Apple's iPod Touch losing out to iPod Nano at checkout lines
After surveying 90 Apple stores and 18 Best Buy locations over the Thanksgiving weekend, analysts for ThinkEquity Partners LLC concluded that despite a high level of interest in the new iPod Touch among shoppers, the more affordable iPod Nano remains the clear winner at the cash register.
iPod sales
"Our channel checks indicate that of all the iPods, the Touch piqued the most interest from customers," analyst Darren Aftahi wrote in a research report to clients this week. "However, our conversations do not lead us to the conclusion that "level of interest" translated into consumer purchases of iPod Touch."
From interactions with sales representatives and store managers, Aftahi and his team determined that even though 8GB iPod Touch ($299) generated lots of interest among holiday shoppers, when it came to purchases, they instead decided on the 8GB iPod Nano given its smaller size and lower price ($199).
"Also, a lot of consumers seemed to opt for iPhones over iPod Touch because iPhones facilitate all that iPod can do (and more), but the opposite is not true," the analyst further advised clients. "Older individuals preferred iPod Touch because of its interface and Wi-Fi capability, while iPod Nano was more favored by younger individuals (children and teens)."
iPhone sales
Based on his checks, Aftahi believes that iPhones are selling well, perhaps well enough to best his 3.2 million quarterly estimate come the close of Apple's first fiscal quarter of 2008 in late December.
However, he noted that feedback concluded that shoppers who are not currently AT&T customers are generally choosing an the iPod Touch over an iPhone -- satisfied with its WiFi capability -- to avoid early-termination carrier fees form their existing cellular providers.
"Our checks also confirmed our view that an individual buying an iPhone would not purchase iPod Touch and vice versa," he wrote. "It may be noted that the comparison between iPhones and iPods is essentially a comparison between iPhone and iPod Touch, given their similarity in appearance."
Mac sales
Meanwhile, MacBooks were the clear winner of Apple's personal computer business during the Thanksgiving weekend, according to ThinkEquity's data and channel checks.
"MacBooks were perceived to have generated greater interest (and purchases) than iMacs among consumers this past weekend, and we believe this will continue throughout the holiday season," Aftahi told clients. "It is worth noting that MacBooks are more popular among the college population, while iMacs are favored by families, a point reinforced through our checks."
The analyst reiterated his Buy rating and $227 on shares of the Cupertino-based Apple.
"Consumer sentiment seems to favor Apple this holiday season," he wrote. "The stores that we visited exhibited high customer inflow rates, and the people who entered the store spent a considerable time there."
iPod sales
"Our channel checks indicate that of all the iPods, the Touch piqued the most interest from customers," analyst Darren Aftahi wrote in a research report to clients this week. "However, our conversations do not lead us to the conclusion that "level of interest" translated into consumer purchases of iPod Touch."
From interactions with sales representatives and store managers, Aftahi and his team determined that even though 8GB iPod Touch ($299) generated lots of interest among holiday shoppers, when it came to purchases, they instead decided on the 8GB iPod Nano given its smaller size and lower price ($199).
"Also, a lot of consumers seemed to opt for iPhones over iPod Touch because iPhones facilitate all that iPod can do (and more), but the opposite is not true," the analyst further advised clients. "Older individuals preferred iPod Touch because of its interface and Wi-Fi capability, while iPod Nano was more favored by younger individuals (children and teens)."
iPhone sales
Based on his checks, Aftahi believes that iPhones are selling well, perhaps well enough to best his 3.2 million quarterly estimate come the close of Apple's first fiscal quarter of 2008 in late December.
However, he noted that feedback concluded that shoppers who are not currently AT&T customers are generally choosing an the iPod Touch over an iPhone -- satisfied with its WiFi capability -- to avoid early-termination carrier fees form their existing cellular providers.
"Our checks also confirmed our view that an individual buying an iPhone would not purchase iPod Touch and vice versa," he wrote. "It may be noted that the comparison between iPhones and iPods is essentially a comparison between iPhone and iPod Touch, given their similarity in appearance."
Mac sales
Meanwhile, MacBooks were the clear winner of Apple's personal computer business during the Thanksgiving weekend, according to ThinkEquity's data and channel checks.
"MacBooks were perceived to have generated greater interest (and purchases) than iMacs among consumers this past weekend, and we believe this will continue throughout the holiday season," Aftahi told clients. "It is worth noting that MacBooks are more popular among the college population, while iMacs are favored by families, a point reinforced through our checks."
The analyst reiterated his Buy rating and $227 on shares of the Cupertino-based Apple.
"Consumer sentiment seems to favor Apple this holiday season," he wrote. "The stores that we visited exhibited high customer inflow rates, and the people who entered the store spent a considerable time there."
Comments
After surveying 90 Apple stores and 18 Best Buy locations over the Thanksgiving weekend, analysts for ThinkEquity Partners LLC concluded that despite a high level of interest in the new iPod Touch among shoppers, the more affordable iPod Nano remains the clear winning at the cash register.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
I bought an iPod Touch (actually 2 Touches!) when I was in Japan last week
- saved about £70 each over the uk price.
- it's really nice - I don't want the iPhone yet (no 3G, 2Mpixel camera, no video camera, no 16GByte version, long expensive service contract etc) - I think I'll stick with my Nokia N95 for a phone for now, and use my Touch for entertainment.
- the nano is ok, but the Touch is definitely worth the extra money, IMHO.
I am looking forward to seeing some more interesting apps running on it after the SDK arrives.
From interactions with sales representatives and store managers, Aftahi and his team determined that even though 8GB iPod Touch ($299) generated lots of interest among holiday shoppers, when it came to purchases, they instead decided on the 8GB iPod Nano given its smaller size and lower price ($199).
"Also, a lot of consumers seemed to opt for iPhones over iPod Touch because iPhones facilitate all that iPod can do (and more), but the opposite is not true," the analyst further advised clients.
Unsurprising. I feel exactly the same way. The Touch is nice, but there's no point to it when placed beside the iPhone. If you just want an iPod, the Nano is a great little player and the Classic has a lot of space. The Touch is the only one without a clear purpose.
Well duh! Thank you Mr analist (misspelling intentional) for pointing out this very subtle fact. I would have missed it completely if not for your deeply insightful analysis.
Sarcasm aside, I bought an iPod classic on black thursday. Would have bought the iPod Touch if it had 80 gigs rather than 16.
"
iPhone sales
Based on his checks, Aftahi believes that iPhones are selling well, perhaps well enough to best his 3.2 million quarterly estimate come the close of Apple's first fiscal quarter of 2008 in late December.
][/url][/c]
Believes? What are the numbers for of the best iPod available- the iPhone? How can he not know the numbers for them. They must be flat.
Yes it would definitely come in handy waiting in an airport or doctor's office, but how often would I do that? Plus how would I control the volume or skip to the next track while I'm riding my bike or driving without having to look at it?
There were too many negatives and few positives, so I went with the Nano, which can do almost everything I need, including watching videos.
The iPod Touch was never a very wise move, but Apple does not always have a hit on its hands.
huh? The iPod Touch is necessary. It's okay that it's not outselling the nanos-- having it in the lineup and available to those that want the "latest greatest" thing is a required part of Apple's lineup. In addition, all those people who wanted an iPhone but didn't want a phone.
Anyway, the touch is the one I want!
From interactions with sales representatives and store managers, Aftahi and his team determined that even though 8GB iPod Touch ($299) generated lots of interest among holiday shoppers, when it came to purchases, they instead decided on the 8GB iPod Nano given its smaller size and lower price ($199).
If I'm already spending $200 on an iPod I'd pluck down $100 more just for all the extra "coolness" the Touch brings and all it's added features over the Nano. $100 more for all that is a steal. But then if it comes down to you just can't afford it... then you're obviously not going for the higher-ticket item.
Unsurprising. I feel exactly the same way. The Touch is nice, but there's no point to it when placed beside the iPhone. If you just want an iPod, the Nano is a great little player and the Classic has a lot of space. The Touch is the only one without a clear purpose.
Unsurprising. I feel exactly the same way. The Touch is nice, but there's no point to it when placed beside the iPhone. If you just want an iPod, the Nano is a great little player and the Classic has a lot of space. The Touch is the only one without a clear purpose.
Of course there is a difference, there isn't a minimum $60/month recurring fee on the touch.
Immediately after announcement, I bought a new Nano, and took it back for a touch.
The click-wheel was too small and I continually misfired on the center-click. (I had a 1st gen Nano for 2 years and still think its a better form-factor.)
The new interface introduced clutter I didn't need on that small of a screen. And there was no way that I was going to watch video content on that small of a screen, with a 4:3 ratio to boot.
I realized that I wanted
1) a nice size screen
2) touch interface
3) 16 gigs was a nice size for my needs
4) its expandability
I do wish it had a camera, but oh well.
Comparing it to the iPhone I like the slimmer form factor. iPhone almost seems clunky to me now when I hold one.
I anticipate a lot of enhancements to the touch over the next 2 years, at which time I'll reconsider whatever iPhone is current at that time.
I think the touch is a great product.
The iPod Touch has a purpose. It represents the future of the iPod line. However, flash memory capacity must rise and prices must fall before the player becomes more attractive to the masses. That is how it always works. When that happens most people seeking a high end player will prefer the iPod Touch.
You know how Apple can make the iPod Touch attractive to me without relying on the price of flash memory?
Put a hard drive in it. Yeah, I said a hard drive. I know I'm not the only person out there who wants the Touch interface mated to the capacity of the Classic. I am still savoring the taste of disappointment with the last product line overhaul, because I was betting on having exactly that: touch + scads of storage. Until the company offers that, I'm out of the market for iPods.
huh? The iPod Touch is necessary. It's okay that it's not outselling the nanos-- having it in the lineup and available to those that want the "latest greatest" thing is a required part of Apple's lineup. In addition, all those people who wanted an iPhone but didn't want a phone.
Anyway, the touch is the one I want!
The iPod Touch will also get better and probably cheaper. I'm waiting for rev 2. (does need more ram.)
Unsurprising. I feel exactly the same way. The Touch is nice, but there's no point to it when placed beside the iPhone. If you just want an iPod, the Nano is a great little player and the Classic has a lot of space. The Touch is the only one without a clear purpose.
This is only true because of the paltry storage space on the Touch. Give it 40 or 60 Gigs and you'd see them fly off the shelves.
The iPod Touch was never a very wise move, but Apple does not always have a hit on its hands.
Huh? Does it have to outsell a lower cost iPod to be a hit? With so many people waiting for a 3G iPhone or that don't want to switch carriers or like/need WndowsCE/Mobile/Blackberry/other mobile the iPod Touch is a perfect alternative that offers WiFi internet using Safari and a neat Video iPod running OS X.
The iPod Touch was never a very wise move, but Apple does not always have a hit on its hands.
AT&T service is poor in my Midwest location, I ditched it long before the iPhone came out and went with Verizon, so an iPhone has no value for me.
To me, the iPhone is a cool phone with a great touch interface, and a small solid-state iPod, but comes with a very high cost of use, and slow data transfer. The battery and capacity certainly isn't up to my usage needs for watching videos.
The Touch is a higher capacity solid-state iPod that also has the great interface and larger screen of the iPhone, and does WiFi really well to boot so I can get to the web and all its resources nearly everywhere. I can have almost all of what I want in a personal music/photo-video/web viewer for under $400 and be done with it. The iPhone with its required service plans never gets paid for. After a year, the thing would have cost me well over a $1000, only have half the capacity, be slower to use for the web on the go, and the poor AT&T connections would still force me to have another phone if I wanted to reliably talk to someone.
If people aren't buying the Touch, it's because the product they are shopping for was meant as a gift and costs too much, or they haven't actually held one and seen what it can do. They probably already have a crappy $49 phone and contract that handles calls and texting, and maybe a crappy MP3 player, and really only want a quality music/video player with a price under $200.
The only changes that would make me happier with my Touch is if they could give it much greater solid state storage, and move the damn earphone jack to the top or side where it won't prevent sitting it upright on a tabletop.
This is only true because of the paltry storage space on the Touch. Give it 40 or 60 Gigs and you'd see them fly off the shelves.
And if/when they have that capacity for Touch they have it for the iPhone too ... that would be cool, especially if 3G version with GPS
You know how Apple can make the iPod Touch attractive to me without relying on the price of flash memory?
Put a hard drive in it. Yeah, I said a hard drive. I know I'm not the only person out there who wants the Touch interface mated to the capacity of the Classic. I am still savoring the taste of disappointment with the last product line overhaul, because I was betting on having exactly that: touch + scads of storage. Until the company offers that, I'm out of the market for iPods.
I agree with you - if there'd been a HDD version I'd have gone with that
- I thought about waiting to see if they did one
- but, I came to the conclusion that they'll probably never do a HDD version, as it wouldn't be a simple upgrade for the hardware or software, and with a limited market
- and, in the end, I thought the 16GB was probably adequate for what I needed, given that I'm not going to store hundered of movies on it at the same time.
- but I'll don't mind being proved wrong about the HDD - but it seems Apple are on a 12 month refresh cycle on the iPods, so you'll have to wait a year to find out.