They say they have 2 million, but if we subtract Gartner's sell through numbers from Apple's shipment numbers things look even less rosy.
Why do you believe Gartner's ESTIMATE over Apple's SEC filing and conference call? Because you're a troll.
Seriously, I have a problem with Gartner's numbers; they're crap. They claim sell-through to end users but provide no methodology over how they determine that. For comparison, Gartner's data for computers and other equipment do not claim sell-through to end users. AFAIK, other companies report sales unit numbers just like Apple does - shipment into the channels, not end users.
Even so, the Apple numbers are consistently low. 4Q07: Apple reports 2.315m; Gartner reports 1.9283m. 4Q08:Apple reports 4.363m and says they reduced channel inventory by 250k, so sell-through should be 4.6m, but Gartner says 4.079m. Something is off, way off.
I'm wondering... what is the smartphones' share in total mobile phones number? RIM, Apple, Windows... are doing only smartphones, but Nokia is doing many "normal" mobile phones... which should differentiate them from others in total mobile phone market even more.
Also... what is definition of smartphone? Many basic phones today have organizer, web access, camera & picture viewer, other gadgets...?
But good for Nokia... and all that with Symbian...
Certainly not. But I think it's fairly certain that, if the iPhone had already been available in the same total number of countries back in 2007 as it was by the end of 2008, then the year-over-year worldwide market share growth figures would not have been nearly as large.
To put it another way, now that Apple is operating in 60+ countries, it would take significantly more effort on their part to reproduce similar year-over-year market share growth figures for 2009, even if there wasn't a worldwide financial crisis.
This whole analysis is crap because the definition of smart phone has become nebulus and I'm not sure the iPhone itself would stand up to the strictest form of the definition.
There are loads of "feature" phones or "dumb" phones out there now depending upon your word choice and definition. They play videos, have touch screens, let you browse the web and get your email. I own one, an LG Dare and LG isn't even mentioned in this category.
Why is this important? Because last I checked, Apple had not added back the one feature that was supposed to seperate it from the feature phone category and also part of the reason it should require a data plan, and that is push notification.
Finally, it is clear from that article that there are a lot of phones in the channel no matter who is making them. It should also be clear from those that have analyzed app store data that most apps curiousities rather than something people spend money on and that like with every other phone, people buy one or two apps and move on with their life and using the phone.
Finally, the smaller carriers are fighting back with some insane plans. The best was unlimited everything for $50 a month per phone with no contract. The carriers might not be able to sustain the loss-leader model on phone pricing. We see this dynamic right now happening in the videogame industry where the Wii kicked the hell out of XBOX360 and PS3 when it was supposed to have no chance. To some, those little additional charges keep adding up and make the solution much less competitive to anyone who is not "hardcore." How long can AT&T afford to subsidize the iPhone via more expensive plans when other carriers are starting to give away the store for $50 a month?
Says who? Especially, considering their margins are among the highest in the business? Can you point to some evidence?
According to whom? Compared to whom or what product?
Can you read numbers? Where does it show loss of share? "Further"? When was the prior share loss? Shrinking sales? Which compelling products are you talking about by which competitor (let's only talk about those actually in the market)? Can you provide some evidence on how their market share is doing?
'Reportedly'.... by whom?
Apple did not. Softbank may have (I am not even sure about that).
Yeah, I am sure sales are sliding even 'further'......
And, how do you conclude it is 'dangerous?' Can you provide any evidence?
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
This whole analysis is crap because the definition of smart phone has become nebulus and I'm not sure the iPhone itself would stand up to the strictest form of the definition. There are loads of "feature" phones or "dumb" phones out there now depending upon your word choice and definition. They play videos, have touch screens, let you browse the web and get your email. I own one, an LG Dare and LG isn't even mentioned in this category.
Their has never been a hard definition for a smartphone. At this point the what all smartphones have in common are an evolving operating system and a software development platform.
Dumb phones don't typically allow for updating the operating system and don't have a software development platform.
Quote:
Finally, it is clear from that article that there are a lot of phones in the channel no matter who is making them. It should also be clear from those that have analyzed app store data that most apps curiousities rather than something people spend money on and that like with every other phone, people buy one or two apps and move on with their life and using the phone.
There have been over 500 million App Store downloads and roughly 12 million iPhones sold. People have been downloading far more than only two apps.
Quote:
Finally, the smaller carriers are fighting back with some insane plans. The best was unlimited everything for $50 a month per phone with no contract. The carriers might not be able to sustain the loss-leader model on phone pricing. We see this dynamic right now happening in the videogame industry where the Wii kicked the hell out of XBOX360 and PS3 when it was supposed to have no chance. To some, those little additional charges keep adding up and make the solution much less competitive to anyone who is not "hardcore." How long can AT&T afford to subsidize the iPhone via more expensive plans when other carriers are starting to give away the store for $50 a month?
Sprint and T-Mobile are in a far different position than the Wii. This past quarter Sprint lost 1.3 million subscribers, T-Mobile added 610,000 subscribers. Verizon added 1.4 million subscribers, AT&T added 2.1 million subscribers.
Sprint and T-Mobile are forced to lower their prices to stay competitive, in the case of Sprint to stay in business at all.
A couple of problems with the article you've posted. The first problem is that it sets up the iPhone selling 440,000 less units predicted from an educated guess as a sign of a downturn in sales. That's a ridiculous rational.
The other problem with this article is that it gives no other example of another phone performing better than the iPhone in the current economic climate. To prove that the iPhone is too expensive you have to give an example of another phone that is performing better. They attempt to cast the iPhone as being much more expensive than other phones and this is not at all true.
As far as the iPod Touch cannibalizing iPhone sales, Apple has already stated they'd rather have one of their own products cannibalizing sales rather than someone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by surur
Hey, its about as valid as the conclusion of the base article.
Read this:
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
This is the basis for your claims!?
The article by Dan Frommer is silly at so many different levels. About as informed as your posts. And who is he (and businessinsider) anyway? Some major analyst? Technology prognosticator? Seer? Can you point to any important trends or outcomes that he has called vis-a-vis Apple (or anyone else)? Does he have a huge following, i.e., is he some sort of opinion leader? Lead steer? Does he drive tech trends and buying habits? And what is his forecasting record?
Indeed, the very informed comments following the article -- which you perhaps did not read -- rip apart many of Mr. Frommer's facile assertions. (No need to go through which, since they are all fairly obvious).
Pardon me for thinking this person sounds to me like another blowhard offering his completely unsolicited (and possibly uninformed) views on Apple and iPhone. Just adds to a multitude of those out there, doing not much more than contributing to the noise-to-signal ratio.
A couple of problems with the article you've posted. The first problem is that it sets up the iPhone selling 440,000 less units predicted from an educated guess as a sign of a downturn in sales. That's a ridiculous rational.
The other problem with this article is that it gives no other example of another phone performing better than the iPhone in the current economic climate. To prove that the iPhone is too expensive you have to give an example of another phone that is performing better. They attempt to cast the iPhone as being much more expensive than other phones and this is not at all true.
Given that the iPhone lost market share between Q3 and Q4, it could easily be argued that Apple's stratergy of only having one model and one price point will continue to limit their market, while companies that address the market at various levels, like RIM or the Windows Mobile market in general will have more success.
I mean, how many people would suggest Apple respond to the recession by releasing a cheaper iPhone nano?
The article by Dan Frommer is silly at so many different levels. About as informed as your posts. And who is he (and businessinsider) anyway? Some major analyst? Technology prognosticator? Seer? Can you point to any important trends or outcomes that he has called vis-a-vis Apple (or anyone else)? Does he have a huge following, i.e., is he some sort of opinion leader? Lead steer? Does he drive tech trends and buying habits? And what is his forecasting record?
Indeed, the very informed comments following the article -- which you perhaps did not read -- rip apart many of Mr. Frommer's facile assertions. (No need to go through which, since they are all fairly obvious).
Pardon me for thinking this person sounds to me like another blowhard offering his completely unsolicited (and possibly uninformed) views on Apple and iPhone. Just adds to a multitude of those out there, doing not much more than contributing to the noise-to-signal ratio.
A bit like your post, which attacks the person, not the points. (Is this the opposite of appeal to authority?)
Or are you suggesting its not the high price which has resulted in Apple sales going down while everyone else's was going up which is the problem, but lack of demand?
That was the operating system market share not the device market share. As a singular device the iPhone far outsells all other singular smartphones. Nokia, RIM, and Windows mobile make hundreds of phones. As a single device platform the iPhone cannot out compete platforms that have multiple devices.
Apple isn't competing to dominate market share, Apple is competing for profits. Those are two different concepts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by surur
Given that the iPhone lost market share between Q3 and Q4, it could easily be argued that Apple's stratergy of only having one model and one price point will continue to limit their market, while companies that address the market at various levels, like RIM or the Windows Mobile market in general will have more success.
I mean, how many people would suggest Apple respond to the recession by releasing a cheaper iPhone nano?
I don't think you understand what these numbers are saying. You have it all wrong. Everyone's sales have gone down.
Where you saw Apple's market share recede was on a platform basis not a single phone basis. Apple is in fourth place behind Windows Mobile with one phone. Windows Mobile is in third place with the sales of all of its phones combined.
Quote:
Originally Posted by surur
Or are you suggesting its not the high price which has resulted in Apple sales going down while everyone else's was going up which is the problem, but lack of demand?
I don't think you understand what these numbers are saying. You have it all wrong. Everyone's sales have gone down.
Where you saw Apple's market share recede was on a platform basis not a single phone basis. Apple is in fourth place behind Windows Mobile with one phone. Windows Mobile is in third place with the sales of all of its phones combined.
There are very many who said the iphone is going to take over the smartphone world.
They point at the iPod as an example of this.
If you say the iphone will be confined to its MacOS-like niche, your view would be seen as rather contoversial around here I suspect.
BTW between Q3 and Q4, Nokia sales are up (only 90 000, but still up)
RIM sales up 1.64 million
HTC has "record sales" implying they are the highest ever
Samsung went from below 1.2 million to 1.6 million, so also up.
I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
iPhone 3G was launched in Q3 to huge pentup demand, so of course there was a dropoff in subsequent quarters. The only exceptions to this rule are if supply is very constrained at launch, or if major marketing efforts don't occur until later. (For the iPhone 3G, supply was constrained but had resolved itself by Sept, which was still within the same quarter.) This pattern also holds true for computer models, major software releases, car models, etc.
The one point you made that makes some sense is that Apple may have to launch new "phones" more frequently. However, since Apple claims that software is the key, major iPhone software updates on a semi-annual basis (which Apple has not yet done) could capture 50-75% of what a new hardware model would bring.
There are very many who said the iphone is going to take over the smartphone world.
They point at the iPod as an example of this.
If you say the iphone will be confined to its MacOS-like niche, your view would be seen as rather contoversial around here I suspect.
Some people may have said it, but Apple never did. They said they wanted 1% of all phone sales (by unit) in their first full year, and they achieved it.
That said, the iPhone has already begun to takeover the smartphone world. All other smartphones are now copying its interface.
This is analogous to the Mac. Though Mac unit sales are only about 5% of all worldwide PC sales, the Mac interface was "copied" and exists on probably 99+% of all worldwide PG sales.
That said, the iPhone has already begun to takeover the smartphone world. All other smartphones are now copying its interface.
This is analogous to the Mac. Though Mac unit sales are only about 5% of all worldwide PC sales, the Mac interface was "copied" and exists on probably 99+% of all worldwide PG sales.
This is not really true. Samsung's Touchwiz interface, used on both their smart and dumb phones, does not look anything like the iphone's grid.
Nokia's N97 will have a widget interface.
HTC uses TouchFlo3D, dominated by a clock rather than icons.
Comments
After so many attempts by other companies Apple still owns Music Player Beezwax
They say they have 2 million, but if we subtract Gartner's sell through numbers from Apple's shipment numbers things look even less rosy.
Why do you believe Gartner's ESTIMATE over Apple's SEC filing and conference call? Because you're a troll.
Seriously, I have a problem with Gartner's numbers; they're crap. They claim sell-through to end users but provide no methodology over how they determine that. For comparison, Gartner's data for computers and other equipment do not claim sell-through to end users. AFAIK, other companies report sales unit numbers just like Apple does - shipment into the channels, not end users.
Even so, the Apple numbers are consistently low. 4Q07: Apple reports 2.315m; Gartner reports 1.9283m. 4Q08:Apple reports 4.363m and says they reduced channel inventory by 250k, so sell-through should be 4.6m, but Gartner says 4.079m. Something is off, way off.
If Apple really wanted to they could subsidize their handsets via App store profits and annihilate the opposition...
...if they wanted to.
Also... what is definition of smartphone? Many basic phones today have organizer, web access, camera & picture viewer, other gadgets...?
But good for Nokia... and all that with Symbian...
If Apple really wanted to they could subsidize their handsets via App store profits and annihilate the opposition...
I doubt that Apple makes any significant profit from the app store. It's all about encouraging people to buy and stay with the hardware.
Did you expect 60 x sales? lol
Certainly not. But I think it's fairly certain that, if the iPhone had already been available in the same total number of countries back in 2007 as it was by the end of 2008, then the year-over-year worldwide market share growth figures would not have been nearly as large.
To put it another way, now that Apple is operating in 60+ countries, it would take significantly more effort on their part to reproduce similar year-over-year market share growth figures for 2009, even if there wasn't a worldwide financial crisis.
There are loads of "feature" phones or "dumb" phones out there now depending upon your word choice and definition. They play videos, have touch screens, let you browse the web and get your email. I own one, an LG Dare and LG isn't even mentioned in this category.
This article talks about the industry as a whole, not just one category.
Why is this important? Because last I checked, Apple had not added back the one feature that was supposed to seperate it from the feature phone category and also part of the reason it should require a data plan, and that is push notification.
Finally, it is clear from that article that there are a lot of phones in the channel no matter who is making them. It should also be clear from those that have analyzed app store data that most apps curiousities rather than something people spend money on and that like with every other phone, people buy one or two apps and move on with their life and using the phone.
Finally, the smaller carriers are fighting back with some insane plans. The best was unlimited everything for $50 a month per phone with no contract. The carriers might not be able to sustain the loss-leader model on phone pricing. We see this dynamic right now happening in the videogame industry where the Wii kicked the hell out of XBOX360 and PS3 when it was supposed to have no chance. To some, those little additional charges keep adding up and make the solution much less competitive to anyone who is not "hardcore." How long can AT&T afford to subsidize the iPhone via more expensive plans when other carriers are starting to give away the store for $50 a month?
Yikes, I've rarely seen so much errant nonsense crammed into two sentences.
Hey, its about as valid as the conclusion of the base article.
Read this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/...x-iphone-sales
By whom, where? Can you cite any evidence?
Says who? Especially, considering their margins are among the highest in the business? Can you point to some evidence?
According to whom? Compared to whom or what product?
Can you read numbers? Where does it show loss of share? "Further"? When was the prior share loss? Shrinking sales? Which compelling products are you talking about by which competitor (let's only talk about those actually in the market)? Can you provide some evidence on how their market share is doing?
'Reportedly'.... by whom?
Apple did not. Softbank may have (I am not even sure about that).
Yeah, I am sure sales are sliding even 'further'......
And, how do you conclude it is 'dangerous?' Can you provide any evidence?
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
This whole analysis is crap because the definition of smart phone has become nebulus and I'm not sure the iPhone itself would stand up to the strictest form of the definition. There are loads of "feature" phones or "dumb" phones out there now depending upon your word choice and definition. They play videos, have touch screens, let you browse the web and get your email. I own one, an LG Dare and LG isn't even mentioned in this category.
Their has never been a hard definition for a smartphone. At this point the what all smartphones have in common are an evolving operating system and a software development platform.
Dumb phones don't typically allow for updating the operating system and don't have a software development platform.
Finally, it is clear from that article that there are a lot of phones in the channel no matter who is making them. It should also be clear from those that have analyzed app store data that most apps curiousities rather than something people spend money on and that like with every other phone, people buy one or two apps and move on with their life and using the phone.
There have been over 500 million App Store downloads and roughly 12 million iPhones sold. People have been downloading far more than only two apps.
Finally, the smaller carriers are fighting back with some insane plans. The best was unlimited everything for $50 a month per phone with no contract. The carriers might not be able to sustain the loss-leader model on phone pricing. We see this dynamic right now happening in the videogame industry where the Wii kicked the hell out of XBOX360 and PS3 when it was supposed to have no chance. To some, those little additional charges keep adding up and make the solution much less competitive to anyone who is not "hardcore." How long can AT&T afford to subsidize the iPhone via more expensive plans when other carriers are starting to give away the store for $50 a month?
Sprint and T-Mobile are in a far different position than the Wii. This past quarter Sprint lost 1.3 million subscribers, T-Mobile added 610,000 subscribers. Verizon added 1.4 million subscribers, AT&T added 2.1 million subscribers.
Sprint and T-Mobile are forced to lower their prices to stay competitive, in the case of Sprint to stay in business at all.
The other problem with this article is that it gives no other example of another phone performing better than the iPhone in the current economic climate. To prove that the iPhone is too expensive you have to give an example of another phone that is performing better. They attempt to cast the iPhone as being much more expensive than other phones and this is not at all true.
As far as the iPod Touch cannibalizing iPhone sales, Apple has already stated they'd rather have one of their own products cannibalizing sales rather than someone else.
Hey, its about as valid as the conclusion of the base article.
Read this:
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
Hey, its about as valid as the conclusion of the base article.
Read this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/...x-iphone-sales
I answered your questions point by point earlier, but the forum suddenly became "too busy". I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
This is the basis for your claims!?
The article by Dan Frommer is silly at so many different levels. About as informed as your posts. And who is he (and businessinsider) anyway? Some major analyst? Technology prognosticator? Seer? Can you point to any important trends or outcomes that he has called vis-a-vis Apple (or anyone else)? Does he have a huge following, i.e., is he some sort of opinion leader? Lead steer? Does he drive tech trends and buying habits? And what is his forecasting record?
Indeed, the very informed comments following the article -- which you perhaps did not read -- rip apart many of Mr. Frommer's facile assertions. (No need to go through which, since they are all fairly obvious).
Pardon me for thinking this person sounds to me like another blowhard offering his completely unsolicited (and possibly uninformed) views on Apple and iPhone. Just adds to a multitude of those out there, doing not much more than contributing to the noise-to-signal ratio.
A couple of problems with the article you've posted. The first problem is that it sets up the iPhone selling 440,000 less units predicted from an educated guess as a sign of a downturn in sales. That's a ridiculous rational.
The other problem with this article is that it gives no other example of another phone performing better than the iPhone in the current economic climate. To prove that the iPhone is too expensive you have to give an example of another phone that is performing better. They attempt to cast the iPhone as being much more expensive than other phones and this is not at all true.
Given that the iPhone lost market share between Q3 and Q4, it could easily be argued that Apple's stratergy of only having one model and one price point will continue to limit their market, while companies that address the market at various levels, like RIM or the Windows Mobile market in general will have more success.
I mean, how many people would suggest Apple respond to the recession by releasing a cheaper iPhone nano?
This is the basis for your claims!?
The article by Dan Frommer is silly at so many different levels. About as informed as your posts. And who is he (and businessinsider) anyway? Some major analyst? Technology prognosticator? Seer? Can you point to any important trends or outcomes that he has called vis-a-vis Apple (or anyone else)? Does he have a huge following, i.e., is he some sort of opinion leader? Lead steer? Does he drive tech trends and buying habits? And what is his forecasting record?
Indeed, the very informed comments following the article -- which you perhaps did not read -- rip apart many of Mr. Frommer's facile assertions. (No need to go through which, since they are all fairly obvious).
Pardon me for thinking this person sounds to me like another blowhard offering his completely unsolicited (and possibly uninformed) views on Apple and iPhone. Just adds to a multitude of those out there, doing not much more than contributing to the noise-to-signal ratio.
A bit like your post, which attacks the person, not the points. (Is this the opposite of appeal to authority?)
Or are you suggesting its not the high price which has resulted in Apple sales going down while everyone else's was going up which is the problem, but lack of demand?
Its either one or the other, isnt it?
Apple isn't competing to dominate market share, Apple is competing for profits. Those are two different concepts.
Given that the iPhone lost market share between Q3 and Q4, it could easily be argued that Apple's stratergy of only having one model and one price point will continue to limit their market, while companies that address the market at various levels, like RIM or the Windows Mobile market in general will have more success.
I mean, how many people would suggest Apple respond to the recession by releasing a cheaper iPhone nano?
Where you saw Apple's market share recede was on a platform basis not a single phone basis. Apple is in fourth place behind Windows Mobile with one phone. Windows Mobile is in third place with the sales of all of its phones combined.
Or are you suggesting its not the high price which has resulted in Apple sales going down while everyone else's was going up which is the problem, but lack of demand?
Its either one or the other, isnt it?
I don't think you understand what these numbers are saying. You have it all wrong. Everyone's sales have gone down.
Where you saw Apple's market share recede was on a platform basis not a single phone basis. Apple is in fourth place behind Windows Mobile with one phone. Windows Mobile is in third place with the sales of all of its phones combined.
There are very many who said the iphone is going to take over the smartphone world.
They point at the iPod as an example of this.
If you say the iphone will be confined to its MacOS-like niche, your view would be seen as rather contoversial around here I suspect.
BTW between Q3 and Q4, Nokia sales are up (only 90 000, but still up)
RIM sales up 1.64 million
HTC has "record sales" implying they are the highest ever
Samsung went from below 1.2 million to 1.6 million, so also up.
Apple down 700 000.
I wont repeat myself, but I will put forward my main point -
iPhone Q3 4.7 million sell through
iPhone Q4 4.07 million sell through
iPhone Q1 3.3 million sell though?
iPhone 3G was launched in Q3 to huge pentup demand, so of course there was a dropoff in subsequent quarters. The only exceptions to this rule are if supply is very constrained at launch, or if major marketing efforts don't occur until later. (For the iPhone 3G, supply was constrained but had resolved itself by Sept, which was still within the same quarter.) This pattern also holds true for computer models, major software releases, car models, etc.
The one point you made that makes some sense is that Apple may have to launch new "phones" more frequently. However, since Apple claims that software is the key, major iPhone software updates on a semi-annual basis (which Apple has not yet done) could capture 50-75% of what a new hardware model would bring.
There are very many who said the iphone is going to take over the smartphone world.
They point at the iPod as an example of this.
If you say the iphone will be confined to its MacOS-like niche, your view would be seen as rather contoversial around here I suspect.
Some people may have said it, but Apple never did. They said they wanted 1% of all phone sales (by unit) in their first full year, and they achieved it.
That said, the iPhone has already begun to takeover the smartphone world. All other smartphones are now copying its interface.
This is analogous to the Mac. Though Mac unit sales are only about 5% of all worldwide PC sales, the Mac interface was "copied" and exists on probably 99+% of all worldwide PG sales.
That said, the iPhone has already begun to takeover the smartphone world. All other smartphones are now copying its interface.
This is analogous to the Mac. Though Mac unit sales are only about 5% of all worldwide PC sales, the Mac interface was "copied" and exists on probably 99+% of all worldwide PG sales.
This is not really true. Samsung's Touchwiz interface, used on both their smart and dumb phones, does not look anything like the iphone's grid.
Nokia's N97 will have a widget interface.
HTC uses TouchFlo3D, dominated by a clock rather than icons.
RIM looks the way they always looked.
SE has its panels.
Android has its desktop.