Somebody is Lying

A few months ago we all heard Steve Jobs say that Apple had sold more phones than Blackberry. Of course, when you check the phrase you notice it lacks context, which type of phone?, which geography? The markets number are being manipulated left and right. The first clue of these manipulation is that they are now talking about "Smartphones". This is a no no when one talks about market share. You do not make artificial divisions of a market. People are not buying Smartphones, they are buying phones and some have more features than others. There isn't even a clear definition of Smartphones. The manipulation is made to be able to claim whatever you want: Apple is beating RIM, Apple has 16.6% of the "Smartphone" market, and Apple has 12.9% of the "Smartphone" market, behind RIM which we ignore how much it has, but it has grown tremendously. Sounds fishy? Welcome to the Smartphoney market. All those numbers are baloney and the presentation is designed to push Apple stock up and push RIM stock down. The reality is clear, Apple has almost no presence in the real market of Cell Phones. It has less than 0.04% of the real market, while RIM is the number 5 manufacturer with 2.01% and is poised to surpass Motorola. Look at that chart and ask yourself: Which stock should be increasing in price? The FTC should investigate this clear manipulation of the markets. (Read comments by Martin Hill).

Comments

Posted by  
on December 4, 2008, 2:42 pm
Oh, please. Do your homework before spewing out nonsense.

Apple is competing only in the smartphone market. So why are you even mentioning the overall market for handphones? Saying there's no such market as a smartphone segment is disingenuous at best, especially when the MARKET ITSELF recognises the distinctions.

As for the stats... yes, RIM overall is still ahead of Apple, but last quarter was the first time sales of the iPhone overtook that of the BB's. Doesn't mean Apple has MORE overall marketshare... yet. Just means for THAT quarter, those were Apple's overall marketshare in the smartphone segment.

Nothing to lie about there. The context of the numbers are there... if you want to read it yourself... now who's "manipulating" the figures?

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 4, 2008, 4:52 pm
Please read, people do not buy smartphones, they buy phones.

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 4, 2008, 4:58 pm
By the way, you don't understand the definition of market share. Is not the same as installed base. Look it up in Wikipedia.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on December 4, 2008, 3:07 pm
Personally, I think "market share" is a pretty useless statistic anyway.

For example, Apple has 0.04% of the world-wide cellular phone market. So? What does this actually mean? To drag out the dreaded car analogy, Ferrari has a very low market share. This doesn't mean I don't want to own one. So, from a consumer standpoint, market-share means next to nothing. Some of the most desirable products in the world have low market-share.

From a P&L standpoint, market-share doesn't really relate to revenue and profit, either. Apple makes good money selling iPhones for $399 with thick profit margins. Nokia makes good money selling phones for $49 with thin profit margins. Both are legitimate ways of doing business. I can be profitable or unprofitable with a low or high market-share.

About the only place where market-share is interesting is for ancillary companies. Consider all the accessories for the iPod compared with, say, the Zune. If I want to make, say, a waterproof box so Scuba Divers can listen to their favorite tunes while swimming along the reef, I'm probably going to make sure it fits their iPod and not care so much if it doesn't work with a Zune. Of course, I might want to look a little deeper and see what kind of music player most Scuba Divers use. Perhaps they're all Zune fans, even though the most popular player among all demographic groups is the iPod.

I tend to agree with you about the definition of a "smart phone," however. We'll all pretty much agree that the iPhone is "smart phone", that phones from RIM are "smart phones", etc. But what actually denotes this category is left up to the researcher which, of course, means that the statistics are dubious at best.

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 4, 2008, 4:54 pm
The problem is not whether market share is relevant or not, the problem is they are using market share to lie. It is impossible for Apple to have simultaneously 16.6% and 12.9% of the same market.

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on December 4, 2008, 3:48 pm
Smartphone is not an artificial distinction. Or, maybe it is. Maybe also "notebook" computers are an artificial distinction, since they are all the same as regular computers except that they have the added feature of being untethered and carried around. So all the analysts who measure notebook market share are also engaging in phantom accounting and share price manipulation.

Nice try. At least you kept your flame bait civil

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 4, 2008, 5:00 pm
The proof that is artificial is that in some numbers Apple has 16.6% of the share and in others 12.9%. Why? Because they define smartphone differently. The comparison with Notebooks is not on target, Netbooks will be better (have you heard of a "Netbook market share"? ). And still you get market share numbers of Computers, not Notebooks, desktops, etc.

I find it interesting that I have gotten 3 comments in such a short time. My blog is not that popular... I guess I touch a nerve somewhere...

Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on December 4, 2008, 6:48 pm
Smartphones...phones. Aren't we laboring under the same ide as:

"All bulldogs are dogs, but all dogs aren't bulldogs."?



Reply to this comment
Posted by  
on December 4, 2008, 10:40 pm
Crap for brains, you do realize that cut either way, smartphones or just cellphones, Apple shipped more last quarter than Blackberry?

And, what you consider artificial distinction is not by most. YOU are in the minority, and a tiny minority at that. Apple is NOT the one making any market distinction, the smartphone market existed BEFORE Apple entered it.

Third, Apple's comments were made in its earnings conference call. They ARE legally liable for their statements. If you have some legal quibble, I'm sure the SEC would be all ears, before they laugh you out of the office.

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 7:39 am
Actually, that's exactly what I don't realize. Since different reports have different results. Do you even know how to read?

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 1:58 am
What a load of hooey Alfredo. You've touched a nerve as your blog has been linked to from macsurfer.com and quite a few informed iPhone users don't agree with your conclusions. :-)

I call foul on your statement that the iPhone only grabbed 0.04% of worldwide mobile phone shipments. The total number of mobile phones sales in Q3 2008 were 299 million according to IDC and Cellular News.

That means that the iPhone 3G with sales of 6.9 million grabbed over 2.3% of the global cell phone market. RIM Blackberry in contrast only managed 6.1 million.

(why is your blog rejecting my posting saying it is spam? I've had to break it up into sections and remove all link references)

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 7:41 am
You try to use HTML and I don't permit it. Blackberry has 2.01% of the global market of cellphones and tha's a lot more than 6.1 million according to your own numbers. You can pick and chose to believe some numbers and disbelieve others in the same report.

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 7:53 pm
What are you talking about? Blackberry has 2.01% of the global cellphone market. 2.01% of 299 million = 6.01 million phones. A perfect match.

Are you saying that IDC is lying and the worldwide sales of cellphones in Q3 2008 is actually far greater than 299 million?

Apple stated in their financial conference that they have sold 6.9 million iPhones which equals over 2.3% of the global cell phone market.

What is your argument? Are you saying Apple is lying and they didn't really sell 6.9 million but in actual fact only 0.04% of 299 million which equals only 119 thousand iPhones?!!!

Now I can understand variation of say 10-20% between the figures put out by Gartner an Canalys, but your 0.04% figure is out by two orders of magnitude.

Don't you realise the 0.04% figure that you plucked from getjar.com (a Java games website) is referring to the percentage of phones visiting that particular site, NOT the global marketshare of phones manufactured. Considering that the iPhone doesn't even run Java, I'm surprised it even showed up at 0.04%.

I think you'd better clean up your comprehension of statistics before you accuse anyone else of lying. *sheesh*

-Mart

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 7:56 pm
By the way, I didn't have any HTML in my comments. Your blog rejects any URL that is entered in the comments making it impossible to post links as reference.

-Mart

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 2:00 am
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 7:47 am
I never said it was Apple who was lying, that just your bias as a fan boy. The rule about markets is that you don't make distinctions and segments unless people shop in that segment. For example, you talk about sport cars if you believe that people that buy sport cars do not buy other cars. Market share only make (some) sense if you keep the market whole. When you use the distinction as a way to lie, then something is fishy. What it is clear to me is that Smartphones do not have as clear a definition as Sport car, and hence people use to lie about it. And, as you can see, I have published a lot of Apple related opinions that Macsurfer didn't pick upon. This is the first in that I get the force of the Apple fanboys unleash. Whoever said that the average mac user is smarter than the normal computer user, has to revise that statement. You guys have problem with reading and arithmetic!

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 8:51 pm
Here we go again.

Because both RIM and Apple only make smartphones, it doesn't matter if you compare their share of the smartphone market or the overall cell phone market. The ratio will remain the same.

(apart from the normal variation between different analyst's figures due to differing measurement techniques)

Your point is invalid and no-one is lying apart from you.

-Mart

Reply to this comment
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 9:34 pm
It matters because the definition of smartphone is not clear. And that's how you get different numbers in different places. They count different things. Which is my point.

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 8:35 pm
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 9:02 pm
let see if I understand. The 0.04% figure from getjar is phones visiting that site, but the 2.01% for Blackberry from the same site is Blackberry market share! Yeah, I see... I am the brick wall... Two figures same site, different meanings. Makes perfect sense fanboy. Please stay away.

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 10:00 pm
Posted by aoctavio  
on December 5, 2008, 9:39 pm
Minor thing. You are mixing different numbers for different periods. Q3 08 is not the same as November 08, if you read correctly you will see your error. But I guess the truth is not your goal.

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 10:10 pm
No, I am not using any figures from the getjar.com java games site. Those figures do not represent worldwide marketshare as I explain above. As the Network World quote demonstrates, all my figures refer to Q3 2008.

But I guess that obscuring the truth is your goal.

-Mart

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 10:14 pm
Sorry,
Didn't mean to descend to insults as well. You're just dragging me down to that level and I'm getting weary.

-Mart

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 5, 2008, 11:09 pm
Posted by   www
on May 7, 2010, 2:24 am
The <a href="http://lowest-rate-loans.com/topics/personal-loans">lowest-rate-loans.co
m</a> seem to be essential for guys, which would like to start their own organization. As a fact, that's not really hard to receive a secured loan.

Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on October 9, 2010, 10:07 pm
Thanks a lot for sharing this information with us all, it has really helped me that's for sure.


Reply to this comment
Posted by   www
on December 1, 2010, 4:26 am


 
Name

Email

URL


Remember me?

Comments


Verification code
Verification code