iPhone 5

[This is The End]

Shipped is not what counts here. That was the point. Duh!

You purposefully ignored when he pointed to the data on shipping and sales of a tablet.

How about you try bringing the data to back up your sales claims instead of pulling chains? If you can't, then thats OK.

That is not what happened at all. TheL8Elvis claimed the numbers in that article were shipped for Samsung, and sold for Apple.

"Samsung ships two smartphones for every one Apple sells" kind of says it all, doesn't it ?

If you read the article past the headline you see that that is not the case. It is clearly shipped vs. shipped.

Also, are you suggesting that they are amassing huge quantities in a warehouse somewhere? Like it's 1982 with Atari ET games?? I seriously doubt that. I'm sure both companies have a very good idea of what future demand is.

Also, even if you were suggesting that, you would have to be implying that only Samsung is doing that and not Apple!! Because the article is "shipped" numbers for both companies.

So, yes, "shipped" is a very good indicator of "what counts here". Therefore the data in the article that started this entire conversation is valid. Which is what the entire point is.

 

[chulbert]

Also, are you suggesting that they are amassing huge quantities in a warehouse somewhere? Like it's 1982 with Atari ET games?? I seriously doubt that. I'm sure both companies have a very good idea of what future demand is.

I don't believe that there are mountains of Samsung smartphones in warehouses; however it is quite commonly the case that a manufacturer has a substantial amount of inventory in the supply chain -- shipped but not sold. For example, Samsung got busted on this very point with the initial launch of the Galaxy Tab. If my memory serves, they claimed to have shipped something like a million but it eventually came out that they only sold about 100,000.

Again, I do not think that's the case here but it does, in principle, happen.

 

[This is The End]

Again, I do not think that's the case here but it does, in principle, happen.

Well if it could happen then it could happen with both companies. And since the article was "shipped" vs "shipped" why even bring it up?

 

[This is The End]

Apparently the iPad mini is so popular that not only do customers not realize there is also a new iPad (iPad 3.5), some employees don't know about it either!!

So much for Jobs thinking that 10 inches was the minimum size...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-5...g-ipad/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Call it the featherweight KO'ing the heavyweight. On the first day of sales, the 312-gram Mini knocked the 652-gram fourth-generation iPad into quick obscurity.

I knew there was a problem when I had to explain to people asking me about the iPad Mini that there was also this thing called the gen 4 (gen 3.5 may actually be more accurate) iPad.

And some stores weren't exactly aware of the new iPad either. A sales rep at a certain large U.S. retail store (which will go unnamed) in Los Angeles gushed about the iPad Mini but was stumped when I asked about the gen 4 iPad.

"You know, the one right in front of you," was (more or less) what I had to say.

Though I like the Mini, I'm partial to the fourth-generation iPad for, among other things, reasons I reported on yesterday.

 

[kajata]

I saw the iPad Mini in person yesterday. Great feel and weight but after living with an iPhone 4S and iPad 3 I can't go back to that resolution. Looked downright fuzzy.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Well if it could happen then it could happen with both companies. And since the article was "shipped" vs "shipped" why even bring it up?

And the point you never seem to have understood is that apple doesn't release shipped numbers. It release sales numbers.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/07/24Apple-Reports-Third-Quarter-Results.html
...
The Company sold 26.0 million iPhones in the quarter, representing 28 percent unit growth over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 17.0 million iPads during the quarter, an 84 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. The Company sold 4.0 million Macs during the quarter, a two percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter. Apple sold 6.8 million iPods, a 10 percent unit decline from the year-ago quarter.
...

So much for the accuracy of your article. No signs of the weasel word shipped ...

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Here are the top ten handsets in the UK. 2 Samsungs, followed by 2 iPhones. iPhone 5 moved 5 million units in 3 days, but it wasn't enough to top Samsung Galaxy S3 sales.

http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/mobile_tracker/

ETA - apparently Galaxy S3 sales increased in the US with the release of the iPhone 5, as people apparently were waiting to see what it was before buying a phone. It apparently underwhelmed some undecided buyers.

http://www.autoomobile.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s3-vs-iphone-5-sales/1006720/

Galaxy S3 weekly sales growth #'s

Thanks, but I didn't see that any of those links gave solid numbers. They talked about percentages, and positions, but no solid numbers.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Apple iPhone is the make, the # is the model. Pretty hilarious you want us to buy that so you can continue to use that lie. Even if you convinced someone of that, then that would mean that the Samsung Galaxy S2, S2 Skyrocket, and S3 would count as one phone as well!! Apple would still be losing.

OK so maybe they stopped selling the 3GS since the last time you tried this spin.

The top 3 Samsung phones are absolutely destroying the top 3 Apple Phones. You can't even come up with convincing spin to make it not so. Also, the gap is widening.

All I see is how the total number of samsung phones *shipped* is greater than the number of iphones sold.

Can you back up your claim above that the s2/s3 outsells the iphone 4/4s/5 ?

I'm betting you can't.

Still waiting for you to back YOUR claims up, OTT....

 

[This is The End]

I saw the iPad Mini in person yesterday. Great feel and weight but after living with an iPhone 4S and iPad 3 I can't go back to that resolution. Looked downright fuzzy.

Oh Apple, gotta love it:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203347104578099112540216392.html

When Apple Inc. first announced the iPad Mini and said it would sell for a starting price of $329, many analysts and consumers were disappointed that the price wasn't $299.

Now a teardown analysis of the iPad Mini by the market research firm IHS reveals the costs of the components used to build the device. In a report scheduled to be released Monday, IHS estimates the combined cost of parts, including the display, chips and battery, adds up to about $188 for the base model of the iPad Mini.

The component cost amounts to about 57% of the retail price, implying a gross margin on the iPad Mini of about 43%. Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said on an Oct. 25 earnings conference call that the iPad Mini commands a gross margin that is "significantly below the corporate average." Apple's overall gross margin in its most recent quarter was 40% and it said it expects a 36% gross margin in its fiscal first quarter for 2013, which includes the approaching holiday season.

That's all well and good. Some companies sell at cost and make money back on software. Apple chooses not to. (Certain types of) people buy it anyway. Whatever.

But then there is this:

Two other Wi-Fi only models sell with 32, and 64 gigabytes of storage for $429 and $529, respectively. With the price of flash memory falling and approaching about 50 cents per gigabyte, Apple is adding $8 to $24 of additional memory on the 32-GB and 64-GB versions, and generating between $90 and $162 in additional profits per unit, he [Andrew Rassweiler, the head of the research team at IHS] said.

 

[GraculusTheGreenBird]

I saw the iPad Mini in person yesterday. Great feel and weight but after living with an iPhone 4S and iPad 3 I can't go back to that resolution. Looked downright fuzzy.

Yeah, it does seem a little odd that they would go to a non-retina screen for that, particularly as competing tablets have better resolution.

One theory is that they couldn't get the usual profit margin they wanted if they added the retina screen, as they were very aware the price would be a major sticking point for customers when models like the Kindle, Nexus etc were already relatively cheap, so they needed to keep the cost of components down and take a hit on the spec.

Edit: The post above seems to confirm that possibility, the gross margin for the mini is already apparently lower than the corporate average. So adding the retina would have pushed it even lower. Will have to see if that makes any dent in sales.

 

[carlitos]

Thanks, but I didn't see that any of those links gave solid numbers. They talked about percentages, and positions, but no solid numbers.

What is it that you are looking for, but can't find?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

What is it that you are looking for, but can't find?

Since OTT won't do it, I was looking for Samsung sales numbers broken out by phone model. Shipping numbers, even. Then we could compare apples to apples as far as SIII sold versus iPhone 5, etc.

Did I just overlook the number in your links ? I saw that samsung shipped a total of XXX phones, and that S III was number 1 at some point in time...

 

[chulbert]

Well if it could happen then it could happen with both companies. And since the article was "shipped" vs "shipped" why even bring it up?

To educate you. Shipped is a weasel word. I have no recent memory of Apple releasing any shipment figures - only sales figures - so I question any source that claims to know.

To demonstrate my fairness, Apple's announcement today of 3M iPads and iPad minis sold is also weasely. They launched a brand new product yet rolled its sales total in with another product. While I think it accounts for the lion's share of the 3M figure, they used weasely language to arrive at a bigger number.

 

[carlitos]

Since OTT won't do it, I was looking for Samsung sales numbers broken out by phone model. Shipping numbers, even. Then we could compare apples to apples as far as SIII sold versus iPhone 5, etc.

Did I just overlook the number in your links ? I saw that samsung shipped a total of XXX phones, and that S III was number 1 at some point in time...

There was a bar chart on the uk figures. Let me check.

Regarding total market share:

From July, so it's a bit dated, but here are global figures through Q2 of this year. Apple at around 14% and Samsung at 26%. This more or less jibes with the other numbers posted in this thread.

Their respective sales numbers were revealed in the patent trial. However, it's not like-for-like because Samsung didn't include all of their phones that weren't part of the lawsuit. Those numbers were 3:1 apple, which can't be even close to right.

Here's another chart of market share, with Samsung at 26% to Apple's 16%.

Sales by model:

Samsung Galaxy S3 hits 30 million sales

The rise and rise of the Samsung Galaxy S3 has continued with latest sales figures topping 30 million.

....

So with around 10m further shipments in the last two months alone, momentum continues to be high for the flagship Galaxy S3.
...

Just yesterday came news that the Galaxy S3 had outsold the iPhone 5 to remain the UK's most popular handset for the sixth consecutive month.
The Galaxy S3 had defeated the iPhone 5 in September also, but October's figures carry a little more weight as it was the new Apple smartphone's first full month on sale.

So the Galaxy S3 had 10 million shipments in September and October.

iPhone sold a "disappointing" 5 million units in the first weekend it was available.

I'm having no luck at all finding sales numbers from October, 2012. According to one recent article:

Apple has not broken out iPhone 5 sales since the launch but in its Q4 financial results Cupertino said it sold 26.9 million iPhones in the quarter.

 

[funk de fino]

Just seen global sales figures for Q3. S III was 18million. iPhone 4S was 16.2 million. A whopping 1.2 million difference with the now "older model" iPhone

No weasel "shipped" nonsense in the piece either. I guess OTT will still not get it or pony any data up

 

[This is The End]

No weasel "shipped" nonsense in the piece either. I guess OTT will still not get it or pony any data up

I'm not the person that claimed only 1 of the 2 was "shipped". If anything was weasely it was that.

I'm the person that realized the first article (from post #486) was legit. There were no complaints about the first article from me.

Perhaps by your comment you are still claiming that the shipped to sell ratio is different between those 2 companies. Do you have anything to back that up?

Either that or you've got what happened in the last 30 posts completely backwards. To claim that I'm the person didn't "get" something is pretty funny.

As for your numbers, you need to also get the sales of S2 and S2 Skyrockets and sales numbers for the iPhone 4 and iPhone 5. The Skyrockets in particular have been selling a ton.

Don't forget the comparison we agreed on. If we let the Apple fanboys claim that the iPhones are just "1 phone" then the Galaxy S's are just "1 phone" as well:

iPhone 4 = Galaxy S II
iPhone 4S = Galaxy S II Skyrocket
iPhone 5 = Galaxy S III

So stop trying to compare just 1 of them to another one. Stop trying to just compare them during 1 quarter. And please stop trying to do both at once. Especially when you do both and Apple still comes up short! That just looks bad.

 

[funk de fino]

I'm not the person that claimed only 1 of the 2 was "shipped". If anything was weasely it was that.

I'm the person that realized the first article (from post #486) was legit. There were no complaints about the first article from me.

Perhaps by your comment you are still claiming that the shipped to sell ratio is different between those 2 companies. Do you have anything to back that up?

Either that or you've got what happened in the last 30 posts completely backwards. To claim that I'm the person didn't "get" something is pretty funny.

As for your numbers, you need to also get the sales of S2 and S2 Skyrockets and sales numbers for the iPhone 4 and iPhone 5. The Skyrockets in particular have been selling a ton.

Don't forget the comparison we agreed on. If we let the Apple fanboys claim that the iPhones are just "1 phone" then the Galaxy S's are just "1 phone" as well:


So stop trying to compare just 1 of them to another one. Stop trying to just compare them during 1 quarter. And please stop trying to do both at once. Especially when you do both and Apple still comes up short! That just looks bad.

Still refusing to give us any data? Just continuing with the hot air about shipping units. It is absolutely hilarious that you ask anyone to back anything up. And that you make up stories about what people are claiming. Just fabulous dishonesty.

I was comparing like for like on the models current in that quarter. OK?

Globally a 1.2 million difference is less than I expected. I believe October will show a turn around.

 

[This is The End]

Still refusing to give us any data? Just continuing with the hot air about shipping units. It is absolutely hilarious that you ask anyone to back anything up. And that you make up stories about what people are claiming. Just fabulous dishonesty.

I was comparing like for like on the models current in that quarter. OK?

Globally a 1.2 million difference is less than I expected. I believe October will show a turn around.

I'm quite your you are not following the chain of events here.

Someone, not me, posted an article.

Other users attacked that article using flawed reasoning. I clearly showed how that reasoning is flawed.

I even suggested, multiple times, what the relevant numbers we need are. If you want to cite those numbers, have at it. I don't care. Nor do I jump around complaining if you don't. But if you post something other than that, I assume you just want me to not point it out??

Thanks for posting the information from the article. (Even though you, for whatever reason, didn't give us the link, it was on several news sites yesterday, I saw it anyway.) If you didn't mean for that to represent the analogy currently being discussed I apologize.

And then when I do point out that those are not the numbers that the person that attacked the article needed for a valid comparison, you yell at me about how I should be the one getting them??

The claim was, that if you count Apple as 1 phone, then Samsung really isn't selling more.

Though I did help to clarify what Apple being 1 phone would mean, it is not my claim.

 

[carlitos]

it is not my claim.

So drop it. Someone is wrong on the internet. No biggie.

 

[This is The End]

So drop it. Someone is wrong on the internet. No biggie.

Yeah I'm beginning to think it is just better to ignore it when people try to find which metric they can use to feel that Apple is still the leader in smartphones.

I suppose if I was an Apple fan I would be in denial as well.

But I would probably also be happy that they had a few good years. It was surely unexpected to anyone familiar with Apple history.