"An analysis of Verizon Wireless smartphone sales over the past year indicates why the carrier is suddenly demonstrating interest in Apple's iPad and iPhone"
I wouldn't say Verizon's interest in the iPhone is sudden at all. Rumors of a Verizon iPhone have been going now for almost a year if not longer.
Rumors do not equal "Verizon's interest." The article specifically posits that the relatively underwhelming (and relatively recent) performance of Android makes Verizon much more receptive to an iPhone deal.
Quote:
And Android based phones are no slouch compared to the iPhone. The only reason Verizon is working on a deal with Apple is name recognition. People will buy big names regardless of needs, features, value, etc. - just ask any advertising agency.
Lord, did you even read the article? The whole point is that Android phones aren't giving Verizon the numbers they'd want. No one is saying that Android is a "slouch", just that the iPhone is doing a lot more for AT&T than Android is doing for Verizon--hence their (theorized) new openness to getting the iPhone on their network.
Quote:
I have an iPhone 4, and I owned the first Android phone available. I like them both, but get real; Android sales are not disappointing, but additional iPhone sales would be better.
So you didn't read the article. The entire premise is that, relative to the performance of the iPhone on AT&T, Android sales at Verizon are, in fact, "disappointing." That's not the entire Android market or world wide sales, it's sales on one American carrier vs. another American carrier.
Quote:
I own a new iPhone 4 for only one reason, Radio Shack offered a great discount last week. Before last week I was set on moving to an Android based phone.
What a piece of crap article that was.
Right. Because you almost bought an Android phone but were swayed by a modest upfront savings, so obviously it's impossible for Android sales on Verizon to be underperforming the market. That's extremely persuasive.
Wow - "AT&T now selling 2.5 times as many iPhones as Verizon is Android models". Comparing apples and orangutans. DED really spinning the stats there. Spin doctor is spinning like a top.
Sigh. The article is just reporting on what's being said at Asymco, which is a pretty level headed, data driven site.
What about iPhones at AT&T compared to Android phones at Verizon do you consider "apples and orangutans"? What is being spun?
According to new analysis by Asymco, data published earlier by ITG Investment Research analyst Matthew Goodman shows just how much the iPhone has done to blunt Verizon's growth, and how little Android has done to help Verizon.
So your source is "analysis" by Asymco, who published data by a research analyst. To quote:
Quote:
ITG Investment Research analyst Matthew Goodman is forecasting monthly sales record for all of Verizon’s devices “based largely on our proprietary daily point-of-sale data from thousands of independent wireless retailers across the US.”
Ok, so far so good, if we use the same source for all the numbers. BUT:
Quote:
Strike three, the site states, is that Android is simply not competitive with Apple's iPhone. "In an apples-to-apples comparison," the report states, "in Q3 the iPhone at AT&T outsold Android at Verizon (remember, same addressable market) by a factor of 2.5. This is with a variety of devices and vendors thrown in the market. We hardly ever get to see this finely grained a comparison when looking at platforms."
is a fallacy, since it is based on incomplete data. Android is sold at all carriers. To come to the conclusion that Android cannot compete with the iphone based on how it sells at Verizon is downright retarded. In fact, most of my friends jumped from Att/iphones to Sprint, and got EVOs.
That doesn't mean though the iphone isn't still edging out Android. Even if it were/were not, so what? Who cares except fanboys stirred up by DED?
Of course, Apple could just start selling the iphone everywhere so as to stop this stupid bull shit of having to use POS Att and we can settle this argument once and for all.
Good info. Charts are a little deceptive, but it is pretty clear that Verizon's smart phone subscriber base is flat, RIM lost 45 points, and Android gained 35 points. AT&T has added or converted more smartphone users.
...All of this with Verizon pouring lots of money into advertising and creating a brand for Android.
Then is the real story that Verizon is losing smartphone users, or that RIM is falling apart? If RIM had just been flat, Verizon would have gained quite a bit. It is still shocking that AT&T is growing as fast as it is. Shows the massive appeal of the iPhone, and I suspect AT&T will be in deep crap in a few months.
You're right about VZW users waiting. Being long 'invested' with Apple gear, and having been disappointed with the android marketplace. There are quite a few of us out there unable due to coverage, or unwilling to use At&t. If I'm having to pay the high data fees, I want the smart phone that will match the accumulated Apple hardware/software. Too bad that T-Mobile has not built-out their data system & that Apple hasn't flipped that switch.
So your source is "analysis" by Asymco, who published data by a research analyst. To quote:
Why the scare quotes on analysis? If you read it at all, Asymco is pretty good site, in my book, that does just plain old analysis.
Quote:
is a fallacy, since it is based on incomplete data. Android is sold at all carriers. To come to the conclusion that Android cannot compete with the iphone based on how it sells at Verizon is downright retarded.
Which isn't what the article or analysis is about. It's about Verizon.
Quote:
In fact, most of my friends jumped from Att/iphones to Sprint, and got EVOs.
Cool, so you've refuted the irrelevant "fallacy" with a irrelevant random anecdotal observation.
Quote:
Of course, Apple could just start selling the iphone everywhere so as to stop this stupid bull shit of having to use POS Att and we can settle this argument once and for all.
I think Apple will start selling the iPhone at Verizon as soon as Verizon agrees to Apple's terms, which, again, was pretty much what the article was about.
Good info. Charts are a little deceptive, but it is pretty clear that Verizon's smart phone subscriber base is flat, RIM lost 45 points, and Android gained 35 points. AT&T has added or converted more smartphone users.
...All of this with Verizon pouring lots of money into advertising and creating a brand for Android.
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
So you don't think they would be concerned about having a flat share of a growing pie?
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
Well stated. There is a reason that this report hasn't gotten mainstream media attention.
So you don't think they would be concerned about having a flat share of a growing pie?
That isn't what this data is showing at ALL
READ the data.
It's looking at % breakdowns based on smartphone OS. NOT on the number of NEW smartphone subscribers (from other carriers, or on upgrades) added to the pie. EVERY report commenting on smartphone % growth shows that Verizon is gaining a lot of new smartphone subscribers compared to where they were.
Not to mention that this data is gathered from 3rd party retailers. Smartphones are high ticket items, so people try to get them where they are cheap. I hope this data includes sales from best buy, walmart, wirefly, lets talk, etc. it already is missing data from corporate locations, if it is missing big box data it really doesn't tell us anything.
at an average third party retailer, it's 300 on store for a Droid x. Go to a big box, it's 200 or cheaper. Go online, it's as little as $50. Where do you think people will buy the phone?
What's interesting about the numbers is the rate of growth for iphone from Q1 to Q2 is the same as for Android from Q2 to Q3. What most people have ignored is that Apple does one release a year so there's one time a year that the sales go through the roof and then it settles back down to it's norm. Android doesn't have one release per year so the sales are more predictable. It will be interesting to see the sales charts for 2011 Q1 to Q2.
Also interesting is that the charts have WebOS gaining in both quarters even if by just a little. I would have thought that WebOS had tanked in that time.
I'm also curious about the sales numbers. In the chart on the left it shows WebOS gaining marketshare from Q1-Q3 and and Android gaining marketshare from Q2 to Q3. However sales of phones made by those same companies have tanked in Q3 in the chart on the right. In all cases the sales at the end of Oct10 are lower than in July before the brief peak in Aug10. If the sales of all Android and WebOS phones are going down than how are they going up at the same time? This means that a company besides Palm is making WebOS devices and someone besides the Android big boys are making Android devices but who? I don't know of any other company making WebOS devices than Palm but their sales are going up overall in Q3 but down in the number of devices. I'd like to see how these numbers were created.
I don't know the source of the numbers but it's not very clear what's really happening from the article.
What's interesting about the numbers is the rate of growth for iphone from Q1 to Q2 is the same as for Android from Q2 to Q3. What most people have ignored is that Apple does one release a year so there's one time a year that the sales go through the roof and then it settles back down to it's norm. Android doesn't have one release per year so the sales are more predictable. It will be interesting to see the sales charts for 2011 Q1 to Q2.
Also interesting is that the charts have WebOS gaining in both quarters even if by just a little. I would have thought that WebOS had tanked in that time.
I'm also curious about the sales numbers. In the chart on the left it shows WebOS gaining marketshare from Q1-Q3 and and Android gaining marketshare from Q2 to Q3. However sales of phones made by those same companies have tanked in Q3 in the chart on the right. In all cases the sales at the end of Oct10 are lower than in July before the brief peak in Aug10. If the sales of all Android and WebOS phones are going down than how are they going up at the same time? This means that a company besides Palm is making WebOS devices and someone besides the Android big boys are making Android devices but who? I don't know of any other company making WebOS devices than Palm but their sales are going up overall in Q3 but down in the number of devices. I'd like to see how these numbers were created.
I don't know the source of the numbers but it's not very clear what's really happening from the article.
A lot of retailers pushed the WebOS devices because of the free tethering and Verizon offered an insane compensation on commissions for it to try and clear it out of inventory. As this data is gathered from 3rd party retailers POS systems, this could be the case.
Also the Pixi is free (no rebate) and the pre is 50.. never underestimate the selling power of a free device.
Why the scare quotes on analysis? If you read it at all, Asymco is pretty good site, in my book, that does just plain old analysis.
It's one persons quote from an analyst from their "proprietary data collection", not actual sales data from Verizon, as I already posted.
Quote:
Which isn't what the article or analysis is about. It's about Verizon.
The article is about Verizon. The conclusion of point three that Android cannot compete with the iphone because Verizon isn't selling as many Android phones as Att's iphones is a logical fallacy. The fact that dumbass troll DED pegged the headline as "Android's weak sales" based on only sales of Verizon and not even counting Att as they sell Android phones, is again, a fallacy.
Verizon may not be selling as many smartphones due to their 3G tech vs. 3.75G tech from Sprint or Att, their particular smartphone offerings, reputation, costs of ownership, competition from Sprint, or whatever. To flatly lay the blame on "weak sales" of Android is quite the wrong conclusion.
Quote:
Cool, so you've refuted the irrelevant "fallacy" with a irrelevant random anecdotal observation.
Yes, by showing that people can go to other carriers other than Verizon and get Android based phones. In other words, Verizon can go out of business and Att, T-Mobile and Sprint can all still sell near or even more iphones.
To draw a more accurate (yet still somewhat inconclusive) picture, we need to see all smartphone sales of Att, not just the iphone, and all smartphone sales of the other carriers. And...
Quote:
I think Apple will start selling the iPhone at Verizon as soon as Verizon agrees to Apple's terms, which, again, was pretty much what the article was about.
So let's say they do. Then as usual, we can all see whether Android lives or dies. Even if they have 25% and Apple 40%, it isn't like we can't all just get along. With people like DED it's either 95% for Apple and everyone else is "other"
Numbers are always going to be massaged on both sides of the issue. For example, an article on the Financial Times website published today states the following:
"More than 300,000 Android handsets are activated each day, according to Google, up from 200,000 in August. By contrast, Apple reported shipments of 14.1m iPhones during its most recent quarter, to September 25, or roughly 150,000 a day."
A different argument altogether, sure. But are Android's "weak sales" really the motivating factor behind Verizon's desire to add the iPhone to its offerings? I seriously doubt it.
Let's all agree on this, carriers don't care about a smartphone user switching from one smartphone to another since they pay the same amount for a data plan.
However, gaining NEW data plan subscribers from former featurephone users is the real goal of all carriers. And let's face it, if you were on AT&T before, you already had an iPhone if you wanted a smartphone. No self-respecting geek would let their friends buy an AT&T Android or Palm phone. The network sucks!
Verizon customers for the first time last year had a smartphone OS that was meant for general consumers (Android), and I'm sure they bought them in droves. Now, we all know that such a thing wouldn't have happened were the iPhone on Verizon, but it has. And Verizon is taking that money to the bank.
As much as Verizon loves money, they do not want to get steamrolled by Apple dictating all the rules. They know they have the best network. They know that their LTE network currently has the best speeds. And they know that even if Android isn't the best thing out there, network speed will be an important factor in next-gen mobile uses (streaming HD video, uploading photos, video chatting, etc..) Regardless of how awesome your phone is, if the network can't handle it, it's feature set is limited. And Verizon f***ing knows it. So it's going to bargain with Apple until it gets the best deal possible.
Anyway, hopefully an LTE iPhone works on both Verizon and AT&T. I'm tired of this proprietary bullcrap.
A different argument altogether, sure. But are Android's "weak sales" really the motivating factor behind Verizon's desire to add the iPhone to its offerings? I seriously doubt it.
Huh?
My competitor's store is across the street... I can look out my front window and see that his sales are increasing at a greater rate than mine due greatly to a product that he carries that I don't carry... and I wouldn't be motivated to also carry that product??!!
Comments
sounds like Don Juan.
"An analysis of Verizon Wireless smartphone sales over the past year indicates why the carrier is suddenly demonstrating interest in Apple's iPad and iPhone"
I wouldn't say Verizon's interest in the iPhone is sudden at all. Rumors of a Verizon iPhone have been going now for almost a year if not longer.
Rumors do not equal "Verizon's interest." The article specifically posits that the relatively underwhelming (and relatively recent) performance of Android makes Verizon much more receptive to an iPhone deal.
And Android based phones are no slouch compared to the iPhone. The only reason Verizon is working on a deal with Apple is name recognition. People will buy big names regardless of needs, features, value, etc. - just ask any advertising agency.
Lord, did you even read the article? The whole point is that Android phones aren't giving Verizon the numbers they'd want. No one is saying that Android is a "slouch", just that the iPhone is doing a lot more for AT&T than Android is doing for Verizon--hence their (theorized) new openness to getting the iPhone on their network.
I have an iPhone 4, and I owned the first Android phone available. I like them both, but get real; Android sales are not disappointing, but additional iPhone sales would be better.
So you didn't read the article. The entire premise is that, relative to the performance of the iPhone on AT&T, Android sales at Verizon are, in fact, "disappointing." That's not the entire Android market or world wide sales, it's sales on one American carrier vs. another American carrier.
I own a new iPhone 4 for only one reason, Radio Shack offered a great discount last week. Before last week I was set on moving to an Android based phone.
What a piece of crap article that was.
Right. Because you almost bought an Android phone but were swayed by a modest upfront savings, so obviously it's impossible for Android sales on Verizon to be underperforming the market. That's extremely persuasive.
Wow - "AT&T now selling 2.5 times as many iPhones as Verizon is Android models". Comparing apples and orangutans. DED really spinning the stats there. Spin doctor is spinning like a top.
Sigh. The article is just reporting on what's being said at Asymco, which is a pretty level headed, data driven site.
What about iPhones at AT&T compared to Android phones at Verizon do you consider "apples and orangutans"? What is being spun?
According to new analysis by Asymco, data published earlier by ITG Investment Research analyst Matthew Goodman shows just how much the iPhone has done to blunt Verizon's growth, and how little Android has done to help Verizon.
So your source is "analysis" by Asymco, who published data by a research analyst. To quote:
ITG Investment Research analyst Matthew Goodman is forecasting monthly sales record for all of Verizon’s devices “based largely on our proprietary daily point-of-sale data from thousands of independent wireless retailers across the US.”
Ok, so far so good, if we use the same source for all the numbers. BUT:
Strike three, the site states, is that Android is simply not competitive with Apple's iPhone. "In an apples-to-apples comparison," the report states, "in Q3 the iPhone at AT&T outsold Android at Verizon (remember, same addressable market) by a factor of 2.5. This is with a variety of devices and vendors thrown in the market. We hardly ever get to see this finely grained a comparison when looking at platforms."
is a fallacy, since it is based on incomplete data. Android is sold at all carriers. To come to the conclusion that Android cannot compete with the iphone based on how it sells at Verizon is downright retarded. In fact, most of my friends jumped from Att/iphones to Sprint, and got EVOs.
That doesn't mean though the iphone isn't still edging out Android. Even if it were/were not, so what? Who cares except fanboys stirred up by DED?
Of course, Apple could just start selling the iphone everywhere so as to stop this stupid bull shit of having to use POS Att and we can settle this argument once and for all.
Good info. Charts are a little deceptive, but it is pretty clear that Verizon's smart phone subscriber base is flat, RIM lost 45 points, and Android gained 35 points. AT&T has added or converted more smartphone users.
...All of this with Verizon pouring lots of money into advertising and creating a brand for Android.
Then is the real story that Verizon is losing smartphone users, or that RIM is falling apart? If RIM had just been flat, Verizon would have gained quite a bit. It is still shocking that AT&T is growing as fast as it is. Shows the massive appeal of the iPhone, and I suspect AT&T will be in deep crap in a few months.
So your source is "analysis" by Asymco, who published data by a research analyst. To quote:
Why the scare quotes on analysis? If you read it at all, Asymco is pretty good site, in my book, that does just plain old analysis.
is a fallacy, since it is based on incomplete data. Android is sold at all carriers. To come to the conclusion that Android cannot compete with the iphone based on how it sells at Verizon is downright retarded.
Which isn't what the article or analysis is about. It's about Verizon.
In fact, most of my friends jumped from Att/iphones to Sprint, and got EVOs.
Cool, so you've refuted the irrelevant "fallacy" with a irrelevant random anecdotal observation.
Of course, Apple could just start selling the iphone everywhere so as to stop this stupid bull shit of having to use POS Att and we can settle this argument once and for all.
I think Apple will start selling the iPhone at Verizon as soon as Verizon agrees to Apple's terms, which, again, was pretty much what the article was about.
PS: This article is Samab?s bat signal. Prepare for unrelenting defense of Verizon?s subscriber numbers.
ha - he posted right before you
I find it amusing he's using the "Verizon doesn't care about marketshare" meme - esp. since they brag about it in all of their advertising.
Yup, they don't care
Good info. Charts are a little deceptive, but it is pretty clear that Verizon's smart phone subscriber base is flat, RIM lost 45 points, and Android gained 35 points. AT&T has added or converted more smartphone users.
...All of this with Verizon pouring lots of money into advertising and creating a brand for Android.
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
So you don't think they would be concerned about having a flat share of a growing pie?
Then again, in northern Virgina, Verizon reigns supreme in their coverage...
Not according to root metrics iphone app (and my experience)
AT&T works just fine for me.
No it actually doesn't show that at all. The chart is assuming that the number of smartphone users remained static. It didn't
What it's doing is showing how smartphone sales break down once you remove the % of smartphone sales compared to total subscribers.
EVERY major tech blog ran the article a few months ago showing the phenomenal growth of Verizon's smartphone market. That's the number Verizon cares about. Smartphone sales are anything but a zero sum game.
The stats, as their presented, are completely pointless when trying to figure out how verizon perceives things. The number of smartphone users (compared to total subscribers) is significantly higher now than it was a year ago. THAT is what they care about.
It's yet another piece of misinformation mis-quoted by this site by someone who doesn't understand the first thing about the subject matter.
Well stated. There is a reason that this report hasn't gotten mainstream media attention.
So you don't think they would be concerned about having a flat share of a growing pie?
That isn't what this data is showing at ALL
READ the data.
It's looking at % breakdowns based on smartphone OS. NOT on the number of NEW smartphone subscribers (from other carriers, or on upgrades) added to the pie. EVERY report commenting on smartphone % growth shows that Verizon is gaining a lot of new smartphone subscribers compared to where they were.
Not to mention that this data is gathered from 3rd party retailers. Smartphones are high ticket items, so people try to get them where they are cheap. I hope this data includes sales from best buy, walmart, wirefly, lets talk, etc. it already is missing data from corporate locations, if it is missing big box data it really doesn't tell us anything.
at an average third party retailer, it's 300 on store for a Droid x. Go to a big box, it's 200 or cheaper. Go online, it's as little as $50. Where do you think people will buy the phone?
Also interesting is that the charts have WebOS gaining in both quarters even if by just a little. I would have thought that WebOS had tanked in that time.
I'm also curious about the sales numbers. In the chart on the left it shows WebOS gaining marketshare from Q1-Q3 and and Android gaining marketshare from Q2 to Q3. However sales of phones made by those same companies have tanked in Q3 in the chart on the right. In all cases the sales at the end of Oct10 are lower than in July before the brief peak in Aug10. If the sales of all Android and WebOS phones are going down than how are they going up at the same time? This means that a company besides Palm is making WebOS devices and someone besides the Android big boys are making Android devices but who? I don't know of any other company making WebOS devices than Palm but their sales are going up overall in Q3 but down in the number of devices. I'd like to see how these numbers were created.
I don't know the source of the numbers but it's not very clear what's really happening from the article.
What's interesting about the numbers is the rate of growth for iphone from Q1 to Q2 is the same as for Android from Q2 to Q3. What most people have ignored is that Apple does one release a year so there's one time a year that the sales go through the roof and then it settles back down to it's norm. Android doesn't have one release per year so the sales are more predictable. It will be interesting to see the sales charts for 2011 Q1 to Q2.
Also interesting is that the charts have WebOS gaining in both quarters even if by just a little. I would have thought that WebOS had tanked in that time.
I'm also curious about the sales numbers. In the chart on the left it shows WebOS gaining marketshare from Q1-Q3 and and Android gaining marketshare from Q2 to Q3. However sales of phones made by those same companies have tanked in Q3 in the chart on the right. In all cases the sales at the end of Oct10 are lower than in July before the brief peak in Aug10. If the sales of all Android and WebOS phones are going down than how are they going up at the same time? This means that a company besides Palm is making WebOS devices and someone besides the Android big boys are making Android devices but who? I don't know of any other company making WebOS devices than Palm but their sales are going up overall in Q3 but down in the number of devices. I'd like to see how these numbers were created.
I don't know the source of the numbers but it's not very clear what's really happening from the article.
A lot of retailers pushed the WebOS devices because of the free tethering and Verizon offered an insane compensation on commissions for it to try and clear it out of inventory. As this data is gathered from 3rd party retailers POS systems, this could be the case.
Also the Pixi is free (no rebate) and the pre is 50.. never underestimate the selling power of a free device.
Why the scare quotes on analysis? If you read it at all, Asymco is pretty good site, in my book, that does just plain old analysis.
It's one persons quote from an analyst from their "proprietary data collection", not actual sales data from Verizon, as I already posted.
Which isn't what the article or analysis is about. It's about Verizon.
The article is about Verizon. The conclusion of point three that Android cannot compete with the iphone because Verizon isn't selling as many Android phones as Att's iphones is a logical fallacy. The fact that dumbass troll DED pegged the headline as "Android's weak sales" based on only sales of Verizon and not even counting Att as they sell Android phones, is again, a fallacy.
Verizon may not be selling as many smartphones due to their 3G tech vs. 3.75G tech from Sprint or Att, their particular smartphone offerings, reputation, costs of ownership, competition from Sprint, or whatever. To flatly lay the blame on "weak sales" of Android is quite the wrong conclusion.
Cool, so you've refuted the irrelevant "fallacy" with a irrelevant random anecdotal observation.
Yes, by showing that people can go to other carriers other than Verizon and get Android based phones. In other words, Verizon can go out of business and Att, T-Mobile and Sprint can all still sell near or even more iphones.
To draw a more accurate (yet still somewhat inconclusive) picture, we need to see all smartphone sales of Att, not just the iphone, and all smartphone sales of the other carriers. And...
I think Apple will start selling the iPhone at Verizon as soon as Verizon agrees to Apple's terms, which, again, was pretty much what the article was about.
So let's say they do. Then as usual, we can all see whether Android lives or dies. Even if they have 25% and Apple 40%, it isn't like we can't all just get along. With people like DED it's either 95% for Apple and everyone else is "other"
"More than 300,000 Android handsets are activated each day, according to Google, up from 200,000 in August. By contrast, Apple reported shipments of 14.1m iPhones during its most recent quarter, to September 25, or roughly 150,000 a day."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/ebbfa58c-0...#axzz1834ZqwVK
A different argument altogether, sure. But are Android's "weak sales" really the motivating factor behind Verizon's desire to add the iPhone to its offerings? I seriously doubt it.
However, gaining NEW data plan subscribers from former featurephone users is the real goal of all carriers. And let's face it, if you were on AT&T before, you already had an iPhone if you wanted a smartphone. No self-respecting geek would let their friends buy an AT&T Android or Palm phone. The network sucks!
Verizon customers for the first time last year had a smartphone OS that was meant for general consumers (Android), and I'm sure they bought them in droves. Now, we all know that such a thing wouldn't have happened were the iPhone on Verizon, but it has. And Verizon is taking that money to the bank.
As much as Verizon loves money, they do not want to get steamrolled by Apple dictating all the rules. They know they have the best network. They know that their LTE network currently has the best speeds. And they know that even if Android isn't the best thing out there, network speed will be an important factor in next-gen mobile uses (streaming HD video, uploading photos, video chatting, etc..) Regardless of how awesome your phone is, if the network can't handle it, it's feature set is limited. And Verizon f***ing knows it. So it's going to bargain with Apple until it gets the best deal possible.
Anyway, hopefully an LTE iPhone works on both Verizon and AT&T. I'm tired of this proprietary bullcrap.
A different argument altogether, sure. But are Android's "weak sales" really the motivating factor behind Verizon's desire to add the iPhone to its offerings? I seriously doubt it.
Huh?
My competitor's store is across the street... I can look out my front window and see that his sales are increasing at a greater rate than mine due greatly to a product that he carries that I don't carry... and I wouldn't be motivated to also carry that product??!!
Yeah... okay... sure...