a. the study from your link includes everything until the end of September.
b. the company that did the study had another set of figures for another study last year and in that article we learned that they polled less than 400 people from a pool of just over 6000 people. Any statistics major will tell you that if the same number of people is used for the current study then the margin of error between 23% and 27% is damn near a dead heat.
Here's your response- "That's just one study". To which I'll retort- "Let's see one of yours". Then you'll say "I don't have to- the proof is on you" which translated is: I don't have one. Then the conversation ends.
Lets just skip to that, huh?
Hah! Like clockwork
23 and 27% aren't a dead heat when you are talking about 6 million vs 9 million units sold. If you believe the 27%- then the 4S would have needed to account for 40.5% of the iPhones sold to be a "dead heat" in units sold. You REALLY suck at math. Like, bad.
I assume the "but but but advertising!" posts are coming from the fandroids who don't understand iPhone buyers. If you're ready for an upgrade and you can afford the iPhone 5s, guess what? You're not going to buy last year's models to save $100. I wouldn't. The fact that the iPhone 5c doesn't have a smaller percent of the new iPhones sold would indicate that the new colors and advertising have compensated for the plastic case for buyers of the $99 year-old iPhone.
23 and 27% aren't a dead heat when you are talking about 6 million vs 9 million units sold. If you believe the 27%- then the 4S would have needed to account for 40.5% of the iPhones sold to be a "dead heat" in units sold. You REALLY suck at math. Like, bad.
So you are sticking with the theory that if Apple would not have sold units to China this year then the number of units sold would have been 6 - 6.5 million in the 3 day weekend.
(for those that give a shit, I'll explain if he bites)
[ a very simplified version of where I was going... Andysol is claiming that 9 million units were sold in the USA... and we all know that just isn't true]
iPhone 5 was released a year ago. If they sold it now, at $99, instead of this 5c, that would not have been a flop, you're correct. Time will tell, but even before that, it's just a head-scratcher that Apple thought there was a need do to this to the iPhone 5. I predict it will fail, when the initial release dust settles.
I think when you are too cost sensitive you become irrational. You can get either the 5s or the 5c for zero down from AT&T with their new Next™ offering. It is the monthly fee that costs all the money. The cost of every other high end smartphone is the same price. If a $100 dollars here or there is going to be a deal breaker how do you expect to pay the $2000+ two year contract. The down payment is peanuts. People who buy last year's phone to save a hundred dollars are penny wise, pound foolish. The only reason to buy the 5c is because it comes in bright colors.
The 100 euro/difference is there partly to tempt people considering a 5C to make the extra effort for a 5s. It would be great for Apple if all potential 5C buyers could find the the extra 100.
It seems the 5C is selling in proportionally lower numbers than the 5s but is selling all the same.
The big and killer question is whether Apple is generating the kind of sales volume it estimated and if it isn't, are those 'lost' buyers buying into Android? If the people not buying iPhones, but who are in the market for one, are just holding off for longer, then perhaps Apple can sweat it out but if people look at Apple's offerings and conclude:
Lousy screen size options.
Premium Pricing
Low capacity (especially on the 4S)
Zero expandability to ease the problems caused by the (expensive) on board memory
No black plastic 5C (what if bright colours aren't my style?)
iPhones are seldom discounted (unlocked) between launches whereas Android phones may be off your price radar at launch but pop onto it a couple of months later.
The result may be they turn to Android and have every one of their smartphone fantasies made reality with one exception: iOS7.
Then the question becomes how many iOS users is Apple losing to Android?
Clearly there is still a lot of room for first time smartphone buyers to get their first phone. That should be a market Apple would want to take a chunk of. More so, if they can do it making a profit while taking sales away from competitors (Samsung probably needs volume more than Apple does). There will also be Android users tired of the issues connected with Android phones (difficult upgrade paths leaving you stuck on old versions of Android and the problems that brings etc).
That brings us full circle and we look at what Apple is offering (the conclusions above). Would an Android user be prepared to sacrifice that much just to avoid Android's habitual problems?
I'd say that on screen size alone, Apple is losing a lot of sales.
Pricing is also an impediment if your can pick up a top of the line Android phone for much less than an equivalent iPhone or go further down the line and get an Android phone that was a flagship phone just months ago at a discounted price.
Capacities are also a problem. it's just plain evil that the 4S comes with just 8GB (seeing as there are zero expandability options). It's also 'old' and people are sensitive to age in this market.
Then we have the emerging markets issue. I think they missed the ball completely there.
If Apple is happy with 5s sales then great. Is Apple happy with 5C and 4S sales? I'd say probably not (if the rumours of cuts in component orders prove to be true).
So what can they do?
I think an easy option would be too chop 200 dollars/euros off the 5C and make a black version. It wouldn't be the first time they got iPhone pricing wrong! Bump the 4S up to 16GB baseline capacity and add a BTO 32GB offering - keeping pricing competitive.
If they planned to have these models right through to October 2014 I think they should re-think the plan.
I was surprised that a larger screen offering wasn't released last month. I think it was a huge mistake but a harder one to fix but they should release one ASAP.
Personally I think Apple is bleeding sales needlessly. I was in the market for an iPhone but have given up on it (it's out of my price range for what I want). Android has all my needs covered except iOS at much better price/quality points. That means one less iOS user and one less sale for Apple. One more Android user and one more sale (to Samsung or Sony).
If Apple has a blowout Christmas then great for them but I have a feeling that whatever the sales, the markets will frown on them for not shifting as many units as they could have and the share price will suffer.
This is conditioned by newer pre xmas offerings. If Apple delivers a killer product(s) next Tuesday then the share price might get off lightly.
However, the underlying problem remains. We're not talking about diving into the low end market but the mid range market with a new phone. I have around 400/450 euros for an unlocked phone but all Apple can offer me is an 'old' 4S that is crippled with 8GB of memory and only one screen size. I don't have the 599 euros required for a 5C and a subsidised plan would tie me to options I don't want.
So much comedy in this thread! I'm kinda sad the mods cleaned dillio's posts out.
Anyway isn't it obvious by how many unsold 5Cs are at retailers that 5C sales are running below Apple and retailers expectations?
The positive thing is the 5S is seemingly picking up the sales slack but Apple obviously anticipated far higher sales or else they wouldn't have produced so many 5Cs to begin with.
It seems obvious to me that this is a move Apple had planned all along. Cook does not screw up on this kind of stuff.
The production ramp on the new model's components was slow as has been true for every new model, but the 5C uses mostly existing components that already were being manufactured in great quantities. So Apple built a lot of 5C's initially, because they could, and Pagatron had put the capacity in place. That capacity was always planned to be used for 5S production eventually when the components were in full supply.
The assemblers like Pegatron only saw low quantities of the 5S and high quantities of the 5C being built initially, and then analysts are surprised when Apple rebalances their production to meet actual (and predicted) demand.
BTW, layoffs are not mentioned, just a halt in new hiring. So the total volume is the same.
So much comedy in this thread! I'm kinda sad the mods cleaned dillio's posts out.
Anyway isn't it obvious by how many unsold 5Cs are at retailers that 5C sales are running below Apple and retailers expectations?
The positive thing is the 5S is seemingly picking up the sales slack but Apple obviously anticipated far higher sales or else they wouldn't have produced so many 5Cs to begin with.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that Apple 'can' increase production of the 5s. In contrast to all the people who have been saying that the 5s is harder to make.
Sure doesn't sound like it. It seems as if the 5s is as easy to make as the 5c. Drop the production of the 5c, increase the 5s.
So you are sticking with the theory that if Apple would not have sold units to China this year then the number of units sold would have been 6 - 6.5 million in the 3 day weekend.
(for those that give a shit, I'll explain if he bites)
[ a very simplified version of where I was going... Andysol is claiming that 9 million units were sold in the USA... and we all know that just isn't true]
No- I never claimed that. But you can spin whatever you want to make you feel correct- which you clearly aren't.
I don't care if it sold in the US, China, or Africa. So while you pull stats out of your ass- like "2.5-3 million iPhones were sold internationally"- which you have no clue about- I will give you concrete data, like 6 and 9 million. Numbers don't lie. You on the other hand...
No- I never claimed that. But you can spin whatever you want to make you feel correct- which you clearly aren't.
I don't care if it sold in the US, China, or Africa. So while you pull stats out of your ass- like "2.5-3 million iPhones were sold internationally"- which you have no clue about- I will give you concrete data, like 6 and 9 million. Numbers don't lie. You on the other hand...
Lol.
You just wouldn't listen to the fact that it is a USA study.
I have no clue about? How about the things you don't know about:
1. How many 4s units were made available last year.
2. How many 5c units were made available to the US this year.
3. How many 5c units were left in the channel
4. How many 5c units were sold in China (oh, btw, if the number jumped from 5 million to 9 million that's an 80% increase... so, if China is included and last year 2 million units were sold in China on opening weekend then add 80%, well, you get the idea... and since the Chinese market is apparently increasing...)
5. Since you are making up numbers then I'll making up even more numbers... 6.2 million units were sold without the China numbers. Round down the 27% to 25% and last year's 4s numbers up to 25% (margin of error thingy which doesn't seem to concern you) and you get 1.25 vs. 1.55 which is a 24% jump. Oops!
Things aint looking good for your numbers anymore...
If the 5c wasn't left in the channel (ie. 5s) then I'd say your numbers might be semi accurate, being that they might have been able to sell a few more in the US without the China numbers... but, with inventory seeming to be quite ample I'd say you have to only include the US numbers... which, of course you didn't do.
... and we still don't know how many 4s units were made available last year. By all accounts I read there were few if any left in the channel... which means they probably could have sold a lot more.
You see pal, this is all about business growth. 23% vs. 27%... a dead heat when including margin of error. If you are going to say that they could have sold more in the USA if they would have had them (the origin of your study with USA only numbers) then you have to say the same thing about the 4s numbers last year. Either the numbers are finite this year and last or they are not. YOu seem to have chosen finite numbers... what they sold in the US is the only amount they were able to sell, regardless of numbers available.
You see pal, this is all about business growth. 23% vs. 27%... a dead heat when including margin of error. If you are going to say that they could have sold more in the USA if they would have had them (the origin of your study with USA only numbers) then you have to say the same thing about the 4s numbers last year. Either the numbers are finite this year and last or they are not. YOu seem to have chosen finite numbers... what they sold in the US is the only amount they were able to sell, regardless of numbers available.
The supply lines of 5c still in the channel is a moot point. The 5 faced the same supply (because of demand) constraints the 5s is facing. So channel has nothing to do with it. They aren't sold out of the 5c just like they weren't sold out of the 4s last year. Apples to Apples.
What you are right about, is the comparison about adding china. However- what you are wrong about- is the assumption that the same amount of iPhones were sold in the US (6.2) and the remainder went to China (3). We don't know that. What we also don't know is what the percentages in China were. But again- even if they sold zero of the 5c in China- it would still be a dead heat here in the US for supply. Take into account that they likely did sell in China as well- let's take a tiny amount like 15% (although it might be higher, you can agree)- that is still a 450,000 increase in "mid-tier" sales. Take that number up to 27% and its 810,000 more. Again- that's assuming it's a dead heat in the US.
But please also think objectively. I know you are trying to prove your point, but rounding down the 5c numbers and rounding up the 4s numbers isn't being exactly fair. Yes, there is margin of error- so while I can concede the 23% of 4s and 27% of 5c are actually 25%- you should also be able to concede it could easily be 21% and 29% based on those same errors- which now makes my point look better. So again- I realize rounding errors take place, and I appreciate you discussion- I really do. But let's be fair all the way around.
The fact of the matter is- volume wise- a substantial more amount of 5c phones have sold vs the 4s during the same stretch of time- regardless of the reasons.
The supply lines of 5c still in the channel is a moot point. The 5 faced the same supply (because of demand) constraints the 5s is facing. So channel has nothing to do with it. They aren't sold out of the 5c just like they weren't sold out of the 4s last year. Apples to Apples.
What you are right about, is the comparison about adding china. However- what you are wrong about- is the assumption that the same amount of iPhones were sold in the US (6.2) and the remainder went to China (3). We don't know that. What we also don't know is what the percentages in China were. But again- even if they sold zero of the 5c in China- it would still be a dead heat here in the US for supply. Take into account that they likely did sell in China as well- let's take a tiny amount like 15% (although it might be higher, you can agree)- that is still a 450,000 increase in "mid-tier" sales. Take that number up to 27% and its 810,000 more. Again- that's assuming it's a dead heat in the US.
But please also think objectively. I know you are trying to prove your point, but rounding down the 5c numbers and rounding up the 4s numbers isn't being exactly fair. Yes, there is margin of error- so while I can concede the 23% of 4s and 27% of 5c are actually 25%- you should also be able to concede it could easily be 21% and 29% based on those same errors- which now makes my point look better. So again- I realize rounding errors take place, and I appreciate you discussion- I really do. But let's be fair all the way around.
The fact of the matter is- volume wise- a substantial more amount of 5c phones have sold vs the 4s during the same stretch of time- regardless of the reasons.
Your problem is that you keep telling me that I don't know certain things. Of course, the flip side of that is that you don't know things.
You should just leave it at that.
We both don't know.
You can no more prove your figures than I can prove mine.
We're both equally right and we're both equally wrong. How's that for you.
Comments
Hah! Like clockwork
23 and 27% aren't a dead heat when you are talking about 6 million vs 9 million units sold. If you believe the 27%- then the 4S would have needed to account for 40.5% of the iPhones sold to be a "dead heat" in units sold. You REALLY suck at math. Like, bad.
.
You BEST post today! Keep it up.
Oh no, that would be too easy. It also demonstrates that continuing to post here is a choice and act of free will. That he keeps making.
.
You BEST post today! Keep it up.
There will be a few more posts to get these AI folks to remove my account. Not sure if I can beat this one though.
Drama queen.
Just shut up and stop posting. This is ludicrously infantile.
Hah! Like clockwork
23 and 27% aren't a dead heat when you are talking about 6 million vs 9 million units sold. If you believe the 27%- then the 4S would have needed to account for 40.5% of the iPhones sold to be a "dead heat" in units sold. You REALLY suck at math. Like, bad.
So you are sticking with the theory that if Apple would not have sold units to China this year then the number of units sold would have been 6 - 6.5 million in the 3 day weekend.
(for those that give a shit, I'll explain if he bites)
[ a very simplified version of where I was going... Andysol is claiming that 9 million units were sold in the USA... and we all know that just isn't true]
Just shut up and stop posting. This is ludicrously infantile.
Oh, you're being too harsh. Posts like his provide me comic relief...
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
iPhone 5 was released a year ago. If they sold it now, at $99, instead of this 5c, that would not have been a flop, you're correct. Time will tell, but even before that, it's just a head-scratcher that Apple thought there was a need do to this to the iPhone 5. I predict it will fail, when the initial release dust settles.
I think when you are too cost sensitive you become irrational. You can get either the 5s or the 5c for zero down from AT&T with their new Next™ offering. It is the monthly fee that costs all the money. The cost of every other high end smartphone is the same price. If a $100 dollars here or there is going to be a deal breaker how do you expect to pay the $2000+ two year contract. The down payment is peanuts. People who buy last year's phone to save a hundred dollars are penny wise, pound foolish. The only reason to buy the 5c is because it comes in bright colors.
Various points:
The 100 euro/difference is there partly to tempt people considering a 5C to make the extra effort for a 5s. It would be great for Apple if all potential 5C buyers could find the the extra 100.
It seems the 5C is selling in proportionally lower numbers than the 5s but is selling all the same.
The big and killer question is whether Apple is generating the kind of sales volume it estimated and if it isn't, are those 'lost' buyers buying into Android? If the people not buying iPhones, but who are in the market for one, are just holding off for longer, then perhaps Apple can sweat it out but if people look at Apple's offerings and conclude:
Lousy screen size options.
Premium Pricing
Low capacity (especially on the 4S)
Zero expandability to ease the problems caused by the (expensive) on board memory
No black plastic 5C (what if bright colours aren't my style?)
iPhones are seldom discounted (unlocked) between launches whereas Android phones may be off your price radar at launch but pop onto it a couple of months later.
The result may be they turn to Android and have every one of their smartphone fantasies made reality with one exception: iOS7.
Then the question becomes how many iOS users is Apple losing to Android?
Clearly there is still a lot of room for first time smartphone buyers to get their first phone. That should be a market Apple would want to take a chunk of. More so, if they can do it making a profit while taking sales away from competitors (Samsung probably needs volume more than Apple does). There will also be Android users tired of the issues connected with Android phones (difficult upgrade paths leaving you stuck on old versions of Android and the problems that brings etc).
That brings us full circle and we look at what Apple is offering (the conclusions above). Would an Android user be prepared to sacrifice that much just to avoid Android's habitual problems?
I'd say that on screen size alone, Apple is losing a lot of sales.
Pricing is also an impediment if your can pick up a top of the line Android phone for much less than an equivalent iPhone or go further down the line and get an Android phone that was a flagship phone just months ago at a discounted price.
Capacities are also a problem. it's just plain evil that the 4S comes with just 8GB (seeing as there are zero expandability options). It's also 'old' and people are sensitive to age in this market.
Then we have the emerging markets issue. I think they missed the ball completely there.
If Apple is happy with 5s sales then great. Is Apple happy with 5C and 4S sales? I'd say probably not (if the rumours of cuts in component orders prove to be true).
So what can they do?
I think an easy option would be too chop 200 dollars/euros off the 5C and make a black version. It wouldn't be the first time they got iPhone pricing wrong! Bump the 4S up to 16GB baseline capacity and add a BTO 32GB offering - keeping pricing competitive.
If they planned to have these models right through to October 2014 I think they should re-think the plan.
I was surprised that a larger screen offering wasn't released last month. I think it was a huge mistake but a harder one to fix but they should release one ASAP.
Personally I think Apple is bleeding sales needlessly. I was in the market for an iPhone but have given up on it (it's out of my price range for what I want). Android has all my needs covered except iOS at much better price/quality points. That means one less iOS user and one less sale for Apple. One more Android user and one more sale (to Samsung or Sony).
If Apple has a blowout Christmas then great for them but I have a feeling that whatever the sales, the markets will frown on them for not shifting as many units as they could have and the share price will suffer.
This is conditioned by newer pre xmas offerings. If Apple delivers a killer product(s) next Tuesday then the share price might get off lightly.
However, the underlying problem remains. We're not talking about diving into the low end market but the mid range market with a new phone. I have around 400/450 euros for an unlocked phone but all Apple can offer me is an 'old' 4S that is crippled with 8GB of memory and only one screen size. I don't have the 599 euros required for a 5C and a subsidised plan would tie me to options I don't want.
Anyway isn't it obvious by how many unsold 5Cs are at retailers that 5C sales are running below Apple and retailers expectations?
The positive thing is the 5S is seemingly picking up the sales slack but Apple obviously anticipated far higher sales or else they wouldn't have produced so many 5Cs to begin with.
It seems obvious to me that this is a move Apple had planned all along. Cook does not screw up on this kind of stuff.
The production ramp on the new model's components was slow as has been true for every new model, but the 5C uses mostly existing components that already were being manufactured in great quantities. So Apple built a lot of 5C's initially, because they could, and Pagatron had put the capacity in place. That capacity was always planned to be used for 5S production eventually when the components were in full supply.
The assemblers like Pegatron only saw low quantities of the 5S and high quantities of the 5C being built initially, and then analysts are surprised when Apple rebalances their production to meet actual (and predicted) demand.
BTW, layoffs are not mentioned, just a halt in new hiring. So the total volume is the same.
Jon
So much comedy in this thread! I'm kinda sad the mods cleaned dillio's posts out.
Anyway isn't it obvious by how many unsold 5Cs are at retailers that 5C sales are running below Apple and retailers expectations?
The positive thing is the 5S is seemingly picking up the sales slack but Apple obviously anticipated far higher sales or else they wouldn't have produced so many 5Cs to begin with.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that Apple 'can' increase production of the 5s. In contrast to all the people who have been saying that the 5s is harder to make.
Sure doesn't sound like it. It seems as if the 5s is as easy to make as the 5c. Drop the production of the 5c, increase the 5s.
No- I never claimed that. But you can spin whatever you want to make you feel correct- which you clearly aren't.
I don't care if it sold in the US, China, or Africa. So while you pull stats out of your ass- like "2.5-3 million iPhones were sold internationally"- which you have no clue about- I will give you concrete data, like 6 and 9 million. Numbers don't lie. You on the other hand...
No- I never claimed that. But you can spin whatever you want to make you feel correct- which you clearly aren't.
I don't care if it sold in the US, China, or Africa. So while you pull stats out of your ass- like "2.5-3 million iPhones were sold internationally"- which you have no clue about- I will give you concrete data, like 6 and 9 million. Numbers don't lie. You on the other hand...
Lol.
You just wouldn't listen to the fact that it is a USA study.
I have no clue about? How about the things you don't know about:
1. How many 4s units were made available last year.
2. How many 5c units were made available to the US this year.
3. How many 5c units were left in the channel
4. How many 5c units were sold in China (oh, btw, if the number jumped from 5 million to 9 million that's an 80% increase... so, if China is included and last year 2 million units were sold in China on opening weekend then add 80%, well, you get the idea... and since the Chinese market is apparently increasing...)
5. Since you are making up numbers then I'll making up even more numbers... 6.2 million units were sold without the China numbers. Round down the 27% to 25% and last year's 4s numbers up to 25% (margin of error thingy which doesn't seem to concern you) and you get 1.25 vs. 1.55 which is a 24% jump. Oops!
Things aint looking good for your numbers anymore...
If the 5c wasn't left in the channel (ie. 5s) then I'd say your numbers might be semi accurate, being that they might have been able to sell a few more in the US without the China numbers... but, with inventory seeming to be quite ample I'd say you have to only include the US numbers... which, of course you didn't do.
... and we still don't know how many 4s units were made available last year. By all accounts I read there were few if any left in the channel... which means they probably could have sold a lot more.
You see pal, this is all about business growth. 23% vs. 27%... a dead heat when including margin of error. If you are going to say that they could have sold more in the USA if they would have had them (the origin of your study with USA only numbers) then you have to say the same thing about the 4s numbers last year. Either the numbers are finite this year and last or they are not. YOu seem to have chosen finite numbers... what they sold in the US is the only amount they were able to sell, regardless of numbers available.
Originally Posted by island hermit
You see pal, this is all about business growth. 23% vs. 27%... a dead heat when including margin of error. If you are going to say that they could have sold more in the USA if they would have had them (the origin of your study with USA only numbers) then you have to say the same thing about the 4s numbers last year. Either the numbers are finite this year and last or they are not. YOu seem to have chosen finite numbers... what they sold in the US is the only amount they were able to sell, regardless of numbers available.
The supply lines of 5c still in the channel is a moot point. The 5 faced the same supply (because of demand) constraints the 5s is facing. So channel has nothing to do with it. They aren't sold out of the 5c just like they weren't sold out of the 4s last year. Apples to Apples.
What you are right about, is the comparison about adding china. However- what you are wrong about- is the assumption that the same amount of iPhones were sold in the US (6.2) and the remainder went to China (3). We don't know that. What we also don't know is what the percentages in China were. But again- even if they sold zero of the 5c in China- it would still be a dead heat here in the US for supply. Take into account that they likely did sell in China as well- let's take a tiny amount like 15% (although it might be higher, you can agree)- that is still a 450,000 increase in "mid-tier" sales. Take that number up to 27% and its 810,000 more. Again- that's assuming it's a dead heat in the US.
But please also think objectively. I know you are trying to prove your point, but rounding down the 5c numbers and rounding up the 4s numbers isn't being exactly fair. Yes, there is margin of error- so while I can concede the 23% of 4s and 27% of 5c are actually 25%- you should also be able to concede it could easily be 21% and 29% based on those same errors- which now makes my point look better. So again- I realize rounding errors take place, and I appreciate you discussion- I really do. But let's be fair all the way around.
The fact of the matter is- volume wise- a substantial more amount of 5c phones have sold vs the 4s during the same stretch of time- regardless of the reasons.
The supply lines of 5c still in the channel is a moot point. The 5 faced the same supply (because of demand) constraints the 5s is facing. So channel has nothing to do with it. They aren't sold out of the 5c just like they weren't sold out of the 4s last year. Apples to Apples.
What you are right about, is the comparison about adding china. However- what you are wrong about- is the assumption that the same amount of iPhones were sold in the US (6.2) and the remainder went to China (3). We don't know that. What we also don't know is what the percentages in China were. But again- even if they sold zero of the 5c in China- it would still be a dead heat here in the US for supply. Take into account that they likely did sell in China as well- let's take a tiny amount like 15% (although it might be higher, you can agree)- that is still a 450,000 increase in "mid-tier" sales. Take that number up to 27% and its 810,000 more. Again- that's assuming it's a dead heat in the US.
But please also think objectively. I know you are trying to prove your point, but rounding down the 5c numbers and rounding up the 4s numbers isn't being exactly fair. Yes, there is margin of error- so while I can concede the 23% of 4s and 27% of 5c are actually 25%- you should also be able to concede it could easily be 21% and 29% based on those same errors- which now makes my point look better. So again- I realize rounding errors take place, and I appreciate you discussion- I really do. But let's be fair all the way around.
The fact of the matter is- volume wise- a substantial more amount of 5c phones have sold vs the 4s during the same stretch of time- regardless of the reasons.
Your problem is that you keep telling me that I don't know certain things. Of course, the flip side of that is that you don't know things.
You should just leave it at that.
We both don't know.
You can no more prove your figures than I can prove mine.
We're both equally right and we're both equally wrong. How's that for you.
Have a nice day.
We both don't know.
We’re both equally right…
Well, at least you know you don’t know what you don’t know. That ended pretty well!