Still More Apple Pwnage

[Pekka]

Well, all I know is that I don't know how realistic the figures are. They might be misleading or not. I think there's no 100% way to tell.

About the panic price cut, well, that same can be used to argue that they aren't selling enough or have some other problems. Why? Because it looks like a panic price cut. Yes, people cut the price of their products, but this looked like a panic cut more than anything else. That's how the investors reacted to it. So they percieved it as one. SO the market has reacted to it, I don't know if it was a false perception or not, but it really doesn't matter that much as long as it was a perception. To me it looks like they missed the target if I had to guess. IF it's true or not, that I don't know.

If this means AT&T has tons of unsold units, I don't know.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher
So AT&T walks up to the Apple stores, buys some phones, then re-sells those phones?

They order them from Apple numbnuts. OMFG it's so incredible that they should order them from the supplier! And the supplier .... wait for it...... delivers the product! OMFG it's an incredible ****ing idea!

The point is simple. AT&T is Apple's partner. It makes perfect sense that they have some kind of agreement or arrangement in the distribution and sale of the iPhone. There would be initial order allotments, say X thousands to Apple, X thousands to AT&T.

Pure speculation. No source. That's not how it normally happens. Manufacturers have regional distribution centers for a reason you know. It's because retailers don't order from friggin China. Distribution is generally the responsibility of the manufacturer or the manufacturer highers a distributor to do that. The retailers don't do most of the trasportation except from their own LOCAL warehouses.

This is standard practice. It makes no sense to let retail managers of 1,800 stores, to make individual orders for how many they want. I've never, ever, heard of a hyped electronics product launched with the input of 1,800 peon managers -- with knowledge on par with yours, I'm sure. These agreements are made at a much higher level.

What a bunch of crap! Of course the retail managers do their own ordering. What you keep calling "standard practice" is nothing but your fantasy world. I've been a retail manager. They do make their own orders.

For instance, AT&T could've ordered 300,000 while Apple ordered 700,000 of the initial allotment. No, there is no link, so shut up about that -- if you want a link, you don't understand the purpose of conjecture.

No link to your ridiculous claims. Go figure. Asher why should we take anything you say worth a grain of salt. You don't understand economics, why should we assume that you know what the "industry standard" is. If you did you would be able to provide a source. You are completerly biased, which is more reason to doubt you. Without sources you have nothing for an argument.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Pekka
Well, all I know is that I don't know how realistic the figures are. They might be misleading or not. I think there's no 100% way to tell.

About the panic price cut, well, that same can be used to argue that they aren't selling enough or have some other problems. Why? Because it looks like a panic price cut. Yes, people cut the price of their products, but this looked like a panic cut more than anything else.

You can't have a panic price cut when you are already meeting expectations that you made a long time ago, when your product was still a hot seller. Whatever the reason for the price cut, it can't have been because Apple wasn't meeting expectations. All evidence says that they were, particularly the fact that it took only 3 days after the price cut to make the millionth sale.

The point of this thread is that Asher is an utter fool who didn't bother looking up the facts before he spouted some ridiculous conspiracy theory for which he has not one iota of proof. Apparently, this conspiracy includes Apple, AT&T and the most prominent independent business analyst of Apple.

[Pekka]

Well, the price cut can be for various of reasons, not all of them are positive.

It doesn't necessarily mean they were in panic. That was the perception of the market though.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Pure speculation. No source. That's not how it normally happens. Manufacturers have regional distribution centers for a reason you know.

Yes, if they have a wide variety of clients to ship to. Apple doesn't do that. I notice you constantly ask for sources, yet you've provided none.

What a bunch of crap! Of course the retail managers do their own ordering. What you keep calling "standard practice" is nothing but your fantasy world. I've been a retail manager. They do make their own orders.

They absolutely do not on launch events for major products. Chains are allocated X amounts, then stores are allocated X amounts.

By the way: "Pure speculation. No source." That's quite an innovative argument technique, avoids having to think.

No link to your ridiculous claims. Go figure. Asher why should we take anything you say worth a grain of salt. You don't understand economics

I don't understand economics, yet you're the one ashamed to mention which school you got your "BA in economics" from, and you're famous around these parks for "refuting" Adam Smith. You also had some gems of quotes in the first thread regarding your understanding of supply and demand.

why should we assume that you know what the "industry standard" is. If you did you would be able to provide a source.

Why don't you provide a source otherwise? Because certain things aren't documented in nicely maintained webpages. Talk to the manager of a Best Buy and ask him if he picks how many Xbox 360s he got to order on launch day.

Link me to a source saying all 1,800 AT&T store managers (most of which tend to be kids who have never gone to college) can pick and choose how many iPhones they got on launch day. Of course, there is no link for that either.

You are completerly biased, which is more reason to doubt you. Without sources you have nothing for an argument.

Why am I biased? That's a good question, actually. Most of my posts came from a MacBook Pro's keyboard.

On the other hand, you have stated your purpose in this argument is to "pwn" me, rather than to understand what is going on -- which is precisely why you've been pwned in the first place.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Asher

The iPhone was hyped. It was a HUGE launch. Do you think AT&T would risk having only a handful of phones they sold from their stores?

1,000,000 phones sold. Apple is outselling AT&T 7-1, so that gives AT&T 142,857 phones sold.

142,857 phones sold from 1,800 stores over 74 days. That's about 1 phone per store per day.

Given the enormity of the launch and all of the hype, are you saying AT&T correctly predicted that each store would only sell 7 phones a week? I think if AT&T predicted such low sales, they wouldn't have paid to enter into a 5-year exclusive agreement for the phone.

I don't pretend to know how many they expected to sell, unlike you. I just know that it's contrary to good business sense for them to over order a new product in the quantity that you claim especially if that product isn't selling.

[Asher]

Pre-emptive Kid post:

YOU PROVIDE NO LINK. YOU PROVIDE NOTHING, NUMBNUTS. YOU ARE COMPLETEREERLRELY BIASEDED. I was retail manager and I got order as many colorued pencils as I wanted to!!

You are PWN#D!!!

And on that, I've finally become bored of Kid. I hope Agathon actually replies instead.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I don't pretend to know how many they expected to sell, unlike you.

I don't pretend to know either. I have stated REPEATEDLY using the words "speculation' and "hypothesis".

You've REFUTED my hypothesis without any substance other than "you provide no link!" You've missed the point, completely. "WHOOSH" and all that.

I just know that it's contrary to good business sense for them to over order a new product in the quantity that you claim especially if that product isn't selling.

As I have stated REPEATEDLY, I specifically referred to the initial orders. So they wouldn't order if the product wasn't selling, would they?

And is it not good business sense to order a product as severely hyped as the iPhone so as you have enough products to capitalize on the hype? It would be even more stupid to have the capacity to have more phones, but simply not have any on the basis of being conservative. And if AT&T didn't have full faith, why would they enter in a 5 year exclusive agreement with Apple?

See? There's lots of questions to be answered here and discuss. You, however, are incapable of discussing them -- you instead chose to insult, demand links for every little piece of SPECULATION, then claim you 'pwn' people when they don't provide links for SPECULATION.

[lord of the mark]

1. the 7-1 number seems to be from "apple Insider" I cant find the article. Can someone quote the source?


2. No one here seems to know for sure who Apple and ATT handle logistics, who keeps DCs where, what mode of shipment is used from China, where the product changes hands, etc.

3. Nor do we know exactly what the activation rate was past the first data point.


Id say everything on both sides is sheer speculation. The only strong fact is that the stock market seems unhappy with ATT and Apple.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Pekka
Well, the price cut can be for various of reasons, not all of them are positive.

It doesn't necessarily mean they were in panic. That was the perception of the market though.

Yes, but the market was wrong.

You cannot accuse a company of a panic price cut when they are already meeting their own sales expectations without the price cut. The logical inference to make is that the price cut was for other reasons. The obvious reason was stated by me in the other thread.

[Kidlicious]

Asher,

ATT ordered enough to sell for maybe a week. They don't order from friggin China. This is too absurd. I give up. Your last couple posts are not worth replying too.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
1. the 7-1 number seems to be from "apple Insider" I cant find the article. Can someone quote the source?

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/piper_apple_store_outselling_atampt_in_iphones_7_to_1/

The source boils down to Gene Munster, of Piper Jaffray. I did some research on him when Agathon mentioned him as the God of Apple analyst, and I can see why he has that title. Not one piece of speculation regarding Apple he's released since 1995 has been negative in any way. As such, the Mac websites quote him a lot as an authority. A bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

3. Nor do we know exactly what the activation rate was past the first data point.

Id say everything on both sides is sheer speculation. The only strong fact is that the stock market seems unhappy with ATT and Apple.

And the absence of the activation rates, given the stock market reaction, is even more suspicious. If they were good, a simple press release would save their stock. But I think more people would ask questions if Apple claims 1,000,000 sold and AT&T says 600,000 activations...

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Asher,

ATT ordered enough to sell for maybe a week. They don't order from friggin China. This is too absurd. I give up. Your last couple posts are not worth replying too.

I accept your resignation.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
Yes, but the market was wrong.

You cannot accuse a company of a panic price cut when they are already meeting their own sales expectations without the price cut.

You are making the assumption that the sales were going to the hands of the consumers. Did you miss this whole part of the discussion?

Is it not likely that Apple realized consumer uptake was slowing noticably to the point that in terms of actual end-users using the device, they would fall short? It's entirely possible, if not damn likely, given:
1) Even post-price cut, 99% of Apple stores had ample iPhone stocks
2) AT&T is not releasing activation numbers, even if positive numbers could salvage their stock
3) If they were meeting projections, there's no reason to deeply cut into profits with massive pricecuts that they knew would also piss off their loyal fanbase

They overpriced the unit, it comes down to that. The uptake was NOT meeting expectations, thus the "panic" price cut.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
1. the 7-1 number seems to be from "apple Insider" I cant find the article. Can someone quote the source?

The source is the very same Gene Munster from Piper Jaffray who estimated that Apple was going to meet its expectations without the price cut.

Id say everything on both sides is sheer speculation. The only strong fact is that the stock market seems unhappy with ATT and Apple.

How can it be speculation that the price cut was not caused by underperforming sales, when sales were in fact performing according to expectations. We know this, since it only took Apple a few days of price cut iPhones to beat its own prediction 3 weeks early. They were pretty much already there, and the cut just accelerated the inevitable.

We know this. Both the stated expectations and the fact that Apple passed the million mark 3 weeks early with only a few days of sales at the lower price. These are documented facts.

We also know that they were pretty close to the million before the price cut, and we have good reason to believe (from Munster's research) that they would have passed it anyway without the price cut.

While the price cut may have prompted some extra sales, the company appeared to have already been far closer to the 1m target than expected, said Mr Kay.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20714278/

Again.. the evidence for a panic price cut simply isn't there...