iPhone 5 opening weekend sales worse than expected


Recommended Posts

Maybe. Just maybe it is a sign that iPhone users have gotten smart instead of wasting truckloads of money breaking their contracts year after year.

Honestly I think that in the big picture those who upgrade their device every year are very much in the minority. Apple would be foolish to count on yearly upgrades for the bulk of its sales. Even among previous iPhone owners I would expect the majority to be upgrading from the 3GS or 4.

Maybe during the first week or weekend there will be a large proportion of people upgrading from the iPhone 4S, but over the course of a year or two of sales for a particular model the vast majority probably come from people who never owned an iPhone before.

Weird Wall St. Journal is saying different ( kinda )

Apple Inc. sold more than five million units of the iPhone 5 during its first three days in stores, a new record that still undershot some analysts' estimates because of supply constraints.

The company has sold out of its initial inventory
, Chief Executive Tim Cook said in a statement Monday, though most customers who pre-ordered their iPhones had their devices shipped already.

"Demand for iPhone 5 has been incredible, and we are working hard to get an iPhone 5 into the hands of every customer who wants one as quickly as possible," Mr. Cook said. "While we have sold out ...

i think Boz just does random doom and gloom searches for iPhone / Apple. in my mind i picture him with the sandwich sign saying the end is near, repent, just with an Apple logo circled with a line through it

What do you base that assumption on? That's basically the same as saying in order to develop for Android you need every possible hardware configuration. That's just sillyness. I'm sure that a lot of developers upgraded to the new iPhone (or *GASP* the new iPod since the screen resolution is the same). But many rely on the emulator that comes with xcode.

Boz is rationalizing standing in line for a new iPhone,, because " its for work "

  • Like 3

Weird Wall St. Journal is saying different ( kinda )

[/size][/size][/font][/color][/indent]

i think Boz just does random doom and gloom searches for iPhone / Apple. in my mind i picture him with the sandwich sign saying the end is near, repent, just with an Apple logo circled with a line through it

Supply doesn't affect pre-orders, only how fast they ship. That's just Apple trying to trick people into thinking there's a reason why it didn't meet some analysts' estimates. You can still order now, it just won't ship for quite a while. Did the website ever say it was actually sold out? I honestly never saw because I never paid attention, but doesn't Apple just push the wait time on shipping when they start to run out of supplies rather than stopping preorders?

Supply doesn't affect pre-orders, only how fast they ship. That's just Apple trying to trick dumb people into thinking there's a reason why it didn't meet some analysts' estimates.

analyst's estimates....

so people that have no idea the internal workings of apple's supply, and going just off past history like it doesn't change at all.

Supply doesn't affect pre-orders, only how fast they ship. That's just Apple trying to trick people into thinking there's a reason why it didn't meet some analysts' estimates. You can still order now, it just won't ship for quite a while. Did the website ever say it was actually sold out? I honestly never saw because I never paid attention, but doesn't Apple just push the wait time on shipping when they start to run out of supplies rather than stopping preorders?

As far as I know Apple does not count phones ordered but not yet shipped in their sales numbers. That's why the number was so high when they announced the preorders placed in the first 24 hours (2 million) compared to the actual sales numbers we see here for the first weekend.

So when Apple's next earnings report comes in, and they show they shattered earning records, Boz will come in and say that Apple is doomed.

Yup, it was hilarious 5 years ago and its still hilarious now.

  • Like 3

FYI, iPhone 4 first weekend sales were 1.7 million. iPhone 4S was roughly what? 4 million. iPhone 5 is being reported as roughly 5 million.

I'm not sure where the logic is coming from that Apple somehow has done worse with the iPhone 5 than previous iPhones. The data certainly doesn't support it. Maybe it is based on an emerging anti-Apple ideology. Ideologies don't need supporting information.

not saying they have done worse compared to previous iPhones sales. Boz is saying that its doom and gloom because its done worse then Some person not on apples payroll said it would do

So the 4S was a major success when it sold 4millions but the 5 is a failure because it only sold 5 millions? :/

well its a tricky thing, because people were expecting alot more people to upgrade due to being out of Contract Term for the 3G and iPhone 4, they are calling it a failure because the numbers expected were based on the people upgrading from a 3G, 3 and 4 ( not 4S ).

the problem lies on the production run, and if the people that wanted to upgrade would. because of being sold out they couldn't even if they wanted to, or wanted to and couldn't. is not considered. also iOS 6 was underwelming, and didnt bring anything new from my personal standpoint, let alone the Backlash from Maps, which may also be a cause of people holding off on the new iPhone so they dont have to deal with iOS6 Maps

IMO and this is pure IMO if i had an iPhone i would probably skip it ( iPhone 5 ), because a couple additional inches of screen space for a phone is not important to me in comparison. now i do own an iPad, i use to one a 1st gen and skipped the 2nd Gen because i didnt care about a camera and a little speed bump. but i got the 3rd gen, because of a combination of all the upgrades compared to a iPad 1G it actually was worth an upgrade. and like i said in https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1106591-ios-6-worth-the-update/ iOS6 isnt anything impressive

now its a garentee that when the iPhone comes back in stock, it will still sell like hotcakes. and people that wanted to upgrade will. and on same token people that don't think its a value enough wont.

Exactly. However, that doesn't make nearly as spectacular of a news story title.

Yeah, the REAL title for this article should be "Apple can't keep up with demand for iPhone 5!". But of course, that wouldn't make any sense to our resident anti-Apple trolls.

I think the thing to take away from this is the analyst don't know diddly! In good times or bad analyst say things for them to make money not consumers. They predicted 8 million and the stock jumped. They manipulate or at least try to manipulate prices.

Perhaps the reason for this is that they can't meet the demand. There have been rumours of supply issues.

That could be the case but I have not heard of anyone anywhere not being able to buy the new iPhone. Have there been reports of people going into stores and being told they were out?

I think the thing to take away from this is the analyst don't know diddly! In good times or bad analyst say things for them to make money not consumers. They predicted 8 million and the stock jumped. They manipulate or at least try to manipulate prices.

That could be the case but I have not heard of anyone anywhere not being able to buy the new iPhone. Have there been reports of people going into stores and being told they were out?

Apple dedicated a certain percentage of their stock to the stores. If a particular store doesn't sell all of theirs they don't go back into the pool. Lots of people who ordered online are still waiting for their orders to ship, so overall supply has not caught up yet.

As much as I dislike the iPhone (love the hardware, hate the software), I can't deny the numbers. The demand for the iPhone 5 has exceeded the supply and 5 million is a very impressive number for smartphones sold. I think it's safe to assume they would've sold more if the supply was there. What would have been worrying is if they sold less than 4 million iPhone 5s.

  • Like 2

Typical Boz. Spinning something good into bad because there's an Apple logo on it.

I understand that what goes up must come down, but it's not that time yet. Articles like these remind me of the articles that come out after Apple's quarterly announcements saying how the company is on the decline because they didn't hit some pie in the sky mark set by some random analysis, when I reality, they beat the record they set the previous year while other companies are slipping.

It also reminds me of all the articles that came out last year about the, "underwhelming," iPhone 4s, and we all know how that panned out...

Eventually at some point their sales will hit a plateau, but given sales figures are up from the previous generation it's a bit premature to spin this as a failure.

Though a considerable number of consumers deem the iPhone as sufficient for their needs. Naturally they'll switch away when their demands are no longer being met. Seems like that hasn't happened yet else we'd see much more dismal sales figures. Making assumptions that people's requirements are the same as yours is the classic "solution looking for a problem" scenario.

(Y)

The most well reasoned post on Neowin.

That could be the case but I have not heard of anyone anywhere not being able to buy the new iPhone. Have there been reports of people going into stores and being told they were out?

The AT&T Corporate store in my area sold out of the 70 iPhone or so iPhone 5s, and I saw people being turned away. The 3rd party AT&T store that I got mine from only got 4 (2 16GB and 2 32GB) and they were gone soon after the UPS man dropped them off...naturally...

Really? I expect to sell 10 computers. I sold 5. Yep, everything went as expected. :rolleyes:

Spin that story to meet your preconceived notion of what Apple is.

But Apple did not "expect to sell 10 computers" in your analogy. Let's try this:

I expect to sell a lot of computers. I make as many as I can ahead of time. I get 2 pre-orders before they even go on sale. I get 5 made before launch day.

Because of the 2 pre-orders, some analysts who don't work for me report that I should sell at least 10 computers in the first weekend.

When the launch day comes around, I sell all 5 of the computers I made within 3 days. I take orders for more and will get them to customers as soon as I can.

The analysts who expected that I would sell the 10 computers I didn't have built yet then post articles about how I missed their expectations and make profits from the page views.

That's how it seems to me, unless you can somehow account for several million iPhones sitting ready in a warehouse somewhere that for some reason Apple isn't shipping out to people who have ordered them.

But Apple did not "expect to sell 10 computers" in your analogy. Let's try this:

I expect to sell a lot of computers. I make as many as I can ahead of time. I get 2 pre-orders before they even go on sale. I get 5 made before launch day.

Because of the 2 pre-orders, some analysts who don't work for me report that I should sell at least 10 computers in the first weekend.

When the launch day comes around, I sell all 5 of the computers I made within 3 days. I take orders for more and will get them to customers as soon as I can.

The analysts who expected that I would sell the 10 computers I didn't have built yet then post articles about how I missed their expectations and make profits from the page views.

That's how it seems to me, unless you can somehow account for several million iPhones sitting ready in a warehouse somewhere that for some reason Apple isn't shipping out to people who have ordered them.

best analogy so far :)

also the leap from 4 to 5 was expected to be bigger; remember that there was lot of fuss when 4S was released (it was percieved as as minor update) so it was expected that the sales for the iPhone 5 were going to be better then the 4S because of that; so yeah it's selling as Apple expected but the percieved demand should be much bigger.

If you expect the ridiculous you're bound to be disappointed. Doesn't matter how Boz tries to spin this one around, at the end of the day Apple still sold a million more iPhone 5 units compared to the iPhone 4S last year in the same timeframe. That's excluding pre-orders that haven't arrived yet.

Analyst Says Perhaps Millions of iPhone 5 Pre-Orders Still in Transit, Not Included in Announced Sales

http://www.macrumors...nnounced-sales/

  • Like 2

Um.. it's obvious where Apple will end up.. I said the same thing with Android and Apple fanboys said "OMG Android will never come close to iPhone".. and we see how that ended up.

Face it.. Apple has been milking the same phone for 5 years.. they are are not innovating anything, they have a stale OS and it's inevitable.

Consumers will eventually wake up and realize "Damn, I'm buying the same thing over and over again".. unfortunately consumers are slow to realize that, and that's why Apple gets away with mediocrity and marginal improvements.

Face it. OSX has had the same interface for past 10 years and yet it's become more popular than ever. Not just for individual buyers, but for corporations as well. Ever thought about why or do you figure that if you find the interface stale, everybody else is going to follow suit? I get that you don't like Apple, but the rationale behind your opinions of how the company is going down doesn't make a lot of sense. Let's break this down for you:

1. Estimates were set by Wall Street analysts, they all have their varying ranges from very conservative to very optimistic. The company doesn't strive to break analysts targets, it strives to break its own.

2. Apple sold 5 million iPhones on their opening weekend. That's 25% more than its predecessor. In an environment where there are countless alternatives by numerous companies which are cheaper or at the same price point.

3. The new iPhones cost $40 MORE than the predecessor and still sold 25% more. You would think people would know better than to pay more for something they find stale and old, right? Don't worry, here's some consolation for you. Apple didn't make more profit per phone because they incurred more material costs that was passed to the customer. "That's because they're all iSheep." (s) Yes - millions of customers and enterprises are all sheep because you managed to show a video of 5~6 people who couldn't tell the difference between 4S and 5. (/s)

4. Apple makes more profit per phone that's sold than all your other counterparts. Having 99% of market share by volume means doesn't mean much if you're profits shrink as a result.

Now let's look at why this stale interface works.

5. Apple's approach has been to make user interface INTUITIVE for the average retail user. For better or worse, it's why they have promoted a closed walled-garden since the beginning. The average user prefers familiarity and doesn't want/care to learn new things that is outside of their comfort zone. The way average users define 'simple' is very different from how technical folks define it. For you it's easy enough to swipe a finger or pull down a menu to change settings in Android but if you give it to someone new and ask them to figure the device out, it would take them a lot longer compared to an iPhone.

5b. People are comfortable with what is familiar to them unless there is a compelling reason to change. The interface maybe stale for you but it works for the masses who know exactly where to go and what to do when they get another device or software upgrade. They don't have to spend time figuring it out. I can give my grandma an iPad and she can figure out how to use it for her purposes without teaching her anything and she can barely read/write in English (she does have one and uses it). This again is entirely subject to people's preference.

5c. Why do you think increasing number of businesses are testing iPhones and iPads now? If there is one thing businesses feel comfortable with, it is consistency. They don't have the time to keep installing and trying different interfaces. They find what works and use it for as long as possible. If they get this level of consistency from Apple, you think they are just going to drop the devices because the interface is stale? Why don't you ask Microsoft how Windows 95/XP/7 fares for them? I'd love to find out how many companies are comfortable having Android devices on their network to be used for business related uses (not being sarcastic, really would like to know).

I'm not a "fanboy" simply because of Apple's marketing tactics. I've followed the company's products, services, business practices, design ethos stock since 2004 as closely as I could have. Their screw-ups aside (MobileMe, Antennagate, hockey puck mouse, issues at Foxconn, Maps, etc etc), their market position is justified.

I've not read the whole thread, but when reading other topics regarding this "news" most people (and news articles) seem to ignore the actual growth of the smartphone market (soemthing which the Analysts did include and why they were expecting more than 5 million sales). 5 million sales now is a smaller amount of the whole market than 4 million sales at the last iPhone launch.

Therefore in real terms there are more people buying iPhones, but less of the market are buying iPhones, and therefore you could anticipate good sales for Android and WP8 in the future, or otherwise people are simply holding onto their phones for longer.

I've not read the whole thread, but when reading other topics regarding this "news" most people (and news articles) seem to ignore the actual growth of the smartphone market (soemthing which the Analysts did include and why they were expecting more than 5 million sales). 5 million sales now is a smaller amount of the whole market than 4 million sales at the last iPhone launch.

Therefore in real terms there are more people buying iPhones, but less of the market are buying iPhones, and therefore you could anticipate good sales for Android and WP8 in the future, or otherwise people are simply holding onto their phones for longer.

this is a great point.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!