His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Well, in the ultimate analysis, profits are what matter and we know that almost the entire profits of the mobile industry belong to Apple. Android has the larger market share and Google monetizes it primarily through collecting user data and serving ads, so they do make money, but nowhere near Apple's scale of either revenue or profits.
Yet still one of the most successful and profitable companies on the planet, and the world's most valuable brand. Not being the richest does not equal fail.
In fairness, I consider the Google Pixel a viable contender in the Android OS market, and Google is currently leading in smart speakers. Google's hardware ventures, while historically a bit chaotic, seem to be bearing fruit.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Well, in the ultimate analysis, profits are what matter and we know that almost the entire profits of the mobile industry belong to Apple. Android has the larger market share and Google monetizes it primarily through collecting user data and serving ads, so they do make money, but nowhere near Apple's scale of either revenue or profits.
Yet still one of the most successful and profitable companies on the planet, and the world's most valuable brand. Not being the richest does not equal fail.
In fairness, I consider the Google Pixel a viable contender in the Android OS market, and Google is currently leading in smart speakers. Google's hardware ventures, while historically a bit chaotic, seem to be bearing fruit.
Of some significance too is that Google has managed to find their way into China as well, via partnerships with OEM's. The first on board is Xiaomi who has started integrating Google's AR/VR platform (ARCore) with their Chinese market handsets, and compatible apps being made available in their app store.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Well, in the ultimate analysis, profits are what matter and we know that almost the entire profits of the mobile industry belong to Apple. Android has the larger market share and Google monetizes it primarily through collecting user data and serving ads, so they do make money, but nowhere near Apple's scale of either revenue or profits.
Yet still one of the most successful and profitable companies on the planet, and the world's most valuable brand. Not being the richest does not equal fail.
In fairness, I consider the Google Pixel a viable contender in the Android OS market, and Google is currently leading in smart speakers. Google's hardware ventures, while historically a bit chaotic, seem to be bearing fruit.
Of some significance too is that Google has managed to find their way into China as well, via partnerships with OEM's. The first on board is Xiaomi who has started integrating Google's AR/VR platform (ARCore) with their Chinese market handsets, and compatible apps being made available in their app store.
I hadn't been aware of that, but that is very good news for the AR/VR market.
I was actually really delighted to see this review. I carry a 7 plus as my daily driver and have a OnePlus 5T as a work phone. It's only a few months old and a bezelless design like the OnePlus 6 and it's a beast.
Things I love:
- The OnePlus is the worlds fastest charging Smartphone (https://www.tomsguide.com/us/fastest-charging-phone,review-4933.html) - Bezelless display is beautiful and really amazing value for the price - Dual sim cards allows me to keep my old Australian sim in the phone in case of emergencies - Face unlock is screaming fast, faster than iPhone X's i've used (also mentioned in the review) - Close-to-stock Android is quite good even coming from an Apple fan
I only found out about this brand because some very smart technical people I know who are android developers buy this brand and I have to say it's great build quality and exceptional value. I think if more people knew about these phones they would sell a lot more of them.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Please remind us of the bigger picture for Huawei.
What were YoY unit sales, revenues and net profits like for 2017?
One quarter is not at all representative, especially when neither the P20 series nor the Honor 10 were able to make an impact. But in that light (and in a contracting western European market) the numbers you quoted are nothing short of spectacular.
There are many unknowns but those unknowns apply equally to Samsung and Apple.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Can you please share the link with details for 38% increase in unit sales Vs 1.7% increase in revenue? Something seems to be iffy there.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Can you please share the link with details for 38% increase in unit sales Vs 1.7% increase in revenue? Something seems to be iffy there.
Apple was down 5%, yet the iPhone X was the best selling smartphone, not untypical for that quarter, and Samsung was divesting itself of the lower end of the market in pursuit of higher profitability. Xiaomi, and others are also active in the market, but not as far along as Huawei is.
I don't remember where that link for the 1.7% revenue gain was. I'll look for it.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Can you please share the link with details for 38% increase in unit sales Vs 1.7% increase in revenue? Something seems to be iffy there.
Apple was down 5%, yet the iPhone X was the best selling smartphone, not untypical for that quarter, and Samsung was divesting itself of the lower end of the market in pursuit of higher profitability. Xiaomi, and others are also active in the market, but not as far along as Huawei is.
I don't remember where that link for the 1.7% revenue gain was. I'll look for it.
Thanks for the marketshare increase link. But revenue gain of 1.7% is the most important aspect here. It does not make any sense to me, because they are releasing phones in ALL price ranges ($100 to $1600). I find it very hard to imagine ALL of that additional growth + a huge chunk of existing customer base moved to $100-$200 phones, that too in Europe. Even in India (the most difficult market to succeed), I don't expect such a scenario to play out given that ALL OEMs are increasing the prices of their smartphones in the last 2 years across all ranges (low-end, mid-range, high-end). Hard to believe this happening in Europe, without data points.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Can you please share the link with details for 38% increase in unit sales Vs 1.7% increase in revenue? Something seems to be iffy there.
Apple was down 5%, yet the iPhone X was the best selling smartphone, not untypical for that quarter, and Samsung was divesting itself of the lower end of the market in pursuit of higher profitability. Xiaomi, and others are also active in the market, but not as far along as Huawei is.
I don't remember where that link for the 1.7% revenue gain was. I'll look for it.
Thanks for the marketshare increase link. But revenue gain of 1.7% is the most important aspect here. It does not make any sense to me, because they are releasing phones in ALL price ranges ($100 to $1600). I find it very hard to imagine ALL of that additional growth + a huge chunk of existing customer base moved to $100-$200 phones, that too in Europe. Even in India (the most difficult market to succeed), I don't expect such a scenario to play out given that ALL OEMs are increasing the prices of their smartphones in the last 2 years across all ranges (low-end, mid-range, high-end). Hard to believe this happening in Europe, without data points.
I provided a link. If you don't believe it, then source your own data.
To me, it points to the cost of acquisition of new customers.
His narrative, btw, is all about marketshare. He does not recognize ASP as a metric in line with his arguments.
Well, we have had this marketshare Vs ASP discussion few times. I strongly believe BOTH (ASP and MarketShare) are equally important, while you are talking about ASP alone. Here is a question for you. Which of the following OEMs do you think is a "competitor" to Apple and why?
1. OnePlus - ASP $500+. 5 devices (One Plus 3, 3T, 5, 5T and 6) launched in last 2.5 years, all with price >$500. No significant discounts for old models either.
2. Essential - ASP $500+. Only 1 device launched in last 2 years.
3. Google - ASP $500+. 4 devices (Pixel, Pixel XL, Pixel 2, Pixel 2XL), all with price >$600 in last 2 years. Even accounting for discounts, ASP is greater than $500 overall.
4. Samsung - ASP $250 to $275. About 100+ models in last 2 years
Of those, OnePlus is an Oppo brand, who knows what sales are, Essential sold something like 165,000 units all total, Google sold 3.9 million Pixel 2 for the year, leaving Samsung more as an indirect competitor to Apple; they have the best sales and distribution of Android OS devices.
Apple's market is certainly flattening in unit sales for the iPhone, but with that, the average age of iPhones in use is near 4 years, the user base is still increasing, and their is likely still a demand for 225 million units a year, still averaging above $600 ASP.
I also note that the YOY sales for all smartphones is down.
The question is - Does Market Share matter at all, or NOT? And Why?
Minimal marketshare, and it varies by case, is relevant to viability, but otherwise is only one of a number of metrics by which companies are evaluated. I never stated that marketshare didn't matter. I do state that marketshare acquisition is a cost, so I feel free to comment on that. I would also state that in a declining market, it really is both zero sum and a race to the bottom for the participants.
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Can you please share the link with details for 38% increase in unit sales Vs 1.7% increase in revenue? Something seems to be iffy there.
Apple was down 5%, yet the iPhone X was the best selling smartphone, not untypical for that quarter, and Samsung was divesting itself of the lower end of the market in pursuit of higher profitability. Xiaomi, and others are also active in the market, but not as far along as Huawei is.
I don't remember where that link for the 1.7% revenue gain was. I'll look for it.
Thanks for the marketshare increase link. But revenue gain of 1.7% is the most important aspect here. It does not make any sense to me, because they are releasing phones in ALL price ranges ($100 to $1600). I find it very hard to imagine ALL of that additional growth + a huge chunk of existing customer base moved to $100-$200 phones, that too in Europe. Even in India (the most difficult market to succeed), I don't expect such a scenario to play out given that ALL OEMs are increasing the prices of their smartphones in the last 2 years across all ranges (low-end, mid-range, high-end). Hard to believe this happening in Europe, without data points.
I provided a link. If you don't believe it, then source your own data.
To me, it points to the cost of acquisition of new customers.
Thanks for the link. I didn't get a chance to go through that, before making my comment. So what you said actually happened in the last quarter. Need to see the trend in other quarters, before concluding that the marketshare increase can come only at the expense of revenues/profits.
Edit: Surprisingly, none of the other articles from Canalys talk about revenue share or numbers. Just one article, with %increase about revenue for Samsung and Huawei for Q1 2018. For Apple, it is mentioned flat, with no percentages (either +Ve or -Ve) in that article. It would have been ideal if they had given additional details (particularly total revenue for the current quarter Vs year ago quarter) to make sense out of it.
Anyway, apologies for the slight detour. The thread is about the OnePlus and not Pixels. Like other posters in the thread I'm no big fan of specs as a predictor of satisfactory experience anyway. I loved my Axon 7. Until I didn't. But specs still have value in the purchasing process so I can appreciate what the AI article is trying to accomplish at least in part.
I was the one who derailed this thread from OnePlus to Pixels and I have explained my reasons as well already. Trust is a big issue when it comes to OnePlus. There are few issues with OnePlus which were reported in almost all android sites. @AppleMagic shared some of those links and I added one more. AI seem to have plans to do a deep dive on One Plus 6 like they did with Samsung Galaxy S9. My request to AI was to reconsider that and review a Pixel phone instead. While Pixel phones are overpriced, you can still get few good deals from time to time at a right price.
I've passed your request to the Video team.
Thanks a lot Mike.
We'll review the next Pixel phone. It's too late for the Pixel 2.
Anyway, apologies for the slight detour. The thread is about the OnePlus and not Pixels. Like other posters in the thread I'm no big fan of specs as a predictor of satisfactory experience anyway. I loved my Axon 7. Until I didn't. But specs still have value in the purchasing process so I can appreciate what the AI article is trying to accomplish at least in part.
I was the one who derailed this thread from OnePlus to Pixels and I have explained my reasons as well already. Trust is a big issue when it comes to OnePlus. There are few issues with OnePlus which were reported in almost all android sites. @AppleMagic shared some of those links and I added one more. AI seem to have plans to do a deep dive on One Plus 6 like they did with Samsung Galaxy S9. My request to AI was to reconsider that and review a Pixel phone instead. While Pixel phones are overpriced, you can still get few good deals from time to time at a right price.
I've passed your request to the Video team.
Thanks a lot Mike.
We'll review the next Pixel phone. It's too late for the Pixel 2.
I like the idea of a pre-applied screen protector. I can't seem to do it without bubbles, would be nice to be able to have Apple deliver a perfectly applied (presumably machine-applied, rather than manually?) one.
Does it have Apple's security embedded and constantly updated?
Does the company sell the data they collect from my phone?
Does it automatically back up my files and configurations?
Does it automatically share my photos with my other devices?
Does it provide FaceTime so I can talk to my grandson?
Can I take it the my Apple Store if I have a question or problem?
Does it work with my Apple Watch?
Does it track my health and fitness parameters? Does it....
No? Then what good is it?
.....AirDrop has worked exactly twice for me since it was released. ....
You must be doing something wrong.
I have used airdrop hundreds of times in the last couple of years. Between iPhones, MacBooks, iMacs , iPads and every combination in between. My own devices and friends/family. It just works.
Anything from a jpeg or browser link to multiple videos and photos in gigabytes. Very tempted to call BS but maybe you’re having an issue that is atypical??
Does it have Apple's security embedded and constantly updated?
Does the company sell the data they collect from my phone?
Does it automatically back up my files and configurations?
Does it automatically share my photos with my other devices?
Does it provide FaceTime so I can talk to my grandson?
Can I take it the my Apple Store if I have a question or problem?
Does it work with my Apple Watch?
Does it track my health and fitness parameters? Does it....
No? Then what good is it?
.....AirDrop has worked exactly twice for me since it was released. ....
You must be doing something wrong.
I have used airdrop hundreds of times in the last couple of years. Between iPhones, MacBooks, iMacs , iPads and every combination in between. My own devices and friends/family. It just works.
Anything from a jpeg or browser link to multiple videos and photos in gigabytes. Very tempted to call BS but maybe you’re having an issue that is atypical??
Definitely not doing anything wrong and if I were this is the kind of thing that that sending system should warn you of. I've troubleshooted this for too long and simply given up. It's voodoo. I've even had an iPhone 6, iPad Mini 2, iPad Air 2, MBP and MBA all sitting next to each other on the same table and they couldn't even see each other! Two different Apple IDs in the mix, BT, wifi, iCloud all ready to go, contacts visible to all and also tried visible only to contacts.
When I dug into this issue I found a lot of people with similar issues. It works for some but not for others.
How much bloatware do you get for the $400 savings and can the device run with only 64GB of storage? Also what are OnePlus’ sales volume and customer satisfaction ratings?
Comments
I will restate that Apple is, for the most part, alone in its own market with little actual direct completion from Android OS device manufacturers. Hence, they are viable with a limited product line, which decreases production and development cost, all at a rising user base.
An example of acquisition cost,
Huawei increased its European unit sales in a recent quarter by 38%, but revenues only increased by 1.7%. That is what the cost of acquisition of customers looks like. I'd guess that much of that was Samsung's loss. Whether Huawei can hold on to that share is unknown.
In Essential's case, they did not have enough marketshare to survive in the smartphone market.
Things I love:
- The OnePlus is the worlds fastest charging Smartphone (https://www.tomsguide.com/us/fastest-charging-phone,review-4933.html)
- Bezelless display is beautiful and really amazing value for the price
- Dual sim cards allows me to keep my old Australian sim in the phone in case of emergencies
- Face unlock is screaming fast, faster than iPhone X's i've used (also mentioned in the review)
- Close-to-stock Android is quite good even coming from an Apple fan
I only found out about this brand because some very smart technical people I know who are android developers buy this brand and I have to say it's great build quality and exceptional value. I think if more people knew about these phones they would sell a lot more of them.
What were YoY unit sales, revenues and net profits like for 2017?
One quarter is not at all representative, especially when neither the P20 series nor the Honor 10 were able to make an impact. But in that light (and in a contracting western European market) the numbers you quoted are nothing short of spectacular.
There are many unknowns but those unknowns apply equally to Samsung and Apple.
Apple was down 5%, yet the iPhone X was the best selling smartphone, not untypical for that quarter, and Samsung was divesting itself of the lower end of the market in pursuit of higher profitability. Xiaomi, and others are also active in the market, but not as far along as Huawei is.
I don't remember where that link for the 1.7% revenue gain was. I'll look for it.
Here:
https://www.canalys.com/newsroom/smartphone-shipments-fall-63-europe-q1-2018
Thanks for the marketshare increase link. But revenue gain of 1.7% is the most important aspect here. It does not make any sense to me, because they are releasing phones in ALL price ranges ($100 to $1600). I find it very hard to imagine ALL of that additional growth + a huge chunk of existing customer base moved to $100-$200 phones, that too in Europe. Even in India (the most difficult market to succeed), I don't expect such a scenario to play out given that ALL OEMs are increasing the prices of their smartphones in the last 2 years across all ranges (low-end, mid-range, high-end). Hard to believe this happening in Europe, without data points.
To me, it points to the cost of acquisition of new customers.
Short and simple article
Thanks for the link. I didn't get a chance to go through that, before making my comment. So what you said actually happened in the last quarter. Need to see the trend in other quarters, before concluding that the marketshare increase can come only at the expense of revenues/profits.
Edit: Surprisingly, none of the other articles from Canalys talk about revenue share or numbers. Just one article, with %increase about revenue for Samsung and Huawei for Q1 2018. For Apple, it is mentioned flat, with no percentages (either +Ve or -Ve) in that article. It would have been ideal if they had given additional details (particularly total revenue for the current quarter Vs year ago quarter) to make sense out of it.
237m yuan for consumer (including smartphones), 366 for telecom. Revenue is split 40% consumer/60% telecom.
I have used airdrop hundreds of times in the last couple of years. Between iPhones, MacBooks, iMacs , iPads and every combination in between. My own devices and friends/family. It just works.
Anything from a jpeg or browser link to multiple videos and photos in gigabytes. Very tempted to call BS but maybe you’re having an issue that is atypical??
When I dug into this issue I found a lot of people with similar issues. It works for some but not for others.
Second question answer: Very high: https://mashable.com/2017/11/03/oneplus-smartphone-contender/#c4WBVf5fmiqX