Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Sep 2013 10:38 UTC
Apple

I've been thinking a bit more about those iPhone 5C/5S weekend sales figures, and while it is certainly impressive, if you compare it to the iPhone 5's first weekend sales figures, it's actually quite a step backwards for Apple. The issue here - something many sites and even Apple itself doesn't want to focus on - is that the iPhone 5C/5S is available to a lot more people than the iPhone 5 was.

The iPhone 5 was available to 720 million people at launch, and sold 5 million units. This is a penetration of 0.69%. The iPhone 5C and 5S, however, are available to 2078 million people, and sold 9 million units, which constitutes a penetration of 0.43%. So, Apple has two new models to advertise and lure consumers with instead of one, and has a huge additional market (China) to address, yet it failed to capitalise on either of these two factors.

What this shows is that while the sales figure is still pretty darn impressive, it's not nearly as groundbreaking if you put it in perspective. Looking at it this way, the so-called record breaking 9 million figure can easily be explained away by Apple almost tripling its launch weekend audience, instead of an increasing popularity of the iPhone.

The only reason I'm writing this is to illustrate how numbers are entirely arbitrary, and it's easy to make silly comparisons and claim an arbitrary victory - or, change perspective a bit and claim arbitrary defeat, as I've done here.

Thread beginning with comment 573236
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

If the point is that numbers are arbitrary, wouldn't it have been a more convincing argument to try to make Nokia, BlackBerry, or Motorola's numbers look good?

Oh, they aren't that arbitrary.

You may think that this is impossible, but Nelson has actually been doing this with Nokia numbers for quite a long time now.

Numbers can really tell everything, if you take the time to find those that prove your point best. That's probably because reality, unlike market number interpretations, is never a fully black and white picture.

Edited 2013-09-25 15:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

No. Nelson tries. He does not succeed. 99.9% of the people reading Nelson's posts aren't going to come away with Thom's purported claim: that numbers are completely arbitrary and can be made to look good or bad.

Again, If Thom had actually attempted this exercise from the perspective of any of these failing companies to make them look positive, he would likely not convince anyone and his point would fall apart.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I read the financial reports, stake out a position, and make a prediction. I invest my own money into my positions. I reap good returns.

Most everybody else are just Monday morning quarter backs. I implore you, or anyone else for that matter to find a prediction I've made which has been off the mark.

I've pretty much called it this entire time. Come on, I mean look at last thread, we have people who don't understand CEO compensation and think its a grand conspiracy to sell to Microsoft. These are the special types I'm dealing with.

Reply Parent Score: 3