Apple Sneaks by Android in Fourth Quarter U.S. Smartphone Sales

[kdarling]

Actually i gave you several reasons. You still fail to understand that apple did not open up to a market of 210 million ppl. The market was always there.

Such a comment makes no sense at all. Are you claiming Apple saw no extra market when they made a CDMA capable phone? If so, why did they do it? For fun?

It's also demonstrably false. Apple immediately had more sales by adding support for Verizon and Sprint.

There's a huge difference between saying "the market was always there", and real life where millions obviously did not want to leave Verizon or Sprint just to get an iPhone, but were quite willing to buy one if it came to them.

Second, you failed to answer my other questions. How come it wasn't expected for android to do so much better, instead of dipping in share? Do they not have free models, cheap models, and if they're waiting for ces why didn't android have an explosion of sales after last years ces?

- Android buyers did not have 18 months of pent up desire for a new model. iPhone sales actually dropped 16% in 3Q in anticipation of the 4S model.

- Android buyers have had inexpensive models all along, unlike iPhone buyers.

- Android phones were available on all carriers last year. The iPhone was not.

Remember: this particular USA iPhone sales growth was a comparison between THIS YEAR and LAST YEAR during the fourth calendar quarter.

So we have to look for what was different between 4Q last year and 4Q this year. The iPhone had all the differences, not Android. Those differences are what I brought up.

 

[voonyx]

Such a comment makes no sense at all. Are you claiming Apple saw no extra market when they made a CDMA capable phone? If so, why did they do it? For fun?

It's also demonstrably false. Apple immediately had more sales by adding support for Verizon and Sprint.

The market was always there. Are you claiming it wasn't?

There's a huge difference between saying "the market was always there", and real life where millions obviously did not want to leave Verizon or Sprint just to get an iPhone, but were quite willing to buy one if it came to them.

So the people who said "if they want one they'd have one" and "it's all previous owners" are demonstrably wrong too, right? I think my discussion started with you because of those blatant contradictions. You've corrected those.

- Android buyers did not have 18 months of pent up desire for a new model. iPhone sales actually dropped 16% in 3Q in anticipation of the 4S model.

18 months is the magic number? Got it. So the 9 months waiting for the bionic are inconsequential, and the two waiting for the nexus? Not long enough to "expect" a doubling of share?

- Android buyers have had inexpensive models all along, unlike iPhone buyers.

Android phones were available on all carriers last year. The iPhone was not.

Remember: this particular USA iPhone sales growth was a comparison between THIS YEAR and LAST YEAR during the fourth calendar quarter.

So we have to look for what was different between 4Q last year and 4Q this year. The iPhone had all the differences, not Android. Those differences are what I brought up.

Listen this whole thing started because you made the outrageous claim that it would be a miracle if they didn't double their share. It was outrageous because it was a direct contradiction to what you posted elsewhere about new vs current iphone users. You've completely backtracked on that, and are now pushing a new theory.

Unfortunately your theory has holes because you simply cannot deny that anyone who wanted an iphone could have gotten one. (I want to qualify this sentence before it is nitpicked). I'm not saying that there is no demand for the iPhone, what I am saying is that anyone who wants to get an iPhone can get one at anytime.

 

[faroZ06]

You fall into the category of new to smartphones because you're mesmerized by a smartphone thats not all that smart.


No, not irrational, just not objective because the're either new to smartphones and think iphones are the most capable smartphones, or loyal Apple fans that have never used anything but iphones.

I have used both since they came out, and I am not new to smartphones. You have no reasons to call it "not smart" other than you being a hater. I wouldn't call a simple stating of facts being "mesmerized". You are the one who is irrational/trolling and providing no reasons as to why you think the iPhone is not smart (other than calling iPhone users fanboys, a silly argument). I actually have an iPod touch, an iPhone minus the phone, which I find way smarter in terms of OS details than the other stuff.

Just saying, Java is not all that smart compared to Objective C.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Sorry could not resist. Got a kick out of both these items.

These charts will make the Fandroids want to puke.

Looks like there is already a fire sale on the just released Galaxy Nexus.

 

[faroZ06]

I predict Android will retake iOS in marketshare next quarter, and continue to lead until iPhone 6 launches around september with most likely a redesign, and possibly LTE. then iOS will retake marketshare indefinately.

Android will probably pass iOS, and the people who care about 4G (who are mostly non-iPhone users) would switch once Apple adds it. Really, 4G is a very overrated thing though. Claiming that your text messages and Facebook updates will load faster on 4G is BS.

 

[samcraig]

The market was always there. Are you claiming it wasn't?



Unfortunately your theory has holes because you simply cannot deny that anyone who wanted an iphone could have gotten one. (I want to qualify this sentence before it is nitpicked). I'm not saying that there is no demand for the iPhone, what I am saying is that anyone who wants to get an iPhone can get one at anytime.

Just because you say it doesn't make it true. You keep asserting your fallacies. You have conviction and passion. It's just misguided.

 

[voonyx]

Sorry could not resist. Got a kick out of both these items.

These charts will make the Fandroids want to puke.

Looks like there is already a fire sale on the just released Galaxy Nexus.

Yeah I just wrote about that over on my blog haha...of course to the android fanatics, it's because "Amazon is nice and gives its customers a break unlike Apple that is sooo overpriced"...another iPhone "killer" bites the dust. Geez the phone is not even 2 months old!

 

[faroZ06]

This does not include iPod touches and iPads as well as the Android tablets, right? I'd like to see an iOS vs Android OS share comparison. I basically use my iPod as a phone by texting for free (and voice calls are stupid anyway). Seriously, America needs to kill the phone system from the 1800s souped up for 2011 in favor of IP already!

----------

Yeah I just wrote about that over on my blog haha...of course to the android fanatics, it's because "Amazon is nice and gives its customers a break unlike Apple that is sooo overpriced"...another iPhone "killer" bites the dust. Geez the phone is not even 2 months old!

It's true that Android attempts are horrible, but I find those charts misleading. Actually, every chart on these things is always misleading. There is always an aspect of it that affects the outcome a lot, making Android or iOS seem like it's on top.

The only way I tell at this point is by how many people I see using each thing. I know only 3 Android users. One of them is just an Apple hater (he also uses Windows and rants a lot against Apple), one is a Google fan (he uses gmail.com instead of the built-in Mail on his Mac as well as everything made by Google), and one hates his Droid and considers it a mistake. Almost everyone else I know uses the iPhone, and a few use semi-smartphones and other smartphones. I am the only person I know who uses a flip-phone anymore. I don't know anyone who uses a slide phone (those things suck).

 

[voonyx]

This does not include iPod touches and iPads as well as the Android tablets, right? I'd like to see an iOS vs Android OS share comparison. I basically use my iPod as a phone by texting for free (and voice calls are stupid anyway). Seriously, America needs to kill the phone system from the 1800s souped up for 2011 in favor of IP already!

----------



It's true that Android attempts are horrible, but I find those charts misleading. Actually, every chart on these things is always misleading. There is always an aspect of it that affects the outcome a lot, making Android or iOS seem like it's on top.

The only way I tell at this point is by how many people I see using each thing. I know only 3 Android users. One of them is just an Apple hater (he also uses Windows and rants a lot against Apple), one is a Google fan (he uses gmail.com instead of the built-in Mail on his Mac as well as everything made by Google), and one hates his Droid and considers it a mistake.

Yeah no, I'm not putting much into the charts, I was just commenting on the link about Amazon dropping the Nexus to $99. There would be zero reason for any company to ever drop prices if their products are selling at a certain pricepoint. That's the fundamentals of supply and demand, something some people here just can't grasp.

 

[Taz Mangus]

This does not include iPod touches and iPads as well as the Android tablets, right? I'd like to see an iOS vs Android OS share comparison. I basically use my iPod as a phone by texting for free (and voice calls are stupid anyway). Seriously, America needs to kill the phone system from the 1800s souped up for 2011 in favor of IP already!

What's a Android Tablet?

----------

Yeah no, I'm not putting much into the charts, I was just commenting on the link about Amazon dropping the Nexus to $99. There would be zero reason for any company to ever drop prices if their products are selling at a certain pricepoint. That's the fundamentals of supply and demand, something some people here just can't grasp.

Actually it's $99.99.

 

[faroZ06]

Yeah no, I'm not putting much into the charts, I was just commenting on the link about Amazon dropping the Nexus to $99. There would be zero reason for any company to ever drop prices if their products are selling at a certain pricepoint. That's the fundamentals of supply and demand, something some people here just can't grasp.

I know what your argument was, and I agree. You can tell that something is horrible when the seller wants to give it to you so badly. Either that, or they're overpriced due to expensive hardware and production (the Xoom for example).

 

[samcraig]

Yeah no, I'm not putting much into the charts, I was just commenting on the link about Amazon dropping the Nexus to $99. There would be zero reason for any company to ever drop prices if their products are selling at a certain pricepoint. That's the fundamentals of supply and demand, something some people here just can't grasp.

Manufacturers of Android phones should follow Apple's model a little more closely. You can have different form factors (but limited) - but they shouldn't deliver a new phone every 2/6/8 months but rather yearly. I believe Motorola is going to start that type of cycle. We'll see.

But as long as there's a new Android phone of the week (and I am NOT referring to any phone as an iPhone killer or wannabe - just new phone/new specs) sales will never reach even an iota of the iPhone.

It's a no brainer because depending what week you sign up - many people pick the best "phone of the week" or they choose the one that's on sale. Either way - with a new model coming out all the time, there's simply no way to grab enough of an audience for any one phone

 

[faroZ06]

Manufacturers of Android phones should follow Apple's model a little more closely. You can have different form factors (but limited) - but they shouldn't deliver a new phone every 2/6/8 months but rather yearly. I believe Motorola is going to start that type of cycle. We'll see.

But as long as there's a new Android phone of the week (and I am NOT referring to any phone as an iPhone killer or wannabe - just new phone/new specs) sales will never reach even an iota of the iPhone.

It's a no brainer because depending what week you sign up - many people pick the best "phone of the week" or they choose the one that's on sale. Either way - with a new model coming out all the time, there's simply no way to grab enough of an audience for any one phone

They're trying to show off their customization and diversity by making a whole bunch of Android-running models. Plus, Google is giving Android to a bunch of phone makers, where Apple is making iPhones by themselves. The Android strategy is really bad, and Google bought Motorola Mobility, so it seems like they are trying to do what Apple does and make the software AND hardware.

Meanwhile, if you buy a Droid, you are getting Google Java-based software running on middleware and hardware that is probably really junky. It's like Windows minus the expandability with even more complexity (software, hardware, and carrier all different) and with some more ease for developing software. For a smartphone, you want it to at least be made completely by one company, even though the carrier differences usually produce some annoyances.

 

[Taz Mangus]

I know what your argument was, and I agree. You can tell that something is horrible when the seller wants to give it to you so badly. Either that, or they're overpriced due to expensive hardware and production (the Xoom for example).

I suspect that when Samsung saw the Apple sales figures they wanted to hedge their bets on this quarter by taking a loss on the Galaxy Nexus in hopes that they would get their shipped figures above Apple again. When you are as large as Samsung you can afford to write off a loss on something like the Galaxy Nexus.

----------

Manufacturers of Android phones should follow Apple's model a little more closely. You can have different form factors (but limited) - but they shouldn't deliver a new phone every 2/6/8 months but rather yearly. I believe Motorola is going to start that type of cycle. We'll see.

But as long as there's a new Android phone of the week (and I am NOT referring to any phone as an iPhone killer or wannabe - just new phone/new specs) sales will never reach even an iota of the iPhone.

It's a no brainer because depending what week you sign up - many people pick the best "phone of the week" or they choose the one that's on sale. Either way - with a new model coming out all the time, there's simply no way to grab enough of an audience for any one phone

Apple learned their lesson about licensing their product to third party vendors. It was a mess as they could not control the quality of the product.

 

[samcraig]

I suspect that when Samsung saw the Apple sales figures they wanted to hedge their bets on this quarter by taking a loss on the Galaxy Nexus in hopes that they would get their shipped figures above Apple again. When you are as large as Samsung you can afford to write off a loss on something like the Galaxy Nexus.

----------



Apple learned their lesson about licensing their product to third party vendors. It was a mess as they could not control the quality of the product.

I am not arguing about quality of product. I have several friends who have Android phones and they perform very well and for some, rival the iPhone. That's all subjective anyway.

I am talking strict product cycles. If there's a new Android "top of the line" phone every 2-4 weeks, that doesn't bode well for any ONE model. Choice is great. But you don't need 15 new phones a year from EACH manufacturer. It's not about quality. It's quantity.

 

[BaldiMac]

Would you gentlemen please stop cherry-picking my sentences to support your claims?

Cherry picking? I responded to part of your claim, and did not address it directly to your post. I responded to other parts in other posts.

As for the ATT numbers above, since they include activations of iPhones that were passed down or sold to others, we'd have to do deeper analysis to get a more accurate number. (Verizon also reports "activations", not "sales". Is this an Apple requirement ?)

Not sure why this is relevant.

Of course, to some people, simply stating an important fact like that makes me "negative towards Apple", when in fact, what I'm really negative towards is laziness, ignorance and not questioning / thinking about what we read or are told.

(I also get accused of being negative towards Apple every time I point out that such and such a patent doesn't mean what the press thinks it does. Some people seem to value drama over facts, and take it personally if their myths are mistaken.)

I have never accused you of that, so please save it for another post.

Again, not one person has come back with any good reason to be surprised that the combination of 120 million larger direct customer base, the free 3GS, and especially the delayed 4S, would easily add up to 7 million more sales during the holidays than last year with none of those contributing factors.

So you were not surprised by 7 million more? Almost triple? The actual number of activations was 11.8 million plus Sprint. Up from 4.1 million.

Again, if you are saying it's not surprising because Apple is executing so well, that's one thing. But if you are implying that any other company would have the same results given those factors with any random product, its just ridiculous.

And, as has been pointed out multiple times, Apple did not add 120 million potential customers to it's market. It only added those customers who did not have access to AT&T but do have access to Verizon and Sprint. Apple simply made the iPhone more attractive to people who prefer Verizon and Sprint.

 

[KnightWRX]

Looks like there is already a fire sale on the just released Galaxy Nexus.

What fire sale ? This is simply a carrier subsidy, to get the 99.99$ price, you need to get a contract with Verizon. By your logic, the iPhone 4S is also on fire sale, you can get it for 0$ at O2 UK :

http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/iphonetariffs/



The lack of logic around here is astounding. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good bashing. Why some people are so interested in products they do not own always baffles me.

 

[voonyx]

What fire sale ? This is simply a carrier subsidy, to get the 99.99$ price, you need to get a contract with Verizon. By your logic, the iPhone 4S is also on fire sale, you can get it for 0$ at O2 UK :

http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/iphonetariffs/



The lack of logic around here is astounding. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good bashing. Why some people are so interested in products they do not own always baffles me.

The difference is it was always $0 at O2, it wasn't dropped to $0 because it's not selling (which is clearly what's happening here). If it was selling at it's original pricepoint at Amazon ($299 or something), there would be no reason for them to drop the price. Supply and demand. But let's not let econ 101 get in the way of what you think is happening.

 

[DeathChill]

On a related note: the idea that the more you pay monthly the cheaper the initial phone cost is. Carriers everywhere should do that.

 

[dgree03]

Again, if you are saying it's not surprising because Apple is executing so well, that's one thing. But if you are implying that any other company would have the same results given those factors with any random product, its just ridiculous.

And, as has been pointed out multiple times, Apple did not add 120 million potential customers to it's market. It only added those customers who did not have access to AT&T but do have access to Verizon and Sprint. Apple simply made the iPhone more attractive to people who prefer Verizon and Sprint.

Can you ever be wrong?

I agree with samcraig and kdarling, it is NOT surprising to me at all to see the number of iPhone sales increase as much as it did. Its impressive but not surprising.

You seem to be dismissing the fact that somehow, someway apple saw it fit to open the phone on more carriers. If they weren't expecting a major difference in iPhone sales, then why do it?

According you to those 130million customers had access to the iPhone since 2007? So when apple 4s goes on sale in china, do you not expect a big increase in sales? Or are you going to argue that "they had access to the iPhone all along"

I have access to every carrier too to get any phone but there are many factors that would prevent me from switching, none of which have to do with reception.

"It only added those customers who did not have access to AT&T but do have access to Verizon and Sprint. "

Who would meet that criteria? Rural America? Where does Verizon have advantages over att or sprint or vice versa?

Again, why even open sales at all in other countries, Apple could just release in the USA any GSM 850mhz iPhone and have it compatible with the world?

----------

The difference is it was always $0 at O2, it wasn't dropped to $0 because it's not selling (which is clearly what's happening here). If it was selling at it's original pricepoint at Amazon ($299 or something), there would be no reason for them to drop the price. Supply and demand. But let's not let econ 101 get in the way of what you think is happening.

Then what is the incentive to have the iPhone start at zero? By your logic they must be afraid that it wont sell at $99, $199, $299?

 

[voonyx]

Then what is the incentive to have the iPhone start at zero? By your logic they must be afraid that it wont sell at $99, $199, $299?

Is that my logic? Did I say Amazon dropped the price because they're afraid it won't sell? No...they dropped the price because they know it doesn't sell at that pricepoint. The difference between that and O2's offering is that O2 offered that as an incentive to get new customers and that's how it's been since the beginning. They didn't start at $199, and then say "Oh this is selling awesome at this pricepoint, let's lower the price!!" Are you suggesting that if O2 sold the iPhone at $199, they'd have trouble selling it and would be forced to lower the price in less then 2 months? Come on, be serious. The phone is dropping in price because it's not selling. What by your logic is the reason it's dropped? Cuz Amazon was making a crapload of money off the phones and then went against all economic logic and decided "hey let's do our customers a favor"?

If it's how it's always been, it's a subsidy. If it started out at $299, and then a month later its $99, it's because of supply and demand forcing them to give them a subsidy. You can really argue this?

Can you ever be wrong?

 

[dgree03]

Is that my logic? Did I say Amazon dropped the price because they're afraid it won't sell? No...they dropped the price because they know it doesn't sell at that pricepoint. The difference between that and O2's offering is that O2 offered that as an incentive to get new customers and that's how it's been since the beginning. They didn't start at $199, and then say "Oh this is selling awesome at this pricepoint, let's lower the price!!" Are you suggesting that if O2 sold the iPhone at $199, they'd have trouble selling it and would be forced to lower the price in less then 2 months? Come on, be serious. The phone is dropping in price because it's not selling. What by your logic is the reason it's dropped? Cuz Amazon was making a crapload of money off the phones and then went against all economic logic and decided "hey let's do our customers a favor"?

If it's how it's always been, it's a subsidy. If it started out at $299, and then a month later its $99, it's because of supply and demand forcing them to give them a subsidy. You can really argue this?

Can you ever be wrong?

Actually upon further research it seem that is O2's overall strategy. They price every phone with an option to get it for free. But it all depends on the price point of the service plan you get.

iPhone seems to need one of the highest services plans in order for a customer to get it free(Along with the Galaxy Nexus, I might add). So the fact they are selling it for free doesn't denote not being able to sale it.

amazon dropping the prices is a move to sell more units. What their reason is I do not know, because this is common practice for Letstalk, Wirefly, and Amazon. They also all have a seperate cancellation penalty on top of the one you might incur from the service provider. This is probably how they can drop the price and still get all the money

 

[BaldiMac]

Can you ever be wrong?

Of course. No problem admitting when I am. But I disagree that record sales are a foregone conclusion just because you delay your product three months, add two carriers, and release it during the holiday quarter.

I agree with samcraig and kdarling, it is NOT surprising to me at all to see the number of iPhone sales increase as much as it did. Its impressive but not surprising.

Again, if that's because of how well Apple has been executing, I'll say you are a super analyst. At least retroactively. But if you are saying that given the factors that kdarling discussed, any smartphone would have seen iPhone like growth, I think you are wrong.

You seem to be dismissing the fact that somehow, someway apple saw it fit to open the phone on more carriers. If they weren't expecting a major difference in iPhone sales, then why do it?

According you to those 130million customers had access to the iPhone since 2007? So when apple 4s goes on sale in china, do you not expect a big increase in sales? Or are you going to argue that "they had access to the iPhone all along"

I have access to every carrier too to get any phone but there are many factors that would prevent me from switching, none of which have to do with reception.

"It only added those customers who did not have access to AT&T but do have access to Verizon and Sprint. "

Who would meet that criteria? Rural America? Where does Verizon have advantages over att or sprint or vice versa?

Again, why even open sales at all in other countries, Apple could just release in the USA any GSM 850mhz iPhone and have it compatible with the world?

You are completely mischaracterizing what I said. I've specifically said that releasing to more carriers is a huge part of the increase in sales in the US. Increased distribution and carrier choice are extremely important, but only if the demand is there.

Again, Verizon and Sprint customers, for the most part, have always been abled to buy an iPhone just as easily as AT&T customers. They would just have to switch carriers.

Customers in China do not currently have access to the iPhone 4S in their local markets.

 

[voonyx]

Actually upon further research it seem that is O2's overall strategy. They price every phone with an option to get it for free. But it all depends on the price point of the service plan you get.

iPhone seems to need one of the highest services plans in order for a customer to get it free(Along with the Galaxy Nexus, I might add). So the fact they are selling it for free doesn't denote not being able to sale it.

amazon dropping the prices is a move to sell more units. What their reason is I do not know, because this is common practice for Letstalk, Wirefly, and Amazon. They also all have a seperate cancellation penalty on top of the one you might incur from the service provider. This is probably how they can drop the price and still get all the money

So you're saying they might be having tremendous sales at the original pricepoint, and then to get more customers they just haphazardly drop the price 66% even though they were having no problems at the original price? This is what you're really saying or implying?

 

[samcraig]

Again, Verizon and Sprint customers, for the most part, have always been abled to buy an iPhone just as easily as AT&T customers. They would just have to switch carriers.

What gets me is that you keep asserting this (the latest with "they would just have to switch carriers" as if that's no big deal. As if they weren't in a contract. Or that they had one or more other reasons why they stayed with that carrier.

Obviously whatever their reasons for NOT buying an iPhone before it was on their carrier was stronger than they reason to switch.

Again - technically you are correct. Just as it is technically correct that anyone in the world (GSM accessible) could have already bought an unlocked iPhone - but for some reason you want to dismiss that because it would involve traveling to a different country to buy it? I'd call that a decent obstacle. Just like switching carriers is a decent obstacle.

The problem with your assertion is that it's not based in the real world. "Just having to switch carriers" is obviously not a real world scenario for enough people that they didn't. Yet - when the iPhone WAS available on their carrier of choice - BAM! Sales. Not a shocker at all.