Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Shipped an Estimated 4.2 Million Apple Watches in 3Q2018, With Series 3 Making Up the Bulk of Sales

it’s easy for Xiaomi to undercut Apple when they sell users name, email address, delivery address, ID card, driver license, passport details, mobile phone number, birthday, gender, bank account number or credit card details (if you have made a purchase at Xiaomi online), phone numbers stored in your phone, location, photos and content stored in or synced through Mi Cloud service, education and professional background, IMEI number of the device as well as any apps you install, or delete (and in some cases how the apps are used).

This is just what they come out and admit on their website.

But sure, let them have access to real time heath monitoring too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacemnspiff and clauzzz203
4jasontv said:
it’s easy for Xiaomi to undercut Apple when they sell users name, email address, delivery address, ID card, driver license, passport details, mobile phone number, birthday, gender, bank account number or credit card details (if you have made a purchase at Xiaomi online), phone numbers stored in your phone, location, photos and content stored in or synced through Mi Cloud service, education and professional background, IMEI number of the device as well as any apps you install, or delete (and in some cases how the apps are used).

This is just what they come out and admit on their website.

But sure, let them have access to real time heath monitoring too.
Click to expand...

At least they don’t sell my soul?
 
The chart is meaningless if Apple does not provide the actual figures. The only thing that matters is the individual who are happy with their purchase.
 
gnasher729 said:
"Xiaomi watch" in Google gives immediately pictures of six watches, some for around £20 and some for around £100. So to some degree this is like a statistics of manufacturers of "things on four wheels", and you have a company making busses, one making sports cars, and one making skateboards.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The chart is simply titled "Wearables" but there are many products in that broad category.

There is a Xiaomi fitness band for $30... and also an Apple Watch that makes freakin' phone calls for $400

Why are those on the same chart? :p
 
Last edited:
manu chao said:
And since when is October part of Q3?
Click to expand...
You are correct that October is not part of Q3.

What I take exception to is IDC's spin that customers chose the reduced price of the Series 3 over Series 4.

Series 4 was released on Sept. 21, so it had 10 days in the quarter vs 90 for Series 3.

Many people ordering the Series 4 didn't receive them until October or even November in some cases.

It's clear Series 4 was supply constrained during its brief appearance in the quarter, and not that customers chose Series 3 over Series 4.
[doublepost=1543928640][/doublepost]
BvizioN said:
I think you will find that your waiting time will be like - forever. Health/fitness is the bread and butter for the Apple Watch.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Asking for an Apple Watch with no health features or sensors is like asking for an iPod that doesn't play music.
 
Last edited:
tromboneaholic said:
You are correct that October is not part of Q3.

What I take exception to is IDC's spin that customers chose the reduced price of the Series 3 over Series 4.

Series 4 was released on Sept. 21, so it had 10 days in the quarter vs 90 for Series 3.

Many people ordering the Series 4 didn't receive them until October or even November in some cases.

It's clear Series 4 was supply constrained during its brief appearance in the quarter, and not that customers chose Series 3 over Series 4.
Click to expand...
I agree with all you said, I was merely somewhat surprised that nobody had pointed out the 'October mistake' yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tromboneaholic
Most of this information is irrelevant as it pertains to AAPL. The only thing that is remotely useful is the units sold estimated number for the AW. None of the others have a line that is solely full-featured smartwatches.

The only relevance a $25 wrist band has with an Apple watch is that it's generally worn on the wrist and most people only have 2 wrists. Therefore, if these $25 bands are finding themselves attached on many many people, it will reduce the number of wrists that AW's can attach to.

Aside - From a unit sales point of view, the numbers presented by IDC here are likely pretty accurate. In a few weeks (I guess), we'll see the numbers from Gartner and that will be used as an independent model to validate IDC's. This will be how it will go from now on regarding unit sales of iPhone. Both IDC and Gartner will publish their data regarding iPhone numbers and if it's grossly inaccurate, I'm sure Apple will provide statements correcting them, as they've done in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tromboneaholic
manu chao said:
And since when is October part of Q3?
Click to expand...

It’s not. Q3 ended July 30th. AW4 was announced halfway through Q4. We are now in Q1. (This is isn’t for you, but for people who might be confused by your statement.)
 
4jasontv said:
It’s not. Q3 ended July 30th. AW4 was announced halfway through Q4. We are now in Q1. (This is isn’t for you, but for people who might be confused by your statement.)
Click to expand...

I agree that MR didn't do a great job of distinguishing between Apple's fiscal quarters and IDC.

IDC is using calendar quarters, so IDCs Q3 is July, August, September. Q4 would be October, November, December.

Apple Watch Series 4 was released 10 days before the end of calendar Q3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ftaok
I7guy said:
And rising stock price indicates hook, line and sinker?
Click to expand...
Who knows - Apple thinks it has the only truth.
The only problem with financial markets is they have a higher truth. And think different.
 
ondert said:
Another example proves that US people think the world consist of only USA. Sadly, I have witnessed such things before many times.
Click to expand...
I bet I've traveled abroad more than you. My point was never that China didn't exist. I'm simply saying the Xiaomi watch is simply irrelevant in the US.

Since these numbers are total speculation, I don't believe the Xiaomi watch is that popular, particularly when Apple has told us the Apple Watch is the #1 watch in the world. Remember, Apple can't lie or people go to jail.
[doublepost=1543937027][/doublepost]
honglong1976 said:
Have you ever been to China? I have. Xiaomi bands are everywhere. They have over a billion people.

I had an amazfit bip before and it was pretty good. Using a miband for sleep tracking.
[doublepost=1543913931][/doublepost]
That's true for other cheap Chinese products, but xiaomi products are very high quality and super cheap!
Click to expand...
Yes, I've bee to China. I never said they didn't exist in China. I'm asking if anyone has ever seen one.

They likely sell a ton of different SKUs, but I'm still skeptical of any number that comes out of China.
 
tromboneaholic said:
I agree that MR didn't do a great job of distinguishing between Apple's fiscal quarters and IDC.

IDC is using calendar quarters, so IDCs Q3 is July, August, September. Q4 would be October, November, December.

Apple Watch Series 4 was released 10 days before the end of calendar Q3.
Click to expand...
IDC and MR consistently only used calendar quarters (I think that unless otherwise stated almost everybody will assume that quarters refer to calendar quarters). Their only real mistake was to write October when it should have said September which then might have lead to confusion about how the quarters were defined in this context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tromboneaholic
sinsin07 said:
What leads you to believe he/she is from the US?
Click to expand...

I've seen many US citizens talking like that, so I assumed he/she is from the States. Haven't you noticed? It's kind of common along the US citizens, there is a sense like "world=US". Am I wrong? I don't blame them, just saying it's my observation and generally my guesses were correct.
 
ftaok said:
Most of this information is irrelevant as it pertains to AAPL. The only thing that is remotely useful is the units sold estimated number for the AW. None of the others have a line that is solely full-featured smartwatches.

The only relevance a $25 wrist band has with an Apple watch is that it's generally worn on the wrist and most people only have 2 wrists. Therefore, if these $25 bands are finding themselves attached on many many people, it will reduce the number of wrists that AW's can attach to.

Aside - From a unit sales point of view, the numbers presented by IDC here are likely pretty accurate. In a few weeks (I guess), we'll see the numbers from Gartner and that will be used as an independent model to validate IDC's. This will be how it will go from now on regarding unit sales of iPhone. Both IDC and Gartner will publish their data regarding iPhone numbers and if it's grossly inaccurate, I'm sure Apple will provide statements correcting them, as they've done in the past.
Click to expand...
A $25 wrist band customer is most likely not a $400 AW customer. If the customer wasn't wearing a $25 wrist band, customer may wear another manufacturers brand of tracker. Interesting you can buy these on Amazon and other websites, but seemingly not directly from US retailers.

$25 seems like a steal though.
 
I7guy said:
A $25 wrist band customer is most likely not a $400 AW customer. If the customer wasn't wearing a $25 wrist band, customer may wear another manufacturers brand of tracker. Interesting you can buy these on Amazon and other websites, but seemingly not directly from US retailers.

$25 seems like a steal though.
Click to expand...
Hence my comment about the irrelevency of grouping the AW along with all of the cheap wristband trackers.

The AW competes with devices like the Galaxy Gear and the full Fitbit watches/trackers.

The IDC data is good for estimating the number of AW's that Apple sold last quarter, but other than that, it's just noise and clickbait. It's pandering to the people with the insatiable "Market Share Above All Else Fetish". No one really cares about the market share that the AW has in the wearable market. It's boring, but it generate clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
I7guy said:
Is that why Apple’s valuation went to $1T? Because the markets have a higher truth?
Click to expand...
tromboneaholic said:
Investors react to uncertainty, speculation, and rumors. There is no higher truth at play.
Click to expand...
Not for you, presumably.
There are lots of opportunities and challenges to improve Apple tenure when it comes to innovation, quality, financial outlook, redefining its mission in saturated markets - which are not optimally served by a CEO denying every problem and diverting his attention so much towards external causes. Look at his Twitter feed.
Note: that’s not just my assessment, but a more general impression in the market.
It is up to Tim to either feed or calm those factors you mention.
He has no higher truth than that, apparently. And raising prices for the sake of protecting sales volume is actually a very, very (=intrinsically) bad idea.
Not disclosing unit sales numbers is already backfiring on him. Time for a change.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back