The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.
No big surprise here. Since Apple got the iPad right on the first try and has such an awesome ecosystem for it, it was always going to dominate. It's nice to have options, but they've got such a lead that they're never going to lose it (a la MS with OSes). Frankly not entirely sure why Samsung is even bothering to make a table at all at this point - they're not going to make any inroads imo. Just cut your losses and focus on smartphones, where you're actually doing well.
Focus is not in the competition's DNA. It runs counter to "throw everything, see what sticks" strategy.
Apple fans typically lead busy lives to be bothered to counter post. I left MR a long, long time ago (and never came back) since the site is obviously about inciting post counts, ad analytics and pleasing advertisers at the expense of its intended audience. It is the site for "Apple fans" such as Da Hard-on.
These days over at MR there are more defenders of Andorid and other companies than Apple. They really need to change their site name because the mix of posts isn't any different than what you'd see at Engadget or c|net.
And it took just about the same amount of time for Apple to get 75% of all cell phone profits worldwide, having never made a phone before in the history of the company, and only making four models of phone ever.
It's not too early.
Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S
I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.
Wonder no more.
Partisans on all topics - political, technological, whateveral flood each other's sites with the usual superficial "your side is junk/we're great" keystroke littering. Except not that politely.
The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.
Samsung lied about the first numbers and these are legit: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.
Samsung told the truth about the first numbers and these are a lie: They'll be crucified by their shareholders, an inquiry will be raised, and there'll be a ton of trouble.
Samsung lied about the first numbers and is also lying about these: They'll be crucified 2x by their shareholders, an even larger inquiry will be raised, and there will be unimaginable trouble.
It really doesn't happen. It'll be one person with one post, something simple, "Apple rocks!", and that's that. Not like here. Not at all like here. These people are deranged.
Lately, he says…
Or, option number four = reality.
Shipped and sold are NOT the same thing.
If Samsung shipped 1 million tablets to Best Buy, Radio Shack, Wal-Mart, etc., that means that those tablets are sitting on the sales floor at those retailers. However, Samsung doesn't get to count any of those tablets as a sale until an actual end customer walks in the door, buys one, and takes it home.
If Samsung only sells 10,000 of that million, the rest will eventually get shipped back to Samsung and Samsung would take (very simplified explanation:) some sort of write-down on inventory as an expense. Take a look at press coverage of RIM's tablet debacle.
Typically a manufacturer without any retailing operations (e.g., Samsung vs. Apple, which does have retail as well), would include units shipped in their financial reporting, disclosures, etc. but may not ever disclose the actual number of units that are sold -- in no small part, becuse they don't want a competitor to be able to back into the numbers to figure out their cost of goods sold, net profit per unit, etc. given that the company would probably consider that to be a proprietary trade secret.
There is also a financial reporting distinction that you expect between units sold and units shipped simply because of quarterly financial reporting. If a company records a unit as sold in Q2, it may have actually been shipped in Q1 or before. Similarly, units shipped in Q2, may not sell until a subsequent quarter (or never).
Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.
(Well, I guess they may have lied when they said they made great tablets that consumers would eagerly purchase...)
Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S
He mentioned three years; I used an 'about'. I had to throw just the 4 in there because Apple didn't hit that profit mark until its release, at least.
Originally Posted by tmhisey
Or, option number four = reality.
So where'd those ~1.7 million tablets go?
Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.
Isn't that the definition? They don't get to count it as a sale until it's sold; you're absolutely right. So how'd they sell 1.7 million tablets to the rest of the world in that quarter?
Because samsung stole designs? Consumers don't give a crap.
May be i should get me a fake Rolex, since technical support is any street corner watch repair mom and pop will do just fine. An added benefit is that instead of send money to Swiss i will support the local business and should be very proud!
This is a much better article than two of the previous ones dealing with the same general subject. At least it's not blatantly misleading and certainly livable enough for an Apple-enthusiast website.
This is what some of us were focusing on in the previous thread, when you were going on about smartphones. Incidentally, I am inclined to believe that, while their numbers for smartphones are not as dire, it is nowhere near what they (and their apologists) claim.
Samsung (and its acolytes) should simply put up the numbers or shut up.
I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.
I think the difference is that Apple fans have a sense of shame that kicks in at some point, to proxy for decency.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker
Frankly not entirely sure why Samsung is even bothering to make a table at all at this point -
They need the table to support the tablets that they have shipped but can't sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmmx
"to quantify the extend of potential"
You guys need to prof reed!
You need to proofread too.
The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.
Focus is not in the competition's DNA. It runs counter to "throw everything, see what sticks" strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
So Galaxy Tab sales have been quite smoother since the 1st qtr they were available.
Smoother ... LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
They need the table to support the tablets that they have shipped but can't sell.
HAH! Good catch - thanks.
Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.
Wonder no more.
Partisans on all topics - political, technological, whateveral flood each other's sites with the usual superficial "your side is junk/we're great" keystroke littering. Except not that politely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
iPads are just jumbo iPhones.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Yawn, this tired old counterproductive attack on the iPad.
Fundamentally a drinking glass, a bucket and a swimming pool are the same - containers of fluid.
By your logic a swimming pool is just a jumbo bucket and a bucket is just a jumbo drinking glass.
Yet it's unlikely Michael Phelps will be swimming in a drinking glass any time soon.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida
Too early to make these claims. It took 3 years for Samsung to really compete with Apple iPhone.
Should read 'copy'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
The real question is, if Samsung and IDC "exaggerated" tablet sales, how much are they also "exaggerating" smartphone sales. It's starting to look like Samsung is mostly smoke and mirrors. Exaggerate is a kinder word than lie but I'm thinking the "lie" shoe fits.
SSSSHHHHH!!!
We're not supposed to think of that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiA
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Yawn, this tired old counterproductive attack on the iPad.
Fundamentally a drinking glass, a bucket and a swimming pool are the same - containers of fluid.
By your logic a swimming pool is just a jumbo bucket and a bucket is just a jumbo drinking glass.
Yet it's unlikely Michael Phelps will be swimming in a drinking glass any time soon.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
You can pee in a swimming pool without anyone noticing (ask Phelps's buddy, Ryan Lochte). Not so with a glass or bucket.
Or, option number four = reality.
Shipped and sold are NOT the same thing.
If Samsung shipped 1 million tablets to Best Buy, Radio Shack, Wal-Mart, etc., that means that those tablets are sitting on the sales floor at those retailers. However, Samsung doesn't get to count any of those tablets as a sale until an actual end customer walks in the door, buys one, and takes it home.
If Samsung only sells 10,000 of that million, the rest will eventually get shipped back to Samsung and Samsung would take (very simplified explanation:) some sort of write-down on inventory as an expense. Take a look at press coverage of RIM's tablet debacle.
Typically a manufacturer without any retailing operations (e.g., Samsung vs. Apple, which does have retail as well), would include units shipped in their financial reporting, disclosures, etc. but may not ever disclose the actual number of units that are sold -- in no small part, becuse they don't want a competitor to be able to back into the numbers to figure out their cost of goods sold, net profit per unit, etc. given that the company would probably consider that to be a proprietary trade secret.
There is also a financial reporting distinction that you expect between units sold and units shipped simply because of quarterly financial reporting. If a company records a unit as sold in Q2, it may have actually been shipped in Q1 or before. Similarly, units shipped in Q2, may not sell until a subsequent quarter (or never).
Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.
(Well, I guess they may have lied when they said they made great tablets that consumers would eagerly purchase...)
Originally Posted by tmhisey
Five models. Not four. Original iPhone. 3G. 3GS. 4. 4S
He mentioned three years; I used an 'about'. I had to throw just the 4 in there because Apple didn't hit that profit mark until its release, at least.
Originally Posted by tmhisey
Or, option number four = reality.
So where'd those ~1.7 million tablets go?
Samsung may have lied about the number of units sold. They may have lied about the number of units shipped. I have no clue. But just because those numbers don't match up in a specific quarter, it's not any proof that they did lie about anything.
Isn't that the definition? They don't get to count it as a sale until it's sold; you're absolutely right. So how'd they sell 1.7 million tablets to the rest of the world in that quarter?
Mostly in disbelief and stunned surprise. But very balanced
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
Because samsung stole designs? Consumers don't give a crap.
May be i should get me a fake Rolex, since technical support is any street corner watch repair mom and pop will do just fine. An added benefit is that instead of send money to Swiss i will support the local business and should be very proud!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
This is a much better article than two of the previous ones dealing with the same general subject. At least it's not blatantly misleading and certainly livable enough for an Apple-enthusiast website.
This is what some of us were focusing on in the previous thread, when you were going on about smartphones. Incidentally, I am inclined to believe that, while their numbers for smartphones are not as dire, it is nowhere near what they (and their apologists) claim.
Samsung (and its acolytes) should simply put up the numbers or shut up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
I've often wondered if Apple fans flood Android and/or Samsung fan sites in an attempt to provide balance. Because lately there's been an influx of the reverse here and on MR.
I think the difference is that Apple fans have a sense of shame that kicks in at some point, to proxy for decency.
Fandroids have neither shame nor decency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida
Too early to make these claims. It took 3 years for Samsung to really compete with Apple iPhone.
Prove it with numbers.