy so he is familiar with the processors, actually.

post #68 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

He mentioned three years; I used an 'about'. I had to throw just the 4 in there because Apple didn't hit that profit mark until its release, at least.


Sorry, but I can't let you off that easily... ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And it took just about the same amount of time for Apple to get 75% of all cell phone profits worldwide, having never made a phone before in the history of the company, and only making four models of phone ever.

It's not too early.
post #69 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmhisey View Post


Or, option number four = reality.
Shipped and sold are NOT the same thing.
If Samsung shipped 1 million tablets to Best Buy, Radio Shack, Wal-Mart, etc., that means that those tablets are sitting on the sales floor at those retailers. However, Samsung doesn't get to count any of those tablets as a sale until an actual end customer walks in the door, buys one, and takes it home.
If Samsung only sells 10,000 of that million, the rest will eventually get shipped back to Samsung and Samsung would take (very simplified explanation:) some sort of write-down on inventory as an expense. Take a look at press coverage of RIM's tablet debacle.
Typically a manufacturer without any retailing operations (e.g., Samsung vs. Apple, which does have retail as well), would include units shipped in their financial reporting, disclosures, etc. but may not ever disclose the actual number of units that are sold -- in no small part, becuse they don't want a competitor to be able to back into the numbers to figure out their cost of goods sold, net profit per unit, etc. given that the company would probably consider that to be a proprietary trade secret.
There is also a financial reporting distinction that you expect between units sold and units shipped simply because of quarterly financial reporting. If a company records a unit as sold in Q2, it may have actually been shipped in Q1 or before. Similarly, units shipped in Q2, may not sell until a subsequent quarter (or never).
Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.
(Well, I guess they may have lied when they said they made great tablets that consumers would eagerly purchase...)

 

Somehow Wall Street are projecting them to be sold as they don't expect any manufacturer to shelve millions of units without making money off of them. That stunt won't hunt anymore.

post #70 of 116
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post
livable?

 

"Less pro-Apple", he means.

 

Originally Posted by tmhisey View Post
Sorry, but I can't let you off that easily... ;-)

 

And again, I am talking about a period of time in the past from one date to another date, not to the present. Apple hadn't made phones prior to the iPhone, and only four models had existed at that time.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #71 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

 

livable?

LOL he lives on this site, to smother everyone with his passive aggressive charm. 

iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
iMac 2007, Macbook pro 2008, Mac Mini 2011
Reply
post #72 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

 

livable?

I expect articles on a pro-Apple site to put them in the best light and have a pro-Apple slant. Outright misstatements to achieve that aren't acceptable IMO, while some others here might think that's fine and overlook it. This article didn't make any obvious misstatements.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #73 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I'm not sure what you mean about "going on about smartphones" nor what specific thread you're referring to. Are you still having an issue with the clarifications I added to the "21 million sold' thread, clearing up some member's confusion on just what was being shown and claimed? Believe it or not, some members misunderstood the article. Who'da thunk?

 

I can't imagine you'd have a problem with anyone clearing up misunderstandings so I'm guessing it might be something else? Or perhaps nothing?

See my response to you in #97 of that thread -- where you kept going on about smartphones.

 

"Clarifications"? It was more like hitting people over the head multiple times.... who'd thunk?

post #74 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkndrublic View Post

.... his passive aggressive charm. 

 

Perfectly put!

 

But it won't be too long before that charm turns to grating all of one's senses.... you'll see what I mean.

post #75 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

They were interested in the HD displays (1920x1200) more so than the processor.

Wait... They wanted an HD display on their tablet so they waited for a 1920x1080 Android one instead of getting a 3rd gen iPad already available at 2048x1536... Sorry, that doesn't make any sense to me unless they're (or you or your tech savvy Dad) are Android fanboys.
post #76 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

See my response to you in #97 of that thread -- where you kept going on about smartphones.

 

"Clarifications"? It was more like hitting people over the head multiple times.... who'd thunk?

Gotcha. So you agreed with what I had to say, just not how often I felt I had to say it before I felt forum members understood. 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #77 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiA View Post

Yawn, this tired old counterproductive attack on the iPad.
 
Fundamentally a drinking glass, a bucket and a swimming pool are the same - containers of fluid. By your logic a swimming pool is just a jumbo bucket and a bucket is just a jumbo drinking glass.

I'm glad you responded to this... I was going to but your analogy beats what I was going to say. I'm sick of people saying its just a bigger iPhone... Technically, maybe, but operationally just not true.
post #78 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post


You need to proofread too.

He/she was being sarcastic and intentionally wrong in their spelling.

post #79 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida View Post

Too early to make these claims.  It took 3 years for Samsung to really compete with Apple iPhone.

Meanwhile, Monkey Boy's taken 5 years, and counting....

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #80 of 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by punkndrublic View Post

LOL he lives on this site, to smother everyone with his passive aggressive charm. 

Perhaps in your view I'd fit in better by relying more on juvenile taunting mixed with a bit of pompous snarkiness? Nah, there's members here that already have parts of that covered. Courteous responses are still pretty rare so I try to stick to those for the most part. Maybe it will catch on.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Internal sales documents show Samsung has lost the war for tablet supremacy in the US
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Internal sales documents show Samsung has lost the war for tablet supremacy in the US