It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more.
Samsung traditionally never used to report sales counts. They only started doing it a few years ago, and then later went back to their previous silence after all the lawsuits started up.
Samsung does still report milestones like 5, 10, etc million sales, which helps analysts.
All companies keep certain details close to their chest. Apple only recently began splitting out iOS accessory revenue from hardware revenue, for example, and do not give individual model sales because that would help the competition.
Quote:
In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
As has been pointed out here many times by people from all sides, web share and ad impression shares are totally useless for figuring out sales. Too much info is lacking. Too many unknowns are involved.
Web share values totally miss people using apps, and enterprise usage, etc (e.g. thousands of airline pilots using an iPad).
Ad impressions especially are terrible, because they're just simple counters of ads being displayed. What if a popular browser often reloads pages as the user navigates around a website, causing the counts to double or triple or more? That behavior alone would heavily skew the results.
I mean, if you believe in ad impressions, what does this graphic say to you about GS3 and iP5 sales?
The fact is, it doesn't tell us anything about sales. Heck, it doesn't even tell us about webs share unless we also know the number of devices sold and a bunch of other user, website and browser specific details.
The better analysts use their own study groups, exit polls, insider info from suppliers, etc to figure out a ballpark figure for sales and model breakdowns.
Bear in mind that even Apple's sales numbers are flaky until the NEXT quarterly report, where we can better figure out what actual end user sell through was.
Samsung traditionally never used to report sales counts. They only started doing it a few years ago, and then later went back to their previous silence after all the lawsuits started up.
Samsung does still report milestones like 5, 10, etc million sales, which helps analysts.
All companies keep certain details close to their chest. Apple only recently began splitting out iOS accessory revenue from hardware revenue, for example, and do not give individual model sales because that would help the competition.
Quote:
In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
As has been pointed out here many times by people from all sides, web share and ad impression shares are totally useless ...... blah blah...
Samsung started posting volumes, their volumes sucked (no, sorry, they were "smooth") so they stopped. Nothing much more complicated than that. Since then, all we have are guesses about everyone else other than Apple.
"Milestones" are worth the piece of paper they're printed on. Like Rubin's "activations." I call b-s.
The fact that you bring up the quality of Apple's reporting in the same breath as the rest of the industry simply confirms (for me) that you live in a world you're created for yourself.
As to the rest of your post, it is the usual set of talking points that are trotted out ad nauseam by trolls in this forum.
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better.
Excuse me, I think you have a bit of flawgic on your shoulder.
Let me just brush that off for you...
I think we desperately need to actually get you in a Ferrari after making a statement that ignores acceleration, handling, braking, and desirability to jump straight to a comment about "interior bits".
Men the world over!
It is time for you to tear down your posters of these:
The fact that you bring up the quality of Apple's reporting in the same breath as the rest of the industry simply confirms (for me) that you live in a world you're created for yourself.
Excuse me, I think you have a bit of flawgic on your shoulder.
Let me just brush that off for you...
I think we desperately need to actually get you in a Ferrari after making a statement that ignores acceleration, handling, braking, and desirability to jump straight to a comment about "interior bits".
Men the world over!
It is time for you to tear down your posters of these:
...and replace them with these!
Umm, anyone who has been in a taxi has seen bits falling off too
Apple reached the limit of what a premium 4" phone can do, and that's 4.5 billion profit per quarter (+-). [SIZE=20px]If[/SIZE] they want to earn marketshare to give more power to iOS, they need:
a) a cheaper iPhone line (like macbook air and pro);
b) a bigger screen iPhone to lure costumers away form samsung, htc and sony;
c) both a) and b), my favourite. So 3 iphone lines.
If they do not want to produce a newer cheaper iPhone, the price of the iPhone 4 has to drop at least 150 dollars. It's 3 years old, no matter how good. The iphone 4 costs 400 euros, the nexus 4? 300.
They wouldn't go after the lower end to gain shitloads of money, no one gains money from that range, they would after it to give more power to iOS as a platform.
A bigger screen iphone line should come too. Of course, some users here are stupid to understand that millions and millions find the 4" small, and are willing to pay a lot for a big screen and such iPhone line wouldn't have any impact (besides something great, like more power to iOS) to regular 4" iPhone users.
Obviously, they can keep the current model, that has been working so well. But won't iOS suffer in the long run? Macs are the best computers, OSX the best OS, but they could be better with more marketshare, for what is worth.
Apple can easily put iOS as the dominant OS for the next 10 years with 2 more iPhone lines. This, allied with the fact that income from the ecosystem is growing, is only good.
I fail to see why they wouldn't do this. They have everything now. They could more than double the number of iPhones being sold and almost double the profit per quarter. Samsung will only slow down when ZTE and Huwai go up, and LG too. The Market is far from saturation!
And please, do not talk about china mobile. That would be a temporary thing too...
I agree with some of what you said but you also have to keep in mind Apple's largest markets.
Please don't take this offensively.
Samsung large screen phones are targeted to people who only want one device or can't afford a tablet and smartphone. Also people who aren't convinced that each device can be more productive at different things.
In Apple's most important markets, many (not all) people that can afford a 4" iPhone 5 can afford to buy an iPad also. That's why Apple isn't making 5" screens.
It's Apple's analsys when trying to make a limited number of products. They can sell an iPhone and an iPad to consumers in there most profitable market rather than one 5" iPhone.
Samsung large screen phones are targeted to people who only want one device or can't afford a tablet and smartphone. Also people who aren't convinced that each device can be more productive at different things.
Us older people with lots of money and a desire to have more screen real estate, would disagree. We often own multiple devices from different sources.
To me, at least, a larger screen is more productive.
As for those people in the world who can only afford one device, the smartest move would seem to be to get the largest screen they can afford, in order to maximize its potential as a combination phone and tablet.
As for those people in the world who can only afford one device, the smartest move would seem to be to get the largest screen they can afford, in order to maximize its potential as a combination phone and tablet.
Depends; if you already have a computer and only money for a smartphone OR tablet I'd go for a smartphone..because I need a phone. Certainly won't be trying to use a small tablet and then VoIP over BT to make a call. But that's just me.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
It still begs the question of why none of these other guys provide channel data or volume data if their sales volumes and market shares are growing and as high as people say. Samsung used to report it, but not any more.
Samsung traditionally never used to report sales counts. They only started doing it a few years ago, and then later went back to their previous silence after all the lawsuits started up.
Samsung does still report milestones like 5, 10, etc million sales, which helps analysts.
All companies keep certain details close to their chest. Apple only recently began splitting out iOS accessory revenue from hardware revenue, for example, and do not give individual model sales because that would help the competition.
Quote:
In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
As has been pointed out here many times by people from all sides, web share and ad impression shares are totally useless for figuring out sales. Too much info is lacking. Too many unknowns are involved.
Web share values totally miss people using apps, and enterprise usage, etc (e.g. thousands of airline pilots using an iPad).
Ad impressions especially are terrible, because they're just simple counters of ads being displayed. What if a popular browser often reloads pages as the user navigates around a website, causing the counts to double or triple or more? That behavior alone would heavily skew the results.
I mean, if you believe in ad impressions, what does this graphic say to you about GS3 and iP5 sales?
The fact is, it doesn't tell us anything about sales. Heck, it doesn't even tell us about webs share unless we also know the number of devices sold and a bunch of other user, website and browser specific details.
The better analysts use their own study groups, exit polls, insider info from suppliers, etc to figure out a ballpark figure for sales and model breakdowns.
Bear in mind that even Apple's sales numbers are flaky until the NEXT quarterly report, where we can better figure out what actual end user sell through was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
And who said anything about iOS, Mac, Blackberry or Apple. I did. If you are looking for the motoring forum, you are in the wrong place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Samsung traditionally never used to report sales counts. They only started doing it a few years ago, and then later went back to their previous silence after all the lawsuits started up.
Samsung does still report milestones like 5, 10, etc million sales, which helps analysts.
All companies keep certain details close to their chest. Apple only recently began splitting out iOS accessory revenue from hardware revenue, for example, and do not give individual model sales because that would help the competition.
Quote:
In addition, this share data is inconsistent with other collateral data (e.g., web shares, app revenues, ad impressions).
As has been pointed out here many times by people from all sides, web share and ad impression shares are totally useless ...... blah blah...
Samsung started posting volumes, their volumes sucked (no, sorry, they were "smooth") so they stopped. Nothing much more complicated than that. Since then, all we have are guesses about everyone else other than Apple.
"Milestones" are worth the piece of paper they're printed on. Like Rubin's "activations." I call b-s.
The fact that you bring up the quality of Apple's reporting in the same breath as the rest of the industry simply confirms (for me) that you live in a world you're created for yourself.
As to the rest of your post, it is the usual set of talking points that are trotted out ad nauseam by trolls in this forum.
(Edit: Deleted incorrect data).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24
Except that Ferraris aren't superior products. They're just expensive, not better.
Excuse me, I think you have a bit of flawgic on your shoulder.
Let me just brush that off for you...
I think we desperately need to actually get you in a Ferrari after making a statement that ignores acceleration, handling, braking, and desirability to jump straight to a comment about "interior bits".
Men the world over!
It is time for you to tear down your posters of these:
...and replace them with these!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
The fact that you bring up the quality of Apple's reporting in the same breath as the rest of the industry simply confirms (for me) that you live in a world you're created for yourself.
His world:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NelsonX
I'm just guessing.
Fixed that for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
Excuse me, I think you have a bit of flawgic on your shoulder.
Let me just brush that off for you...
I think we desperately need to actually get you in a Ferrari after making a statement that ignores acceleration, handling, braking, and desirability to jump straight to a comment about "interior bits".
Men the world over!
It is time for you to tear down your posters of these:
...and replace them with these!
Umm, anyone who has been in a taxi has seen bits falling off too
I agree with some of what you said but you also have to keep in mind Apple's largest markets.
Please don't take this offensively.
Samsung large screen phones are targeted to people who only want one device or can't afford a tablet and smartphone. Also people who aren't convinced that each device can be more productive at different things.
In Apple's most important markets, many (not all) people that can afford a 4" iPhone 5 can afford to buy an iPad also. That's why Apple isn't making 5" screens.
It's Apple's analsys when trying to make a limited number of products. They can sell an iPhone and an iPad to consumers in there most profitable market rather than one 5" iPhone.
Does that make sense, I hope I explained it ok
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacepower
Samsung large screen phones are targeted to people who only want one device or can't afford a tablet and smartphone. Also people who aren't convinced that each device can be more productive at different things.
Us older people with lots of money and a desire to have more screen real estate, would disagree. We often own multiple devices from different sources.
To me, at least, a larger screen is more productive.
As for those people in the world who can only afford one device, the smartest move would seem to be to get the largest screen they can afford, in order to maximize its potential as a combination phone and tablet.
Depends; if you already have a computer and only money for a smartphone OR tablet I'd go for a smartphone..because I need a phone. Certainly won't be trying to use a small tablet and then VoIP over BT to make a call. But that's just me.