or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215

post #1 of 164
Thread Starter 
IDC reported 251.1 million smartphone shipments for Q3, reflecting 40 percent year over year market growth but an implosion in Average Selling Prices, at least outside of Apple's iPhone sales.

IDC smartphones Q3 2013


IDC highlights market share and volumes



IDC's public interpretation of its smartphone market figures were outlined in a press release that focused on market share, particularly noting that devices using Android now account for 81 percent of its total figures.

IDC also emphasized the percentage of growth in Microsoft's Windows Phone platform "which grew an amazing 156.0% year over year," the research firm stated. Windows Phone grew to 9.5 million shipments compared to 3.7 million in the year ago quarter, an increase of 5.8 million new shipments.

In contrast, Apple's iOS "saw its market share decline during 3Q13," IDC stated, outlining YoY sales growth of only 25.6 percent. However, based on IDC's numbers, Apple's sales grew from 26.9 million to 33.8 million, an increase of 6.9 million new sales.

Such percentage of growth numbers compare each platform to its own previous record, so using that metric to judge the relative performance of two different companies with different past records creates the impression that Windows Phone licensees are finding new customers faster than Apple, when really the opposite is true. The problem for Android is that its high volume sales are not generating profits, because the majority of those volumes represent very low end phones

Similarly, among Android licensees IDC reports YoY growth of "only" 51.3 percent, but that represents shipments of 71.7 million more devices than last year, more than ten times the number of new Phones sold.

Average Selling Prices plunge toward $200



The problem for Android is that its high volume sales are not generating profits, because the majority of those volumes represent very low end phones. We can easily deduce this by subtracting Apple's known revenue.

Apple's iPhone ASP for the quarter was $635, down from the company's year ago figures of $675. The company reported selling 33.8 million iPhones, resulting in about $21.5 billion in gross revenues.

IDC reported that overall "smartphone average selling prices (ASPs) have continued to decline as the appetite for more affordable devices grows. ASPs were down -12.5% in 3Q13, accounting for an average price of $317."

At $317 each, IDC's estimate of 261.1 million smartphones results in nearly $82.8 billion in total revenues. However, these numbers include Apple's much higher iPhone ASP. Subtract Apple's $21.5 billion and you're left with $61.3 billion.

Across the remaining, 227.3 million non-iPhone devices, that leaves an ASP of less than $270. However, most of the "smartphones" IDC is counting sell for far less than even this. We know this because IDC also outlined an ASP specific to premium phablets.



Peeling back layers of phablet



IDC defines phablets as large-screen smartphones with 5-7 inch screens and "more powerful and expensive components."

The firm reported that its ASPs for phablets plunged by 22.8 percent over the year ago quarter, and is now sitting at $443. In contrast, despite much handwringing about Apple's falling ASPs, the iPhone has only seen its ASP figures fall by 5.9 percent year over year.

Ryan Reith, IDC's Program Director for its Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, also revealed that, "in 3Q13, phablet shipments accounted for 21% of the smartphone market, up from just 3% a year ago," adding, "we believe the absence of a large-screen device may have contributed to Apple's inability to grow share in the third quarter."Market share growth achieved by slashing ASPs and margins is something that analysts both recommend and gravely warn about, but Apple isn't following the rest of the industry in doing that

Market share growth achieved by slashing ASPs and margins is something that analysts both recommend and gravely warn about, but Apple isn't following the rest of the industry in doing that.

IDC's 21 percent figure for phablets is remarkably high; previous numbers for big screen phones have been closer to 10 percent of the overall market, but as Reith noted, this is a new peak because just a year ago, the proportion of big screen phones was at just 3 percent.

That means phablets accounted for a whopping 54.8 million of the total number of Q3 smartphone shipments, 1.6 times as many phones as Apple sold in the quarter. Multiplied by IDC's $443 ASP, these phablets account for $24.3 billion in total revenue. That's more than Apple's total revenue, but there's far less profit there because the ASP per premium device is whopping $192 less.

ASPs in the smartphone market scraps



Add IDC's premium phablets to Apple's iPhone revenue number and subtract both from the total smartphone revenues IDC is outlining, and you get $37 billion remaining.

However, there are vast shipment volumes remaining too: 172.5 million "smartphones," accounting for 66 percent of all the total volumes IDC counted. Divide those remains and you get an ASP of $214.50.

This means Apple's 12.9 percent unit share of the "smartphone market" accounts for a 26 percent revenue share. Apple's profit share is even higher: around 75 percent, because it is only selling premium iPhones at an ASP that's nearly three times higher than the average price of two thirds of the entire "smartphone" market. About two thirds of the overall smartphone market is represented by extremely low end "mass market" devices

Other segments of the overall smartphone market involve devices with higher ASPs: IDC says Blackberry devices are currently selling for $386 and Windows Phone ASPs are $287. Combined with "other," however, these devices account for less than 6 percent of the entire market.

As IDC emphasizes, the "smartphone market" is 81 percent Android, so most of the incredibly cheap devices that are pushing ASPs toward $200 are super cheap Android phones that sell for even less than this average because the total Android ASP still includes some premium Android phones that don't count among phablets: 4-5 inch devices that sell for prices similar to Apple's iPhone, such as Samsung's flagship Galaxy S4.

This reinforces that about two thirds of the overall smartphone market is represented by extremely low end "mass market" devices that are really only called "smartphones" because the industry has decided that running Android makes a device "smart," even if it is a product like the Samsung Galaxy Y, with a hard to read, low resolution screen and such anemic processing power and limited memory that it can't really run apps and can't be upgraded, with hardware specs inferior to Apple's iPhone 3G from five years ago.



Strategy Analytics recently credited the ancient, essentially obsolete Galaxy Y as significant component of Samsung's "smartphone" shipment volumes, helping to further illustrate the worthlessness of marginalizing Apple's premium iPhone sales in a "market" that is mostly junk.

Last week, Samsung leaked a similar one third proportion of premium smartphones (its Galaxy S and Note lines) to its two thirds volume of low end devices, following up the admission that its smartphone sales growth is coming entirely from mid to low end models while its high end sales remain unchanged.

Samsung flat premium sales


Collapsing ASPs not just a problem for smartphones



While industry market research firms like IDC and Strategy Analytics consistently focus on market share and shipment volumes, it's becoming clear that smartphones are joining tablets in replicating the history of PC sales.

Over the decade of the 2000s, ASPs of PCs similarly crashed alongside the emergence of netbooks and similar attempts to deliver bargain priced devices. Apple swam against that trend, instead focusing on high mobility technologies including battery performance and solid state notebook designs, accompanied by higher prices.

The result in the PC market was that vendors who chased low prices delivered products that the market overwhelmingly rejected, while Apple consistently outpaced the market's growth with higher end, premium sales that drew repeat customers.

This trend is happening again in smartphones and tablets, where attempts to cater to low end markets have cast a negative impression over Android as a whole, apparent in the results of customer satisfaction surveys. But the problem for Android vendors is not that they aren't charging enough for their phones.

Market share not creating a solid platform



The plummeting ASPs affecting Android makers are happening despite efforts by Samsung and others to sell more high end flagships like its Galaxy S4 and Note 3. Prices are dropping rapidly on both the low end and among high end premium devices because slack demand is not supporting higher prices. Android's high market share in device shipments stands in stark contrast to Apple's overwhelming share visible in real world usage stats

This high volume, low profit strategy might make sense if there were some platform advantage to blanketing the globe with low cost smartphones. However, Android's 81 percent sales volumes aren't resulting in a boon for app developers, because two thirds of that volume is made up of low end devices that are effectively being used as basic camera phones.

Low end volume sales are also not helping Android hardware makers, most of whom are losing money. Few are even seeing market share gains. As IDC's report notes, "Samsung accounted for 39.9% of all Android shipments for the quarter, while the rest of the vendors either saw single-digit market share or, in the case of the majority of vendors, market share of less than 1%."

Android's heavy representation by the low end is also failing to provide Google with a viable alternative to Apple's iOS. Despite being ostensibly a larger platform, Android doesn't sell more apps or generate more advertising revenue.

Instead, Android's high market share in device shipments stands in stark contrast to Apple's overwhelming share visible in real world usage stats that indicate the vast majority of smartphone and tablet app and media sales, web browser use, ad network representation, enterprise adoption and retail shopping are occurring on iOS devices.
post #2 of 164

And this surprises WHO exactly?

post #3 of 164
Wall Street doesn%u2019t care, apparently.
post #4 of 164

EG: They are feature phones that run android, not smart phones.

 

there are no sales stats for android devices, so these numbers showing android winning are generally just made up. 

 

I know it's hard to believe that they are made up, but they are.

 

That's why these articles refer to "analysts" who are paid to make up numbers.

 

If you compare apples to Apples, iOS has had 4.9 billion activations to googles 1billion.  

post #5 of 164

That sounds about right but is a little surprising at the same time.

 

That 66% are low end is somewhat expected.  There is a huge market for low end that Apple chooses not to go after, so of course Android owns that.

 

The more surprising part is the remaining 34% of that 81% still leave Androids higher end phones crushing Apple's market share even in the high end phones- I had thought the high end market was closer to 50/50

post #6 of 164
We need a study to show this?

It has been obvious to anyone with half a brain from Day 1 of these silly market share statistics being thrown around.
post #7 of 164
So that's 81% (66 of 81) of Android phones are really just modern feature phones. Even if we consider the IDC to be accurate and objective without their typical lean away from anything Apple that's means Android's take is 15% (unadjusted) compared to Apple's 12.9%. I guess that sounds reasonable since I do see a lot of Galaxy phones with the large displays in the US, this still counts cheap "smartphones" that Apple doesn't do, and it is worldwide where Apple hasn't tackled much of the below-premium markets.

Removing those 66 point and adjusting the values now like this:




Consider how Apple get nearly half the PC profits from 10% of the PC sales and you see this isn't far fetched at all. Let the bottom dwellers live in their excrement.
post #8 of 164
They really should split up the market share numbers by price categories. It will put things in a different perspective.

And the Android mfg aren't making any profits. Every once in a while I read about another small Android player getting out. NEC got out of that business, and I'm sure there will be more. Unless these cell carriers are going to pay the smartphone mfg spiff money when they sign up for their services, the low priced players will end up spitting out essentially older technology for no profits.

I think these Android mfg should consider changing their business status to becoming a non-profit business. At least they'll be more in line with their business model.
post #9 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post
 

That sounds about right but is a little surprising at the same time.

 

That 66% are low end is somewhat expected.  There is a huge market for low end that Apple chooses not to go after, so of course Android owns that.

 

The more surprising part is the remaining 34% of that 81% still leave Androids higher end phones crushing Apple's market share even in the high end phones- I had thought the high end market was closer to 50/50

 

IDC says the high end "cream" of Android premium phablets that account for 21% or "a whopping 54.8 million of the total number of Q3 smartphone shipments, 1.6 times as many phones as Apple sold in the quarter," have an ASP of $443 ASP, $192 less than the iPhone. 

 

​So even when you compare iPhones to the biggest and best of Android, you’re still including lots of mid-grade stuff that delivers a poor experience and doesn’t contribute toward a viable platform (great apps and games). 

 

Going forward, Samsung is saying its high end has peaked, while Apple keeps growing (and its only high end). That’s an ominous trend, especially as Samsung attempts to break Android in half by jumping on its own Tizen platform. 

post #10 of 164
But but but high margins = ripping you off

"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 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

So that's 81% (66 of 81) of Android phones are really just modern feature phones. Even if we consider the IDC to be accurate and objective without their typical lean away from anything Apple that's means Android's take is 15% (unadjusted) compared to Apple's 12.9%. I guess that sounds reasonable since I do see a lot of Galaxy phones with the large displays in the US, this still counts cheap "smartphones" that Apple doesn't do, and it is worldwide where Apple hasn't tackled much of the below-premium markets.

Removing those 66 point and adjusting the values now like this:




Consider how Apple get nearly half the PC profits from 10% of the PC sales and you see this isn't far fetched at all. Let the bottom dwellers live in their excrement.

But, remember that the ~40% number for Android may be inflated, since we do not know the actual link between shipments and sales for any of these Android guys (there is no way to infer that, since they do not report volumes or channel inventory).

 

With Apple, we know both, and therefore, know that the ~34% pretty much represents actual sales (even though reported as 'shipments').

post #12 of 164
This must be why developers have never lusted over Android's phenomenal market share number.

The number is huge... but clearly not many of those phones that make up that number are worth a damn. And the users of those phones aren't downloading apps as much as that huge number would lead you to believe.

If someone buys an ultra cheap Android phone... they bought it because it's cheap... not because it's running Android. That person is not looking for an amazing app experience... they just bought it to be a phone.

This generation's low-end Android phones have taken the place of last generation's feature phones.

Nowadays... someone goes into the store to buy "a phone" and they walk out with a device that happens to be running Android.

That doesn't get developers excited... but all those phones sure make a big market share number.

Congratulations Google (?)
post #13 of 164
Android IS WINNING!!
post #14 of 164
"We don't ship junk."
~ Steve Jobs, 2008.

"We're not in the junk business."
~ Tim Cook, 2013.

Apple's *core* values seem to be alive and well.

Google can keep the *particular* market share crown they've got at the moment. It's certainly well-deserved.
post #15 of 164
Every damn week I'm forced to hear about Apple losing market share to Android in EVERY category possible. That's all the bloggers and Wall Street seems to focus on with the whole mobile industry. Seriously, what does it prove and why should anyone even care? Consumers are using what they're using and if they're satisfied with it it, good for them.

How come there aren't articles constantly being written about how Porsche is losing market share to Kia and Toyota and how it's killing Porsche's automobile business. What is so darn important about platform market share? Most of the companies selling Android devices are barely making anything from all that huge amount of market share although there must be some companies selling decent products that consumers are happy to be using. Should it matter to anyone if Casio is selling more watches than, say, Movado, Tag Heuer or Rolex?

Since when did the viability of individual companies become so unimportant compared to the size of the whole platform? Even Samsung admitted that they'd like to sell more high-end smartphones than they do. Still, Samsung is not losing money and it's business is not in danger of collapse like Apple's business is always made to seem like. This constant nonsense about how much market share a platform has is absolutely ridiculous. It just should be considered one statistic and not made to seem like the only important statistic there is. Nokia once had major cellphone market share but so what? It didn't save their business. BlackBerry (RIM) once had major smartphone market share and that didn't save their business, either. This market share crap is so retarded. Android is winning but winning what exactly? Certainly not a guarantee of preventing the platform from collapsing. There are no guarantees for that.
post #16 of 164
Part of the problem is that Android is kind of in two camps, running on a Samsung device or everyone else.

The others can't really differentiate themselves from Samsung apart from price & horrible UI skins, so they all try to under cut each other killing their profits.

Pitiful really.
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #17 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

Consider how Apple get nearly half the PC profits from 10% of the PC sales and you see this isn't far fetched at all. Let the bottom dwellers live in their excrement.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Oh lordy. Junk phones for the scum, is it? Perhaps karma will eat you from inside and the world will once again be in balance.

 

It's statistically inevitable that unit sales volume growth will increasingly be at lower price points. Whether you like it or not, the better smartphones get at the bottom end, the less real value there is at the top end. Unless top end prices fall, the difference in cost relies increasingly on buyer sentiment and less on tangible differentiation.

post #18 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb123 View Post

1rolleyes.gif

Oh lordy. Junk phones for the scum, is it? Perhaps karma will eat you from inside and the world will once again be in balance.

It's statistically inevitable that unit sales volume growth will increasingly be at lower price points. Whether you like it or not, the better smartphones get at the bottom end, the less real value there is at the top end. Unless top end prices fall, the difference in cost relies increasingly on buyer sentiment and less on tangible differentiation.

I can see how one can take my comment to mean I'm referring to users but I was referring to the vendors who call some cheap crap Android phone running a 2 year old out of date OS a smartphones. Those are the bottom dwellers (as in race to the bottom) to sell cheaper and cheaper devices with less and less of a margin instead of trying to create something of actual value.

The same goes for the PC market.
post #19 of 164
Not surprising but glad to know anyone can get a smart phone (Android or not) even though Samsung will fudge the #s to their favor for perception's sake over iOS. Lets not get into margins since I am tired of all of the Apple profit articles.
post #20 of 164
Excellent write up.

I wonder why the market can't see it.
post #21 of 164
Perhaps that's why no Android vendor releases real numbers or any real per unit data in their financials.
post #22 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb123 View Post
 

It's statistically inevitable that unit sales volume growth will increasingly be at lower price points. Whether you like it or not, the better smartphones get at the bottom end, the less real value there is at the top end. Unless top end prices fall, the difference in cost relies increasingly on buyer sentiment and less on tangible differentiation.

 

It sounds like you're predicting a dearth of future innovation.  Why would you assume that?

post #23 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
 
As IDC emphasizes, the "smartphone market" is 81 percent Android, so most of the incredibly cheap devices that are pushing ASPs toward $200 are super cheap Android phones that sell for even less than this average because the total Android ASP still includes some premium Android phones that don't count among phablets: 4-5 inch devices that sell for prices similar to Apple's iPhone, such as Samsung's flagship Galaxy S4.

 

 

If 5-7" screened phones are counted as "phablets", then that would include the S4 range (apart from the mini), the HTC One, Sony Xperia Z and others, which could explain the 21% share attributed to "phablets" and which would include almost all the premium Android phones.

 

So are they or are they not included in any other category?

 


Edited by hill60 - 11/12/13 at 5:10pm
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #24 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacAir View Post
 

Last but not least: Stop with these ignorant articles. A 250$ Android phone is the best computer the vast majority of internet users ever had, calling it "junk" clearly shows a huge lack of knowledge of the current situation worldwide as well as total ignorance from a technical point of view, both hardware and software. At 250$, you have a dual core + 1gb ram + good screen and jelly bean software. That gives you a great way to browse the web, facebook, listen to music, twitter and radio. That's 90% of the market.

 

 

Android phones start at below $50, you are trying to beat up a market that barely exists seeing as how you brought up "ignorance".

 

The people who buy these phones often do not want to pay extra associated data costs so do not use any thing other than voice calls and SMS, just like they did with the feature phones these "smartphones" are replacing. 

 

This shows up in usage stats where Android is the dark matter in the smartphone universe.


Edited by hill60 - 11/12/13 at 5:17pm
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #25 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzare View Post

I wonder why the market can't see it.

 

Maybe it's because the "market" exists to milk pension funds and other investors of their money and the volatility reports like these create helps them to do that with thousands of trades per second whenever a share price changes.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #26 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacAir View Post
 

And what is the goal of this article? People try and try to bend numbers to their will, but the fact is that Samsung makes as much money as Apple and is only going up. That's an undeniable truth, at least for the foreseeable future and anything else is guessing.

 

iOS is growing, especially due to Apple's powerful ecosystem in few countries like the US, but outside of those few countries Apple loses a lot of power to the point that they have nothing more to offer than, say, Android. They need time to change that.

 

Meanwhile, on the smartphone arena something is pretty clear: Samsung alone sells 2 thirds of the number of iPhones being sold based on their Galaxy S and Note lines, so there's something in Android/Samsung that attracts people that could add to Apple's bottom line. And what is that? Big screen, only that. Some people here will fiercely deny that, because:

 

  1. They love their iPhone;
  2. They know Android's drawbacks;
  3. They will defend Apple no matter what.

 

And that's ok (1 and 2), but the market has spoken and most users have to understand that they do not represent the entire market, all of us do. For each user that has and loves an iPhone with a 4" screen, another user that could have bought an iPhone, specifically said "no", because it has a smaller screen that severally limits the usability of a smartphone to anyone that browses the Web, reads or plays on their devices. Doesn't Apple have the talent to have both users? Then we have those that would prefer a bigger screen on an iPhone, but do not want Android, so they stay with Apple, for now.

 

This alone tells us that Apple has amazing growth margin on the high end, and together with Samsung's numbers, we know that flexibility also pays off. Apple can learn from that, the middle term: Choice on the high end, like on Macs, iPads, iPods.

 

Last but not least: Stop with these ignorant articles. A 250$ Android phone is the best computer the vast majority of internet users ever had, calling it "junk" clearly shows a huge lack of knowledge of the current situation worldwide as well as total ignorance from a technical point of view, both hardware and software. At 250$, you have a dual core + 1gb ram + good screen and jelly bean software. That gives you a great way to browse the web, facebook, listen to music, twitter and radio. That's 90% of the market.

 

And again, if it's all about money, Apple isn't ahead anymore. They might pull ahead this quarter, but if things do not change, Samsung electronics will definitely pull ahead next year. So, based on $, their strategy is at least as good as Apple's.

 

A) Samsung Electronics overall nets less than Apple. Samsung Mobile sells more phones and earns less than Apple. 

 

B) Saying "Apple's powerful ecosystem in few countries like the US" is flatly ignorant. Apple has movies for sale and rent everywhere from Anguilla to Zimbabwe. Apps are everywhere. Music is nearly everywhere. Some content like TV has limited markets, but far better than any other global source. Third party content is also more available to iOS than any other platform.  http://support.apple.com/kb/TS3599

 

C) You neglect to mention that Samsung has far wider distribution than Apple, and its recent success comes largely from violating IP worldwide. That’s now drawing to a close. It is failing with most of its new ventures, from Smart TV to Gear watches. Tizen is a mess, Android is a commodity business, and it will increasing need to pay Microsoft and other phone makers for IP licenses, on top of having razor thin profit margins and little prospects for turning that around. It’s spending unsustainable amounts on advertising and seeing limited benefits. Samsung faces competitors who are virtually identical to it. If Apple faces dire threats from commoditization, what future does Samsung have, given that it has little original anything, and that everything it has can be duped by LG or cloned by Lenovo and the masses of Chinese firms who excel at making cheap junk slightly cheaper? Samsung has no reputation for quality, or design, or even good software. 

 

D) Virtually all of your facts are completely backward. Makes one wonder why you share your uninformed opinions.

post #27 of 164
The usual delusional garbage... When iOS reach the one digit market share it will be another victory...
post #28 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

 

If 5-7" screened phones are counted as "phablets", then that would include the S4 range (apart from the mini), the HTC One, Sony Xperia Z and others, which could explain the 21% share attributed to "phablets" and which would include almost all the premium Android phones.

 

So are they or are they not included in any other category?

 

 

Any premium phones under 5" are bringing up the curve to that ASP of $215. 

 

It’s hard to imagine that 66% of the "smartphone" market averages $215, but that’s what IDC is saying. Clearly, most smartphones are basic feature phones that are fudging the line, creating a nonsense metric for smatphones that sounds good to Android fans but is really not at all connected to reality. Same thing with tablets, as I found in speaking to IDC

post #29 of 164
Seems like android is doing pretty well sales wise on both the low end and the high end. I'm curious to see how they did with the new iPhones. I'm especially interested to see how they do next year, with the revamped iPhone 6! In the mean time, I think share matters. I'm talking about usage share. Who buys more, who browses more. Androids high numbers are good for google, that's more ad hits for them. It also keeps developers interested despite the low usage. Apple business model is working - evidenced by their enormous piles of cash. Let's face it, they make a couple billion in profit every week. I think the iPhone 5c was a good move. I'd like to see larger screen iPhones, with keyboards that have swype, and a little bit lower end - maybe an iPhone nano. But, apple seems to have their strategy mapped out. The consumer is winning big time right now. Thanks to apple who is driving all this crazy innovation.
post #30 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

Seems like android is doing pretty well sales wise on both the low end and the high end. I'm curious to see how they did with the new iPhones. I'm especially interested to see how they do next year, with the revamped iPhone 6! In the mean time, I think share matters. I'm talking about usage share. Who buys more, who browses more. Androids high numbers are good for google, that's more ad hits for them. It also keeps developers interested despite the low usage. Apple business model is working - evidenced by their enormous piles of cash. Let's face it, they make a couple billion in profit every week. I think the iPhone 5c was a good move. I'd like to see larger screen iPhones, with keyboards that have swype, and a little bit lower end - maybe an iPhone nano. But, apple seems to have their strategy mapped out. The consumer is winning big time right now. Thanks to apple who is driving all this crazy innovation.

What "sales" did Android do that could be classified as "doing well"? I associate doing well in sales with money but there seems be none.
post #31 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensi View Post

The usual delusional garbage... When iOS reach the one digit market share it will be another victory...

You own it. Mass market garbage
post #32 of 164
Well this settles two things:

1. The high end android phones are outselling the iPhone.
2. Phablets are a large part of the smartphone landscape.

Phablets alone are selling 1.6x as many units as the iPhone sells, and there are only two phablets that fall into something other than the high end category that I'm aware of - the two Galaxy Mega models, which are mid-tier phones.

Outside of the phablet category are most of the flagship models of the last year (assuming the cutoff is 5" and above).

Nexus 4 - 4.7"
HTC One - 4.7"
Moto X - 4.7"
LG Optimus G - 4.7"
Droid RAZR HD - 4.7"

Apple needs to offer a larger screen ASAP. Maybe even the rumored two larger sizes in addition to the current size.
post #33 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post
 

 

IDC says the high end "cream" of Android premium phablets that account for 21% or "a whopping 54.8 million of the total number of Q3 smartphone shipments, 1.6 times as many phones as Apple sold in the quarter," have an ASP of $443 ASP, $192 less than the iPhone. 

 

​So even when you compare iPhones to the biggest and best of Android, you’re still including lots of mid-grade stuff that delivers a poor experience and doesn’t contribute toward a viable platform (great apps and games). 

 

Going forward, Samsung is saying its high end has peaked, while Apple keeps growing (and its only high end). That’s an ominous trend, especially as Samsung attempts to break Android in half by jumping on its own Tizen platform. 

 

I know its your job to say that Android midrange phones deliver 'a poor experience'- but they really are quite good.  And at the $443 range you're actually getting some very capable Android phones.  But yes, Apple does deliver an excellent and substantially pricier experience, I don't think anyone disputes that.  Apple fans saying 'Android stinks' to me is a lot like the Android fans who say Apple stinks... they are all wrong :p

 

I think you are right about the high end stuff.  The areas of the world that are high end oriented are fairly well saturated- pretty much anyone who wants a phone has one.  So the 'new' high enders are people moving from feature phones to the 'big leagues'  I think your prior article showed a big decline in feature phones- and a good number of those people are choosing Apple to move up to.  If Apple does release a bigger screened phone they'll put a tight squeeze on Samsung.


Edited by Frood - 11/12/13 at 6:42pm
post #34 of 164

I dont like the header. Even as an Apple user I find the word Junk Phone insulting.  Especially when you put the range up to $215. Which is ridiculous. Because you can call Sub $100 Junk. But there are a lot of phones at $215 which are very capable. They may not have the best design and quality software ecosystem like Apple. But they are anything but JUNK.

 

And it is exactly these kind of Attitude that makes more people hate apple for no logical reason.

post #35 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post

Every damn week I'm forced to hear about Apple losing market share to Android in EVERY category possible. That's all the bloggers and Wall Street seems to focus on with the whole mobile industry. Seriously, what does it prove and why should anyone even care? Consumers are using what they're using and if they're satisfied with it it, good for them.

How come there aren't articles constantly being written about how Porsche is losing market share to Kia and Toyota and how it's killing Porsche's automobile business. What is so darn important about platform market share? Most of the companies selling Android devices are barely making anything from all that huge amount of market share although there must be some companies selling decent products that consumers are happy to be using. Should it matter to anyone if Casio is selling more watches than, say, Movado, Tag Heuer or Rolex?

Since when did the viability of individual companies become so unimportant compared to the size of the whole platform? Even Samsung admitted that they'd like to sell more high-end smartphones than they do. Still, Samsung is not losing money and it's business is not in danger of collapse like Apple's business is always made to seem like. This constant nonsense about how much market share a platform has is absolutely ridiculous. It just should be considered one statistic and not made to seem like the only important statistic there is. Nokia once had major cellphone market share but so what? It didn't save their business. BlackBerry (RIM) once had major smartphone market share and that didn't save their business, either. This market share crap is so retarded. Android is winning but winning what exactly? Certainly not a guarantee of preventing the platform from collapsing. There are no guarantees for that.

 

That is where you need to take a step back and ask yourself what matters to *you*   If you love Apple products and love using them and the Apple experience I'd say stop worrying about blogs, Apple share price, and what Wall Street says.  Apple is going to continue delivering great phones and great experiences for many many years to come.   Period.  Kick back and enjoy.

 

If you are primarily an investor, and your primary interest in Apple is not using their products but rather buying their shares in the hopes that you can sell them for more money at a later date- all those blogs and articles probably should concern you, and just take all of your 'Apple passion' out of the argument.  Apple's current valuation is based on them selling an insane amount of phones at profit margins much higher than other competitors in the market.  Continuing to do as well as they are currently doing will not drive their stock price up- it will generally mean they are correctly valued and the stock price will remain relatively flat.  In order for them to increase their valuation Apple will either need to sell substantially more phones at their current margins, or sell the same number of phones for higher margins.  If they start selling few phones, or sell a similar number of phones at lower margins- their valuation goes down.  Their valuation going down does not mean their phones are lousy, or Apple 'sucks' or anything along those lines- it just means they are selling fewer.

 

The high end smartphone binge has been an amazing ride but is slowing down.  Growth rates of 200%, 140%, 80% yoy were tremendous- but they are a thing of the past.  Now even 20ish percent gain yoy is a pretty darn good feat.  So the 'upside' is viewed as limited (Apple is not going to double phone sales yoy) while the 'downside' remains a possibility.  High margins in a competitive industry are generally not sustainable.  The wild card for Apple is that they have a knack for coming out with a breakthrough that can reinvigorate sales and add a surprise new revenue stream.  *NOBODY* knows the right answer.  If they did there would not be a stock market.  So as an investor your job is to try to take in as much information as you can, and invest where you think you can get the most returns while taking on the least risk.  The phone market gets a lot of attention because it moves so fast- in your own example Nokia and Blackberry highlight the risks of choosing the wrong side.  You just choose to focus on the 'phone wars'  If you want to see people arguing about Porsche, Kia, or any thing imaginable- go to investment sites like investor's business daily (investors.com) or the Motley Fool (fool.com).   You'll get a lot of great arguments on both sides of any argument (and in time half of them will be proven to have been 'terrible' arguments).   Apple's products are generally so well loved that quite a few people let their passion for the product translate into passion for what the share price is doing.  Plain and simple- that's a mistake if you are going to invest, but it can be acceptably fun if you're just going to 'talk' on a blog.   Saying 'Apple is freakin' *awesome* so their share price should be umpty gajillion dollars, no price is high enough to value Apple! is a lot different then putting your life savings in the stock with that expectation.

 

Since it generally sounds like you get quite stressed about it.....

 

Enjoying great products is a lot less stressful than investing.  Apple isn't going anywhere anytime soon regardless of what their share price does.

 

Think about it... In order for Apple to go away soon someone would have to deliver a vastly superior offering- so you'd get that instead.  Win/win    (plenty of people that loved their Blackberry's in the day are now loving their iPhones)


Edited by Frood - 11/12/13 at 7:35pm
post #36 of 164

does IDC keep track of total smartphones not subsidized by mobile operators?

post #37 of 164

Wonder how much of the 66% "junk" devices of Android 81% marketshare are losing money?

 

For comparison, I wonder what % of PCs manufactured which compose Windows 87% marketshare are considered "junk" PC's. 

Wonder how much of those % "junk" PCs which compose Windows 87% marketshare are losing money?

 

correlation? I think so. 


Edited by snova - 11/12/13 at 8:16pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #38 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

That is where you need to take a step back and ask yourself what matters to *you*  . . . 

 

I wonder if you chime in on most of the other tech sites, where (they believe) Google has already won the smartphone wars with its 80% market share.  

 

Is it informative, or even intellectually honest, to compare the market shares of the iPhone and a piece of garbage phone from Pantech?  Of course not.  Then why do tech bloggers persist in doing so?  And why do you object to the author pointing out their persistent distortions?  

post #39 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post
 

 

Any premium phones under 5" are bringing up the curve to that ASP of $215. 

 

It’s hard to imagine that 66% of the "smartphone" market averages $215, but that’s what IDC is saying. Clearly, most smartphones are basic feature phones that are fudging the line, creating a nonsense metric for smatphones that sounds good to Android fans but is really not at all connected to reality. Same thing with tablets, as I found in speaking to IDC

 

Someone  needs to learn the definition of a feature phone versus a smartphone.  Feature phones aren't included in this IDC data, they report that separately under 'mobile phones'.

 

Suggest you go read about Micromax (India) and Coolpad (China) to learn what kind of smartphones people buy for much less than $215

post #40 of 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post
 

 

A) Samsung Electronics overall nets less than Apple. Samsung Mobile sells more phones and earns less than Apple. 

 

 

 

The 3Q for Samsung and 4Q results from Apple came out fairly recently.

 

Samsung Electronic's net profit was approx. $7.7 billion and Apple's was $7.5    The Operating profit for Apple was higher, but you've stated net profit, where Samsung beat Apple.


Edited by JamesMac - 11/12/13 at 8:55pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › IDC data shows 66% of Android's 81% smartphone share are junk phones selling for $215