or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone 5 estimated to have sold more than 2X faster at launch than Galaxy S4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iPhone 5 estimated to have sold more than 2X faster at launch than Galaxy S4

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Following a report that Samsung has shipped 20 million units of their new Galaxy S4 smartphone, one analyst has estimated that it took Apple less than half as much time to ship the same amount of iPhone 5 units.

ISI Group


As Apple doesn't break down iPhone sales by model, Brian Marshall from ISI Group looked to official opening weekend numbers and quarterly earnings reports to determine his estimates provided to on Friday. Marshall's estimates took Apple around 25 days to hit the 20 million mark, possibly beating Samsung by over a month.

The estimates suggest that over the first 25 days of iPhone 5 availability, Apple shipped 805,000 units per day. In contrast, Samsung shipped less than half of that ? about 333,000 Galaxy S4 units ? per day.

In May, just weeks after the Galaxy S4 became available, Samsung announced they had shipped 10 million units In comparison, it took the S4?s predecessor, the Galaxy S III, as many as 50 days to reach 10 million units shipped.

Then this week, reports claimed that the Galaxy S4 has reached shipments 20 million units as June came to a close. That would make it Samsung's most popular device to date.

Last fall, Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 units during opening weekend alone. In the first full quarter that the iPhone 5 was available, Apple reached shipments of 48 million total iPhones, including previous-generation iPhone 4S and iPhone 4 models.

Though the Galaxy S4 is breaking Samsung?s sales records, demand for the latest Samsung smartphone is rumored to have cooled just months after its release. In June Samsung?s market capitalization fell by $12.4 billion to $187.8 billion after a note from J.P Morgan claimed third-quarter sales would disappoint investors.

Similarly, the markets have also reacted negatively to reports of alleged slipping demand for Apple?s iPhone 5. As such, anticipation has begun to build for Apple's next-generation handset, unofficially referred to as an "iPhone 5S," which is expected to debut as soon as September.

ISI Group continues to list shares of AAPL as a strong buy with a price target of $600. The investment firm expects numerous new devices ? including a new high-end iPhone, a low-cost iPhone, and potentially even an iPhone with a 5-inch display ? over the next nine months.
post #2 of 28
Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?
post #3 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacKrazyinKC View Post

Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?

 

Financial journalists and analysts understand that fundamental difference perfectly well. When they pretend to ignore it, I can only assume the "mistake" is intentional. And then the error gets spread and repeated by those who truly don't understand the difference, and those who are just not paying attention as the distribute link-bait.

post #4 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacKrazyinKC View Post

Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?

Sure....which iPhone are they talking about? Since Apple doesn't break those numbers down how can they be sure? Should we include all the previous Galaxy models too?

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #5 of 28
What's the point of an article giving estimated unverifiable stats?

Apple don't post models for obvious reasons, so people can write nonsense like this!
post #6 of 28
I sold more, no I sold more, no I sold more! I am going to sound like a troll, but I really don't care. Samsung touted some big sale (or shipped) numbers, and now there is a post about how Apple way outsold them. What's the point? iPhones sell faster than S4's? Got it... Wasn't really a question, was it? Congrats to Samsung for selling a boatload, and to Apple for also selling a boatload.
post #7 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacKrazyinKC View Post

Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?

 

The point is, both numbers mean sold.  It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.

 

For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend.  What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.

 

That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S.   To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.

post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by t0ny View Post

What's the point of an article giving estimated unverifiable stats?

 

Obviously to piss off people like you.

post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

The point is..............................................................................................

 

post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

The point is, both numbers mean sold.  It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.

For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend.  What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.

That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S.   To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.

You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.

The analysts were disappointed with the 5 millions because one idiot by the name of Gene Munster said Apple will sell 10 millions of the iphone 5.
post #11 of 28
Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.

How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.

How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.

You can't just spend money to get into something. That's what MS has done for the past decade... How's that working for them?

Could Apple spend $100B and get into space missions?

No offense, but your posts strike me as someone who invested too much money when Apple was high, got burned, is now pissed, and doesn't really understand the market, its irrationality, or valuations.
post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

The point is, both numbers mean sold.  It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.

For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend.  What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.

That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S.   To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.

Considering the iPhone 5 was VERY hard to get for several days/weeks, I'd say the problem was likely manufacturing constraints and yield as opposed to lack of retailer interest.
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC View Post

You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.

 

Anyone who really follows reports knows that initial sales are not all about end users.  Some is about filling the channel.

 

For example, among others, ISI Group's Brian Marshall noted after the sales debut:
 
"Clarification - recall the 5 mil+ iPhone 5 reported sales only takes into consideration: 1) what was sold into partners (e.g., retail outlets, carriers, etc.), 2) sold in AAPL retail stores, and 3) direct to customers only if they signed for the device."
 
Number (3) is important, since the opening sales figures do NOT include pre-order sales, which can take up to weeks to get delivered.  (Apple does not count direct user sales until they are delivered.)
 
Quote:
The analysts were disappointed with the 5 millions because one idiot by the name of Gene Munster said Apple will sell 10 millions of the iphone 5.

 

See the link above.  Quite a few analysts were expecting between 6-8 million.

 

As it turned out, they were wrong about lack of retail desire, though.  It was more likely the result of a constrained supply, something which no one had expected from a supply guru like Cook.  To be fair, the unexpected problems with iPhone 5 assembly probably blind-sided him as well.

 

Edit:  I see that Pendergast posted the same supply thought, while I was still slowly editing this while cooking dinner.  Edit 2:  In fact, deja vu!   Turns out I had answered this question already back in May, and had forgotten about it.


Edited by KDarling - 7/5/13 at 7:36pm
post #15 of 28
Obvious!
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales.

Well, don't you just have all the answers.
Quote:
How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business?

Less than it would take you to shut up, I'd guess.
Quote:
Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars.

Yes, that's how kindergarten math works.
Quote:
Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.

Dear sweet mother of just shut up.
post #17 of 28
Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.

And that is why it makes sense to have at least 1 more Model of iPhone. No manufacture on earth could handle the requirement and volume of Apple.
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.

How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.

Dear Constable Dodo, I'm going to write you an open letter every time you play your "Timid Cook" card.

Can I call you Dodo for short? Dodo, today's letter is about Apple's capital expenditures. Did you ever find out how that extra 2 billion they spent on Cap Ex turned out, the one that Horace Dediu thought was maybe for . . . what? Do you know? Did you ever find out what Tim Cook was talking about when he said that they invested another 2 billion to secure some new technology or other two years ago?

Dodo, do you know how many more billion-dollar data centers they're going to build? I bet you'd like them to be building them all at once, huh? Do you really think Apple belongs in the penny-per-view ad business?

I'm getting tired of this now, Dodo, more later. Maybe.
post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.

How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.

 

The Search Engine business?? Your clueless "throw sh*t and see what sticks" strategy explains why you're getting burned in the stock market and Apple is sitting on a massive pile of cash. That's the strategy that led to Microsoft's only ever quarterly loss.

 

And speaking of burning, here's a quick investment lesson because you clearly need one.

 

When someone trips and puts their hand in the fire, their first reaction is to pull their hand out of the flames. What they don't do is leave their hand in the fire and whine on about how much it hurts.

post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


Dear Constable Dodo, I'm going to write you an open letter every time you play your "Timid Cook" card.

Can I call you Dodo for short? Dodo, today's letter is about Apple's capital expenditures. Did you ever find out how that extra 2 billion they spent on Cap Ex turned out, the one that Horace Dediu thought was maybe for . . . what? Do you know? Did you ever find out what Tim Cook was talking about when he said that they invested another 2 billion to secure some new technology or other two years ago?

Dodo, do you know how many more billion-dollar data centers they're going to build? I bet you'd like them to be building them all at once, huh? Do you really think Apple belongs in the penny-per-view ad business?

I'm getting tired of this now, Dodo, more later. Maybe.

 

Ah, Horace Dediu; the only analyst who actually does any analysis. 

post #21 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC View Post


You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.

The analysts were disappointed with the 5 millions because one idiot by the name of Gene Munster said Apple will sell 10 millions of the iphone 5.

 

Yes, this is a tricky one. I imagine that Apple does count sales to end users if phone was purchased from an Apple store. I can't really see how they could report anything else. However, only 20% of iPhone sales are from an Apple store. So unless the stores only give Apple the money when the phone is sold then I'm not sure how they would be able to count the phone until it was activated.

 

Having said that, there is one thing that really doesn't add up: if Samsung's phones are doing so well then why aren't these figures reflected in the usage and advertising stats?

post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.

And that is why it makes sense to have at least 1 more Model of iPhone. No manufacture on earth could handle the requirement and volume of Apple.

 

Also bear in mind that the iPhone is only available on a relatively small number of carriers. We've already seen that unless the carrier is prepared to let Apple control the updates and user experience then Cupertino is not interested in dealing with them. 

post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Why does any of this even matter. Investors are definitely going to be disappointed with iPhone sales this quarter and Apple's share price is going to fall. Apple needs to get into a new line of business that doesn't involve being at the mercy of smartphone hardware sales. Apple has plenty of money to do other things, but it would rather just let the reserve cash sit in a stink-pile and let the shareholders take the brunt of Timid Cook's mismanagement.

 

No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. If you don't like the price of AAPL, you have only get-rich-quick traders, programmed trading, and market movers to blame.

 

 

Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

How much would it actually cost Apple to start a search engine business? Ten billion dollars? $15 billion dollars? It would still leave Apple with well over a hundred billion dollars. Better to spend the unused money and break Google's stranglehold on the search engine ad business while Apple still has a pot to piss in. It's no wonder investors avoid Apple like a mutating virus. Apple doesn't seem to have any sense when it comes to putting its money to use.
 

LOL. So... copy Google? That's your great idea? Apple isn't Microsoft: they're not desperate to follow their competitors.

Apple should soooo not listen to you.

"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 #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. If you don't like the price of AAPL, you have only get-rich-quick traders, programmed trading, and market movers to blame.


LOL. So... copy Google? That's your great idea? Apple isn't Microsoft: they're not desperate to follow their competitors.
Apple should soooo not listen to you.

I don't get why people have so much interest in Apple's stock anyway. I come into contact with hundreds, if not thousands a products day that are made by publicly traded companies and I honestly couldn't tell you what the stock price of any of them.

Good or bad, I think Apple's stock price is mostly troll fodder. All these android trolls will be quick to tell you Apple lost 10 points but couldn't begin to tell you the stock price of Sony, LG, Samsung, or HTC.
post #25 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacKrazyinKC View Post

Samsung # mean shipped. ... Apples # mean sold... Is there any other point that needs made here?

The point is that you're mistaken. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

The point is, both numbers mean sold.  It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.

 

For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend.  What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.

 

That's why the five million was seen as a disappointment by analysts, because the iPhone 5 launched to two more countries than the iPhone 4S had the year before, yet the iPhone 5 had "only" one million more "sales" the first weekend than the 4S.   To analysts, this indicated that retailer interest was not as high as expected.

Nice to see an objective and informed opinion. I'd argue that both numbers mean shipped. But that's semantics.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Not only the difference between Shipped and Sold, there is more, iPhone has always been constrained by manufacturing capacity till at least 2 - 3 months into from launch. So in reality Apple has always sold as many iPhone as they could make.

 

Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamC View Post

You are the only one who doubt Apple's sale of the iPhones 5 to end users. I wonder where you got e nonsense from. Yes give us a link.
 

KDarling didn't doubt what Apple meant by their numbers. He (she) simply tried to help the misguided ones who misunderstand what Apple numbers mean. You'll probably call me an Android fan or what not. But let's see if the following will help you understand:

 

Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.


Having said this, Apple does provide additional clarity that the likes of Samsung do not (because they can't). Apple often informs analyst the size of channel inventory at (or en route to) Apple Stores. That allows analyst to estimate the real number of iPhones sold to end-users. Apple can do this because they can track sales at their own stores in real-time. But they cannot do this with iPhones shipped to non-Apple retailers. This is why they CANNOT report the number of phones sold until they get reports from retailers, not all of which conform to the same schedule. If I am not mistaken, for accounting purposes, Apple recognizes revenue for iPhones sold to end-users in Apple stores and for those shipped to retailers. 

 

If Galaxy phones are not sold by retailers, they are returned to Samsung which then have to make accounting adjustments (still true if the phones are sold at large discounts after revenue has already been recognized). So, at the risk of being repetitive, until we see write-downs from Samsung, there is no reason to believe there is a large discrepancy between units shipped and units sold to end-users. After all, HP and RIM reported sizeable write-downs after reporting optimistic shipments of Touchpads and Playbooks. Microsoft had to do the same with Zunes. How can Samsung avoid doing the same if they are merely channel-stuffing?


Edited by stelligent - 7/6/13 at 5:02pm
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz View Post

 

Ah, Horace Dediu; the only analyst who actually does any analysis. 

And some of his analysis is based largely on the analysis of other analysts. 

post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

 

No no no. The shareholder can't blame Tim Cook. The free market determines the price of AAPL, not Tim Cook. Whether bubble or bust. Apple management's job is to grow their revenues and profits, which they are continuing to do. 

Apple management has repeated that their job is focus on developing great products. You disagree with them?

post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Or, one could say, Apple has always made as many iPhones as they can sell (after the euphoric post-launch week). To be precise, they make a few more than they can sell. That's real mastery of logistics. 

 

Apple usually announces on the Monday or Tuesday after a new iPhone launch that they have sold X million units. Ask yourself how it is possible every single retailer has reported end user sales. Retailers cannot and do not do this. All Apple can do is use the shipment volume to the retailers. It is fair to argue that, particularly right after launch, every shipped iPhone will be sold shortly after arriving at the retailer. But this doesn't change the fact that Apple is announcing the number of units shipped and not sold.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

The point is, both numbers mean sold.  It's just that a lot of the time, for both companies it means sold to a retailer, not an end user.

 

For example, the article recalled that Apple announced sales of five million iPhone 5 on its first weekend.  What most laymen don't realize, is that those five million included sales to retailers around the world... sales that were still on trucks or planes, since Apple counts a sale the moment an item ships.

 

I believe the problem here is that people tend to conclude base on availability, demand and scarcity of supply on every iPhone launch particularly last year's iPhone 5 and compare it with how the Galaxy S4 did:

 

- Apple had 5 million iPhone 5 shipped/sold in the first three days (in 9 countries).

 

- Samsung shipped 10 million Galaxy S4 in less than a month (in 60 countries)

 

- The iPhone 5 doesn't take much time to sit on shelves, most of the time you won't find one even at Apple Store. (for more than 2 months in 31 countries)

 

- Online ship time for iPhone 5 drops to 1 week (November 29, 2012)

 

- Galaxy S4 seems to have no availability issues for consumers.

 

- iPhone suppliers having problem coping with huge demand (for almost the whole 4th quarter of 2012).

 

- Samsung blamed unexpected high demand for supply chain problems (for the first week)

 

- The iPhone 5 launched in 9 countries and 22 more after more than a week vs Samsung's vast larger channel to carriers in 60 countries for their Galaxy S4 launch. 

 

Some see the iPhone being mostly out of stock as having most of their shipments sold during post launch. Conclusions made from these may not be accurate but tells a lot. With Samsung's history of deception, one can't blame why some would doubt or question Samsung.

 

Shipped or sold doesn't really matter, if it's true then good for them. Samsung is a con artist they may be able to play in numbers shipped but they may never fake people flocking to stores, availability/stock issues at retailers and stores, months of supply issues due to demand, and more.  I get it when people talk how great their Galaxy S4 are, what I don't get is when people get to Samsung's defence as a company, they are nothing to be proud of as a company, they are unethical, bully, deceitful and corrupt. If Samsung is even confident with their product, why not launch at the same time with Apple, new product just before holiday season make more sense anyway.  How I hope a third company could emerge and end this duopoly by Apple and Samsung.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple's iPhone 5 estimated to have sold more than 2X faster at launch than Galaxy S4
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's iPhone 5 estimated to have sold more than 2X faster at launch than Galaxy S4