More Apple pwnage

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher
Additionally, many of Apple's "sales" were to AT&T stores who did not sell very much of them.

That's incredible from an accounting standpoint. Source?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That's incredible from an accounting standpoint.

Not really.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by LordShiva


Not really.

That depends on the terms of the "sales" to the AT&T stores. That's why I want to see some info on it.

[Asher]

Do you seriously not understand how this works? Items are sold to retail stores.

When Sony, Nintendo, and MS report console sales, they report "sold" as "sold to retail" as well.

This is rather basic retail business, isn't it? Companies sell products to the retail stores, not to customers. Apple's stores sold the phones decently, once the hardcore fanboys bought them as soon as they launched. These Apple stores outsold AT&T stores 7 to 1 on the iPhone, AT&T stores aren't selling through their stock which they bought from Apple. Apple can harp about how many it has sold, but those haven't all gone to consumers.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher
Do you seriously not understand how this works? Items are sold to retail stores.

When Sony, Nintendo, and MS report console sales, they report "sold" as "sold to retail" as well.

This is rather basic retail business, isn't it? Companies sell products to the retail stores, not to customers.

Yes, but if AT&T has the right to unconditional return then Apple can't count that as revenue. So it depends on the contract.

Apple's stores sold the phones decently, once the hardcore fanboys bought them as soon as they launched. These Apple stores outsold AT&T stores 7 to 1 on the iPhone, AT&T stores aren't selling through their stock which they bought from Apple. Apple can harp about how many it has sold, but those haven't all gone to consumers.

From what I know the phones would all be selling fine if AT&T were doing a better job activating them.

[Darius871]

Didn't Asher get banned or something?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Yes, but if AT&T has the right to unconditional return then Apple can't count that as revenue. So it depends on the contract.

That sounds highly unlikely, considering Apple is claiming sales far higher than independent analysts have found. And considering AT&T store sales are known to be very slow.

From what I know the phones would all be selling fine if AT&T were doing a better job activating them.

The activation problems were only for the launch days...you are misinformed...it also has absolutely nothing to do with sales, as the vast majority of iPhones are activated only when the buyer goes home and connects with iTunes...

[Agathon]

Originally posted by One_more_turn
Given the activation problems AT&T had and the lack of inventories during the first week, Apple was right to price iPhone at $600.

This whole debate is silly.

The price of an iPhone is much more than $600. In fact, it is probably closer to or over $2000, since you have to sign a 2 year contract with it.

People whining about the $200 price cut and how Apple "screwed" them are being silly (although the whining has prompted Apple to give them a store voucher to shut up).

Sure, $200 off looks like a massive cut from a $600 item, but it's only a 10% discount when you factor in total cost of ownership. And Apple will be getting kickbacks from AT&T on every phone sold. If you buy new tech and the price goes down by 10% two months after you buy it, and you complain, you are an idiot, plain and simple.

Apple had to lower the purchase price, otherwise no-one would buy an iPhone at $600, when they could get a cheap phone and an iPod Touch for less.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher
That sounds highly unlikely, considering Apple is claiming sales far higher than independent analysts have found. And considering AT&T store sales are known to be very slow.

I think it's normal for retailers to have unconditional right to return. Manufacturers do this to encourage them to keep inventory. I could be wrong though.

The activation problems were only for the launch days...you are misinformed...it also has absolutely nothing to do with sales, as the vast majority of iPhones are activated only when the buyer goes home and connects with iTunes...

Then you are just saying that there is a lot of inventory at the AT&T stores? That seems unlikely. Stores don't really keep that much inventory these says.

How about a source?

[Asher]

Sure, $200 off looks like a massive cut from a $600 item, but it's only a 10% discount when you factor in total cost of ownership.

Have you considered applying to be Tony Snow's replacement? You are just as successful as he is at trying to excuse nonsense.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I think it's normal for retailers to have unconditional right to return. Manufacturers do this to encourage them to keep inventory. I could be wrong though.

Yes, you are. This debate has been done to death with game consoles. Consumer electronics companies count sold to retail as sold.

Then you are just saying that there is a lot of inventory at the AT&T stores? That seems unlikely. Stores don't really keep that much inventory these says.

How about a source?

If you're launching one of the most hyped up consumer electronics releases in years, you sure as hell do stockpile stock to try to ensure you meet demand (notable exception to this wisdom is Nintendo, who still hasn't figured it out some 10 months after launch).

As for a link on how AT&T store sales are incredibly slow: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...en_to_one.html

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher

Yes, you are. This debate has been done to death with game consoles. Consumer electronics companies count sold to retail as sold.

I expect at least one source then. That shouldn't be hard since you've spent so much time debating it.

If you're launching one of the most hyped up consumer electronics releases in years, you sure as hell do stockpile stock to try to ensure you meet demand (notable exception to this wisdom is Nintendo, who still hasn't figured it out some 10 months after launch).

As for a link on how AT&T store sales are incredibly slow: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...en_to_one.html

There's probably inventory, and that's another reason to reduce the price. But compared to the total sales, inventory is going to be a small part of that, and that's if it's counted.

[Asher]

I'm not going to do your research for you. You think Apple has sold a million phones to consumers already? You go ahead and do that. Of course, this doesn't jive with activation numbers. Of course, this doesn't jive with a massive 33% pricecut so soon. Of course, this doesn't jive with analyst research which points total sales at about 800,000 at the END of this month..

But what does that matter?

[Wiglaf]

I expect at least one source then. That shouldn't be hard since you've spent so much time debating it.

I remember when the N-Gage came out, nokia insisted it had sold millions in the first week. The actual number was like 50,000.

It's quite common to count sold to retail as sold, if completely misleading.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher
I'm not going to do your research for you.

Do YOUR research. Let's see it. You haven't done anything but made bald assertions. How many product is in store inventory? All you are saying is MOST of the sales is inventory. That means nothing. Give us the numbers and the source.