Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    BTW, no matter what the actual numbers are, at this point, each tablet sold is eating into Apple's market share. The only question seems to be "how much". Take a look at the history of what happend with iPhone, and you'll get a picture of what's about to happen.

    Eco systems are almost definitely a good idea. Closed eco systems, I think not so much.

    As for every tablet sale cutting into iPad marketshare, not so. iPad marketshare was at 95%, not 100%. That means that Apple could have sold two iPads for every one Android tablet. That means their marketshare could have grown. That is the problem with using misleading data.
    Last edited by pogeypre; 01/31/2011 at 03:34 PM.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    As for every tablet sale cutting into iPad marketshare, not so. iPad marketshare was at 95%, not 100%. That means that Apple could have sold two iPads for every one Android tablet. That means their marketshare could have grown. That is the problem with using misleading data.
    You hang on to that, if it gives you comfort. Wanna take bets that Apple's share doesn't hold at 95% by the end of the year? I'll even give you odds.
  3.    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    You hang on to that, if it gives you comfort. Wanna take bets that Apple's share doesn't hold at 95% by the end of the year? I'll even give you odds.
    I'm not sure what you are defending. I never said the iPad will hold at 95%. I said there is no evidence that it has dropped at this time. I have shown where your assumptions about Apple's marketshare are wrong based on a false notion of Tab sales. Are you arguing with Samsung? Are you arguing with math?

    I have not attacked the Tab in this thread. As I said, I was one of the first to congratulate them when they announced big numbers. I'm amending that now based on a correction of the facts. So, again, what exactly are you on about?
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    I'm not sure what you are defending. I never said the iPad will hold at 95%. I said there is no evidence that it has dropped at this time. I have shown where your assumptions about Apple's marketshare are wrong based on a false notion of Tab sales. Are you arguing with Samsung? Are you arguing with math?

    I have not attacked the Tab in this thread. As I said, I was one of the first to congratulate them when they announced big numbers. I'm amending that now based on a correction of the facts. So, again, what exactly are you on about?
    You're misrepresenting what was done, as well as the motive. There's no basis for your claims, and the entire thread is misleading.

    Devices that are subsidized by the carriers are almost always reported this way. Samsung doesn't sell the device to end users, they sell to the carriers, and that's the number they report.

    So, I guess the only thing I'm "defending" is the notion of a little intellectual honesty one the numbers.

    There is no doubt that the tablet industry changed with the introduction of the iPad. There is further no doubt that there will be other players in the field. The entire notion that no one should even try because they're bound to fail, and that anyone that claims any area of success (save claims by/for Apple, of course) are getting tiresome.

    Pardon me if I shed a little light of reality on the subject.
  5. #25  
    Only problem, Dandbj13, is the "correction of the facts" provided no facts of its own. You have no idea what the sellthrough is of the Galaxy Tab. You don't know what the methodology of the marketshare report was. You don't know which Android tablets it included, and which it didn't. Do you what the "sellthrough" of the Nook Color is, for example?

    There weren't enough facts to trumpet the marketshare report in the first place much less to discredit. This is much ado about nothing.
  6.    #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    There is no doubt that the tablet industry changed with the introduction of the iPad. There is further no doubt that there will be other players in the field. The entire notion that no one should even try because they're bound to fail, and that anyone that claims any area of success (save claims by/for Apple, of course) are getting tiresome.
    I think you are posting in the wrong thread. None of this was said or implied
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    I think you are posting in the wrong thread. None of this was said or implied
    See below:
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    If you can't compete in reality, then just make stuff up. Invent a victory: a manufactured triumph. They are kind of coming clean about sales. Seems they were not so hot. Guess they thought that the appearance of strong sales would spur on the real thing.

    At this point, I will not believe any success story about an iPad competitor until I see real sales numbers to real human beings.
  8.    #28  
    Correction!

    The Samsung rep did not say, "quite small," but "quite smooth."

    This link is accompanied by an audio clip of what she said. She still acknowledged that sell-out was lower than expected, and declined to go into sales numbers.

    As for returns, Samsung experiencing a 16 percent return rate on the Galaxy Tab? -- Engadget The percentage of returns rose after Christmas. That does not just mean there were more overall returns due to greater sales, but a higher percentage of people returned the item. That is a trend going in the wrong direction.

    Bottom line, we do not have enough information to know how sales are really doing. They are clearly not what Samsung led us to believe, but they may not be as bad as all that. We only have the extremely fast turn around of Samsung prepping a new model so soon after the first, and the steep discounts of the current product to give us guidance.

    You can beat up Apple over a lot of things. But at least they give you real numbers. You know how their products are selling without shell games. I suspect they are only so forthcoming with numbers because their sales are through the roof on must of their product line. But then again, anyone who has great numbers to boast would do so without hesitation.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    Bottom line, we do not have enough information to know how sales are really doing.
    You could end the thread right there, but....

    You can beat up Apple over a lot of things. But at least they give you real numbers. You know how their products are selling without shell games. I suspect they are only so forthcoming with numbers because their sales are through the roof on must of their product line. But then again, anyone who has great numbers to boast would do so without hesitation.
    You can know how Samsung's or anyone else's products are selling as well. Listen to an earnings call.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    ...
    Bottom line, we do not have enough information to know how sales are really doing. They are clearly not what Samsung led us to believe, but they may not be as bad as all that. We only have the extremely fast turn around of Samsung prepping a new model so soon after the first, and the steep discounts of the current product to give us guidance.

    You can beat up Apple over a lot of things. But at least they give you real numbers. You know how their products are selling without shell games. I suspect they are only so forthcoming with numbers because their sales are through the roof on must of their product line...
    It appears to me that the only "shell game" here was the statements about manufacture triumphs and suggestions that Samsung was attempting to fool people.

    -- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums
    If you type PreCentral on a TouchPad
    It changes to PreMenstrual
    That situation needs to be fixed!
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    BTW, no matter what the actual numbers are, at this point, each tablet sold is eating into Apple's market share. The only question seems to be "how much". Take a look at the history of what happend with iPhone, and you'll get a picture of what's about to happen.

    Eco systems are almost definitely a good idea. Closed eco systems, I think not so much.
    You mean history repeating itself in the tablet market like in the smart phone market with Apple having 4.2% of the market share with 51% of all the profits? I'm sure Apple is just hoping and praying that history does repeat itself.

    Apple doesn't care that a bunch of cheap, low margin tablets get more market share in the tablet market than they do.
  12. #32  
    Samsung should have provided the caveat that their sales have been to carriers and not to consumers. Microsoft said that when they said they sold 1.5 million Win 7 phones. It's deceptive and the fact that Samsung came out and pointed it out later says that they knew they were not giving the true sales picture.

    Think how the developers that decided to make an app for that device must feel. Based upon what Samsung is saying they think they have a potential 2 million customers to sell to. When in reality they don't. It's not ethical and if Samsung really wants to report what they have sold, it should be what they have sold to end user's that will actually use the product. That is what determines market share. Not selling to a middleman.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    You mean history repeating itself in the tablet market like in the smart phone market with Apple having 4.2% of the market share with 51% of all the profits? I'm sure Apple is just hoping and praying that history does repeat itself.

    Apple doesn't care that a bunch of cheap, low margin tablets get more market share in the tablet market than they do.
    Actually, what I was talking about has only just begun. Surely you're not going to try to tell us all that Apple simply doesn't care that Android is eating into their market share? Nah, I take that back. I don't doubt for a minute that it will be the refrain we hear from some fans, but that doesn't make it true.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Actually, what I was talking about has only just begun. Surely you're not going to try to tell us all that Apple simply doesn't care that Android is eating into their market share? Nah, I take that back. I don't doubt for a minute that it will be the refrain we hear from some fans, but that doesn't make it true.
    When has Apple ever been concerned about competitors that sell stuff cheaper than they do?

    Apple doesn't care if Android eats into their market share with products that are CHEAPER, being the operative word, than they do. If Apple cared, wouldn't they offer an alternative product at a similar price as the cheaper competitor?

    Even to this day Apple refuses to sell a laptop cheaper than $1000. That tells you a lot about what Apple thinks of all those cheap laptops that you can buy for $300.

    They don't care.
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    When has Apple ever been concerned about competitors that sell stuff cheaper than they do?

    Apple doesn't care if Android eats into their market share with products that are CHEAPER, being the operative word, than they do. If Apple cared, wouldn't they offer an alternative product at a similar price as the cheaper competitor?

    Even to this day Apple refuses to sell a laptop cheaper than $1000. That tells you a lot about what Apple thinks of all those cheap laptops that you can buy for $300.

    They don't care.
    I think you're wrong about what they "care" about, but if you're right, then they are making a serious mistake.

    Android is not a phone. It's an operating system. The mfgs that use the OS can up the ante on hardware at any time. If/when the there are enough users of Android begging for better, higher quality hardware, it would be an easy enough endeavor for a phone maker. The problem for Apple is "caring" at that point would be too late.

    Of course, I'm sure someone would come along and insist that the demand is a "manufactured triumph". Maybe that would ease their concern.

    Of course, your claims are easily refuted by simply observing the ideas that Apple has borrowed from those "inferior" phones. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be changing course, even if it's only a little.

    Yeah, they care. They're smart enough to.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    When has Apple ever been concerned about competitors that sell stuff cheaper than they do?
    I knew I remembered something about Apple lowering prices on iPhones. To tell the truth, what I was remembering was the drop from $400 to $200. In looking for that, I found this article. I thought it might be of interest:

    Apple Cuts Prices Strategically - BusinessWeek

    I know, I know, ApGuys don't like to hear this stuff, and will probably refuse to acknowledge it, but this particular paragraph I found particularly interesting:

    Apple's most recent reduction came two days after rival Palm (PALM) introduced its much-hyped Pre smartphone for $199. "I figured Apple would come in at closer to $149," Munster says. "They're clearly hungry for market share, and they don't want to give the Palm Pre room to breathe."
    Yeah, they didn't care. That price drop was purely coincidental...
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    ...
    Even to this day Apple refuses to sell a laptop cheaper than $1000. That tells you a lot about what Apple thinks of all those cheap laptops that you can buy for $300.

    They don't care.
    And then there's this:
    Apple - MacBook - The $999 notebook.
    I know, I know, $999 is only a little less than $1000, but it's still less. It's also pretty clear from both the price point and that tag line "Even with with so much more to love, MacBook is still just $999" It's pretty clear they're competing with the cheaper guys...

    Yeah, they care. Their fans may not, but they do. They're businessmen.
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    I think you're wrong about what they "care" about, but if you're right, then they are making a serious mistake.

    Android is not a phone. It's an operating system. The mfgs that use the OS can up the ante on hardware at any time. If/when the there are enough users of Android begging for better, higher quality hardware, it would be an easy enough endeavor for a phone maker. The problem for Apple is "caring" at that point would be too late.

    Of course, I'm sure someone would come along and insist that the demand is a "manufactured triumph". Maybe that would ease their concern.

    Of course, your claims are easily refuted by simply observing the ideas that Apple has borrowed from those "inferior" phones. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be changing course, even if it's only a little.

    Yeah, they care. They're smart enough to.
    What did they borrow that is so significant?
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    What did they borrow that is so significant?
    I didn't say "significant", and I'm not going to get into one of those "no, that's not significant, yes it is, no it's not" silly discussions. If they didn't care, why would they go to the trouble of copying? Simple answer, they do indeed care. They may be able to convince their current fanbase that there are no other options worth considering, but they're smart enough to know that anyone that doesn't own their product now are looking at the competition. And many that do own it are as well.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    I knew I remembered something about Apple lowering prices on iPhones. To tell the truth, what I was remembering was the drop from $400 to $200. In looking for that, I found this article. I thought it might be of interest:

    Apple Cuts Prices Strategically - BusinessWeek

    I know, I know, ApGuys don't like to hear this stuff, and will probably refuse to acknowledge it, but this particular paragraph I found particularly interesting:


    Yeah, they didn't care. That price drop was purely coincidental...
    Fist of all I have never said that Apple doesn't lower their prices from time to time.

    In that article...

    Even as it gains share, Apple is unlikely to sacrifice much margin. Analysts believe the profit margin on the $99 device will be roughly as cushy as in the past. Apple is benefiting from falling component prices as demand for displays, memory chips, hard drives, and other components dries up.
    Gee, look at that. Apple still get's their high margins as they always do. If they can still get their high margins, they will lower prices. As the article states.

    Another nugget of info...

    No doubt, there are fewer dollars of profit on a $99 product compared to one that sells for twice that amount. But Apple also announced a faster, pricier new model that could help make up the difference. Called the iPhone 3G S—"the S is for speed," Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller told the crowd at San Francisco's Moscone Center—the device will cost $199 for a model with 16 gigabytes of storage and $299 for a 32GB model. Given that the additional 16GB cost only $24 or so, Apple is clearly keeping plenty of profit by charging $100 more, says David Carey, an analyst at tech consultancy Portelligent.
    Despite the rise of inexpensive netbooks based on Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows software costing as little as $200, Apple didn't bring out a cheaper entry-level model. Instead, it lowered the price of various versions of its higher-end MacBook Pro laptops by $300.
    So, tell me, where in the above quote did Apple bring out a laptop to match anywhere near that $200 Windows laptop?

    As I said in my other post, Apple does not care about products that are cheaper than what they sell their stuff.

    The article you linked to basically said Apple still get's their ridiculously high margins and they are not going to lower their prices any less if they are not going to get their typical 30% profit margin. And they can't get that 30% margin if they sell their stuff at the prices that everyone else does.

    Basically the same thing I said in my other post. This is another example of you saying something but, not providing the support information that disputes what you are saying. Just like you say HP sells more computers than Apple does, BUT leave out the fact that Apple's cheapest laptop is 3 times more expensive than HP's cheapest laptop.

    Didn't Apple bring out the iPhone 3GS for $199. They lowered the price on the old model. If the iPhone 3GS were cheaper than the Palm Pre then they may have been concerned.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions