Channel stuffing is when a company puts more product into the channel than they KNOW they will sell just to make the financials. We would have to see evidence of that. It's a serious misjudgment, because it is illegal to report stuffing as income for the quarter.
Maybe in the US? Are ETFs subject to the same regulations as US public companies? I don't know. Is it illegal in South Korea? I don't know that either. Anyway it doesn't matter since they came clean on the sales figures.
Nothing funnier than seeing DaHarder now desperately trying to justify this hunk of junk despite the facts.
Yeah, well he may be an idiot and borderline illiterate, but apparently he's fairly wealthy. He also owns several iPads by his account and probably will buy a RIM playbook and a Motorola tablet when they come out too.
It's probably half his problem. He doesn't have to think about what to buy or if he can afford it. He just rushes out and buys the latest whatever and then spouts off about it here. He's seeking validation of himself through his purchases which probably means he used to be poor or grew up poor, or something similar.
It's the equivalent of buying the latest new car each year but taking it down to the local mall to wash it so everyone can see that you own it and admire you.
Maybe in the US? Are ETFs subject to the same regulations as US public companies? I don't know. Is it illegal in South Korea? I don't know that either. Anyway it doesn't matter since they came clean on the sales figures.
Yahoo search for Samsung President Jail
You will find some interesting hits.
I don't have a link but I read somewhere that the Samsung President (or CEO or founder) was given a presidential pardon because the Korean economy needed him...
It can't be assumed that this is channel stuffing. There could have been real expectations that both WP7 and the Galaxy Tab would have sold close to those numbers, even though it didn't work out.
I commented on an older Dilger article where I pointed out he basically made up information to fit the article.
You told me that AI writers don't make anything up, and that it is simply the writers opinion coming through in the article.
I responded that it is confusing for readers as it is essentially impossible to tell what is factual news and what is opinion when it's all presented in the same feed.
Do you see how it can be confusing now?
One question. Was it Dilger that updated the article by Josh Ong with:
Update: Samsung has admitted that its "sales" figures for Galaxy Tab are actually inventory channel stuffing and do not represent real sales to consumers.?
well, i punished myself and went over to TechCrunch to see if they have covered the Galaxy Big Flop story yet today. (their pages run some horrible script that ties up my processor at 50% for over a minute every page load - not Flash). TC of course is Android fanboy territory (except for one token Apple guy, MGS). why even as recently as last thursday they were hyping the 2 million sales story:
but gee, nothing there yet about the Flop Heard Round The World ... except for maybe the sound of the gnashing of teeth. and they are always so up to the minute, so hip!
but i didn't troll. didn't rub it in with a comment there. they need time to lick their wound.
When I first saw 22% I thought 22% my ass. I should be seeing one Samsung in the wild for every 4 iPads but I ain't seeing it. I haven't even seen one Samsung, period.
I've seen a couple Nook Colors in the wild (outside of B&N...I've seen 3-4 customers in B&N with NCs). I've never seen a samsung. When all is said and done I bet more Nook Colors got sold this Christmas than Galaxy Tabs.
When I first saw 22% I thought 22% my ass. I should be seeing one Samsung in the wild for every 4 iPads but I ain't seeing it. I haven't even seen one Samsung, period.
I see them EVERYWHERE... in shop windows, and being sold by touts on street corners. I see iPads on the bus, on the MTR, on minibuses, in coffee shops...
Yeah, well he may be an idiot and borderline illiterate, but apparently he's fairly wealthy. He also owns several iPads by his account and probably will buy a RIM playbook and a Motorola tablet when they come out too.
It's probably half his problem. He doesn't have to think about what to buy or if he can afford it. He just rushes out and buys the latest whatever and then spouts off about it here. He's seeking validation of himself through his purchases which probably means he used to be poor or grew up poor, or something similar.
It's the equivalent of buying the latest new car each year but taking it down to the local mall to wash it so everyone can see that you own it and admire you.
You assume he's telling the truth. I own an Aston Martin DB9 and a Cessna Citation X..... well, not really. But, I can look up reviews and talk about them with authority on a forum.
It's a Galaxy that is far, far, away from initial lies about sales ... Sam has sung and the tune is not very good. Glad all those crack analysts were on the their case originally with penetrating questions like "when you sales, do you mean actual sales?"
I don't have a link but I read somewhere that the Samsung President (or CEO or founder) was given a presidential pardon because the Korean economy needed him...
alexkhan2000 is Korean and has written in a number of posts here about Samsung's behavior - none of it is flattering to Samsung.
Google "Tab sales quite small." This is a story all over the web, the headlines are typically in line with the AI piece. Just because something happens that reflects poorly on an Apple rival and AI reports it doesn't make some kind of DED spin.
My only problem with this article was DED's presumption of channel-stuffing. 2m units for a 100 country/200 carrier launch is 10k units per carrier. Optimistic? Yes, but not overtly stuffing the channel even allowing for the large disparity of what each carrier might sell.
On the other hand, the "our sell-in was quite aggressive" quote may well be a tell. Does "aggressive" mean they pushed their distribution partners into taking more product than what they really wanted?
I met a blog poster with seven wives, every wife had seven kids, wives and kids had seven iPads EACH, for every iPad they bought a Galaxy, and for every Galaxy they bought a Tab. Tabs, Galaxies, iPads kids and wives how many could Samsung fit in a channel?
Sorry-just being silly. I'm stuffed from dinner. Stuffed channel catfish,mmmmm.
My only problem with this article was DED's presumption of channel-stuffing. 2m units for a 100 country/200 carrier launch is 10k units per carrier. Optimistic? Yes, but not overtly stuffing the channel even allowing for the large disparity of what each carrier might sell.
On the other hand, the "our sell-in was quite aggressive" quote may well be a tell. Does "aggressive" mean they pushed their distribution partners into taking more product than what they really wanted?
Even at the numbers you suggest in your break-down, this was still a huge gamble Samsung made based on Apple's iPad numbers it seems. They assumed that people were buying the tablet form factor, not the Apple ecosystem. A huge error in judgement that the "sell-out" numbers demonstrated. So yes I think they were trying to coat-tail the iPad mindshare and dumped a lot of devices into their channels thinking the demand would be there. Bearing in mind also that Samsung is a parts supplier to Apple as well.
Comments
Channel stuffing is when a company puts more product into the channel than they KNOW they will sell just to make the financials. We would have to see evidence of that. It's a serious misjudgment, because it is illegal to report stuffing as income for the quarter.
Maybe in the US? Are ETFs subject to the same regulations as US public companies? I don't know. Is it illegal in South Korea? I don't know that either. Anyway it doesn't matter since they came clean on the sales figures.
Nothing funnier than seeing DaHarder now desperately trying to justify this hunk of junk despite the facts.
Yeah, well he may be an idiot and borderline illiterate, but apparently he's fairly wealthy. He also owns several iPads by his account and probably will buy a RIM playbook and a Motorola tablet when they come out too.
It's probably half his problem. He doesn't have to think about what to buy or if he can afford it. He just rushes out and buys the latest whatever and then spouts off about it here. He's seeking validation of himself through his purchases which probably means he used to be poor or grew up poor, or something similar.
It's the equivalent of buying the latest new car each year but taking it down to the local mall to wash it so everyone can see that you own it and admire you.
Maybe in the US? Are ETFs subject to the same regulations as US public companies? I don't know. Is it illegal in South Korea? I don't know that either. Anyway it doesn't matter since they came clean on the sales figures.
Yahoo search for Samsung President Jail
You will find some interesting hits.
I don't have a link but I read somewhere that the Samsung President (or CEO or founder) was given a presidential pardon because the Korean economy needed him...
It can't be assumed that this is channel stuffing. There could have been real expectations that both WP7 and the Galaxy Tab would have sold close to those numbers, even though it didn't work out.
I commented on an older Dilger article where I pointed out he basically made up information to fit the article.
You told me that AI writers don't make anything up, and that it is simply the writers opinion coming through in the article.
I responded that it is confusing for readers as it is essentially impossible to tell what is factual news and what is opinion when it's all presented in the same feed.
Do you see how it can be confusing now?
One question. Was it Dilger that updated the article by Josh Ong with:
Update: Samsung has admitted that its "sales" figures for Galaxy Tab are actually inventory channel stuffing and do not represent real sales to consumers.?
If so, are the other writers OK with this?
http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/01/27...y-tabs-served/
but gee, nothing there yet about the Flop Heard Round The World ... except for maybe the sound of the gnashing of teeth. and they are always so up to the minute, so hip!
but i didn't troll. didn't rub it in with a comment there. they need time to lick their wound.
My Wife, my dog and I have 3 each...
DaHarder! Where has he been? Lol.
DaHarder! Where has he been? Lol.
Over at Engadget trying to convince anyone who will listen how cool the "Tab" is. Apparently no one believes him.
What specifically about the screens was pathetic? They seemed like pretty decent screens, so I'd like more information on why you didn't like them.
Don't know about him but I liked the nook's IPS screen better than the S-LCD screen in the Tab. Obviously better viewing angles.
When I first saw 22% I thought 22% my ass. I should be seeing one Samsung in the wild for every 4 iPads but I ain't seeing it. I haven't even seen one Samsung, period.
I've seen a couple Nook Colors in the wild (outside of B&N...I've seen 3-4 customers in B&N with NCs). I've never seen a samsung. When all is said and done I bet more Nook Colors got sold this Christmas than Galaxy Tabs.
When I first saw 22% I thought 22% my ass. I should be seeing one Samsung in the wild for every 4 iPads but I ain't seeing it. I haven't even seen one Samsung, period.
I see them EVERYWHERE... in shop windows, and being sold by touts on street corners. I see iPads on the bus, on the MTR, on minibuses, in coffee shops...
Yeah, well he may be an idiot and borderline illiterate, but apparently he's fairly wealthy. He also owns several iPads by his account and probably will buy a RIM playbook and a Motorola tablet when they come out too.
It's probably half his problem. He doesn't have to think about what to buy or if he can afford it. He just rushes out and buys the latest whatever and then spouts off about it here. He's seeking validation of himself through his purchases which probably means he used to be poor or grew up poor, or something similar.
It's the equivalent of buying the latest new car each year but taking it down to the local mall to wash it so everyone can see that you own it and admire you.
You assume he's telling the truth. I own an Aston Martin DB9 and a Cessna Citation X..... well, not really. But, I can look up reviews and talk about them with authority on a forum.
Over at Engadget trying to convince anyone who will listen how cool the "Tab" is. Apparently no one believes him.
TechStud! We want TechStud
Yahoo search for Samsung President Jail
You will find some interesting hits.
I don't have a link but I read somewhere that the Samsung President (or CEO or founder) was given a presidential pardon because the Korean economy needed him...
alexkhan2000 is Korean and has written in a number of posts here about Samsung's behavior - none of it is flattering to Samsung.
Mmmm...
Google "Tab sales quite small." This is a story all over the web, the headlines are typically in line with the AI piece. Just because something happens that reflects poorly on an Apple rival and AI reports it doesn't make some kind of DED spin.
My only problem with this article was DED's presumption of channel-stuffing. 2m units for a 100 country/200 carrier launch is 10k units per carrier. Optimistic? Yes, but not overtly stuffing the channel even allowing for the large disparity of what each carrier might sell.
On the other hand, the "our sell-in was quite aggressive" quote may well be a tell. Does "aggressive" mean they pushed their distribution partners into taking more product than what they really wanted?
TechStud! We want TechStud
He's here under one of his countless aliases.
Sorry-just being silly. I'm stuffed from dinner. Stuffed channel catfish,mmmmm.
My DaHarder tribute!
I miss him!!
My only problem with this article was DED's presumption of channel-stuffing. 2m units for a 100 country/200 carrier launch is 10k units per carrier. Optimistic? Yes, but not overtly stuffing the channel even allowing for the large disparity of what each carrier might sell.
On the other hand, the "our sell-in was quite aggressive" quote may well be a tell. Does "aggressive" mean they pushed their distribution partners into taking more product than what they really wanted?
Even at the numbers you suggest in your break-down, this was still a huge gamble Samsung made based on Apple's iPad numbers it seems. They assumed that people were buying the tablet form factor, not the Apple ecosystem. A huge error in judgement that the "sell-out" numbers demonstrated. So yes I think they were trying to coat-tail the iPad mindshare and dumped a lot of devices into their channels thinking the demand would be there. Bearing in mind also that Samsung is a parts supplier to Apple as well.