Channel stuffing is the business practice where a company, or a sales force within a company, inflates its sales figures by forcing more products through a distribution channel than the channel is capable of selling to the world at large. Also known as "trade loading", this can be the result of a company attempting to inflate its sales figures.
Vendor: "We'll give you a discount on our product if you commit to taking x-quantity. You can return any remaining quantity after y--time period without any financial penalty."
Retail: "Sure."
This is a pretty common tactic.
I have a feeling you left out ...
"Then as soon as you return them we'll ship you a load more and you can ship those back too ..."
3%. I guess Microsoft is now enjoying the kind of market share Apple's had in the desktop and laptop market. Oh well, I guess Microsoft is becoming less relevant. Good. It's about time.
It's like a "rounding error" if Ballmer is to be believed.
Kindle runs a fork of the Android OS, That it needs to run Google Play to be classified as such is not a requirement for generally classifying it an Android tablet except to Google Inc. Especially since a Kindle owner can get all the Android crapware they want from Amazon.
Google defines what is Android, and you'll find they don't class Kindle as Android
Okay honest question. Why would retailers continue to take shipments if the product was not selling? Why would a manufacture continue to put money into a product that wasn't selling? So on some level shipments have to mean something.
I've got an honest question too (and its not the first time I've asked you): why is Apple the only one to report (i) channel inventory; (ii) volumes?
I am sure the shipments mean something "at some level" but I am not sure what, and at what level.
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
My niece has a Kindle tablet and she likes it for reading and surfing. To each their own.
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
Most of the people that i've talked to that buy Android tablets seem to kids for just general use, nothing industry specific, or the elderly on a budget that have the most basic of needs. Business professionals? NOPE, they go with iPads because that's where the more professional quality apps and hardware are at.
It would be interesting to see some market research company do a fairly in depth analysis of the demographics of each brand/model tablet and OS platform.
What I've also noticed is that home automation is becoming more prevalent and there are more solutions around iPads than Android and more expensive home automation customers are going with iPads and they many times have iPads throughout the house, but with all of the family members. For home automation, they typically start around $2,000 and go up drastically from there and the people that buy those systems are typically educated and have high salaries and have a substantial investment portfolio.
I think these Android products typically go for people that look at the price and features/specs but ignore things like security, support, reliability, and malware issues, and how the OS is updated. They may not always be the most astute when it comes to product selection and they'll switch brands as the wind blows and they probably just have fairly basic needs and they don't typically buy high end professional apps and since they don't spend as much on the physical product, they consider them throw away devices.
Really? And how come Samsung managed to have a 7 billion profit by... inflating their sales figures? If they aren't selling that much how could they grow their profits? By magic maybe?
Samsung also makes home appliances, components and TV sets as part of their revenue stream, the mobile devices is probably about half of their profits.
They must be, as they are running a fork of Android, not android itself.
Google isn't the one creating the report, therefore it stands to reason that ALL flavors of Android (note I'm saying Android, which is open source, not Google Android) is grouped together under the "Android" umbrella.
If you really think the Kindle and Nook, two of the more popular "android" tablets, are in the small other category, I think you're being purposely obtuse.
Google defines what is Android, and you'll find they don't class Kindle as Android
Sooo.... that could be because they don't want manufacturers forking their OS. Will they stop counting Samsung devices as Android when they fork the OS??
The rest of the world seems to count the Kindle as an android device and that's where it counts.
I think these Android products typically go for people that look at the price and features/specs but ignore things like security, support, reliability, and malware issues, and how the OS is updated. They may not always be the most astute when it comes to product selection and they'll switch brands as the wind blows and they probably just have fairly basic needs and they don't typically buy high end professional apps and since they don't spend as much on the physical product, they consider them throw away devices.
There's noting like a cheap Android tablet to check off a gift for a relative's kid... Kindles sell to people who only want a reading device. Lots of reasons for a second-rate product. People even buy the dead-in-the-water Surface RT, ignorance is bliss.
Most of the people that i've talked to that buy Android tablets seem to kids for just general use, nothing industry specific, or the elderly on a budget that have the most basic of needs. Business professionals? NOPE, they go with iPads because that's where the more professional quality apps and hardware are at.
It would be interesting to see some market research company do a fairly in depth analysis of the demographics of each brand/model tablet and OS platform.
What I've also noticed is that home automation is becoming more prevalent and there are more solutions around iPads than Android and more expensive home automation customers are going with iPads and they many times have iPads throughout the house, but with all of the family members. For home automation, they typically start around $2,000 and go up drastically from there and the people that buy those systems are typically educated and have high salaries and have a substantial investment portfolio.
I think these Android products typically go for people that look at the price and features/specs but ignore things like security, support, reliability, and malware issues, and how the OS is updated. They may not always be the most astute when it comes to product selection and they'll switch brands as the wind blows and they probably just have fairly basic needs and they don't typically buy high end professional apps and since they don't spend as much on the physical product, they consider them throw away devices.
Despite all phones being carried by discount stores like Walmart, Target, and Best buy, you can find Apple computers and tablets in these discount stores (which I dare say may not draw the astute shopper), but you won't find my tablet or even laptop in those stores. So I'm not sure about your reasoning. There is a reason you can get a Timex at JC Penny and not a Rolex. So what's the throw away brand?
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
I know a couple people who use them almost exclusively for games with a tiny bit of web browsing via WiFi. Then again, they didn't buy the tablets, they got them as gifts.
[...] It would be interesting to see some market research company do a fairly in depth analysis of the demographics of each brand/model tablet and OS platform.
How? Unless you supplied your age, income, place of residence and occupation when you bought your tablet, where is an analytics company going to get that information?
Google isn't the one creating the report, therefore it stands to reason that ALL flavors of Android (note I'm saying Android, which is open source, not Google Android) is grouped together under the "Android" umbrella.
If you really think the Kindle and Nook, two of the more popular "android" tablets, are in the small other category, I think you're being purposely obtuse.
I'm being obtuse? There is a major difference between being correct and obtuse, if you are going to be that loose with the definition you may as well just group Android in with all linux based tablets
Comments
I would say that the percentage in the San Francisco Bay Area is near 80% - 90% in favor of iPad.
I have a feeling you left out ...
"Then as soon as you return them we'll ship you a load more and you can ship those back too ..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
3%. I guess Microsoft is now enjoying the kind of market share Apple's had in the desktop and laptop market. Oh well, I guess Microsoft is becoming less relevant. Good. It's about time.
It's like a "rounding error" if Ballmer is to be believed.
Google defines what is Android, and you'll find they don't class Kindle as Android
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Why would it include those? They don't come with Google Play, which means they aren't Android tablets.
So the Kindle Fire & Nook are counted in "Other" with ~1% of sales between them.
I see 0_o
I've got an honest question too (and its not the first time I've asked you): why is Apple the only one to report (i) channel inventory; (ii) volumes?
I am sure the shipments mean something "at some level" but I am not sure what, and at what level.
They must be, as they are running a fork of Android, not android itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
My niece has a Kindle tablet and she likes it for reading and surfing. To each their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
Most of the people that i've talked to that buy Android tablets seem to kids for just general use, nothing industry specific, or the elderly on a budget that have the most basic of needs. Business professionals? NOPE, they go with iPads because that's where the more professional quality apps and hardware are at.
It would be interesting to see some market research company do a fairly in depth analysis of the demographics of each brand/model tablet and OS platform.
What I've also noticed is that home automation is becoming more prevalent and there are more solutions around iPads than Android and more expensive home automation customers are going with iPads and they many times have iPads throughout the house, but with all of the family members. For home automation, they typically start around $2,000 and go up drastically from there and the people that buy those systems are typically educated and have high salaries and have a substantial investment portfolio.
I think these Android products typically go for people that look at the price and features/specs but ignore things like security, support, reliability, and malware issues, and how the OS is updated. They may not always be the most astute when it comes to product selection and they'll switch brands as the wind blows and they probably just have fairly basic needs and they don't typically buy high end professional apps and since they don't spend as much on the physical product, they consider them throw away devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NelsonX
Really? And how come Samsung managed to have a 7 billion profit by... inflating their sales figures? If they aren't selling that much how could they grow their profits? By magic maybe?
Samsung also makes home appliances, components and TV sets as part of their revenue stream, the mobile devices is probably about half of their profits.
Google isn't the one creating the report, therefore it stands to reason that ALL flavors of Android (note I'm saying Android, which is open source, not Google Android) is grouped together under the "Android" umbrella.
If you really think the Kindle and Nook, two of the more popular "android" tablets, are in the small other category, I think you're being purposely obtuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Google defines what is Android, and you'll find they don't class Kindle as Android
Sooo.... that could be because they don't want manufacturers forking their OS. Will they stop counting Samsung devices as Android when they fork the OS??
The rest of the world seems to count the Kindle as an android device and that's where it counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
I think these Android products typically go for people that look at the price and features/specs but ignore things like security, support, reliability, and malware issues, and how the OS is updated. They may not always be the most astute when it comes to product selection and they'll switch brands as the wind blows and they probably just have fairly basic needs and they don't typically buy high end professional apps and since they don't spend as much on the physical product, they consider them throw away devices.
There's noting like a cheap Android tablet to check off a gift for a relative's kid... Kindles sell to people who only want a reading device. Lots of reasons for a second-rate product. People even buy the dead-in-the-water Surface RT, ignorance is bliss.
Despite all phones being carried by discount stores like Walmart, Target, and Best buy, you can find Apple computers and tablets in these discount stores (which I dare say may not draw the astute shopper), but you won't find my tablet or even laptop in those stores. So I'm not sure about your reasoning. There is a reason you can get a Timex at JC Penny and not a Rolex. So what's the throw away brand?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I've got an honest question too (and its not the first time I've asked you): why is Apple the only one to report (i) channel inventory; (ii) volumes?
I am sure the shipments mean something "at some level" but I am not sure what, and at what level.
Because Apple is number one and leading the pack in every area, they don't need to hide poor performance with vague numbers such as "shipments."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
I still want to know who is actually using all those Android tablets. With phones, you could always argue people just use them as feature phones to explain the 100's of million of missing phones in use but with tablets??? That just does not make sense to me.
I know a couple people who use them almost exclusively for games with a tiny bit of web browsing via WiFi. Then again, they didn't buy the tablets, they got them as gifts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
[...] It would be interesting to see some market research company do a fairly in depth analysis of the demographics of each brand/model tablet and OS platform.
How? Unless you supplied your age, income, place of residence and occupation when you bought your tablet, where is an analytics company going to get that information?
I'm being obtuse? There is a major difference between being correct and obtuse, if you are going to be that loose with the definition you may as well just group Android in with all linux based tablets
It's no mystery why Android is repeating the whole Mac vs PC thing. We're seeing iOS decline just as Mac OS declined back in the day of Windows 95.