Who cares...a sale is a sale. Doesn't matter who it goes to. So if I buy 20 million iPods this quarter its not supposed to count toward their sales vs other players?
To be honest I'm not even sure whether US military purchases could be considered a significant enough contributor of the 11M total iPod sales number.
Last time I heard, US Army don't issue everyone a iPod touch when you enlist or been shipped to Iraq.
No it isn't, Apple sells a device, which competes against these so called 'cheap, or free' phones (which Nokia still gets paid for).
I don't know of anyone that would argue, in good faith, that the iPhone is "competing" with basic free phones.
That's because the iPhone is a small, hand held computer that includes a phone app (as are several other smartphones on the market).
You might as well argue that laptop sales should be viewed against LCD tv sales, since laptops can be used to view video. By which you could prove that Samsung is destroying Apple's notebook business.
I mean, I realize you're not arguing in good faith, and don't care about what makes sense, but I just thought I'd point it out.
True. But Apple's phone sales are up more than double from last year this quarter. Nokia's smartphone sales (as are all of their sales) have been dropping ever since the iPhone came out, and were down another 19%. The difference between the two is continually shrinking. If you look at the numbers we've seen published, it will become clear to you.
Quote:
No it isn't, Apple sells a device, which competes against these so called 'cheap, or free' phones (which Nokia still gets paid for).
No they don't. You are trying to set up an argument that doesn't exist. Nice try, but you're wrong. Give it up.
I don't know of anyone that would argue, in good faith, that the iPhone is "competing" with basic free phones.
That's because the iPhone is a small, hand held computer that includes a phone app (as are several other smartphones on the market).
You might as well argue that laptop sales should be viewed against LCD tv sales, since laptops can be used to view video. By which you could prove that Samsung is destroying Apple's notebook business.
I mean, I realize you're not arguing in good faith, and don't care about what makes sense, but I just thought I'd point it out.
This is a simple business process, one that you seem to miss, maybe this is why the business world is in the position that it currently is in. When a consumer has the choice between two items, and there is a high chance they will only buy one of them, that makes the items competitors. This is regardless of the price, and the category they fall in to.
I could buy a netbook, or a MacBook Pro, they are at different ends of the market, but most people will only buy one or the other.
The same thing with phones, most people will buy one at a time, and there is a range of devices they can choose from across the cellphone category, to which the iPhone, and the 'free' phone are members.
And remembering the whole competition thing runs between categories as well. The majority of the people in the world cannot afford an iPhone, or any cellphone really, so there are other items competing for there money.
True. But Apple's phone sales are up more than double from last year this quarter. Nokia's smartphone sales (as are all of their sales) have been dropping ever since the iPhone came out, and were down another 19%. The difference between the two is continually shrinking. If you look at the numbers we've seen published, it will become clear to you.
How many of the Apple sales are to new customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
No they don't. You are trying to set up an argument that doesn't exist. Nice try, but you're wrong. Give it up.
I think you really need to look outside your own backyard.
This is a simple business process, one that you seem to miss, maybe this is why the business world is in the position that it currently is in. When a consumer has the choice between two items, and there is a high chance they will only buy one of them, that makes the items competitors. This is regardless of the price, and the category they fall in to.
I could buy a netbook, or a MacBook Pro, they are at different ends of the market, but most people will only buy one or the other.
The same thing with phones, most people will buy one at a time, and there is a range of devices they can choose from across the cellphone category, to which the iPhone, and the 'free' phone are members.
And remembering the whole competition thing runs between categories as well. The majority of the people in the world cannot afford an iPhone, or any cellphone really, so there are other items competing for there money.
You're taking that argument too far, and we've gone through that argument several times over the past year in several categories.
In theory, you are correct, but in practice, for the majority of people, you are not. You know that.
When someone thinks, "Gee, I wish I could afford xxx product, but I can't, so I'll buy yyy instead.", you might say that the two products were in competition, but they were not. Not realistically.
When you don't have an answer, this is what you can come up with?
I look so far, I can see into your front yard.
Nope, I came up with this answer as you appear to be taking a simple outtake on this, you appear to be thinking that everyone in the world is in the same financial position as yourself.
The majority of the people could not even afford an Apple product.
So what? Who really cares?
Apple isn't even really after the majority anyway, just the premium end. They sell a premium product to a certain segment of the market. That's typical of premium products, nothing new or exceptional.
Comments
Number 1. The 5800 is not an "iPhone Killer" as you put it.
Number 2. Maybe so many people have purchased it as the purchase requirements are not as restrictive as the likes of Apple.
Compare it to the other iPhone Killers, please.
You'll see the irony.
Who cares...a sale is a sale. Doesn't matter who it goes to. So if I buy 20 million iPods this quarter its not supposed to count toward their sales vs other players?
To be honest I'm not even sure whether US military purchases could be considered a significant enough contributor of the 11M total iPod sales number.
Last time I heard, US Army don't issue everyone a iPod touch when you enlist or been shipped to Iraq.
unless you are one of the people purchasing apple products and aiding their mammoth income levels...
"Hi, I want to buy a new iMac"
"Sure, just bend over and I will be with you shortly"
So we can assume this is trolling, or do you have a real point to make that you couldn't think of doing in a more acceptable way?
Nokia sells over a million phones a day, what is your point?
They don't sell anywhere near a million smartphones a day. Or a week.
unless you are one of the people purchasing apple products and aiding their mammoth income levels...
"Hi, I want to buy a new iMac"
"Sure, just bend over and I will be with you shortly"
If you aren't, then why are you here?
Compare it to the other iPhone Killers, please.
You'll see the irony.
No I don't, what is your point?
They don't sell anywhere near a million smartphones a day. Or a week.
What is your point? At the end of the day, Nokia sells over one million phones a day
What is your point? At the end of the day, Nokia sells over one million phones a day
The point is that we don't care about how many phones Nokia sells. We only care about how many smartphones they sell.
This is about smartphones, not cheap, or free phones.
No I don't, what is your point?
Pfff Nokia sell 1M phones per day!
The 5800 irony?
Indeed I'll admit I can't help you.
The point is that we don't care about how many phones Nokia sells. We only care about how many smartphones they sell.
Well they sell a heck of a lot more than Apple.
This is about smartphones, not cheap, or free phones.
No it isn't, Apple sells a device, which competes against these so called 'cheap, or free' phones (which Nokia still gets paid for).
No it isn't, Apple sells a device, which competes against these so called 'cheap, or free' phones (which Nokia still gets paid for).
I don't know of anyone that would argue, in good faith, that the iPhone is "competing" with basic free phones.
That's because the iPhone is a small, hand held computer that includes a phone app (as are several other smartphones on the market).
You might as well argue that laptop sales should be viewed against LCD tv sales, since laptops can be used to view video. By which you could prove that Samsung is destroying Apple's notebook business.
I mean, I realize you're not arguing in good faith, and don't care about what makes sense, but I just thought I'd point it out.
Well they sell a heck of a lot more than Apple.
True. But Apple's phone sales are up more than double from last year this quarter. Nokia's smartphone sales (as are all of their sales) have been dropping ever since the iPhone came out, and were down another 19%. The difference between the two is continually shrinking. If you look at the numbers we've seen published, it will become clear to you.
No it isn't, Apple sells a device, which competes against these so called 'cheap, or free' phones (which Nokia still gets paid for).
No they don't. You are trying to set up an argument that doesn't exist. Nice try, but you're wrong. Give it up.
I don't know of anyone that would argue, in good faith, that the iPhone is "competing" with basic free phones.
That's because the iPhone is a small, hand held computer that includes a phone app (as are several other smartphones on the market).
You might as well argue that laptop sales should be viewed against LCD tv sales, since laptops can be used to view video. By which you could prove that Samsung is destroying Apple's notebook business.
I mean, I realize you're not arguing in good faith, and don't care about what makes sense, but I just thought I'd point it out.
This is a simple business process, one that you seem to miss, maybe this is why the business world is in the position that it currently is in. When a consumer has the choice between two items, and there is a high chance they will only buy one of them, that makes the items competitors. This is regardless of the price, and the category they fall in to.
I could buy a netbook, or a MacBook Pro, they are at different ends of the market, but most people will only buy one or the other.
The same thing with phones, most people will buy one at a time, and there is a range of devices they can choose from across the cellphone category, to which the iPhone, and the 'free' phone are members.
And remembering the whole competition thing runs between categories as well. The majority of the people in the world cannot afford an iPhone, or any cellphone really, so there are other items competing for there money.
True. But Apple's phone sales are up more than double from last year this quarter. Nokia's smartphone sales (as are all of their sales) have been dropping ever since the iPhone came out, and were down another 19%. The difference between the two is continually shrinking. If you look at the numbers we've seen published, it will become clear to you.
How many of the Apple sales are to new customers.
No they don't. You are trying to set up an argument that doesn't exist. Nice try, but you're wrong. Give it up.
I think you really need to look outside your own backyard.
This is a simple business process, one that you seem to miss, maybe this is why the business world is in the position that it currently is in. When a consumer has the choice between two items, and there is a high chance they will only buy one of them, that makes the items competitors. This is regardless of the price, and the category they fall in to.
I could buy a netbook, or a MacBook Pro, they are at different ends of the market, but most people will only buy one or the other.
The same thing with phones, most people will buy one at a time, and there is a range of devices they can choose from across the cellphone category, to which the iPhone, and the 'free' phone are members.
And remembering the whole competition thing runs between categories as well. The majority of the people in the world cannot afford an iPhone, or any cellphone really, so there are other items competing for there money.
You're taking that argument too far, and we've gone through that argument several times over the past year in several categories.
In theory, you are correct, but in practice, for the majority of people, you are not. You know that.
When someone thinks, "Gee, I wish I could afford xxx product, but I can't, so I'll buy yyy instead.", you might say that the two products were in competition, but they were not. Not realistically.
How many of the Apple sales are to new customers.
How many of Nokia's phones were to new customers?
I think you really need to look outside your own backyard.
When you don't have an answer, this is what you can come up with?
I look so far, I can see into your front yard.
You're taking that argument too far, and we've gone through that argument several times over the past year in several categories.
In theory, you are correct, but in practice, for the majority of people, you are not. You know that.
The majority of the people could not even afford an Apple product.
How many of Nokia's phones were to new customers?
When you don't have an answer, this is what you can come up with?
I look so far, I can see into your front yard.
Nope, I came up with this answer as you appear to be taking a simple outtake on this, you appear to be thinking that everyone in the world is in the same financial position as yourself.
Oh, as expected, continued rip-off margins...
And yet people are buying.
If you're not part of Apple's target market, or are unable to get into it, that's YOUR problem.
The majority of the people could not even afford an Apple product.
So what? Who really cares?
Apple isn't even really after the majority anyway, just the premium end. They sell a premium product to a certain segment of the market. That's typical of premium products, nothing new or exceptional.