Duh, when you're talking unit numbers, penny candy will always outsell boxes of See's or Purdy's. People may dream of a Ferrari or Mercedes, but more Kia's are actually sold. Cheap crap always outsells high priced quality.
So is the iPhone SE cheap crap? The car I drive is not a Mercedes or BMW but it’s certainly not cheap crap. I’ve had it for almost 6 years and have had zero issues with it. Just because something doesn’t cost a lot doesn’t mean it’s cheap crap.
By an amazing coincidence I own an iPhone SE. No it's not cheap crap, it's just the smallest iPhone, but it still was between five and six hundred dollars. A guy I work with loves his LG phone. It cost a couple hundred bucks. He's on his third one since I started working with him five years ago. He doesn't break them, they just stop working. I've had my SE for around two and a half years, and barring accident I expect to get another couple years out of it. That's the difference between cheap crap and quality.
(Oh and for the record I have a 13 year old Toyota Prius. It's not cheap crap either.)
I agree with you. The quality of a product is not necessarily a function of cost, and for most branded smartphones, the quality is good enough that it isn't an issue.
BBK was ahead of Apple in Q3 '16, Q2 '17, Q3'17, and also in the last quarter. Did anyone care? Changed that anything?
Even now, they would be either very close or ahead of Apple if you combine all of their sub brands together (Oppo, Vivo, One Plus, Realme). For some reason, BBK's sub brands are reported as separate entities but Huawei's sub brand Honor is combined with the parent brand.
Duh, when you're talking unit numbers, penny candy will always outsell boxes of See's or Purdy's. People may dream of a Ferrari or Mercedes, but more Kia's are actually sold. Cheap crap always outsells high priced quality.
So is the iPhone SE cheap crap? The car I drive is not a Mercedes or BMW but it’s certainly not cheap crap. I’ve had it for almost 6 years and have had zero issues with it. Just because something doesn’t cost a lot doesn’t mean it’s cheap crap.
By an amazing coincidence I own an iPhone SE. No it's not cheap crap, it's just the smallest iPhone, but it still was between five and six hundred dollars. A guy I work with loves his LG phone. It cost a couple hundred bucks. He's on his third one since I started working with him five years ago. He doesn't break them, they just stop working. I've had my SE for around two and a half years, and barring accident I expect to get another couple years out of it. That's the difference between cheap crap and quality.
(Oh and for the record I have a 13 year old Toyota Prius. It's not cheap crap either.)
I agree with you. The quality of a product is not necessarily a function of cost, and for most branded smartphones, the quality is good enough that it isn't an issue.
Nice to see a neutral stance from you on this - "for most branded smartphones, the quality is good enough that it isn't an issue.". @DAalseth's comment implies the exact opposite - i.e. All Android smartphones (including Samsung, Huawei, Oppo, Vivo, Sony etc) are cheap crap. And I don't agree with his comment. I agree with you that build quality is good enough for most of the brands (including LG, against whom OP saw a negative experience with this colleague) in the last 4-5 years.
Better question is what percentage of those phones make a profit?
That is not a better question but Huawei makes a lot of profit. Billions.
Apple sold a little over 40 million iPhones last quarter. How many of those purchasers cared in the slightest how much profit the phone was making?
Hey, if that was broken down on the price tag, I'm sure many would reconsider the purchase.
High or highest profits are not the concern of the consumer. No Apple user would see a discounted iPhone and insist on paying the full retail price.
Investors care about profits.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
Yet they’re still just a chinese knockoff following Apple.
Profit matters. It’s the air corporations breathe. Market share is not so important. Mcdonald’s sells more crappy burgers than a high-end steakhouse, but so what?
No one ever said profit doesn't matter. Not even Xiaomi.
Corporations might breathe profits but consumers do not.
Market share, depending on business model, can be a top priority. That is where Apple seems to be moving to.
Apple's current model has seen a shift to marketshare gains but it is still early days. We will see how things look come the end of September.
That is why we now have the biggest spread of iPhone models and prices in the history of the iPhone.
That is why virtually every rumour of late (mac, laptop and iPhone) includes words like 'low cost' or 'affordable'.
But don't take it from me:
“The future of Apple is services driven and it needs to ship volume in order to support that. It can’t make money on the App store or services if it doesn’t have a big base of users.”
Apple would love to lumber along with two models on a yearly cycle and see sales balloon. I think most people agree those days are over unless it offers groundbreaking features and lower prices.
It looks like they are changing the business model but largely thanks to Huawei eating their lunch in traditional Apple strongholds. It is a question of need.
The Mate 10 and P20 series stepped over the iPhone in many areas and show no signs of letting up. Next up, the Mate 20 series and Honor Magic 2.
BBK was ahead of Apple in Q3 '16, Q2 '17, Q3'17, and also in the last quarter. Did anyone care? Changed that anything?
If the media, or financial analysts, want to score by quarter, I'm okay with that. At the same time, Company financials are quarterly and yearly, so Apple will always look better in a yearly assessment of sales. It doesn't make any difference except in bragging rights at a particular time.
I'm not yet convinced that either Huawei, Xiaomi, or BKK, are in a position to take Apple's second place position based on yearly unit sales, and I have my doubts that they will challenge Samsung for first place anytime soon. Maybe in 2019. we'll see Apple displaced.
I’ve been a longtime reader of AI and reading the comments hete made me to signup and make my first comment.
I guess most of you are from the US. I’m from Europe (eastern part, still an EU member). I’ve been using Macs since 2004 (Mini G4, white iMac core2duo, first auminium unibody MacBook) and iPhones (3G, 3GS, 4S, 6), iPad mini.
I love these products because the UI is great, I get stability, good hardware, etc. I admit there are exceptions like the cracking polycarbonate Macs or the recent MacBook keyboard problems, etc. But overal I trust Apple’s products and I agree with the philosophy behind.
However I’m getting more and more fed up with Apple due to the pricing and restrictions around upgradebility. With latest iPhone X they went crazy. I cannot buy any of the Macs because they become insanely expensive as well. Still, you cannot upgrade the hard drive or the memory. And these restrictions are clearly not because of somekind of technical limitation. I believe Apple has started increasing prices since they cannot increase the volume sold. So the only way to make more revenue is by increasing prices.
I want to replace my old iPhone 6 this year, but I’m afraid prices will again be so high that I might just buy a Xiaomi phone. I know it’s Android, but one should not spend a whole month of salary in an iPhone.
Apple Watch? Same thing. I really want one but it’s so expensive compared to the wages here that I will probably skip it this year again. I have a Xiaomi Amazfit Bip for now and I don’t even want to tell how cheap it is. Of course it’s dumb compred to an Apple Watch.
Prices (apple.com vs my country’s Apple website)
iPhone X 256 GB, SIM-free: $1149 vs $1570 (36%) Apple Watch S3 42mm, GPS-only: $359 vs $467 (23%) iMac cheapest option: $1099 vs $1509 (37%)
Do you now understand why more and more people buy cheaper Android alternatives outside the US?
Not to mention that these prices only include 1 freaking year of warranty.
Maybe you should petition your government to stop the ridiculous practice of adding VAT to everything that comes into the country. It's not Apple's fault that your country is costing you more to buy an Apple product. It's your government.
The same VAT is applicable to the P20 Pro and it is better in many areas than the iPhone X but the final price is several hundred dollars less than Apple.
Duh, when you're talking unit numbers, penny candy will always outsell boxes of See's or Purdy's. People may dream of a Ferrari or Mercedes, but more Kia's are actually sold. Cheap crap always outsells high priced quality.
Bingo, this guy gets it. Bragging about unit sales is silly when it’s cheap.
Huawei goes from cheap, right through the middle, up into the high end and waaaay past Apple at the ultra high end.
In fact in this last quarter the focus has been on the 9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pro phones that were sold. That's starting at over $500 and going up to $900.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Better question is what percentage of those phones make a profit?
That is not a better question but Huawei makes a lot of profit. Billions.
Apple sold a little over 40 million iPhones last quarter. How many of those purchasers cared in the slightest how much profit the phone was making?
Hey, if that was broken down on the price tag, I'm sure many would reconsider the purchase.
High or highest profits are not the concern of the consumer. No Apple user would see a discounted iPhone and insist on paying the full retail price.
Investors care about profits.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
Yet they’re still just a chinese knockoff following Apple.
Profit matters. It’s the air corporations breathe. Market share is not so important. Mcdonald’s sells more crappy burgers than a high-end steakhouse, but so what?
No one ever said profit doesn't matter. Not even Xiaomi.
Corporations might breathe profits but consumers do not.
Market share, depending on business model, can be a top priority. That is where Apple seems to be moving to.
Apple's current model has seen a shift to marketshare gains.
That is why we now have the biggest spread of iPhone models and prices in the history if the iPhone.
That is why virtually every rumour of late (mac, laptop and iPhone) includes words like 'low cost' or 'affordable'.
But don't take it from me:
“The future of Apple is services driven and it needs to ship volume in order to support that. It can’t make money on the App store or services if it doesn’t have a big base of users.”
Apple would love to lumber along with two models on a yearly cycle and see sales balloon. I think most people agree those days are over unless it offers groundbreaking features and lower prices.
It looks like they are changing the business model but largely thanks to Huawei eating their lunch in traditional Apple strongholds. It is a question of need.
The Mate 10 and P20 series stepped over the iPhone in many areas and show no signs of letting up. Next up, the Mate 20 series and Honor Magic 2.
You keep pushing really poorly sourced data.
Apple iPhones sales have mostly been static, at about 215 million units per year, and there hasn't been any concerted effort to lower entry level pricing since the SE, so your "biggest spread of iPhone models and prices in the history of the iPhone" doesn't really have much meaning with Apple's historically high ASP's. There hasn't been any evidence that marketshare "is where Apple seems to be moving to." At best, you could comment that Apple is investing in emerging markets.
70% of Apple's sales this year, more or less, will be of the three current releases; iPhones 8 and iPhone X. This will continue with the next release, albeit arguably all will be derived from the current X model.
“The future of Apple is services driven and it needs to ship volume in order to support that. It can’t make money on the App store or services if it doesn’t have a big base of users.”, and yet, Apple's user base keeps growing. You failed to consider the vibrant market for used and refurbished iPhones, the longest lived products, and the most valued over their life cycle, in the market, by far.
"Apple would love to lumber along with two models on a yearly cycle"might be true, but in practice, Apple is providing three models, this year, and again in September.
"It looks like they are changing the business model but largely thanks to Huawei eating their lunch in traditional Apple strongholds. It is a question of need". I haven't seen any change in Apple's business model, except to sell higher priced flagships. What would those traditional Apple strongholds be, other than the well regarded Apple ecosystem, and data shows, that there is a continuing net user migration to iOS.
I've asked you for data, over and over again, to show that and you have never been able to provide it. The truth is, Huawei is taking Samsung's, and other Android OS device, marketshare, not Apple's.
You are, by your words, a propagandist for Huawei, and fail to see that Huawei is competing primarily against other Android OS devices, and very much less so against the iPhone, a result of that expanding Apple ecosystem.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Unless you can provide a link that shows that P20 Lite was excluded from the 9 million, I call bullshit. That fact is, you extrapolated that 9 million figure. We had this argument before, and you stated as much.
Duh, when you're talking unit numbers, penny candy will always outsell boxes of See's or Purdy's. People may dream of a Ferrari or Mercedes, but more Kia's are actually sold. Cheap crap always outsells high priced quality.
So is the iPhone SE cheap crap? The car I drive is not a Mercedes or BMW but it’s certainly not cheap crap. I’ve had it for almost 6 years and have had zero issues with it. Just because something doesn’t cost a lot doesn’t mean it’s cheap crap.
By an amazing coincidence I own an iPhone SE. No it's not cheap crap, it's just the smallest iPhone, but it still was between five and six hundred dollars. A guy I work with loves his LG phone. It cost a couple hundred bucks. He's on his third one since I started working with him five years ago. He doesn't break them, they just stop working. I've had my SE for around two and a half years, and barring accident I expect to get another couple years out of it. That's the difference between cheap crap and quality.
(Oh and for the record I have a 13 year old Toyota Prius. It's not cheap crap either.)
I recently had to replace my iPad Pro because of light leakage in the display that kept getting worse. The replacement I got works great for the most part but sometimes the display is unresponsive and I’m not able to scroll or tap anything. I spent over $1000 on this product. I also recently had my Apple Watch replaced. The screen just popped off one day because the battery expanded. I know I’m not the only one it’s happened to.
BBK was ahead of Apple in Q3 '16, Q2 '17, Q3'17, and also in the last quarter. Did anyone care? Changed that anything?
If the media, or financial analysts, want to score by quarter, I'm okay with that. At the same time, Company financials are quarterly and yearly, so Apple will always look better in a yearly assessment of sales. It doesn't make any difference except in bragging rights at a particular time.
I'm not yet convinced that either Huawei, Xiaomi, or BKK, are in a position to take Apple's second place position based on yearly unit sales, and I have my doubts that they will challenge Samsung for first place anytime soon. Maybe in 2019. we'll see Apple displaced.
A very balanced comment. We'll have to wait and see. Nothing is guaranteed and there lies the beauty of the situation: competition
This is actually the second time Huawei has pulled ahead of Apple. It happened last year too. The difference this time is that the position of Huawei is stronger and its flagships are performing even better than last year. To the point that Huawei announced in July that it hoped to top 200 million units this year. That has resulted in Huawei being described as the tech wolf stalking both Apple and Samsung.
All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, just as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are.
One thing is for sure. Given Apple's guidance for this quarter, if it is largely phone related, Apple will not be giving us more of the same this year. That will be solely due to market realities resulting from the extreme competition over the last two years.
BBK was ahead of Apple in Q3 '16, Q2 '17, Q3'17, and also in the last quarter. Did anyone care? Changed that anything?
If the media, or financial analysts, want to score by quarter, I'm okay with that. At the same time, Company financials are quarterly and yearly, so Apple will always look better in a yearly assessment of sales. It doesn't make any difference except in bragging rights at a particular time.
I'm not yet convinced that either Huawei, Xiaomi, or BKK, are in a position to take Apple's second place position based on yearly unit sales, and I have my doubts that they will challenge Samsung for first place anytime soon. Maybe in 2019. we'll see Apple displaced.
A very balanced comment. We'll have to wait and see. Nothing is guaranteed and there lies the beauty of the situation: competition
This is actually the second time Huawei has pulled ahead of Apple. It happened last year too. The difference this time is that the position of Huawei is stronger and its flagships are performing even better than last year. To the point that Huawei announced in July that it hoped to top 200 million units this year. That has resulted in Huawei being described as the tech wolf stalking both Apple and Samsung.
All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, juat as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are.
One thing is for sure. Given Apple's guidance for this quarter, if it is largely phone related, Apple will not be giving us more of the same this year. That will be solely due to market realities resulting from the extreme competition over the last two years.
Evidence of this statement please:
"All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, juat as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are."
I have yet to see Huawei do any damage to Apple in any market, and you haven't supplied any data to that effect. If anything, your previous link, noted that it was Samsung that was being affected, not Apple.
"Apple shipped 2.1 million units, while Samsung shipped 1.6 million units and Huawei 625,000 handsets.
A closer look at the numbers tells a different story, with Apple and Samsung’s YoY performance down 13 per cent and 34 per cent respectively.
Huawei, on the other hand, has registered growth of 63 per cent in the UK, which is showing that it has the potential to take on one of the most brand led markets in the world.
So with the recent surge of Huawei, which of the two is more likely to be impacted by the Chinese brand?
According to the analysts, the signs are more worrying for Samsung and the fact both share an Android platform contributes to this.
Koytcheva argues Apple performed well in the last quarter and that the pressure is on Samsung and other Android players.
Koytcheva said: “It is fair to say this is way less about Apple than it is about Samsung because Apple’s performance showed a slight uptake in a tough market.
“Huawei’s growth has come at the expense of Samsung and other competitors like LG and Sony. The pressure is more on these competitors because it is easier to persuade an Android user to switch from one brand to another than an iOS user to Android.”
Jeronimo also acknowledges the Android battle and that Huawei’s rise is “more worrying” for Samsung than it is Apple and that retailers can have a big influence in this."
There is overwhelming evidence that Huawei phones are being used by the Chinese to spy on Americans according to US senator Tom Cotton.
Android slaves don't care about privacy.
Android slaves.... LOL
I would hope others here appreciate the silliness of hating an entire group of people, billions of individuals you don't know, because of the phone they chose to buy. Really? The company name on an electronic phone you bought has become the defining characteristic of whether you are free and/or have worth in life?
They're slaves because their dumbasses know their iKnockoffs sell their user data.
It's okay for these morons to call people more intelligent and successful than them "sheep" but as soon as you expose the truth(data mining) we cross the line by calling them slaves?
BBK was ahead of Apple in Q3 '16, Q2 '17, Q3'17, and also in the last quarter. Did anyone care? Changed that anything?
If the media, or financial analysts, want to score by quarter, I'm okay with that. At the same time, Company financials are quarterly and yearly, so Apple will always look better in a yearly assessment of sales. It doesn't make any difference except in bragging rights at a particular time.
I'm not yet convinced that either Huawei, Xiaomi, or BKK, are in a position to take Apple's second place position based on yearly unit sales, and I have my doubts that they will challenge Samsung for first place anytime soon. Maybe in 2019. we'll see Apple displaced.
A very balanced comment. We'll have to wait and see. Nothing is guaranteed and there lies the beauty of the situation: competition
This is actually the second time Huawei has pulled ahead of Apple. It happened last year too. The difference this time is that the position of Huawei is stronger and its flagships are performing even better than last year. To the point that Huawei announced in July that it hoped to top 200 million units this year. That has resulted in Huawei being described as the tech wolf stalking both Apple and Samsung.
All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, juat as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are.
One thing is for sure. Given Apple's guidance for this quarter, if it is largely phone related, Apple will not be giving us more of the same this year. That will be solely due to market realities resulting from the extreme competition over the last two years.
Evidence of this statement please:
"All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, juat as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are."
I have yet to see Huawei do any damage to Apple in any market, and you haven't supplied any data to that effect. If anything, your previous link, noted that it was Samsung that was being affected, not Apple.
"Apple shipped 2.1 million units, while Samsung shipped 1.6 million units and Huawei 625,000 handsets.
A closer look at the numbers tells a different story, with Apple and Samsung’s YoY performance down 13 per cent and 34 per cent respectively.
Huawei, on the other hand, has registered growth of 63 per cent in the UK, which is showing that it has the potential to take on one of the most brand led markets in the world.
So with the recent surge of Huawei, which of the two is more likely to be impacted by the Chinese brand?
According to the analysts, the signs are more worrying for Samsung and the fact both share an Android platform contributes to this.
Koytcheva argues Apple performed well in the last quarter and that the pressure is on Samsung and other Android players.
Koytcheva said: “It is fair to say this is way less about Apple than it is about Samsung because Apple’s performance showed a slight uptake in a tough market.
“Huawei’s growth has come at the expense of Samsung and other competitors like LG and Sony. The pressure is more on these competitors because it is easier to persuade an Android user to switch from one brand to another than an iOS user to Android.”
Jeronimo also acknowledges the Android battle and that Huawei’s rise is “more worrying” for Samsung than it is Apple and that retailers can have a big influence in this."
The link provides insight from a number of industry watchers and their opinions vary even though the picture they paint is relatively consistent.
It is clear that Apple simply isn't seeing unit growth and in some of its strongest markets (UK etc) contraction may be the right word. Not good. Bad, in fact.
That lack of growth is partly Apple's own doing and partly competition. The presence of Huawei is having a negative impact on Samsung but isn't limited to Samsung. Samsung is just probably taking more damage than Apple. Apple is suffering too (as per the numbers in the link).
If Huawei were to achieve similar performance in the US (there is zero reason to believe otherwise, just look at the UK ad a model) the damage would be significant. Presently, the US premium cake gets cut into two. Cutting it into three would obviously hurt Samsung but Apple would feel a lot of pain too.
is a call to attention. Huawei wants an official declaration. From there I don't know where they want to go but they lodged the request for a reason, not a play to the gallery. In short, Apple is not being subjected to competitive stress in the US in the same way it is elsewhere. This also applies to Samsung in the US of course.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Unless you can provide a link that shows that P20 Lite was excluded from the 9 million, I call bullshit. That fact is, you extrapolated that 9 million figure. We had this argument before, and you stated as much.
Show me the link.
You argued the same point -repeatedly- in another thread. I gave you the links, multiple times!
When the P20 Series hit 6 million units it wad widely reported. And clarified:
"UPDATE: Huawei has clarified to us that the number does not include sales of the Huawei P20 Lite. Instead, it solely represents sales of the two flagship models and can be considered an even more impressive achievement."
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Unless you can provide a link that shows that P20 Lite was excluded from the 9 million, I call bullshit. That fact is, you extrapolated that 9 million figure. We had this argument before, and you stated as much.
Show me the link.
You argued the same point -repeatedly- in another thread. I gave you the links, multiple times!
You never gave me a link for 9 million units. It doesn't exist, and can't be found in any search.
You extrapolated from the 6 million what were announced sold by mid June; and then there was that caveat about P20 Lite not being included, which is remarkably flakey considering the price/performance/value of the P20 Lite in the niche that you agree is inviting to buyers.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Unless you can provide a link that shows that P20 Lite was excluded from the 9 million, I call bullshit. That fact is, you extrapolated that 9 million figure. We had this argument before, and you stated as much.
Show me the link.
You argued the same point -repeatedly- in another thread. I gave you the links, multiple times!
You never gave me a link for 9 million units. It doesn't exist, and can't be found in any search.
You extrapolated from the 6 million what were announced sold by mid June; and then there was that caveat about P20 Lite not being included, which is remarkably flakey considering the price/performance/value of the P20 Lite in the niche that you agree is inviting to buyers.
You mean the 6,000,000 that in your eyes included the Lite model even though I gave you the exact same link I just posted right here that said otherwise?
Believe me, I provided the link. It is there in that thread. Along with the link to the 20,000,000 figure.
When I mentioned the 9,000,000 million figure it was not extrapolated at all. It came from a Huawei executive but at that precise point in time I didn't have the actual link to hand but I had already given you everything you needed to understand the Lite model wasn't being included and if memory serves me correctly, I posted a link to the 9,000,000 figure in that same thread anyway.
Consumers care about the product and if their budgets can allow the purchase. More often than not with the best bang for buck.
FWIW, Huawei also usually invests more in R&D than Apple and licences a huge amount of patents to Apple too.
nonsense. Most Android users care about one thing only. Price. What phone can I get for $40. Period. You may sugarcoat it and say "best bang for the buck", but we know everything at that price point (i.e. bottom-of-barrel) is basically junk.
I haven't bothered to compare Apple's and Huawei's R&D budgets, but I do know that Huawei's must be up there to come out with so many variations and knockoffs, where Apple just has to deal with a tiny number of iPhone models. Big difference. Again, you're sugarcoating it.
Nonsense? No.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Unless you can provide a link that shows that P20 Lite was excluded from the 9 million, I call bullshit. That fact is, you extrapolated that 9 million figure. We had this argument before, and you stated as much.
Show me the link.
You argued the same point -repeatedly- in another thread. I gave you the links, multiple times!
You never gave me a link for 9 million units. It doesn't exist, and can't be found in any search.
You extrapolated from the 6 million what were announced sold by mid June; and then there was that caveat about P20 Lite not being included, which is remarkably flakey considering the price/performance/value of the P20 Lite in the niche that you agree is inviting to buyers.
You mean the 6,000,000 that in your eyes included the Lite model even though I gave you the exact same link I just posted right here that said otherwise?
Believe me, I provided the link. It is there in that thread. Along with the link to the 20,000,000 figure.
When I mentioned the 9,000,000 million figure it was not extrapolated at all. It came from a Huawei executive but at that precise point in time I didn't have the actual link to hand but I had already given you everything you needed to understand the Lite model wasn't being included and if memory serves me correctly, I posted a link to the 9,000,000 figure in that same thread anyway.
Okay, the following link that you just gave me states the 9 million, which includes P20 Lite, P20, and P20 Pro:
"Yu did announce shipment numbers, and the company's last two flagships each saw significant growth compared to previous generations: Huawei's flagship P20 series shipped a total of 9 million units so far in four months of release, while the Mate 10 series, which is close to a year old, has shipped a total of 10 million devices. Yu said the Mate 10 should finish at around the 11 million mark".
Comments
Did anyone care?
Changed that anything?
Corporations might breathe profits but consumers do not.
Market share, depending on business model, can be a top priority. That is where Apple seems to be moving to.
Apple's current model has seen a shift to marketshare gains but it is still early days. We will see how things look come the end of September.
That is why we now have the biggest spread of iPhone models and prices in the history of the iPhone.
That is why virtually every rumour of late (mac, laptop and iPhone) includes words like 'low cost' or 'affordable'.
But don't take it from me:
“The future of Apple is services driven and it needs to ship volume in order to support that. It can’t make money on the App store or services if it doesn’t have a big base of users.”
http://www.mobilenewscwp.co.uk/2018/08/28/and-then-there-were-three-huawei-shatters-the-duopoly/
Apple would love to lumber along with two models on a yearly cycle and see sales balloon. I think most people agree those days are over unless it offers groundbreaking features and lower prices.
It looks like they are changing the business model but largely thanks to Huawei eating their lunch in traditional Apple strongholds. It is a question of need.
The Mate 10 and P20 series stepped over the iPhone in many areas and show no signs of letting up. Next up, the Mate 20 series and Honor Magic 2.
I'm not yet convinced that either Huawei, Xiaomi, or BKK, are in a position to take Apple's second place position based on yearly unit sales, and I have my doubts that they will challenge Samsung for first place anytime soon. Maybe in 2019. we'll see Apple displaced.
In fact in this last quarter the focus has been on the 9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pro phones that were sold. That's starting at over $500 and going up to $900.
Cheap? Nope.
9,000,000 P20 and P20 Pros shipped in that quarter. That's a starting price of over $500 a pop.
That puts your $40 claim into stark contrast and is from just ONE Android vendor and is excluding Honor.
Apple iPhones sales have mostly been static, at about 215 million units per year, and there hasn't been any concerted effort to lower entry level pricing since the SE, so your "biggest spread of iPhone models and prices in the history of the iPhone" doesn't really have much meaning with Apple's historically high ASP's. There hasn't been any evidence that marketshare "is where Apple seems to be moving to." At best, you could comment that Apple is investing in emerging markets.
70% of Apple's sales this year, more or less, will be of the three current releases; iPhones 8 and iPhone X. This will continue with the next release, albeit arguably all will be derived from the current X model.
“The future of Apple is services driven and it needs to ship volume in order to support that. It can’t make money on the App store or services if it doesn’t have a big base of users.”, and yet, Apple's user base keeps growing. You failed to consider the vibrant market for used and refurbished iPhones, the longest lived products, and the most valued over their life cycle, in the market, by far.
"Apple would love to lumber along with two models on a yearly cycle" might be true, but in practice, Apple is providing three models, this year, and again in September.
"It looks like they are changing the business model but largely thanks to Huawei eating their lunch in traditional Apple strongholds. It is a question of need". I haven't seen any change in Apple's business model, except to sell higher priced flagships. What would those traditional Apple strongholds be, other than the well regarded Apple ecosystem, and data shows, that there is a continuing net user migration to iOS.
I've asked you for data, over and over again, to show that and you have never been able to provide it. The truth is, Huawei is taking Samsung's, and other Android OS device, marketshare, not Apple's.
You are, by your words, a propagandist for Huawei, and fail to see that Huawei is competing primarily against other Android OS devices, and very much less so against the iPhone, a result of that expanding Apple ecosystem.
Show me the link.
This is actually the second time Huawei has pulled ahead of Apple. It happened last year too. The difference this time is that the position of Huawei is stronger and its flagships are performing even better than last year. To the point that Huawei announced in July that it hoped to top 200 million units this year. That has resulted in Huawei being described as the tech wolf stalking both Apple and Samsung.
All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, just as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are.
One thing is for sure. Given Apple's guidance for this quarter, if it is largely phone related, Apple will not be giving us more of the same this year. That will be solely due to market realities resulting from the extreme competition over the last two years.
"All that without equal access to the world's second largest premium handset market. The US, where it could do serious damage to Apple, juat as it is doing in every Apple market where it has equal access. In fact, and due to the protectionist nature of the restictions in the US, Huawei has lodged a formal request that the FTC make an official statement on the issue. We will see what the next moves are."
I have yet to see Huawei do any damage to Apple in any market, and you haven't supplied any data to that effect. If anything, your previous link, noted that it was Samsung that was being affected, not Apple.
http://www.mobilenewscwp.co.uk/2018/08/28/and-then-there-were-three-huawei-shatters-the-duopoly/
"Apple shipped 2.1 million units, while Samsung shipped 1.6 million units and Huawei 625,000 handsets.
A closer look at the numbers tells a different story, with Apple and Samsung’s YoY performance down 13 per cent and 34 per cent respectively.
Huawei, on the other hand, has registered growth of 63 per cent in the UK, which is showing that it has the potential to take on one of the most brand led markets in the world.
So with the recent surge of Huawei, which of the two is more likely to be impacted by the Chinese brand?
According to the analysts, the signs are more worrying for Samsung and the fact both share an Android platform contributes to this.
Koytcheva argues Apple performed well in the last quarter and that the pressure is on Samsung and other Android players.
Koytcheva said: “It is fair to say this is way less about Apple than it is about Samsung because Apple’s performance showed a slight uptake in a tough market.
“Huawei’s growth has come at the expense of Samsung and other competitors like LG and Sony. The pressure is more on these competitors because it is easier to persuade an Android user to switch from one brand to another than an iOS user to Android.”
Jeronimo also acknowledges the Android battle and that Huawei’s rise is “more worrying” for Samsung than it is Apple and that retailers can have a big influence in this."
It's okay for these morons to call people more intelligent and successful than them "sheep" but as soon as you expose the truth(data mining) we cross the line by calling them slaves?
It is clear that Apple simply isn't seeing unit growth and in some of its strongest markets (UK etc) contraction may be the right word. Not good. Bad, in fact.
That lack of growth is partly Apple's own doing and partly competition. The presence of Huawei is having a negative impact on Samsung but isn't limited to Samsung. Samsung is just probably taking more damage than Apple. Apple is suffering too (as per the numbers in the link).
If Huawei were to achieve similar performance in the US (there is zero reason to believe otherwise, just look at the UK ad a model) the damage would be significant. Presently, the US premium cake gets cut into two. Cutting it into three would obviously hurt Samsung but Apple would feel a lot of pain too.
The FTC request (.pdf):
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1082759466040/Huawei FCC Ex Parte Letter Docket 18-89 (08-27-2018).pdf )
is a call to attention. Huawei wants an official declaration. From there I don't know where they want to go but they lodged the request for a reason, not a play to the gallery.
In short, Apple is not being subjected to competitive stress in the US in the same way it is elsewhere. This also applies to Samsung in the US of course.
When the P20 Series hit 6 million units it wad widely reported. And clarified:
"UPDATE: Huawei has clarified to us that the number does not include sales of the Huawei P20 Lite. Instead, it solely represents sales of the two flagship models and can be considered an even more impressive achievement."
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Huawei-P20-sales-numbers_id105758
The series stormed ahead and a few weeks later was at 9,000,000.
"That the P20 series is already at the 9 million mark not even half a year into its life cycle"
Comments by Richard Yu picked up by Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/08/03/huaweis-consumer-business-chief-talks-market-share-sales-kirin-980-and-mate-20/
Now, combined sales of the P20 Series - including the P20 Lite - are expected to top 20,000,000 units.
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Huawei-P20-sales-20-million-2018_id104118
I hope you can make these figures dtick in your head. I have given them to you multiple times now.
You extrapolated from the 6 million what were announced sold by mid June; and then there was that caveat about P20 Lite not being included, which is remarkably flakey considering the price/performance/value of the P20 Lite in the niche that you agree is inviting to buyers.
Believe me, I provided the link. It is there in that thread. Along with the link to the 20,000,000 figure.
When I mentioned the 9,000,000 million figure it was not extrapolated at all. It came from a Huawei executive but at that precise point in time I didn't have the actual link to hand but I had already given you everything you needed to understand the Lite model wasn't being included and if memory serves me correctly, I posted a link to the 9,000,000 figure in that same thread anyway.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/08/03/huaweis-consumer-business-chief-talks-market-share-sales-kirin-980-and-mate-20/#207febe26117
"Yu did announce shipment numbers, and the company's last two flagships each saw significant growth compared to previous generations: Huawei's flagship P20 series shipped a total of 9 million units so far in four months of release, while the Mate 10 series, which is close to a year old, has shipped a total of 10 million devices. Yu said the Mate 10 should finish at around the 11 million mark".