So basically the Samsung US numbers we've been fed all along are bullsh*t. Got it. Suprise, surprise. Sure, there's lots of Samsung smartphones out there but for every one you see there's an iPhone as well. So Samsung has mainly eaten up the other Android phones for the most part.
As for tablets, there are still those numbers of iPad only being 70% or something which I think is total fantasy.
The numbers presented for the trial, I believe, are for the infringing products only. There are probably other phone sales of products that don't infringe but I will bet they are much lower priced feature phones instead of smart phones.
The numbers presented for the trial, I believe, are for the infringing products only. There are probably other phone sales of products that don't infringe but I will bet they are much lower priced feature phones instead of smart phones.
So basically crap that slips under the radar, the Higg's bosun of the Android world, a Galaxy of dark matter, there but not really there.
according to NPD, in Q2 2012, Samsung sold 24% of US smartphones, while Apple sold 31%. so Apple sold 1.3X as many iPhones as all Samsung phones combined (all Android i believe).
we now know Apple actually sold 8.3M iPhones in the US in Q2 2012, while Samsung sold only 2M in the list given to the court. are there any newer Samsung models missing from this total?
if not, Apple actually sold 4.2X as many smartphones in the US as Samsung. to make the NPD report true, Samsung would have had to sold 6.4M units here. is the court list missing 4.4M newer models?
i don't think so. i think the NPD numbers have been revealed to be total utter crap instead.
There's a few that Apple missed....
The Galaxy Note, Mini2, Ace Plus, Ace 2, Galaxy Beam, Galaxy S Advance. . .
It looks like Samsung may have started rolling out revised models (S Advance, Ace Plus, etc) with changes perhaps meant to avoid Apple infringement claims beginning early in the year. Those devices don't appear to be included in Apple's lawsuit. In essence there looks like there could be a lot of Samsung models sold since early this year that aren't accounted for in the charts.
A couple of days ago there was a report (IDC?) that claimed Android with nearly 70% of the EU smartphone market with Apple around 17%. Guess which Android licensee is #1? Even in China where Samsung isn't nearly the market presence as in other areas, they still lead Apple 3:1 in smartphone sales according to market research from back in March. The US is really the only large market where Apple has such a large percentage of smartphone sales. Of course most of the profit is probably coming from the US too.
As Soli said, projecting worldwide sales based on just US figures isn't even remotely reliable. The rest of the world isn't sharing the same metrics.
BTW, I think the reason only US sales are being shown is because those are the only ones that apply to this case with regard to possible damages. What Samsung does in the rest of the world isn't part of this suit and thus doesn't matter.
The problem is that no one knows how many smartphones and tablets Samsung sells, or ships quarterly, as they haven't provided those numbers since early 2011. Occasionally, they will give us numbers for one specific model that has done well, but that's all. All the numbers we see are just guesses, which aren't that useful, because the companies making them can't look to real numbers to enable them to test their methodology.
For example, a quarter ago, we saw numbers from 32 million from iSupply, to 38 million from IDG, and 44.5 million from some small company I had never heard of before. Which number was right? No one knows!
These numbers, even though they are just from the US, and just the infringing models ( almost all of the Android models) are much smaller than what I expected. Only about 10 million a year. That's just about 2.5 million per quarter. How that jibes with these multi tens of millions a quarter, I don't know. The US is about 25% of the worlds market right now, and was a larger portion a couple of years ago. Even if we divided it so that 15 million was from the last year, and 5 million from the year before, that would still just give under 4 million per quarter. Even if we add another 25% to account for the tiny Win Phone sales, and some other non infringing sales, it's still pretty small.
I've always believed that Samsung sells fewer smartphones than anyone realizes. Companies state that they aren't going to give out the numbers any longer because the numbers are poorer, not because they are better. We can see how poor the tablet sales are. Smasung themselves said a few months ago that their tablet sales were doing "poorly".
I think they are very upset about having to release these numbers. It really puts into question those android percentages we read..
The Bloomberg article is screwed up. IPhone marketshare in china last quarter went from just under 9% the quarter before to almost 19%. That's a pretty big jump for a company that's on just about 25% of the phone subscribers on the major networks on China.
The Galaxy Note, Mini2, Ace Plus, Ace 2, Galaxy Beam, Galaxy S Advance. . .
It looks like Samsung may have started rolling out revised models (S Advance, Ace Plus, etc) with changes perhaps meant to avoid Apple infringement claims beginning early in the year. Those devices don't appear to be included in Apple's lawsuit. In essence there looks like there could be a lot of Samsung models sold since early this year that aren't accounted for in the charts.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
<...>I think they are very upset about having to release these numbers. It really puts into question those android percentages we read..
The Bloomberg article is screwed up. IPhone marketshare in china last quarter went from just under 9% the quarter before to almost 19%. That's a pretty big jump for a company that's on just about 25% of the phone subscribers on the major networks on China.
Not to mention the fact that, when it comes to please your shareholders, you tend to pump up figures, but when it comes to pay the taxes (fine, in this case), you tend to go the opposite way. Still, the figures disclosed are a pretty good indication on how far Sammy figures have been exaggerated.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
I've no idea how many of those sold, nor does anyone of us. Didn't ATT report the Note was their number two (or was it three?) seller at some point? Can't remember for sure. Would it be possible, perhaps even likely that at least a million Galaxy Nexus "Google" phones were sold among the various carriers? Could a combo of three or four other models make up a million or so? Maybe two million? Does any of that sound so unreasonable?
Yes it's certainly possible that worldwide Samsung sales numbers were less than estimated. Some may even say it's likely. I might even be one of those people. But iIt's also possible they weren't. The chart of sales for infringing devices can't be used to prove or disprove it as there's too many missing models, including hi-profile Nexus and Notes. Even my quick list wasn't meant to be all of them that Apple didn't target and require sales data for.
While I might agree that there's signs that estimates of their sales could be high, you're trying to prove it with a limited list of sales figures for specific models. It won't work as proof.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
Well going on the price of Samsung's high end phones and the average from the chart of $350 per "smartphone" sold, there are a hell of a lot of cheap phone's being sold to pull that average price down.
It looks like Android = Touchwiz on low powered phones for a majority of users.
Which is why NPD the past few days was singing a different tune. Gone were the Samsung sells gazillions more. They knew the gig was up with the release of these docs.
Still every headline NPD releases manages to put in Samsung as being at par with apple.
NPD is lucky Samsung did not have to release worldwide sales. They can still fudge the numbers.
As a side note, I won't be surprised if Apple is required to break down US iPhone sales by model before all is said and done in this case. That's something they've never done before. The charts submitted to the court so far show iPhone sales as a group rather than by model.
Going by quick and dirty numbers it appears a bit less than half of Apple's US iPhone sales are the 4S, roughly 47%, with the slight majority of sales, 53% or thereabouts, being the older 4 and 3GS (around 16M 3GS and 30M 4's?). I don't believe Samsung is asserting any patent claims against the 4S, so the number of possible infringing iPhones that Apple is reporting (bottom of their sales chart) should be those old models.
Both Gartner and IDC claimed Samsung had 70% more smartphone sales compared to Apple in the US for the first 2Q this year. Google data can point he way foe Nexus sales. The G III was not out.
The question is how these firms will be trying to figure out how they have been so far off the past 2 years and how they over-estimated Samsung sales by 300 to 400 %
And I wonder how many Samsung smartphones are actually running Ice Cream Sandwich, vs Gingerbread. Samsung is PA-THE-TIC.
Samsung did sell some WIndows smartphones too. They're just hedging their bets.
That's exactly the point I was making. All the figures out there grossly overestimated Samsung's sales of high end phones. Even these numbers include a lot of low end junk since the SAP is only $350.
As for your question, it has been well established that the vast majority of Android phones out there are still running some variant of Android 2.2 or 2.3-and few of them will ever be updated. I haven't seen any evidence that suggests that Samsung is any different.
That's exactly the point I was making. All the figures out there grossly overestimated Samsung's sales of high end phones.
Did they? What were some of the percentages of smartphone sales as high-end being claimed by any of the market data companies? I don't recall any of them saying the most expensive models were outselling the mid or lower-tier ones. I might be wrong, but you'd have to give me a link to prove your claim. Personally I've always assumed that the entry level Samsung phones outsell the hi-end models, but I have no way to prove it and wouldn't make the mistake of claiming it as a fact.
Or perhaps you're stating this report is proof that sales of hi-end phones not listed in the chart were over-estimated? Again a link would be needed to establish a bit of validity for your claim, as well as your reasoning behind how you tie-in the chart of possible-infringing devices to determine sales of those not shown.
It's entirely possible that Samsung sales estimates in the US were too high. they also might have been too low. None of us know for certain. You and a couple of others are trying to prove it by relying on the reported sales of models that Apple specifically targeted, ignoring any sales contribution from those that they didn't. Wouldn't even you agree that methodology is fatally flawed?
It doesn't matter. It's still far, far lower than the number of iPhones that Apple sold in the US. So all the "Samsung sold more smartphones than Apple" stories were nonsense. You'd think that people would learn that making numbers up doesn't serve anyone.
The numbers weren't made up. They were what Samsung told us. But then we learned they were telling the sell in numbers to the channel. Not the sell out to users, which is what is in these documents
Comments
So, did this thread actually disappear or is my imagination running riot?
Quite smooth: Samsung actually sold 1/10 of the 2 million Galaxy Tabs it claimed in 2010
The numbers presented for the trial, I believe, are for the infringing products only. There are probably other phone sales of products that don't infringe but I will bet they are much lower priced feature phones instead of smart phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nealg
The numbers presented for the trial, I believe, are for the infringing products only. There are probably other phone sales of products that don't infringe but I will bet they are much lower priced feature phones instead of smart phones.
So basically crap that slips under the radar, the Higg's bosun of the Android world, a Galaxy of dark matter, there but not really there.
There must be a hell of a lot of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
So basically crap that slips under the radar, the Higg's bosun of the Android world, a Galaxy of dark matter, there but not really there.
There must be a hell of a lot of it.
Or not-crap like the Galaxy S3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
ok, some more fun with numbers.
according to NPD, in Q2 2012, Samsung sold 24% of US smartphones, while Apple sold 31%. so Apple sold 1.3X as many iPhones as all Samsung phones combined (all Android i believe).
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/pressreleases/pr_120808
we now know Apple actually sold 8.3M iPhones in the US in Q2 2012, while Samsung sold only 2M in the list given to the court. are there any newer Samsung models missing from this total?
if not, Apple actually sold 4.2X as many smartphones in the US as Samsung. to make the NPD report true, Samsung would have had to sold 6.4M units here. is the court list missing 4.4M newer models?
i don't think so. i think the NPD numbers have been revealed to be total utter crap instead.
There's a few that Apple missed....
The Galaxy Note, Mini2, Ace Plus, Ace 2, Galaxy Beam, Galaxy S Advance. . .
It looks like Samsung may have started rolling out revised models (S Advance, Ace Plus, etc) with changes perhaps meant to avoid Apple infringement claims beginning early in the year. Those devices don't appear to be included in Apple's lawsuit. In essence there looks like there could be a lot of Samsung models sold since early this year that aren't accounted for in the charts.
The problem is that no one knows how many smartphones and tablets Samsung sells, or ships quarterly, as they haven't provided those numbers since early 2011. Occasionally, they will give us numbers for one specific model that has done well, but that's all. All the numbers we see are just guesses, which aren't that useful, because the companies making them can't look to real numbers to enable them to test their methodology.
For example, a quarter ago, we saw numbers from 32 million from iSupply, to 38 million from IDG, and 44.5 million from some small company I had never heard of before. Which number was right? No one knows!
These numbers, even though they are just from the US, and just the infringing models ( almost all of the Android models) are much smaller than what I expected. Only about 10 million a year. That's just about 2.5 million per quarter. How that jibes with these multi tens of millions a quarter, I don't know. The US is about 25% of the worlds market right now, and was a larger portion a couple of years ago. Even if we divided it so that 15 million was from the last year, and 5 million from the year before, that would still just give under 4 million per quarter. Even if we add another 25% to account for the tiny Win Phone sales, and some other non infringing sales, it's still pretty small.
I've always believed that Samsung sells fewer smartphones than anyone realizes. Companies state that they aren't going to give out the numbers any longer because the numbers are poorer, not because they are better. We can see how poor the tablet sales are. Smasung themselves said a few months ago that their tablet sales were doing "poorly".
I think they are very upset about having to release these numbers. It really puts into question those android percentages we read..
The Bloomberg article is screwed up. IPhone marketshare in china last quarter went from just under 9% the quarter before to almost 19%. That's a pretty big jump for a company that's on just about 25% of the phone subscribers on the major networks on China.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
Was the GS3 shipping in the US 6 months ago?
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
<...>I think they are very upset about having to release these numbers. It really puts into question those android percentages we read..
The Bloomberg article is screwed up. IPhone marketshare in china last quarter went from just under 9% the quarter before to almost 19%. That's a pretty big jump for a company that's on just about 25% of the phone subscribers on the major networks on China.
Not to mention the fact that, when it comes to please your shareholders, you tend to pump up figures, but when it comes to pay the taxes (fine, in this case), you tend to go the opposite way. Still, the figures disclosed are a pretty good indication on how far Sammy figures have been exaggerated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz
Or not-crap like the Galaxy S3
The minority, you mean?
Unlike big sellers like the Prevail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
I've no idea how many of those sold, nor does anyone of us. Didn't ATT report the Note was their number two (or was it three?) seller at some point? Can't remember for sure. Would it be possible, perhaps even likely that at least a million Galaxy Nexus "Google" phones were sold among the various carriers? Could a combo of three or four other models make up a million or so? Maybe two million? Does any of that sound so unreasonable?
Yes it's certainly possible that worldwide Samsung sales numbers were less than estimated. Some may even say it's likely. I might even be one of those people. But iIt's also possible they weren't. The chart of sales for infringing devices can't be used to prove or disprove it as there's too many missing models, including hi-profile Nexus and Notes. Even my quick list wasn't meant to be all of them that Apple didn't target and require sales data for.
While I might agree that there's signs that estimates of their sales could be high, you're trying to prove it with a limited list of sales figures for specific models. It won't work as proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
And you really think that those less popular models made up 4-5 million units? Do really, in heart, believe that? What does Occam's razor say?
Perhaps, given a vacume of information about Samsung's distribution of sales, companies made up numbers to fill the void?
Well going on the price of Samsung's high end phones and the average from the chart of $350 per "smartphone" sold, there are a hell of a lot of cheap phone's being sold to pull that average price down.
It looks like Android = Touchwiz on low powered phones for a majority of users.
Edit
Actually the average is $334 for 2012.
Still every headline NPD releases manages to put in Samsung as being at par with apple.
NPD is lucky Samsung did not have to release worldwide sales. They can still fudge the numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
I've no idea how many of those sold, nor does anyone of us. Didn't ATT report the Note was their number two (or was it three?) seller at some point?
Yes, Note was #2 ... when counting bulges in pants.
As a side note, I won't be surprised if Apple is required to break down US iPhone sales by model before all is said and done in this case. That's something they've never done before. The charts submitted to the court so far show iPhone sales as a group rather than by model.
Going by quick and dirty numbers it appears a bit less than half of Apple's US iPhone sales are the 4S, roughly 47%, with the slight majority of sales, 53% or thereabouts, being the older 4 and 3GS (around 16M 3GS and 30M 4's?). I don't believe Samsung is asserting any patent claims against the 4S, so the number of possible infringing iPhones that Apple is reporting (bottom of their sales chart) should be those old models.
That's exactly the point I was making. All the figures out there grossly overestimated Samsung's sales of high end phones. Even these numbers include a lot of low end junk since the SAP is only $350.
As for your question, it has been well established that the vast majority of Android phones out there are still running some variant of Android 2.2 or 2.3-and few of them will ever be updated. I haven't seen any evidence that suggests that Samsung is any different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's exactly the point I was making. All the figures out there grossly overestimated Samsung's sales of high end phones.
Did they? What were some of the percentages of smartphone sales as high-end being claimed by any of the market data companies? I don't recall any of them saying the most expensive models were outselling the mid or lower-tier ones. I might be wrong, but you'd have to give me a link to prove your claim. Personally I've always assumed that the entry level Samsung phones outsell the hi-end models, but I have no way to prove it and wouldn't make the mistake of claiming it as a fact.
Or perhaps you're stating this report is proof that sales of hi-end phones not listed in the chart were over-estimated? Again a link would be needed to establish a bit of validity for your claim, as well as your reasoning behind how you tie-in the chart of possible-infringing devices to determine sales of those not shown.
It's entirely possible that Samsung sales estimates in the US were too high. they also might have been too low. None of us know for certain. You and a couple of others are trying to prove it by relying on the reported sales of models that Apple specifically targeted, ignoring any sales contribution from those that they didn't. Wouldn't even you agree that methodology is fatally flawed?
Not one bit surprised. Already Galaxy SIII here is heavily discounted.
Quote:
Among the top sellers was the Galaxy S II, which sold over 4.1 million copies
I like what you did there :-D
The numbers weren't made up. They were what Samsung told us. But then we learned they were telling the sell in numbers to the channel. Not the sell out to users, which is what is in these documents