iPhone's Q1 2019 share of EMEA market lowest in five years

Posted:
in iPhone edited June 12
The smartphone market has stabilized in EMEA regions despite there being a contraction of sales in the Middle East, claims IDC, with Apple seen to be facing challenges from Chinese competitors as it sees its lowest level of market share in Europe for the first quarter in five years.




The region consisting of Europe, the Middle East, and Africa saw 83.7 million smartphone units ship in the first quarter of 2019, a drop of 3.3% year-on-year, which IDC suggests is a confirmation of a slowing market trend. In terms of revenue, the value of the market at $26.78 billion without sales tax is down further, seeing a decline of just over 10% from last year.

On a more granular basis, the Middle East saw the biggest decline of 18.8% in shipments and almost a third of its value. IDC reasons the "recent buoyancy in the oil price has so far failed to translate into more consumer confidence and exposure. After saw 6% growth while European volume remained relatively static.

Average sale prices are down across Western Europe, with a sharper drop in the Middle East. Central and Eastern Europe average sale prices have sustained over the years, though are barely more than half the value of Western Europe.

On a brand basis, Apple was considered to have a tough quarter, achieving a 23% market share across Europe from 7.8 million units shipped, which is the lowest Q1 result IDC has seen in the last five years. The unit shipment count for the region is down for Apple, with 22.73% fewer iPhones reportedly hitting the market.

Top 5 Smartphone Companies in Western, Central, and Eastern Europe --  Shipments, Market Share, and Year-Over-Year Growth, First-Quarter 2019, Units in Millions (via IDC)
Top 5 Smartphone Companies in Western, Central, and Eastern Europe -- Shipments, Market Share, and Year-Over-Year Growth, First-Quarter 2019, Units in Millions (via IDC)


Meanwhile Chinese brands Huawei and Xiaomi saw "incremental advances," and Samsung saw a moderate dip of market share to 29.47% from 30.76% in 2018, due to 6.82% fewer smartphones being shipped.

"The market has been changing in the last few quarters in relatively predictable ways," said IDC EMEA research manager Marta Pino. "Shipments have slowed as consumers hold onto devices for longer, Apple has been challenged with its latest devices, and Chinese manufacturers have been making strides each quarter."

Europe has become a focus of vendor concentration for the last few quarters, with smaller firms under considerable pressure and making it harder to see clearer trends. Huawei's blacklisting in the United States has also caused forecasting to be extremely difficult by making an unstable situation, even though it isn't something that directly impacts the European market.

In May, Apple was seen to have improved its shipments of iPads in the region, increasing its quarterly market share from 18.28% to 23.95% year-on-year, due to the launch of a new "budget" model and redesigned iPad Pros. The EMEA tablet market as a whole shrank 10.9%.

IDC's numbers are generally accurate for the overall smartphone market. While Apple has made comparisons hard as it no longer reports sales figures for the iPhone, the firm has historically under-estimated iPhone sales. However, even though it is historically off, it would take a fairly significant increase to change the overall results in this case.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 22
    macguimacgui Posts: 1,250member
    Sorry, it's my fault. My 5s and SE are more than competent for my needs, and I really really dislike the size of iPhones larger. Even the 6/7 series is bigger than I want.

    Apple's commitment to the Mac Pro fans a faint ember of hope that maybe the SE form factor will get a little love. I'm not talking Face ID or triple cameras, etc.

    Just make it more than an afterthought for those of us who don't want a bigger phone. A current processor or maybe just one step behind, a better screen, maybe edge to edge?

    Keep the 4/5/5s/SE shape, give it a buff (polished chamfered edges) breath on the performance a little, and update the look. And don't put a premium on the smaller size, a la iPad mini. Ouch.
    racerhomie3AppleExposed
  • Reply 2 of 22
    NotsofastNotsofast Posts: 381member

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    edited June 12 racerhomie3chiamuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 3 of 22
    LatkoLatko Posts: 382member
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    edited June 12
  • Reply 4 of 22
    frantisekfrantisek Posts: 464member
    There are markets that are more price sensitive, like those. Apple increased prices because it brought more expensive components and knows that sales will be flat or go down so higher prices are way to keep profit. Market becomes saturated. I see many people using their 5s/SE. Me 5s. It is not speed demon, but usable. Question is whether Apple is able to build small phone with feature/design/price balance that would motivate people to dump their current small phones,.
  • Reply 5 of 22
    NotsofastNotsofast Posts: 381member
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    AppleExposeddanh
  • Reply 6 of 22
    WLeeWLee Posts: 14unconfirmed, member
    The article simply reflects reality, iPhone sales are falling and they are not good value for money currently. They are so expensive and they offer so little for the price, customers are starting to realise this and change. I personally did this when I saw the design of the x, when I saw the notch I changed from my iPhone to a galaxy s8, I now have a note 9. The note is expensive yes but the feature set is vastly greater than the iPhone. I still have my iPad, iPads are the best tablets going but iPhones are sadly needing both more features and a significant price drop. 
    chemengin1larz2112
  • Reply 7 of 22
    I live in the UK. I remember the golden period when just about everyone in my extended family were getting themselves a new iPhone (around the time of the 6S and 7). 

    This last 2 years only a fraction upgraded to the X or XS series. A couple went to Android. Most stayed with their 6S or 7. 

    three obvious reasons:

    1. New phones just too expensive
    2. No features on new phones justify the price
    3. Current phone works fine. 

    I did upgrade and love my XS. But it’s not worth a grand!  Wife thinks I need my head checked for spending so much on a phone (she is a happy 7 user). 

    So I fully believe it when the EMEA market share looks poor. 
    gatorguypropodchemengin1larz2112
  • Reply 8 of 22
    FolioFolio Posts: 555member
    No Apple enthusiast, whatever the margin of error here, can be satisfied with such poor market share in EU. On the upside, never has Apple had so many levers to pull (range of phone models, ipads, watches, services, discounts, etc) to help Europeans boost their productivity, fun, and satisfaction.
  • Reply 9 of 22
    hentaiboyhentaiboy Posts: 953member
    “Meanwhile Chinese brands Huawei and Xiaomi saw "incremental advances,"”

    Since when is 33-66% growth “incremental”?
  • Reply 10 of 22
    croprcropr Posts: 936member
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course the IDC numbers are wrong.  But if they are consistently wrong (e.g. the Apple market share is always 10% higher than reported by IDC), the trends remain correct.  Important is the fact that the iPhone sales have a downward trend and that Apple should get its act together to reverse this trend.  The exact sales figures is less important.
  • Reply 11 of 22
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,785member
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Huawei reports its smartphone sales numbers:

    https://www.gizchina.com/2019/04/22/huawei-smartphone-shipment-for-q1-2019-announced/

    It has reported them for years in its annual reports.
  • Reply 12 of 22
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 891unconfirmed, member
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available

    HAHAHA so the spokesperson for Apple(/s) is spewing conspiracies as fact. Apple was the only company reporting SALES numbers for years meanwhile the knockoffs refused to disclose numbers beyond "shipped" units.

    This was a STRATEGIC move by Apple not one to cover embarrassment. Heck Apple added 70 million users not long ago. The fact remains that apple devices last years beyond the knockoffs that lose software support months later. I see more iPhone 6 units than 2 year old knockoffs in public.

    Reminds me of the iKnockoff users who claimed Apple Watch just be doing bad because Apple isn't reporting numbers. Even though Apple specifically said they would not before the Watch even launched. STRATEGY.

    Even when Apple was announcing record-breaking sales, the haters were still bashing Apple.

    WLee said:
    The article simply reflects reality, iPhone sales are falling and they are not good value for money currently. They are so expensive and they offer so little for the price, customers are starting to realise this and change. I personally did this when I saw the design of the x, when I saw the notch I changed from my iPhone to a galaxy s8, I now have a note 9. The note is expensive yes but the feature set is vastly greater than the iPhone. I still have my iPad, iPads are the best tablets going but iPhones are sadly needing both more features and a significant price drop. 

    The market disagrees with you. iPhone X is one of the most sold iPhones in history and Apple is adding users every quarter.

    cropr said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course the IDC numbers are wrong.  But if they are consistently wrong (e.g. the Apple market share is always 10% higher than reported by IDC), the trends remain correct.  Important is the fact that the iPhone sales have a downward trend and that Apple should get its act together to reverse this trend.  The exact sales figures is less important.

    So they should introduce crappy devices that break in 6 months to increase sales? They should follow the android model? I personally know someone who buys a knockoff iPhone every 2 months to replace the old one. There are millions of people like this which increases android sales. Maybe Apple should follow this trend?

    Tim Cook hire this guy!
  • Reply 13 of 22
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 891unconfirmed, member
    avon b7 said:
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Huawei reports its smartphone sales numbers:

    https://www.gizchina.com/2019/04/22/huawei-smartphone-shipment-for-q1-2019-announced/

    It has reported them for years in its annual reports.

    Huawei does not disclose sales.

    Apple was the only company to do this and iKnockoff users still sh** on them for it, meanwhile their knockoffs do not report sales.

    Double Standards: The android user way.
  • Reply 14 of 22
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Never let a good theory be destroyed by relevant details.  
  • Reply 15 of 22
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,732member
    lewchenko said:
    I live in the UK. I remember the golden period when just about everyone in my extended family were getting themselves a new iPhone (around the time of the 6S and 7). 

    This last 2 years only a fraction upgraded to the X or XS series. A couple went to Android. Most stayed with their 6S or 7. 

    three obvious reasons:

    1. New phones just too expensive
    2. No features on new phones justify the price
    3. Current phone works fine. 

    I did upgrade and love my XS. But it’s not worth a grand!  Wife thinks I need my head checked for spending so much on a phone (she is a happy 7 user). 

    So I fully believe it when the EMEA market share looks poor. 
    I haven’t upgraded as I have no interest in FaceID.   Maybe if they put the TouchId on the back it would be ok.   Apple keeps taking stuff away like audio jack so they shouldn’t be surprised that people either switch or just stay with current phone.

    Apple’s map and Siri services just aren’t as good as google’s-those two items can be compelling for switchers as friends rave about it and then say I’m stupid for sticking with Apple.
  • Reply 16 of 22
    WLeeWLee Posts: 14unconfirmed, member
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available

    HAHAHA so the spokesperson for Apple(/s) is spewing conspiracies as fact. Apple was the only company reporting SALES numbers for years meanwhile the knockoffs refused to disclose numbers beyond "shipped" units.

    This was a STRATEGIC move by Apple not one to cover embarrassment. Heck Apple added 70 million users not long ago. The fact remains that apple devices last years beyond the knockoffs that lose software support months later. I see more iPhone 6 units than 2 year old knockoffs in public.

    Reminds me of the iKnockoff users who claimed Apple Watch just be doing bad because Apple isn't reporting numbers. Even though Apple specifically said they would not before the Watch even launched. STRATEGY.

    Even when Apple was announcing record-breaking sales, the haters were still bashing Apple.

    WLee said:
    The article simply reflects reality, iPhone sales are falling and they are not good value for money currently. They are so expensive and they offer so little for the price, customers are starting to realise this and change. I personally did this when I saw the design of the x, when I saw the notch I changed from my iPhone to a galaxy s8, I now have a note 9. The note is expensive yes but the feature set is vastly greater than the iPhone. I still have my iPad, iPads are the best tablets going but iPhones are sadly needing both more features and a significant price drop. 

    The market disagrees with you. iPhone X is one of the most sold iPhones in history and Apple is adding users every quarter.

    cropr said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course the IDC numbers are wrong.  But if they are consistently wrong (e.g. the Apple market share is always 10% higher than reported by IDC), the trends remain correct.  Important is the fact that the iPhone sales have a downward trend and that Apple should get its act together to reverse this trend.  The exact sales figures is less important.

    So they should introduce crappy devices that break in 6 months to increase sales? They should follow the android model? I personally know someone who buys a knockoff iPhone every 2 months to replace the old one. There are millions of people like this which increases android sales. Maybe Apple should follow this trend?

    Tim Cook hire this guy!
    The market disagrees with me? Mate, you are aware you are posting in a topic that is saying Apple iPhone sales are the worst in Europe for 5 years? The market doesn’t disagree with me at all and neither does life. Of the folks I know, the iPhone users, some have stuck with older phones because they won’t pay, one upgraded and 10 off the top of my head switched to android because they wouldn’t pay the costs of a new iPhone. 

    if Apple wants to take services seriously it needs to reevaluate the entry price! They talk about the x screen, you can get all the advantages of such screens on a pixel 3a or a galaxy a50 now! So why pay £1000? The reality is these phones are appealing to sheeple (sorry but this is true) not so much general consumers. It is those who argue Apple can do no wrong and everything is rosy and awesome. Meanwhile consumers are more value alert than ever and are changing when they have to. 
  • Reply 17 of 22
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,785member
    avon b7 said:
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Huawei reports its smartphone sales numbers:

    https://www.gizchina.com/2019/04/22/huawei-smartphone-shipment-for-q1-2019-announced/

    It has reported them for years in its annual reports.

    Huawei does not disclose sales.

    Apple was the only company to do this and iKnockoff users still sh** on them for it, meanwhile their knockoffs do not report sales.

    Double Standards: The android user way.


    Did you read the link I included? It reports on Huawei reporting on their numbers. 

    How can you insist that Huawei doesn't report handset sales when I gave you a link pointing to exactly the opposite?

    Here you have the information - straight from the horse's mouth:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2019/4/huawei-q1-2019-business-results

    And here is the full annual audited report from 2018:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/annual-report/2018

    Before you say otherwise, yes, it includes smartphone numbers: 206,000,000.


  • Reply 18 of 22
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 738member
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    What companies publish smartphones sales numbers ? Please provide some links so we can see what other companies report that Apple does not.  
  • Reply 19 of 22
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 738member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Huawei reports its smartphone sales numbers:

    https://www.gizchina.com/2019/04/22/huawei-smartphone-shipment-for-q1-2019-announced/

    It has reported them for years in its annual reports.

    Huawei does not disclose sales.

    Apple was the only company to do this and iKnockoff users still sh** on them for it, meanwhile their knockoffs do not report sales.

    Double Standards: The android user way.


    Did you read the link I included? It reports on Huawei reporting on their numbers. 

    How can you insist that Huawei doesn't report handset sales when I gave you a link pointing to exactly the opposite?

    Here you have the information - straight from the horse's mouth:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2019/4/huawei-q1-2019-business-results

    And here is the full annual audited report from 2018:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/annual-report/2018

    Before you say otherwise, yes, it includes smartphone numbers: 206,000,000.


    I don’t  think you read it, or you sent the wrong link ?  All I see are revenue and some “shipped” numbers ? 
    edited June 13
  • Reply 20 of 22
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,785member
    jcs2305 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Notsofast said:
    Latko said:
    Notsofast said:

    Respected analyst Neil Cybart persuasively calls IDC numbers "embarrassingly" wrong,  and here's more from an article that discusses Cybart's refutation as well as an overall alleged pattern of intentionally misleading estimates from IDC.

    IDC data is much more suspect than "historically underestimating iPhone sales."  Remember, no other phone manufacturer reports their actual sales figures so, ALL of its data is suspect and unverifiable.  

    IDC's subset of publicly reported data isn't designed to give away valuable free information as a public service. Market research groups sell their reports to companies for $10,000 or more, so when they issue free bits of public data, journalists should review these reports with some healthy skepticism and consider why they're getting free data that tells such compelling stories. 

    This is particularly the case because those stories are often wrong to the point of clearly not being just a mistake. There's a history of market data firms releasing bad data coached to make winners look like losers and losers look like winners. 

    In fact, that's a primary goal of these groups, as history shows beyond a shadow of a doubt. These companies even admit that they work, not to enlighten the public with free data, but to help their paying clients with "influencing consumer behavior and buying preferences." 

    We've caught IDC and other market research groups reporting estimated numbers that didn't align with Apple's actual data before, including massive underestimations of Mac sales as part of an overall misleading history of reporting in PC sales and of course in tablet sales."


    https://roughlydraftedbeta.com/home/2019/5/2/idc-latest-estimate-of-q1-2019-iphone-sales-highly-inaccurate-to-the-point-of-embarrassing
    Of course they’re wrong - nobody is right, as Apple doesn’t want salesnumbers (or anything potentially embarassing) to be publicly available
    LOL. The main problem with your conspiracy theory is that NO COMPANY reports their sales numbers of smart phones.
    Huawei reports its smartphone sales numbers:

    https://www.gizchina.com/2019/04/22/huawei-smartphone-shipment-for-q1-2019-announced/

    It has reported them for years in its annual reports.

    Huawei does not disclose sales.

    Apple was the only company to do this and iKnockoff users still sh** on them for it, meanwhile their knockoffs do not report sales.

    Double Standards: The android user way.


    Did you read the link I included? It reports on Huawei reporting on their numbers. 

    How can you insist that Huawei doesn't report handset sales when I gave you a link pointing to exactly the opposite?

    Here you have the information - straight from the horse's mouth:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2019/4/huawei-q1-2019-business-results

    And here is the full annual audited report from 2018:

    https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/annual-report/2018

    Before you say otherwise, yes, it includes smartphone numbers: 206,000,000.


    I don’t  think you read it, or you sent the wrong link ?  All I see are revenue and some “shipped” numbers ? 
    In these cases 'shipped' and 'sold' are virtually the same. Channel inventory is kept as tight as possible. Moreso if you have multiple configurations. That is why you often see 'out of stock - more on the way' notifications when you try the online stores.

    That means if Huawei said 'shipped' in its reporting of 206,000,000 units for 2018 and in Q1-19 reported it shipped numbers that broke records, you can be sure that 'shipped' equates very well to 'sold'. There are not millions of units accumulating in warehouses (if that is what you are implying) because at some point that stock comes back to haunt you and has to be offloaded at discount. Something that would impact future sales. Huawei has been on an upward roll for years now. Furthermore Huawei's smartphone spread has been moving steadily to a proportionally higher mix of premium phones which cannot be easily discounted.

    In summary, take 'shipped' as 'sold' and whichever way you interpret things, the numbers are given and have been given for years.



Sign In or Register to comment.