or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row - Page 3

post #81 of 128
It's only a few weeks until Apple's next earnings report. Gene will have an opportunity to showcase his forecasting mastery again soon.1tongue.gif
post #82 of 128
Great article! These analysts like to embarrass themselves with short lived, unfounded, misleading and manipulative predictions. I'm surprised this guy is still covering Apple. Maybe a change of stock will serve him well.
post #83 of 128
Gene Munster couldn't predict the time if day let alone Apples earnings. Bet against him... Be a winner
post #84 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

 

WTF?  It clearly states "Editorial" on the front page headline.  Sheesh, get a friggin' clue.

post #85 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfhednar View Post

I don't fault Gene Munster for not being able to come up with the correct numbers. It's a tough business predicting the future. The disturbing thing to me is that, even when given the correct numbers, he still gets it wrong. I don't think the man is incompetent. So it really begs the question: What's going on here? Why would he publicly shout: Hey, everybody, look at me, I'm an idiot? What does he have to gain? Some are suggesting it's ego, or an inability on his part to admit when he's wrong, but I doubt that.

Which brings us back to the big question: Why would he do this? What does he get from this?

Any suggestions?

Perhaps a chance to take part in Mike Daisey's new act How to lie.
post #86 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

It's only a few weeks until Apple's next earnings report. Gene will have an opportunity to showcase his forecasting mastery again soon.1tongue.gif

When Apple proves him wrong again, look for Gene to file a complaint with the SEC. Reason: Apple is proving me wrong. Make them stop.
post #87 of 128

Philip Elmer-DeWitt over at CNN Money offers an excellent fact-based analysis of the Munster/Misek BS.

 

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/09/25/apple-analysts-iphone-kerfuffle/

 

he points out shipments to third party retailers like Best Buy are recorded as "sales" by Apple. but if those stores sell out that stock right away - as occurred except for some number of 5c's - that is not "channel stuffing."

 

he also points out the very important fact the DED omitted that Apple does not include in the 9 million sales total all those iPhones that were ordered on line last weekend but not yet delivered to the buyer - Apple only charges your credit card when the phone is delivered (i just checked my own account and can confirm that is true) and only then records a "sale."

 

it's anyone's guess how many on line orders were made over the weekend - none could have been delivered that fast. 5 million more?

 

and even when Apple reports its quarterly sales up to 9/30 next month, that total will leave out the millions of iPhones with delivery dates after 10/1 - which started for orders on Saturday! hopefully at that point Apple will also tell us at least how many additional iPhones were on order as of 9/30 in addition to those "sold," so we can get an accurate idea about what really happened.


Edited by Alfiejr - 9/25/13 at 10:29am
post #88 of 128

I want a appleinsider.com/gene-munster/ page set up that charts Predictions | Actuals | Difference on an ongoing basis with text and links to other AI Munster reports. This way, anyone searching for this hack can easily find the dedicated page and know this guy could not even be a weather man he is so constantly wrong.  

post #89 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

I want a appleinsider.com/gene-munster/ page set up that charts Predictions | Actuals | Difference on an ongoing basis with text and links to other AI Munster reports. This way, anyone searching for this hack can easily find the dedicated page and know this guy could not even be a weather man he is so constantly wrong.  

I agree, but you don't go far enough. Someone should do that for all the major analysts.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #90 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

Philip Elmer-DeWitt over at CNN Money offers an excellent fact-based analysis of the Munster/Misek BS.

 

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/09/25/apple-analysts-iphone-kerfuffle/

 

he points out shipments to third party retailers like Best Buy are recorded as "sales" by Apple. but if those stores sell out that stock right away - as occurred except for some number of 5c's - that is not "channel stuffing."

 

he also points out the very important fact the DED omitted that Apple does not include in the 9 million sales total all those iPhones that were ordered on line last weekend but not yet delivered to the buyer - Apple only charges your credit card when the phone is delivered (i just checked my own account and can confirm that is true) and only then records a "sale."

 

it's anyone's guess how many on line orders were made over the weekend - none could have been delivered that fast. 5 million more?

 

and even when Apple reports its quarterly sales up to 9/30 next month, that total will leave out the millions of iPhones with delivery dates after 10/1 - which started for orders on Saturday! hopefully at that point Apple will also tell us at least how many additional iPhones were on order as of 9/30 in addition to those "sold," so we can get an accurate idea about what really happened.

The PED piece is good. But this post herein is really a bit unfair to Munster. If you listen to him (rather than the *transcript*), he was not really trying to defend his predictions. He was answering questions posed to him. Most importantly, he wasn't truly wrong when he said this year's announcement about # of units sold was not the same as last year's. Even PED doesn't deny this.

 

Gotta be fair, people. After all, Munster is more bullish on Apple than most analysts.


Edited by StruckPaper - 9/25/13 at 10:56am
post #91 of 128

Ah yes.  Gene "Apple-Television-Real-Soon-Now-(tm)" Munster.

I hope he kept his day job.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #92 of 128
I'm glad to see someone take on Munster, if only for his history of outlandishly high predictions for Apple. You're right -- he (and the toadies who followed his lead, sans real sources) had a huge part in Apple's stock slide. If you're a fan of the company, it's so much fun to see these unrealistic predictions, until you realize that they're a set-up. Earnings day reports are bound to look bad if you only triple your profit when you were predicted to quadruple them. I guess.

Seems to me that Apple shareholders should just be content to realize that their company has more cash than it can invest and products that are groundbreaking, interesting and desired by a huge number of buyers. The analysts can ( and do) blow it out their a$$e$.
post #93 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post
 

The PED piece is good. But this post herein is really a bit unfair to Munster. If you listen to him (rather than the *transcript*), he was not really trying to defend his predictions. He was answering questions posed to him. Most importantly, he wasn't truly wrong when he said this year's announcement about # of units sold was not the same as last year's. Even PED doesn't deny this.

 

Gotta be fair, people. After all, Munster is more bullish on Apple than most analysts.

 

I did listen to the piece and he is claiming that Apple is reporting their number differently than in years past.  He's trying to make it sound as if Apple's padding the numbers by reporting "channel sales" (shipped to stores but not necessarily sold to consumers) this year, while in the past they only reported sell through to consumers.  That's bullshit.  There is zero indication Apple is reporting numbers any differently than they have in the past.  He's just covering his ass after being badly wrong two years straight.

post #94 of 128

Munster may very well have estimated the exact number of physical Apple Store retail sales, then figured that Apple could only produce 4 million to 5 million total 5C and 5S units for launch.  Of course, if supply isn't constrained, there's no way that he could guess the number of online sales through the combined sales through the Apple.com store and iOS Apple Store app.  Evidently supply wasn't as constrained as he (wildly) guessed.

 

Here's some bizarre math:  In a world where 9 million people all lined up at once, evenly distributed among the 413 brick-and-mortar Apple Stores worldwide, there would be an average of about 21,792 people per line.  Assuming about 1 foot of linear space per person on average, the lines would be nearly 4.13 miles long at each Apple Store around the world.  I'm extremely glad that I don't live in that world.   Much more convenient to pre-order through the iOS Apple Store app.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #95 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

Was this article written to counter the piece in Business Insider where Munster said Apple only sold 5.5 million on launch weekend?

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-actually-only-sold-55-million-iphones-during-opening-weekend-says-gene-munster-2013-9

And commenter ActiveTrader99 said it most accurately and succinctly:

 

" There has been no change in Apple's counting methodology. Apple initial launch sales has always included:
- product sold through Apple retail stores
- product sold into the channel (Best Buy, AT&T, Walmart, etc.)
- product sold AND delivered via the Apple online store.
If Gene Munster did not factor that into his calculation, that is his error (or excuse for his poor estimate). There was a unique situation with 2 new iPhone models being released and of course this would impact channel inventory."

 

The last sentence is what Munster is particularly harping on.  But again, that's his error, not Apple's.  Further, he has NO idea how the 2 models affected channel inventory he's just guessing and of course guessing in ways that helps him explain his misjudgement.

post #96 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

and even when Apple reports its quarterly sales up to 9/30 next month, that total will leave out the millions of iPhones with delivery dates after 10/1 - which started for orders on Saturday! hopefully at that point Apple will also tell us at least how many additional iPhones were on order as of 9/30 in addition to those "sold," so we can get an accurate idea about what really happened.

Yes.  And many in this forum speculated 2 things:

- that sales of 5c will be subdued for opening weekend (for a couple of reasons, one being that 5c candidates are just not ultra-anxious to buy the 5c on launch weekend).

- that sales of 5c will continue to be strong throughout the Oct-Dec quarter.  Stronger than most think.

 

I do agree with Munster, in that the Sep quarter may be positively impacted due to more than usual channel "stuffing" but only because there are 2 models, one of which has many colors...and that's a natural/reasonable result.  But if he thinks this will somehow negatively affect the Dec quarter...he'll be mistaken.  Strong demand for 5c will continue (along with 5s).  And that's the bottom line for iPhone revenue.

post #97 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBeeson View Post

I'm glad to see someone take on Munster, if only for his history of outlandishly high predictions for Apple. You're right -- he (and the toadies who followed his lead, sans real sources) had a huge part in Apple's stock slide. If you're a fan of the company, it's so much fun to see these unrealistic predictions, until you realize that they're a set-up. Earnings day reports are bound to look bad if you only triple your profit when you were predicted to quadruple them. I guess.

Seems to me that Apple shareholders should just be content to realize that their company has more cash than it can invest and products that are groundbreaking, interesting and desired by a huge number of buyers. The analysts can ( and do) blow it out their a$$e$.

The problem is that investors can't simply ignore the idiots. AAPL is down 1.3% today - between yesterday and today, it's lost nearly half of its gains from Monday. Idiots like Munster do affect the market - no matter how idiotic their rants may be.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #98 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post
Most importantly, he wasn't truly wrong when he said this year's announcement about # of units sold was not the same as last year's. 

In what way was it 'different'? What part of what was 'different' was a surprise for Munster that he failed to factor into his analysis? 

post #99 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Then at the very least, having a law on the books stating they must list all compensations they receive directly or indirectly linked to their prognostications would be a good start. That would certainly make for good reading on these articles. I don't ever watch TV these days, only Netflix and Apple TV but on the odd occasion I do those pharm ads have me doubled over. I recall a Monty Python skit based on that idea before anyone actually did it (or had to). I am sure folks become deaf to it but hearing one after a long time not, is like watching John Cleese all over again.

And is always … if they hide pertinent information, that in of itself could be used against them more easily probably than the actual 'crime'. as Nixon and many others have found out.

 

The possible side reactions are quite funny, but do you know why there are so many and seem so crazy? Because ANYTHING that you experience while taking the drug is supposed to be reported (whether it is caused by the drug, who knows). Once you know that, it makes a little more sense (but doesn't really make the lists any less scary and/or funny).

post #100 of 128

DED and PED surely do shred analyst cred on AAPL! :lol: 

post #101 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Gene Munster still employed for the second year in a row

That’s the more important headline.

Now that's funny! I like it when u use humor to make ur point(s). Perhaps u should only post between 10am and 2pm? 1smile.gif
post #102 of 128
Thank you for an excellent editorial.

It is really appalling the endless nonsense produced by the financial press, particularly as regards Apple, and how none of these error filled pundits are rarely, if ever, called to the mat.

The latest, of course, is Munster's assertion that more than a third of Apple's weekend sales were "channel fill," a remarkable contention unsupported by any real evidence at all. In fact, a Goldman Sachs analyst has counted that such "fill" is not likely to be substantial given that Apple reserves the vast bulk of its stock to its own stores, for which sales are only counted when sold to a customer, as well as the fact that the 5s model, which is not subject to the "channel fill" concept as it sold out over the weekend, appears significantly more popular in every market, including the US, Japan and China, with the 5s comprising 80-90% of initial sales in the latter two markets.

Even more outrageous than Munster's fancy footwork is the Forbes' "contributor" who had estimated 3-4 million in sales -- i.e., off by 300% -- who also gratefully latched onto Munster's post-whiff revisionism.

Nor of course is there any explanation as to why this phenomenon was not part of the analysts' initial estimates. And it is, of course, these same brilliant analysts who have all sorts of brilliant ideas about how Apple should be running its business and how shocked they are when Apple does not follow their brilliant plans. "Presumptuous" hardly does such delusion justice.

One can be quite confident that Apple's management is not only smarter and harder working but also possessed of vastly more information than these "analysts" could ever conceive.
post #103 of 128

I don't know why anyone with an IQ above their shoe size pays attention to what Gene Munster says.

 

The sales split makes perfect sense in the markets reported. If you plan to keep your phone for 2 years the difference between the 5C and 5S is just 14 cents per day.

 

In China the iPhone is a status symbol that's priced well above the reach of the average citizen. In past years you could buy last year's model and nobody would be able to tell you paid less than full price. Now buying anything but the top-of-the-line model is obvious.

post #104 of 128
Gene has done a wonderful job with Apple stock; now, he should move onto covering Google stock, that stock is way too high, i am sure he can bring it down with a couple of analysis.
post #105 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitanTiger View Post
 

 

The point you dimbulbs keep missing is that this is not about anyone's ability to accurately predict future sales.  It is about their behavior once the numbers come in and show how wrong they were.  The proper response by Munster and others who saw Apple's actual sales blow away expectations is to praise Apple and discuss the factors that contributed to such a huge launch, such as having two "new" models available (the 5C is "newish" with the colored plastic backs and some minor upgrades over the 5) rather than one and the impact of China and Japan's largest carriers coming on board.  Instead what these idiots did is try to minimize the huge gains by saying Apple is fudging the numbers and that most of the increase is "channel sell-in" rather than actual sales.  They are insinuating that Apple changed the way they measure sales from how they've done in the past.  In other words, "I wasn't wrong, Apple just manipulated the numbers."

 

It's bullshit and they deserve to be called on it.  And you need to quit acting like you don't get that.

Dimbulbs like me?  Mighty presumptive statement coming from a knee-jerk douche-headed closed-minded ass-hatted dip-shit such as yourself.

 

How on earth did my comments have ANYTHING to do with yours?  As the title of the article states, and as the article lays out in detail, Munster has not been accurate at all with his projections.   In my comments, I was (and am still) truly wondering if there was anyone who HAD been accurate.  If you don't know the answer to my very simple and logical question, then shut the hell up.

post #106 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceek74 View Post

He was only off by 5 million.  Twice.  Let's cut him some slack.  I mean he and his analyst friends did do potential stock buyers a big favor by causing Apple's stock to drop, and quite significantly at that.

/s

In the future all Munster needs to do is present his estimate and add "plus or minus 5 million units."
"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 #107 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by runbuh View Post

Dimbulbs like me?  Mighty presumptive statement coming from a knee-jerk douche-headed closed-minded ass-hatted dip-shit such as yourself.

How on earth did my comments have ANYTHING to do with yours?  As the title of the article states, and as the article lays out in detail, Munster has not been accurate at all with his projections.   In my comments, I was (and am still) truly wondering if there was anyone who HAD been accurate.  If you don't know the answer to my very simple and logical question, then shut the hell up.

I'm sure glad he didn't really piss you off. 1hmm.gif
"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 #108 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Here's some bizarre math:  In a world where 9 million people all lined up at once, evenly distributed among the 413 brick-and-mortar Apple Stores worldwide, there would be an average of about 21,792 people per line.  Assuming about 1 foot of linear space per person on average, the lines would be nearly 4.13 miles long at each Apple Store around the world.

AND... when you factor in the birth/death rate of 9 million people, some of the lines will get longer while waiting to buy their iPhone instead of shorter.
"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 #109 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

 

If you call this article "tabloid trash" even when it was labeled as an editorial, then there isn't a word in the English language to describe articles on Engadget, AP, Reuters or any other news outlet that discuss things like labor practices of Apple's suppliers, pieces entirely devoid of balanced journalism and clearly designed to generate page views. 

post #110 of 128
Simply put, this is a one great editorial. Totally telling, and worthy of being read by the widest audience possible.
post #111 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

Was this article written to counter the piece in Business Insider where Munster said Apple only sold 5.5 million on launch weekend?

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-actually-only-sold-55-million-iphones-during-opening-weekend-says-gene-munster-2013-9

 

Munster basically said that Apple really only sold 5.5 million because the rest of the iPhones were in partner channel inventory.  Which is total bs.  None of the partners have the 5s either and there sold out everywhere not just apple.  He made up that ridiculous tripe to cover his own incompetent prediction, instead of just coming clean and admitting he made a mistake.  He's turning into just another analyst boob like all the rest of the retards that work on wallstreet.

post #112 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

Munster basically said that Apple really only sold 5.5 million because the rest of the iPhones were in partner channel inventory.  Which is total bs.  None of the partners have the 5s either and there sold out everywhere not just apple.  He made up that ridiculous tripe to cover his own incompetent prediction, instead of just coming clean and admitting he made a mistake.  He's turning into just another analyst boob like all the rest of the retards that work on wallstreet.

But remember many stores still had iPhones 5, 4/4S in inventory and any of those purchased would be included in iPhone sales but my guess is that they wouldn't be more than a few hundred thousand worth.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #113 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApplesInCider View Post

This is not journalism; this is tabloid trash.

This sort of article, whose sole purpose seems to be character assassination, reveals gossipy, agenda-driven, pro-company propagandists, and separates the author(s) from blogs of real journalistic integrity.

Can pure editorials please be better labeled and separated from news articles? I quite honestly must be missing something.

 

Obviously you need to go back and look at the article headline and the part where it says "Editorial".

 

But I will help you out:

 

Notice the Clearly market "Editorial" in the upper left part of the headline?

post #114 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


But remember many stores still had iPhones 5, 4/4S in inventory and any of those purchased would be included in iPhone sales but my guess is that they wouldn't be more than a few hundred thousand worth.

 

I dont know if they would be even that much but yes some of those iPhones would be the old 5 and 4s as the low end.  Tim Cook did say though and I cant remember where that the 5's were down to about 2 weeks of inventory just before the 5c and 5s's launch.  I know  locally the 5's are gone.  Most like walmart and best buy sold them for $79.00 just to get rid of them, and Walmart and Target were selling the 5c's for $79.00 as well.

post #115 of 128
I can't stand Gene Munster, yet I find your article very unconvincing. Far too much hyperbole and very little data to back up your core argument that Apple actually sold 9 million units.

The very last chart showing the Localytics data does seem to point to a significant lack of sales of the 5c model. If this is correct, then it is quite possible that at least in principle, Munster is correct; albeit, we have no idea how he got the 3.5 million number that he claims are sell-in numbers.

Before you attack, irrespective of if you ultimately end up being right or wrong, you should have your facts first, and you clearly don't!
post #116 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

You sure do sound like you must be missing something: the ability to read, for starters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SixPenceRicher View Post
 

WTF?  It clearly states "Editorial" on the front page headline.  Sheesh, get a friggin' clue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vvswarup View Post
 

If you call this article "tabloid trash" even when it was labeled as an editorial...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post
 

Obviously you need to go back and look at the article headline and the part where it says "Editorial".

 

 

 

There is no such label in the Ai iOS app (where I read it) or mobile web app (where I commented on it).


Edited by ApplesInCider - 9/25/13 at 9:23pm
post #117 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post
 

 

Munster basically said that Apple really only sold 5.5 million because the rest of the iPhones were in partner channel inventory.  Which is total bs.  None of the partners have the 5s either and there sold out everywhere not just apple.  He made up that ridiculous tripe to cover his own incompetent prediction, instead of just coming clean and admitting he made a mistake.  He's turning into just another analyst boob like all the rest of the retards that work on wallstreet.

 

Not sure why you're having difficulty following what Munster said.  Frankly, I have no idea if he is wrong or right, but his basic assumptions I thought were fairly easy to figure out:

 

1. He seems to have assumed that Apple shipped 9 million units out, of which 4.5 million were 5s and 4.5 million were 5c.

2. He's assumed that all the 5s units sold but that only 1 million of the 5c units sold.  Where he got that number from is anyone's guess, perhaps the 20% Localytics data quoted in this article.

3.  He then assumed that the remaining 3.5 million 5c units are still in the channel.

 

Voila, he now states that sell-through number is 5.5 million units.


Edited by JamesMac - 9/25/13 at 9:20pm
post #118 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesMac View Post

I can't stand Gene Munster, yet I find your article very unconvincing. Far too much hyperbole and very little data to back up your core argument that Apple actually sold 9 million units.

The very last chart showing the Localytics data does seem to point to a significant lack of sales of the 5c model. If this is correct, then it is quite possible that at least in principle, Munster is correct; albeit, we have no idea how he got the 3.5 million number that he claims are sell-in numbers.

Before you attack, irrespective of if you ultimately end up being right or wrong, you should have your facts first, and you clearly don't!

And there's little data saying Apple didn't sell 9 MM. It's also illegalfor a public company to lie. In addition, what's the benefit of lying?
post #119 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post
 

he also points out the very important fact the DED omitted that Apple does not include in the 9 million sales total all those iPhones that were ordered on line last weekend but not yet delivered to the buyer - Apple only charges your credit card when the phone is delivered (i just checked my own account and can confirm that is true) and only then records a "sale."

 

it's anyone's guess how many on line orders were made over the weekend - none could have been delivered that fast. 5 million more?

 Well, I'm one such person. Ordered a 64gb iPhone 5S on the weekend via Apple online, shipping "October". Apple Store employee confirmed in person that my credit card won't be charged til the phone ships.

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #120 of 128
WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Those anal ists should be fired if they guess 3 times in a row wrong , if what they guess is wrong is over 10% difference.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Gene Munster's iPhone launch estimates off by 5M units for the second year in a row