Overall tablet sales shrink for the first time as Apple continues to dominate mobile computer market
Worldwide sales of tablet computers declined by nearly 5 percent in the first quarter of 2014 -- the first such fall since tracking began -- but Apple's iPad maintained its dominant mobile PC position with nearly twice the market share of the closest competitor.
Tablet shipments dropped from 59 million units in the first quarter of 2013 to 56.3 million units in the first quarter of this year, according to a new report from market research firm NPD DisplaySearch. Apple accounted for some 20 percent of the market when laptops and ultrabooks are included, compared to 11 percent for Samsung, the next-largest competitor.
Apple shipped just 16.3 million iPads in the first three months of this year compared to 19.4 million one year ago. Samsung, meanwhile, is thought to have seen a modest shipment increase of around 200,000 units to 9.9 million over the same period.
Despite the downturn, tablets still represented more than half of mobile PC shipments. The iPad accounted for over 80 percent of Apple's own sales by that definition.
Apple is widely expected to bring the iPhone 5s's Touch ID system to the iPad later this year, possibly alongside a new fingerprint-authenticated mobile payments system. Both the iPad Air and iPad mini with Retina display are penciled in for updates this fall.
Even before then, the iPad may gain more powerful computing capabilities with the debut of Apple's next major iOS release, expected to be unveiled at next week's Worldwide Developers Conference. Specifically, iOS 8 is rumored to include support for split-screen multitasking on iPad Air, allowing users to accomplish two tasks at the same time.
Tablet shipments dropped from 59 million units in the first quarter of 2013 to 56.3 million units in the first quarter of this year, according to a new report from market research firm NPD DisplaySearch. Apple accounted for some 20 percent of the market when laptops and ultrabooks are included, compared to 11 percent for Samsung, the next-largest competitor.
Apple shipped just 16.3 million iPads in the first three months of this year compared to 19.4 million one year ago. Samsung, meanwhile, is thought to have seen a modest shipment increase of around 200,000 units to 9.9 million over the same period.
Despite the downturn, tablets still represented more than half of mobile PC shipments. The iPad accounted for over 80 percent of Apple's own sales by that definition.
Apple is widely expected to bring the iPhone 5s's Touch ID system to the iPad later this year, possibly alongside a new fingerprint-authenticated mobile payments system. Both the iPad Air and iPad mini with Retina display are penciled in for updates this fall.
Even before then, the iPad may gain more powerful computing capabilities with the debut of Apple's next major iOS release, expected to be unveiled at next week's Worldwide Developers Conference. Specifically, iOS 8 is rumored to include support for split-screen multitasking on iPad Air, allowing users to accomplish two tasks at the same time.
Comments
I trust NPD's figures about as far as I can toss an African Bull Elephant. Their numbers aren't worth the paper their printed on, and neither is their research. Investor friends of mine have them on ignore totally now.
And what numbers do you trust? What numbers do you have for us to go by instead?
Do you like BareFigures' numbers better?
Again, it wouldn't hurt if these analysts specified what tablets the ones in "others" are. Or who makes them. I mean, since these clearly lead the market by far. I have never ever seen a tablet that was not made by a known manufacturer. Most of the tablets out in the real world seem to be iPads anyway.
I'd imagine that the Kindle Fire would represent a large portion of that group.
... but, yes, it just looks sloppy.
And what numbers do you trust? What numbers do you have for us to go by instead?
Do you like BareFigures' numbers better?
KGI Securities.
KGI Securities.
And what does KGI have listed for the same periods?
So I don't think this rises above the "noise" of new product release cycles, and there may yet be significant growth in the tablet market.
Could the disconnect be that NPD is showing "SHIPMENTS" vs "SOLD"? I understand some of these companies release "SOLD" or "SHIPPED" which could be two different sets of numbers since most mfg ship a lot of products to resellers that store a lot of what is not "SOLD" in their inventories.
I know sometimes that could be the difference in some of these market research numbers. I'm not saying I trust NPD's numbers either, but it's always nice to see a variety of different market research numbers whenever possible just to figure out how close they are to one another to get an average of what these companies get.
Barefigres, to my knowledge, just lists the numbers that are released in Apple quarterly reports and nothing else. So, I kind of trust Barefigures at least for Apple numbers.
Since only Apple releases numbers, I'll take this "report" with a grain of salt.
If i go by NPD's APPLE numbers compared to BareFigures APPLE numbers, they are different from one another and to my knowledge Barefigures gets their APPLE numbers directly from APPLE's quarterly reports and so far, every time Apple releases their numbers, it's the same number when I look at BareFigures for the same quarter. So, for looking at Apple numbers, I look at BareFigures.
In terms of these market research numbers, I look at as many as I can (which may not be everyone) but I can only compare these market research companies numbers and kind of take an average because who knows which one's are the most accurate if they are off from one another.
I know sometimes that could be the difference in some of these market research numbers. I'm not saying I trust NPD's numbers either, but it's always nice to see a variety of different market research numbers whenever possible just to figure out how close they are to one another to get an average of what these companies get.
That's a curious approach.
Now let's say you weren't feeling well. Would you rather go to five doctors, have each one give you a different diagnosis, then try to "average" it out? Same with your car. Let's say it's acting up. Would you like to go to five mechanics?
I'd rather go to one person who gets it right. My time is valuable to me, just put me in touch with someone who knows what they are doing.
But that's just me...
The funny thing is that all of these anal-ysts run businesses that purport that they are the sole keepers of the "right analysis" and that you should shell out your hard-earned cash for their accuracy. Now since they can't all be right, most are getting paid even though they are wrong.
That's the basic problem with tech media sites quoting these anal-ysts willy-nilly without doing any sort of due diligence in tracking accuracy. Quoting every single anal-yst generates page views, but it doesn't provide any knowledge or wisdom, it's just a big pile of data: a little of it good, most of it bad, some of it EXTREMELY BAD.
I think actually real usage numbers are maybe more valuable then these. "Shipped" vs "Sold" plays such a huge role in these numbers that it makes them almost pointless.
Meanwhile, when you see data regarding how much percentage of actually internet traffic each brand's devices comprises the real story begins to show through. Do you want a cheap tablet that sits in the closet and never gets used or a real device with real-world application and legitimate value in the long-run?
That's a curious approach.
Now let's say you weren't feeling well. Would you rather go to five doctors, have each one give you a different diagnosis, then try to "average" it out? Same with your car. Let's say it's acting up. Would you like to go to five mechanics?
I'd rather go to one person who gets it right. My time is valuable to me, just put me in touch with someone who knows what they are doing.
But that's just me...
The funny thing is that all of these anal-ysts run businesses that purport that they are the sole keepers of the "right analysis" and that you should shell out your hard-earned cash for their accuracy. Now since they can't all be right, most are getting paid even though they are wrong.
That's the basic problem with tech media sites quoting these anal-ysts willy-nilly without doing any sort of due diligence in tracking accuracy. Quoting every single anal-yst generates page views, but it doesn't provide any knowledge or wisdom, it's just a big pile of data: a little of it good, most of it bad, some of it EXTREMELY BAD.
Well, how do you determine who's right? How can you be so sure they are right? Especially when they getting numbers from companies that aren't publicly traded and publicly release their numbers. I look at BareFigures for Apple numbers since that's who they get their info from.
Now, in terms of the companies that don't report actual sales, how do you know who's right and who's wrong? How do you compare them?
Making the analogy for what doctor to go with isn't the same thing, because who can be sure what is the best doctor. But if you have a VERY serious disease like Cancer, etc. the smart and wealthy people get second opinions because even the so-called "experts' may not be the best person to go with. Not everyone has the chance to use more than one doctor because of lack of money or their insurance only covers certain doctors. So making that analogy wasn't exactly one I would use. I had a friend of mine that had cancer and all of the experts at Stanford thought he wasn't going to last longer than a year and his family was wealthy enough to research plenty of doctors. (This was back in the 70's when very little was known). Well as it turned out, his family sought someone other than the so-called Experts at Stanford, talked to the guy that was doing Peach extracts and 40+ years later, the guy is STILL living and he basically PROVED that some of the most respected doctors at one of the top research hospitals didn't know #hit. So, when it comes to medicine, it's not a perfect science and if you can afford to get second, third and forth opinions, that's many times the best route to go. But these reports are just simply numbers. The problem is that if not all tablet mfg release real numbers, then these market research groups derive numbers some how and they may not be to the penny, but I'm sure they can derive approximations. which is probably as best as they can do. so it's probably better to just survey as many as you can get, figure out how reliable THEIR sources are (if they even mention it) and then maybe take an average or throw out the least reliable numbers. But again, how do you decide who has the most accurate numbers if the companies don't publicize their numbers?
The biggest problem with ANYONE's number is who are their sources. I really don't look at these kind of numbers anyway, I am more concerned with what Apple releases which shows what Apple is doing compared to themselves. I might compare to Samsung and maybe a few other major corporations where we can get better numbers from, but the "OTHER" category is probably a made up number by ALL of the market research companies. So I would just look at as many as I could and figure out what's more of an average, but in terms of the "OTHER" category, I don't look at those numbers because it's just a combined of the smallest players that doesn't really matter anyway. Apple doesn't try to displace the El Cheapo products, so for comparing Apple, I only look at who are the closest REAL competitors. So, from my standpoint, I will only be most concerned with the top players and the "OTHER" category isn't the top players and I don't care about those since they aren't a REAL competitor to Apple.
In terms of analysts, I also don't make the mistake of not believing the because they don't post something positive about Apple, because sometimes, they end up being right. So, you have to take any bias towards how you like or dislike a company when it comes to what the analysts say. NONE of them are going to be 100% accurate 100% of the time, even the biggest Pro-Apple analysts have been wrong just as much as the biggest Anti-Apple analysts have been.
I take whatever ANY market research and analyst says with a grain of salt and I will run my own numbers, make my own determination, and I will only listen to them IF they make sense as to WHY they think they are right.
So, let me ask you this. What is it about NPD's numbers that you don't like and show me the numbers from another source that you do like and lets figure out why you think one is more accurate than the other.
Again, it wouldn't hurt if these analysts specified what tablets the ones in "others" are. Or who makes them. I mean, since these clearly lead the market by far. I have never ever seen a tablet that was not made by a known manufacturer. Most of the tablets out in the real world seem to be iPads anyway.
This would represent a good sample of others: http://www.lightinthebox.com/c/android-tablets_4781/All-3?currency=USD&litb_from=paid_adwords_search&adword_mt=b&adword_ct=37964936731&adword_kw=+tablets&adword_pos=1s5&adword_pl=&adword_net=g&adword_tar=&gclid=CjgKEAjwkpacBRCNlprWw-u-nBwSJACwHiw-5xXM6wxQUlb1jz2Pr_Nw_7dRAZ7J1Qxi0l446R-5nfD_BwE
This is the type of crap that the iPad is being compared to. I have no doubt that there are plenty of emerging nation consumers using these tablets because they're low in cost. You probably won't see many of them in the U.S. although I know Sears used to sell odd brands of Android tablets.
KGI doesn't blow fluffy assumptions on these things; and never has. They predict big splashes, and changes in the wind, not quarterly nonsense. I think NPD doesn't see the forest for the trees. They are the same company that said Window Mobile would be a dominant force this year, and next, and the one after that.
They blow smoke up people's asses and expect investors and others to take it as fact. In my mind, they are beyond useless, they are grasping at straws to stay relevant as an entity. I'll just listen to Apple's actual quarterly earnings reports on iPad shipments, and watch these stupid reports get ripped to shreds - like I do quarter after quarter.
Just for grins, when it comes to Android numbers, since there are a TON of developers for both Apple and Android phones. The Apple developers only buy "MAYBE" one of each basic Apple model, but the Android developers may have to buy one of everything that comes out to test their product, even though they are just for testing purposes so a developer that develops for both platforms may only buy a couple of iPhones each year, but they end up buying 100 or more Androd models because they have buy one of each product from each mfg. So, maybe that's partially the reason why Android has so much market share. A lot of them are just for developers to test their products and they usually end up not actually used by an end user. So keep that in mind.
Again, it wouldn't hurt if these analysts specified what tablets the ones in "others" are. Or who makes them. I mean, since these clearly lead the market by far. I have never ever seen a tablet that was not made by a known manufacturer. Most of the tablets out in the real world seem to be iPads anyway.
How about the LeapPads by LeapFrog? Are they tablets?
@drblank:
I'm with danv2. I've watched for years as NPD makes uselessly comical predictions quarter after quarter.
As I clearly qualified in my original post, I said "But that's just me…"
But hey, if you want to include their schlock into your analysis, go right ahead