I wish they’d break down the lies erected by Google and tell us about the effing Android phones on every carrier.
Heck, give us a snapshot of NETWORK INFORMATION to see what these phones are even DOING.
Well, we basically know how it's working out for HP, HTC and a few of the others. I don't think it's necessary to rub salt in their wounds. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
What if it was 30% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is in the US only, and just one provider.
What if it was 15% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is a failure- discounting any point you made previously about numbers being US only.
My point- you will use numbers to prove your agenda/point rather than take numbers for what they are.
Edit: Beat me to it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
Why? So you can declare the 5c an epic fail because it isn't what YOU declared it should be?
I don't see the relevance of Verizon announcing how well HW vendors did. It would be akin to stating how many tower equipment widgets or servers they bought that quarter. Since their profit center is subscribers that is the number that matters. In fact it's the subscribers that use recycled devices and/or are outside their 2 year contract that make them the most money since that expensive subsidy, especially with the iPhone and top tier Android devices, that earn them the least per month
I had to talk my roommate my roommate into getting a new iPhone to repce his iPhone 3GS. My argument was that the carriers screw you everyday so when you an get them to fork over $450 subsidy to another company without affecting your monthly fees you do it.
Perhaps that's one of the reasons that Verizon doesn't report smartphone sales numbers. Thanks.
What most people are missing is this: Android does not have a dominant marketshare of the Smartphone market, at best they are marginally ahead with iOS in the total number of smartphone users. What they do have however, is a dominant position in the glorified feature phone market. You get a lot of things like this. http://techsvault.com/samsung-sm-w2014-another-flip-phone-with-android/ and this http://www.intomobile.com/2013/10/17/5-android-flipphones-you-cant-buy-europe-and-us/. What the iphone numbers should be compared to are the likes of s4, htc one, lg g2, motorola droids, nexus, xperia, those are the lines of phone that competes with the iphone. If we did that, the numbers would not be so lopsided. There is a reason why the iphone kills in web usage even with android numbers being so much larger, the answer is simple, most are feature phone. That's where android is growing like wild fire, it is simply all feature phones are now shipping with android in them. http://venturebeat.com/2013/10/16/facebook-ad-profit-a-staggering-1790-more-on-iphone-than-android/. That is also the reason why most apps still launch on ios first despite those inflated android feature phone numbers.
Yep I was right. LA Times headline was "iPhone sales flat despite launch of 5S, 5C". Completely ignoring the YOY increase or that comparing back to back quarters usually isn't meaningful.
Well, people who have invested heavily in AAPL will want some form of barometer on how well Apple is doing, and, probably more importantly, how well Tim Cook is doing.
The 5c seems to be a new strategy for Apple under Cook and they want to know that it is working. if it doesn't seem to be working then they will move onto the next thing, the new iPads. If there is a change in strategy there as well then they'll be watching it. If it does really well then Cook might get a pass (that is based on the assumption that investors feel the 5c isn't doing as well as they feel it should). If the new iPads don't do well... then... well, you get it.
Big investment houses hate change. It makes them all twitchy. The 5c is a departure from the Apple norm. They are twitching.
For you and I it's just a game we play.
... but you know all that.
Considering Apple's stock has actually gone up since these 5C doom stories I don't think Wall Street cares all that much. Or they realize the 5C is a long tail play and not something Apple was expecting to be an immediate best seller. Most likely they're just happy the more expensive phone appears to be selling the best.
Well, people who have invested heavily in AAPL will want some form of barometer on how well Apple is doing, and, probably more importantly, how well Tim Cook is doing.
Apple has already public ally up guidance as they are required too. Really what more is needed here.
The 5c seems to be a new strategy for Apple under Cook and they want to know that it is working. if it doesn't seem to be working then they will move onto the next thing, the new iPads. If there is a change in strategy there as well then they'll be watching it. If it does really well then Cook might get a pass (that is based on the assumption that investors feel the 5c isn't doing as well as they feel it should). If the new iPads don't do well... then... well, you get it.
A few in the investment community might fell as you describe above, but much of the noise you here about Apple and the 5c lately, is about stock manipulation which seems to have reached a all time high. Every real statistic we have seen so far indicates a very successful launch for Apple, so these attempts to color this success as a failure are at times rather humorous or worst despicable.
Big investment houses hate change. It makes them all twitchy. The 5c is a departure from the Apple norm. They are twitching.
I have to call baloney on this one too. If that was true at all they wouldn't invest in Apple, because in the end it took radical change for Apple to get to where it is now. Beyond that rational investors realize that remaining static is often a more miserable fate for a company. Honestly look at RIM or Nokia, they are the definition of what happens to companies that avoid change.
For you and I it's just a game we play.
... but you know all that.
What we are seeing lately isn't a game at all and can be very damaging to a company like Apple. Reporting news as fact when it comes out of somebodies ass is not ethical at all. The fact that there are gullible people willing to lap it up really says something not so nice about such people.
Considering Apple's stock has actually gone up since these 5C doom stories I don't think Wall Street cares all that much. Or they realize the 5C is a long tail play and not something Apple was expecting to be an immediate best seller. Most likely they're just happy the more expensive phone appears to be selling the best.
Let's look at this way, if the 5c was indeed a best seller then Apple really would have failed with the 5s launch. What Apple and frankly much of the industry wants is a very successful 5s launch to get the new technology on the market. Strong 5c sales might actually be seen as a negative in some corners, if it significantly impacts 5s sales. In the end I really think the obsession with 5c sales is more due to some people out there actively trying to find wrong with Apple so that they can either feel self important or use it for market manipulation.
Apple has already public ally up guidance as they are required too. Really what more is needed here.
A few in the investment community might fell as you describe above, but much of the noise you here about Apple and the 5c lately, is about stock manipulation which seems to have reached a all time high. Every real statistic we have seen so far indicates a very successful launch for Apple, so these attempts to color this success as a failure are at times rather humorous or worst despicable.
I have to call baloney on this one too. If that was true at all they wouldn't invest in Apple, because in the end it took radical change for Apple to get to where it is now. Beyond that rational investors realize that remaining static is often a more miserable fate for a company. Honestly look at RIM or Nokia, they are the definition of what happens to companies that avoid change.
What we are seeing lately isn't a game at all and can be very damaging to a company like Apple. Reporting news as fact when it comes out of somebodies ass is not ethical at all. The fact that there are gullible people willing to lap it up really says something not so nice about such people.
Apple didn't up its guidance. Apple just let everyone know that earnings would be in the upper region of its earlier guidance.
I keep hearing this talk about stock manipulation. You'd think Apple was a penny mining play. Too many shares; too many shares traded daily; to many shares in the hands of big investment houses... for this to be out and out manipulation.
This launch was a failure? Oh boy. The 5s alone could keep Apple afloat for a long long time. I don't see anyone questioning the 5s and what it brings to the table.
You can't blame anyone for questioning the 5c strategy. It's a different play for Apple. Will it make a difference? Big question. I don't buy all this nonsense that the 5 would be harder to make. If that were the case then they would have slightly altered the 5s to make the case easier to produce.
As far as not investing in Apple at all because of the radical change of late... bingo! You got one. Exactly. Err on the side of caution is all I see. Be careful boys... she could tip over at any time. "Look at RIM!! Look at Nokia!!"... exactly the type of thinking I'm talking about.
Considering Apple's stock has actually gone up since these 5C doom stories I don't think Wall Street cares all that much. Or they realize the 5C is a long tail play and not something Apple was expecting to be an immediate best seller. Most likely they're just happy the more expensive phone appears to be selling the best.
When Apple has to actually announce that they will be on the high side of guidance then you can imagine that there will be quite a bit of money that doesn't want to be left on the short side at the end of the month.
What if it was 30% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is in the US only, and just one provider.
What if it was 15% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is a failure- discounting any point you made previously about numbers being US only.
My point- you will use numbers to prove your agenda/point rather than take numbers for what they are.
Edit: Beat me to it!
Seems to me that you are the one making up numbers for your agenda. I have no agenda.
If you think that that the difference between Verizon-announced activations and that of device sales is unimportant 9to5 put up an article this morning that makes it clearer.
"For the record, what Verizon announced was that 51 percent of its activations were iPhone, not 51 percent of its phone sales.
If you doubt the importance of this distinction, I have one word for you: T-Mobile. As of 11th April, the carrier had two million iPhone activations. Its iPhone sales as of the same date? Zero: T-Mobile didn’t start selling iPhones until the following day."
If you think that that the difference between Verizon-announced activations and that of device sales is unimportant 9to5 put up an article this morning that makes it clearer.
"For the record, what Verizon announced was that 51 percent of its activations were iPhone, not 51 percent of its phone sales.
If you doubt the importance of this distinction, I have one word for you: T-Mobile. As of 11th April, the carrier had two million iPhone activations. Its iPhone sales as of the same date? Zero: T-Mobile didn’t start selling iPhones until the following day."
Same can be said about Android. Keep spinning. And we shouldn't be impressed by Google's activation numbers then.
Same can be said about Android. Keep spinning. And we shouldn't be impressed by Google's activation numbers then.
How many Android smartphones did Verizon say they activated? The same would apply to those too tho I doubt the number of used activations would be as high as with iPhones. Common perception is that Android phones aren't passed down but just thrown in a drawer or the garbage.
Now if it's Google's stated activations you're referring to the numbers reportedly aren't sourced from carrier activations in the first place. Instead they rely on Google Services activations, with each unique Google Android device only counted once. Re-gifting doesn't count as another activation, nor do Amazon Kindle, Nook or forked Chinese Android devices. Google has no way of accurately counting those knock-offs.
Of course that isn't proof that those Google activation reports should necessarily be blindly trusted. There's a lot of big companies well-versed in word play. What one of them factually says vs. what we think they said or were reported to say may be wildly different.
In any event whatever Android numbers may really be has nothing to do with the iPhone numbers Verizon announced or what they meant by them.
Comments
I wish they’d break down the lies erected by Google and tell us about the effing Android phones on every carrier.
Heck, give us a snapshot of NETWORK INFORMATION to see what these phones are even DOING.
I wish they'd break down the numbers.
Why? What would the numbers prove?
What if it was 30% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is in the US only, and just one provider.
What if it was 15% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is a failure- discounting any point you made previously about numbers being US only.
My point- you will use numbers to prove your agenda/point rather than take numbers for what they are.
Edit: Beat me to it!
Why? So you can declare the 5c an epic fail because it isn't what YOU declared it should be?
Perhaps that's one of the reasons that Verizon doesn't report smartphone sales numbers. Thanks.
What most people are missing is this: Android does not have a dominant marketshare of the Smartphone market, at best they are marginally ahead with iOS in the total number of smartphone users. What they do have however, is a dominant position in the glorified feature phone market. You get a lot of things like this. http://techsvault.com/samsung-sm-w2014-another-flip-phone-with-android/ and this http://www.intomobile.com/2013/10/17/5-android-flipphones-you-cant-buy-europe-and-us/. What the iphone numbers should be compared to are the likes of s4, htc one, lg g2, motorola droids, nexus, xperia, those are the lines of phone that competes with the iphone. If we did that, the numbers would not be so lopsided. There is a reason why the iphone kills in web usage even with android numbers being so much larger, the answer is simple, most are feature phone. That's where android is growing like wild fire, it is simply all feature phones are now shipping with android in them. http://venturebeat.com/2013/10/16/facebook-ad-profit-a-staggering-1790-more-on-iphone-than-android/. That is also the reason why most apps still launch on ios first despite those inflated android feature phone numbers.
Let's look at this way, if the 5c was indeed a best seller then Apple really would have failed with the 5s launch. What Apple and frankly much of the industry wants is a very successful 5s launch to get the new technology on the market. Strong 5c sales might actually be seen as a negative in some corners, if it significantly impacts 5s sales. In the end I really think the obsession with 5c sales is more due to some people out there actively trying to find wrong with Apple so that they can either feel self important or use it for market manipulation.
Apple has already public ally up guidance as they are required too. Really what more is needed here.
A few in the investment community might fell as you describe above, but much of the noise you here about Apple and the 5c lately, is about stock manipulation which seems to have reached a all time high. Every real statistic we have seen so far indicates a very successful launch for Apple, so these attempts to color this success as a failure are at times rather humorous or worst despicable.
I have to call baloney on this one too. If that was true at all they wouldn't invest in Apple, because in the end it took radical change for Apple to get to where it is now. Beyond that rational investors realize that remaining static is often a more miserable fate for a company. Honestly look at RIM or Nokia, they are the definition of what happens to companies that avoid change.
What we are seeing lately isn't a game at all and can be very damaging to a company like Apple. Reporting news as fact when it comes out of somebodies ass is not ethical at all. The fact that there are gullible people willing to lap it up really says something not so nice about such people.
Apple didn't up its guidance. Apple just let everyone know that earnings would be in the upper region of its earlier guidance.
I keep hearing this talk about stock manipulation. You'd think Apple was a penny mining play. Too many shares; too many shares traded daily; to many shares in the hands of big investment houses... for this to be out and out manipulation.
This launch was a failure? Oh boy. The 5s alone could keep Apple afloat for a long long time. I don't see anyone questioning the 5s and what it brings to the table.
You can't blame anyone for questioning the 5c strategy. It's a different play for Apple. Will it make a difference? Big question. I don't buy all this nonsense that the 5 would be harder to make. If that were the case then they would have slightly altered the 5s to make the case easier to produce.
As far as not investing in Apple at all because of the radical change of late... bingo! You got one. Exactly. Err on the side of caution is all I see. Be careful boys... she could tip over at any time. "Look at RIM!! Look at Nokia!!"... exactly the type of thinking I'm talking about.
Considering Apple's stock has actually gone up since these 5C doom stories I don't think Wall Street cares all that much. Or they realize the 5C is a long tail play and not something Apple was expecting to be an immediate best seller. Most likely they're just happy the more expensive phone appears to be selling the best.
When Apple has to actually announce that they will be on the high side of guidance then you can imagine that there will be quite a bit of money that doesn't want to be left on the short side at the end of the month.
Why? What would the numbers prove?
What if it was 30% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is in the US only, and just one provider.
What if it was 15% 5c? You would then yell from the mountain tops it is a failure- discounting any point you made previously about numbers being US only.
My point- you will use numbers to prove your agenda/point rather than take numbers for what they are.
Edit: Beat me to it!
Seems to me that you are the one making up numbers for your agenda. I have no agenda.
Just further proof you have no clue what you're talking about.
Error on the side of caution is all I see.
Quote:
Just further proof you have no clue what you're talking about.
This is the best thing about having a stalker... they point out your typos and then you can go back and correct them.
Anytime sweetheart. And let's not pretend error was a "typo" for err.
Anytime sweetheart. And let's not pretend error was a "typo" for err.
Sure, pumpkin.
[I like it when he gets so bossy]
If you think that that the difference between Verizon-announced activations and that of device sales is unimportant 9to5 put up an article this morning that makes it clearer.
"For the record, what Verizon announced was that 51 percent of its activations were iPhone, not 51 percent of its phone sales.
If you doubt the importance of this distinction, I have one word for you: T-Mobile. As of 11th April, the carrier had two million iPhone activations. Its iPhone sales as of the same date? Zero: T-Mobile didn’t start selling iPhones until the following day."
Same can be said about Android. Keep spinning. And we shouldn't be impressed by Google's activation numbers then.
How many Android smartphones did Verizon say they activated? The same would apply to those too tho I doubt the number of used activations would be as high as with iPhones. Common perception is that Android phones aren't passed down but just thrown in a drawer or the garbage.
Now if it's Google's stated activations you're referring to the numbers reportedly aren't sourced from carrier activations in the first place. Instead they rely on Google Services activations, with each unique Google Android device only counted once. Re-gifting doesn't count as another activation, nor do Amazon Kindle, Nook or forked Chinese Android devices. Google has no way of accurately counting those knock-offs.
Of course that isn't proof that those Google activation reports should necessarily be blindly trusted. There's a lot of big companies well-versed in word play. What one of them factually says vs. what we think they said or were reported to say may be wildly different.
In any event whatever Android numbers may really be has nothing to do with the iPhone numbers Verizon announced or what they meant by them.