30K per day is 10M in the first year. Wouldn't that be considered a runaway success for almost any electronics product?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Orders Estimated to Average 30,000 Per Day in U.S. After Initial Surge
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
30K per day is 10M in the first year. Wouldn't that be considered a runaway success for almost any electronics product?
No I meant the Wii. If you look at the chart provided by bbeagle, the Wii launched in Nov 2006. I'm approximating, but the 360 sold 800K, the Wii sold 500K, and the PS3 sold 400K. December is when the Wii's number exploded, not the launch date.
Maybe I should be a bit more clear. I'm strictly talking about the raw numbers, not the excitement level.
You're completely right. Apologies. I've had 10 family members in my home for a week.
Shouldn't have taken that out on you.Ugh. No, they are not synonyms at all. The only thing they have in common is that the truth is not known.
Estimates are a "guess" as to what has actually happened. So, all these graphs of April 10 through yesterday are estimates of orders/shipments/ what-have-you.
Projections are a "guess" as to what will happen, and are based on what has happened already and/or on other criteria, to predict the future. So, graphs of sales in June and July and farther out are projections.
They are as much synonyms as "past" and "future" are synonyms.
pro·jec·tion
prəˈjekSH(ə)n/
noun
1. an estimate or forecast of a future situation or trend based on a study of present ones.
"plans based on projections of slow but positive growth"
synonyms: forecast, prediction, prognosis, outlook, expectation, estimate
I think it's normal to consider the source company and surrounding publicity.
For instance, most people would consider the one million Pebbles sold over its first year, with little real publicity, to be a successful Kickstarter project from a (at the time) tiny startup company.
OTOH, one million sold in a first year from Apple or Samsung would be considered far less successful, because they're bigger, more established, and can get far more publicity.
As for ten million, that would surely be considered a "runaway success" for Pebble even now, but not sure that same high praise could be applied to Apple, who alone holds all the cards for a deeply iPhone compatible watch and thus should have a huge advantage in desirability.
In other words, for Apple, it would take more than a relatively small fraction of possible buyers getting one, to be a "runaway success", IMHO.
Our house is full of Apple hardware but nobody in our house is least bit of interested in getting an Apple Watch.
This is the first Apple product that doesn't stir up any desire in me to own.
For a dress up watch, I rather wear my Hublot, Bvlgari, Omega or Cartier and for sports use my Casio G-Shock or Garmin serve my needs better than an Apple watch.
I wonder if this attitude is so far off the main stream
If it is mainstream, then I am not part of it. I own 2 Cartier watches, one 18k including the band, a Dunhill, a Movado Tungsten and have owned a Rolex President in 18k, a DeLaneau in 18k, various 18k Cartier watches and an 18k Van Cleef and Arpels version of the Tank. I love my Apple watch. It does things none of the rest of them do. The only watch I put on these days instead of the Apple is the Cartier Panther as it is beautiful to look at even after 15 years and feels like wearing nothing at all. Of course I say to each his own but the Apple watch based on the 1904 Cartier Santos (which I also have owned) is a wonderful piece clearly not foe everybody.
I know you meant the Wii. You got it wrong though. The Wii's sales exploded right from day 1 and didn't slow down too much for a couple of years
Based on this chart, the Wii sales exploded in December, not in November when it launched.
So you think Cook is a bit of a reluctant promoter? I didn't pick up on that, but you may be right. Certainly it makes sense that he wouldn't like the Edition pricing (illogical - like buying a Ferrari with a non-upgradable 4 cylinder air-cooled engine).
I just thought he was the one behind the product and the project as a whole (as opposed to the details and design/fashion). He convinced me that he thinks it's a great product, and that he was behind the huge amount of time and resources they must have invested.
Perhaps it's billed as their "most personal" product because it's one of the least original.
Um you forgot one thing. Supply constraints. Nintendo in the first month sold every one they could make. The supply only increased a month later to allow for more sales.
Um, I forgot nothing. But you did: context. Supply constraints have absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the original OP. That topic was a comparison between the launch of the Apple watch and the Wii. Within that context, the launches were polar opposites. The Wii launched with a smaller volume and it grew tremendously. The Apple watch launched tremendously and the volume fell. bbeagle tried to shade the comparison by using the Wii's best holiday sales and the following month to make the Apple watch launch similar. I said that's BS, and it is.
Again, the Wii's launch compared to it's follow up month was comparatively benign. There's no denying that. The reasons for that were never up for discussion since they weren't relevant to the topic. The data is what it is.
What you're talking about is a different discussion altogether. You're talking about the popularity of the Wii. I'm not. Yes, the Wii was hugely popular from day one. If they had more, they would have sold more. They didn't and they didn't.
Well I guess I got it wrong. You didn't forget. You just ignored it.
I was around the the Wii launch. At the time it was huge. Impossible to get any anywhere for a long while. And also you could not pre-order as many as you wanted and wait for them to be shipped like you could the Apple watch. The Wii pre-orders were for the stock they'd have in store day 1. That's it. If you wanted a Wii and missed out on shipment 1 you pre-ordered for shipment 2. So it was two different shipments and two different pre-orders. The Apple watch was totally different as you know.
The initial months for both were the same, both sold lots and were constrained by supply. The 2nd month, where was no Apple watch orders as they were all already ordered month 1 and just send in month 2. The Wii on the other hand you had to order again if you missed out on shipment, for the 2nd shipment, so you ordered for month 2 and got it month 2.
Hard to explain but hopefully you understand. The launches for both products were relatively the same in this context. The difference is how the orders were taken in the different context of the different shipments. The Apple watch was one order for every shipment. The Wii was a different order for each shipment. That's why the numbers are different. When people get their products will be the same but when they ordered them is rather different.
It's not hard to explain. I understood it completely. You just ignored the context of the original discussion and supplanted it with your own: "The launches for both products were relatively the same in this context." Your context. Not the context of the original discussion.
What you continue to ignore is that wasn't the context of the OP. Not sure how you think I wasn't around for the launch of the Wii. I still have it. I know how hard it was to get. It was popular and hard to get. I get it. Still not relevant to the examination of the numbers from the chart.
"That's why the numbers are different. When people get their products will be the same but when they ordered them is rather different."
I'm trying to say this without sounding snarky cuz that's not my intent. Why are you having a hard time understanding that "why the numbers look that way" wasn't/isn't a part of the original discussion? Every response you make attempts to tell me why the numbers. My every response to you tries to explain that why is irrelevant to the original discussion. Why <-- see what I did there -- is that not resonating with you?
We're talking about two different topics with the same subject. We're so far off thread there's no way back. Can we just chalk it up to difference of opinion and say you won?
A lot of people here putting faith into analyst estimates using their extrapolation of only 14,000 shoppers to come to these numbers. All while Apple describes their sales as being 'fantastic' instead of touting numbers for the circle jerk which is their norm on a big product launch.
We're talking about two different topics with the same subject. We're so far off thread there's no way back. Can we just chalk it up to difference of opinion and say you won?
No. We agree to disagree. But we both won based on what we each are trying to say.