I didnt ask why AT&T didn't report sales out of their distribution channels.I asked why they didn't report their OWN sales figures.I'm sure they can add.
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.
Only 146,000 iPhone activations Opening Weekend
- Thread starter Grimace
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I didnt ask why AT&T didn't report sales out of their distribution channels.I asked why they didn't report their OWN sales figures.I'm sure they can add.
How is that disappointing. I'll repeat what I said before:
Using the same extrapolation technique that's 233,600 – 292,000 phones for a 48-hour weekend. That's incredible, and it is in line with rumors.
Are you kidding me? Just wait 1-2 years, when everyone who currently owns a cell phone is out of contract. Watch the iPhone sales numbers over this period. Only the die-hard will pay $175 or so to break their current contract. WHen other people get out of contracts, see what happens.
I find it nutso that people are trying to gauge iPhone's success after 2 days of sales for a TOTALLY NEW PRODUCT CATEGORY for a product that is INHERENTLY NOT AN IMPULSE PURCHASE, when we should be thinking 2-5 years out. 5 years from now, Apple OWNS portable communications/media. Want to argue against this? Let's dig up this post in 5 years -- I'll probably still be a forum member. Gentleman's bet, even.
Their accounting process may only allow them to report those sales for that previous quarter if they were activated. If they talk sales vs. activations in the same period, people can figure out quickly 2% activation problems is way out of line, and they look bad.
But all of this is irrelevant -- in five years we will laugh about this thread, just like we laugh about those original iPod threads today.
Who cares how many iPhones were activated the first two days!
Let's count how many iPhone (all models) are activated by this time next year.
The phone rocks and the whole industry knows it. As far as the stock value, one bad day doesn't define anything. The market moves in geologic time. This ain't global warming. One analyst or big money manager pee's his pants over ATT's comments and a bunch of the Wall Street lemmings panic.
I think Apple will have much positive to report tomorrow on many fronts. Keep the big picture in focus. This iceberg is huge.
Let's count how many iPhone (all models) are activated by this time next year.
The phone rocks and the whole industry knows it. As far as the stock value, one bad day doesn't define anything. The market moves in geologic time. This ain't global warming. One analyst or big money manager pee's his pants over ATT's comments and a bunch of the Wall Street lemmings panic.
I think Apple will have much positive to report tomorrow on many fronts. Keep the big picture in focus. This iceberg is huge.
actually, many people I've talked to don't want phones that do it all anymore.
even those that have smartphones/blackberries now.
especially at these prices. Lower priced iphones might draw some folks, but I believe only apple die hards will buy iphones.
I also don't think people like the idea of switching their carrier just to get a phone. it's sort of, elitist, to remove the decision making from the consumer.
From what I can tell, most people chose a carrier because of their plans and reputation, not so they can get a specific phone.
Add to that the fact that you have to use itunes only for music, and that convinces most people the iphone is neat, but hardly worth it. (notice how universal pulled out of itunes? I smell a revolt coming)
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
rob, did you see long lines waiting to buy an iphone on days 4-7? Did you see people in sleeping bags waiting for stores to open so they could definitely get one of them on days 3+?
The visible buyer frenzy was in those first 3 days. Activations gives us a peek at what should be a good chunk of those buyers after 2 days.
Of course, this doesn't include those that ordered online and were willing to wait what, at the time was billed as "2-4 weeks". And this doesn't incorporate people who bought the thing but then chose not to actually activate it right away, nor Sunday+ buyers.
But I personally would have expected considerably more than 146K activations in 2 days based on how heated up the excitement was at the time. And I certainly wouldn't extrapolate numbers the way you did when all of the visible frenzied buying seemed to dry up by about day 3.
In fairness, many locations ran out of stock on day 3, but I haven't seen stories about nor actual physical lines since.
The visible buyer frenzy was in those first 3 days. Activations gives us a peek at what should be a good chunk of those buyers after 2 days.
Of course, this doesn't include those that ordered online and were willing to wait what, at the time was billed as "2-4 weeks". And this doesn't incorporate people who bought the thing but then chose not to actually activate it right away, nor Sunday+ buyers.
But I personally would have expected considerably more than 146K activations in 2 days based on how heated up the excitement was at the time. And I certainly wouldn't extrapolate numbers the way you did when all of the visible frenzied buying seemed to dry up by about day 3.
In fairness, many locations ran out of stock on day 3, but I haven't seen stories about nor actual physical lines since.
I feel like most people have few strong feelings about any carrier. Whoever sells them what seems like a good plan and decent phone while they're sauntering through the mall... It's not like there is a ton of differentiation between the products being offered at the carrier level, at least in a reasonably urban area.
If you're really into AAPL they went down 8.81 pts. today.I'd buy early in the morning because it's going to go back up to around 140 by the end of the day tomorrow.
It's a somewhat specious argument because wireless spectrum is a much more bountiful (though by no means infinite) resource than physical roads. How can you run redundant, competing toll or government-financed roads along very limited physical rights of way? GSM and CDMA/TDMA all run on different frequencies within the same airspace.
The problem with making a handset that supports both GSM and TDMA is one of complexity and cost (I believe Nokia has one handset that does GSM/TDMA, and presumably Verizon's one "World-ready" Blackberry model does as well). You'll have a bigger, more expensive phone with worse battery life in exchange for the freedom to shop for carriers. And don't forget they use different radios for EVDO, EDGE, and whatever other data networks need to be supported. You can't viably fit all of that into one compact device, and Apple would be loathe to make different versions that can be confusing to customers. Remember when iPods came in separate Mac and Windows versions?
The American wireless market is extremely dysfunctional, but it's silly to think that Apple alone can cut through the morass of decades of bad decisions primarily driven by marketing and profit-taking, not by technology.
Well, I love VT and all man (I'm from MA), but down here in the Baltimore/DC region where I now live, most people I know really dig on "convergence devices." I think this is true of most urban areas.
And every time I've switched cell carriers was for a phone. In fact, I have never kept a carrier longer than single contract, and maybe several months of month-to-month billing once the contract was up. It's always been a phone that encourages me to switch carriers.
But again, this is all meaningless -- lets talk in 3-5 years.
Now let's get this straight once and for all; I have seen this stated many times before and it is just plain false. Apple first approached Verizon to market the iPhone, and Verizon ONLY uses CDMA! So CDMA was Apple's first choice here. They only went with GSM after Verizon turned them down.
Except that in the early days of iPod, it wasn't $100-300, it was much more, some as expensive as the iPhone (iPod photo $599).
Prices came down, and sales went up. Same will happen with the iPhone. Since supplies are initially constrained, why not start pricing on the high side to take advantage of the people who will buy at any price?
Much of the iPhone hype does come from people seeing the unit and playing with it. As the price comes down, more and more people will give into the urge. And don't forget, there will likely be simpler/cheaper iPhones in the future, also like the iPods did.
Could you do that the first day the first BB was released? What did they cost when they first shipped?
Cutting edge products command higher prices. BB did when it was new, now that it's years old, people aren't willing to pay a huge price for it. Once the early adopters have paid the intro price, the price will come down.
4% of its stock price, not earnings. And that takes it back to where it was, what, July 12th? Seriously, when the stock went up over 40% in two months, is giving back 4-6% that big a deal?
It just looks like a good buying opportunity to me.
The planet where the cost of phones is subsidized by monthly usage fees. You don't think profit is being made even when they give you a phone for FREE?
They were not sold out here in South Carolina. You could walk into a store and just buy one.....
Peter
Some recurring themes ... and errors
People waiting to activate is but one variable. Another variable is when exactly AT&T logs the activation as being fully complete on their books.
It has significance, but as a minimum, not a maximum. I'll explain in a moment.
Yes, it must be more then 146,000 iPhones. That's what most posters aren't seeing.
Exactly.
Now let's take a step back and look at this question from a "Set Theory" perspective...
As of 1 July 2007:
A) Apple has produced "N" iPhones.
B) Apple had (N-M) iPhones available in the USA to be shipped to retail outlets;
C) Apple had ((N-M)-O) iPhones available for "brick&mortar" retail outlets;
D) Apple actually sold (((N-M)-O)-P) iPhones before the deadline hour;
E) Consumers actually opened the package on ((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q) iPhones before the deadline hour;
F) Consumers actually tried to register the A&T Service on (((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R) iPhones before the deadline;
G) A&T Service Registration was successful on ((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S) of these iPhones before the deadline;
H) A&T Service Registration processing was reported as completed on (((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S)-T) before the deadline;
and so on. I've probably missed a couple.
Now what A&T reported today was:
146,000 = (((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S)-T)
One equasion, eight unknowns.
If the number that you're interested in is (((N-M)-O)-P) = units sold by Apple ...and in the hands of the buyer (no web sales)...before the deadline, that number leaves Q, R, S, & T aside as unknown variables and its a certainty that these are not all zeros.
Even if we wanted to handle this as percentages and assume a 90% success rate for Q, R, S, T, what this means is:
146,000 = (((N-M)-O)-P) * .9 * .9 * .9 * .9
...which means that with these assumed values, (((N-M)-O)-P) would have been around 222K.
...and which also means that when adding in 'first day' web sales, you're looking at somewhere around (222K + "O")
-hh
From a new account, no less. Okay, we all know why you're here.
Or the people who failed Set Theory back in Linear Algebra.
People waiting to activate is but one variable. Another variable is when exactly AT&T logs the activation as being fully complete on their books.
It has significance, but as a minimum, not a maximum. I'll explain in a moment.
Yes, it must be more then 146,000 iPhones. That's what most posters aren't seeing.
Exactly.
Now let's take a step back and look at this question from a "Set Theory" perspective...
As of 1 July 2007:
A) Apple has produced "N" iPhones.
B) Apple had (N-M) iPhones available in the USA to be shipped to retail outlets;
C) Apple had ((N-M)-O) iPhones available for "brick&mortar" retail outlets;
D) Apple actually sold (((N-M)-O)-P) iPhones before the deadline hour;
E) Consumers actually opened the package on ((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q) iPhones before the deadline hour;
F) Consumers actually tried to register the A&T Service on (((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R) iPhones before the deadline;
G) A&T Service Registration was successful on ((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S) of these iPhones before the deadline;
H) A&T Service Registration processing was reported as completed on (((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S)-T) before the deadline;
and so on. I've probably missed a couple.
Now what A&T reported today was:
146,000 = (((((((N-M)-O)-P)-Q)-R)-S)-T)
One equasion, eight unknowns.
If the number that you're interested in is (((N-M)-O)-P) = units sold by Apple ...and in the hands of the buyer (no web sales)...before the deadline, that number leaves Q, R, S, & T aside as unknown variables and its a certainty that these are not all zeros.
Even if we wanted to handle this as percentages and assume a 90% success rate for Q, R, S, T, what this means is:
146,000 = (((N-M)-O)-P) * .9 * .9 * .9 * .9
...which means that with these assumed values, (((N-M)-O)-P) would have been around 222K.
...and which also means that when adding in 'first day' web sales, you're looking at somewhere around (222K + "O")
-hh
I am the first to admit that I don't understand the scalping idea, but I just checked eBay a few minutes ago for completed listings and found 36 have closed just today for over retail (some for well over and 2 at $1100) and about an equal number that were bid up well over retail but did not sell. I am amazed that so many people are paying over retail for a product that they can get at a local store. I don't get it.
It's worse. Some chinese guys are producing an iPhone lookalike. Just a normal $50 phone in a case similar to an iPhone. And it is getting bids for over $400! Some people are just stupid.
Right, Apple lost 4% of its equity. Sorry, I was half asleep earlier.
That's much higher than its earnings for the quarter, anyway (by a factor of 10, by my count).
It's actually more like 6% now.
Oh so we're in agreement that Apple doesn't make computers?
Apple is wasting resources on iPhone and robbing from its hardware/software. Apple postponed Leopard for iPhone. It's not like we're pulling this idea out of our asses or something.
I know the situation is somewhat temporary, but I'm still pissed.
So, like I said before: iPhone sales are mediocre. It didn't revolutionize the telephone. So now that we're all on the same page, let's get back to making stuff that people actually want. Let's stop siphoning resources from successful products.
Too many missing the point...
If the channel had XY units and all the X units were sold Friday and Saturday and the Y units sold by Sunday, then what expectations were not met.
They sold what they brought to market and that's that. Apple will have a field day with this when the "complete" picture is available.
That's my guess. I don't know how these analyst earn their paydays. They are blinded by what they see in data and not what is the full picture of it.
Just get that software update out Apple.
If the channel had XY units and all the X units were sold Friday and Saturday and the Y units sold by Sunday, then what expectations were not met.
They sold what they brought to market and that's that. Apple will have a field day with this when the "complete" picture is available.
That's my guess. I don't know how these analyst earn their paydays. They are blinded by what they see in data and not what is the full picture of it.
Just get that software update out Apple.
sidebar
Slughead,
quick question. What do you do that you need 3 superdrives on a single computer. Video production maybe?
just curious
Slughead,
quick question. What do you do that you need 3 superdrives on a single computer. Video production maybe?
just curious
I personally bought my phone the week after. My two roommates bought their's a couple of days after mine so that's 3 phones right there not accounted for in the quarter.
Right, Apple lost 4% of its equity. Sorry, I was half asleep earlier.
That's much higher than its earnings for the quarter, anyway (by a factor of 10, by my count).
It's actually more like 6% now.
Oh so we're in agreement that Apple doesn't make computers?
Apple is wasting resources on iPhone and robbing from its hardware/software. Apple postponed Leopard for iPhone. It's not like we're pulling this idea out of our asses or something.
I know the situation is somewhat temporary, but I'm still pissed.
So, like I said before: iPhone sales are mediocre. It didn't revolutionize the telephone. So now that we're all on the same page, let's get back to making stuff that people actually want. Let's stop siphoning resources from successful products.
LOL oh man -- talk about dictionary definition of internet forum troll. You must be kidding here, right? Trying to kill the end of your work day baiting some fanboys on the forums? S'All good, man, just want to call you out on it.
We bought one about a week ago. We wanted to touch it first. Now we haveone and wait for Apple coming out with Version 2.0. There are to many things that they missed....
Peter
Peter