Apple cored: Samsung sells 10 million Galaxy S4 in a month Samsung's Galaxy S4 has become the South Korean firm's fastest selling smartphone after shifting some 10 million units since its launch in April. By way of comparison, Apple's 21 September 2012 launch of the iPhone 5 yielded over five million in sales in the opening weekend - although Cupertino did not reveal how many had sold …
Right - so in a full month, Samsung have only managed to double what Apple sold in the first two days of their own launch.
And ok, Apple's quarterly figure includes sales of the two older iPhone models still on the market - but still show they're selling more than 10m per month long after the iPhone 5 could be considered new.
Yes, what a knockout success for Samsung. The boys at Cupertino may as well pack up now.
Don't forget that both these figure include all the pre-ordered phones. So saying they sold 5M in two days is a bit of a stretch, as is no doubt the 10M in one month.
Haven't bother to get mine yet. The S2 is still fine, but mostly because waiting a short while then threatening to leave current provider will get me a much better price than joining the crowd of "most have this weeks model" fans. Their just phones FFS.
This post has been deleted by its author
Shouldn't that be "whose just phones"?
The OP seemed to exclaim that certain unnamed people were in possession of telephones that were in some way righteous.
I guess it would explain why these phones are selling so well. Who could resist a device that was ideologically superior?
Samsung sell loads more Android phones, so if we're comparing by company, I'd expect at least double the 10m a month from them. Not to mention all the other phones they sell that don't even get counted in the "smart" stats.
I'm not sure the iphone 5 not being as new is an excuse - Samsung thrashed everyone else in Q1, even when their flagship was much older.
I do love how, when one company sells more 2 days of the year, you trumpet that as being amazing, but when the other company sells more the rest of the 363 days of the year, you suggest it's unfair, as the first company's phone isn't new anymore...
This post has been deleted by a moderator
Samsung has the advantage of doing the hardware too. That advantage was handed over to them by us. Nokia fell a sleep and Elop has acted like an elephant in a porcelain shop, being, him self, the "burning platform". That is sad, especially as Nokia did understand fairly early the potential of Linux. I was much surprised years ago that they even knew there was Qt. Internal struggles, sleepy bosses destroyed it all. In the end, I suppose, Nokia had all the problems similar to the problems within Microsoft. Anyway as long as there is competition things happen mostly for the better, I think.
Some reports ( e.g. http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-dominates-95-of-android-phone-sales-say-analysts-15282170/ ) suggest Samsung is trampling over the Android market with 95% of phone sales.
If those reports are anything like correct, it would seem Samsung ate most other Android manufacturers' lunches too. If Nokia were to enter that market, it would be in with that 5% of Android also-rans struggling to claw back some of the 95% from Samsung.
@Simon Harris
True, except the percentage figure you are setting store by is profit and on that basis Samsung is trailing Apple by some margin, 43% versus 57%. Yes that's correct, between the two of them they have taken all the profit share.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/05/08/apple-profits-lead-samsung/
Personally I find this quite disconcerting because it means in terms of effective business, we now have a global smartphone duopoly.
@AC 14:30
The report I was quoting was purely Android based - I wasn't trying to compare Android vs Apple at all. There was the claim in Eadon's post that Nokia would be doing much better if they produced Android phones rather than Windows phones.
I was merely pointing out that Samsung dominated the Android market (your last statement seems to agree with this), so Nokia would have a huge hill to climb if it was to have joined in there, and possibly not had the success suggested.
I'm inclined to agree that Nokia has f***d up.
A device similar to the Lumia 920/928 but running Android with a PureView camera and all Nokia's HERE goodies (inc off-line maps, Nokia Music etc) would give the Galaxy S3/4 a run for its money. Samsung's only real competition has come from HTC, Sony and Motorola none of whom had the sales and marketing clout (as far as mobile phones go) of Nokia.
Hell, even an N9 running Android would have sold well if it had been released in mid 2010 to go up against the iPhone 4.
If they'd entered quickly at the time when they decided to go with Microsoft they could easily be a major player in the Android market.
Some of their hardware is good and they were one of the biggest brands in Mobile phones in Europe (pretty much everyone had a Nokia phone at some point).
In the early days of Android HTC were the leaders by far in the UK. In fact very often people would call an Android phone "an HTC", as in "are you getting an HTC?". Android wasn't ever marketed by the stores or the Manufacturers so you didn't readily know what was running on the phones unless you were a bit tech savvy.
However, HTC seemed to get blasé about their popularity with the G1, G2, Hero and early Desire models being early leaders. However, a lack of support, bugs, lack of updates etc, IMO started their decline.
Samsung capitalised, made some bold and brave choices and has become the runaway success it is now.
I hope HTC can return to their former glory and capture a larger part of the market again as they are pioneers in the smartphone arena, way before the iPhone was a twinkle in Jobs' eye.
Then again it would also be good for Sony to get some recognition for some of the great devices they produce as well.
If Nokia entered the Android race now, I easily think they could get more sales than their Windows devices, quite quickly and they could also innovate enough to take a significant chunk of the Android market.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
>suggest Samsung is trampling over the Android market with 95% of phone sales.
No-one suggests that - 95% of Android profits at a stretch - not impossible anyway.
10 million S4's in April/May is pretty good for a phone at that price, but most analysts are estimating Android phone sales in the 70-100 million range globally for that period....a lot of them other Samsungs, but not even vaguely most of them.
Nokia would actually have a chance in the android market... They have (or had) existing inertia from existing symbian users, and they have a large base of dumbphone users who may be looking to upgrade.
Nokia has a brand that at least in mobiles was every bit as strong as samsung's if not more so... On a level playing field they could have competed but their brand is fading fast.
The other android manufacturers simply aren't as well known and never have been, they don't have the same brand recognition.
Samsung won this many years ago when they decided that flatscreens of all sizes were the future. It was not just the smartphone category, but also monitors and TVs. They dumped large amounts into R&D and focused massive organizational resources towards all 3 of these form factors. By putting early products on the market at or below breakeven, they were able to gobble up market share in display and then use their size to bring down costs faster than competitors could, they repeated this in smartphones, all the meanwhile reorganizing the electronics side of the business and vertically integrating.
Companies like Nokia, Ericsson and the like could do well while phones were mostly antennae and code. Once the rest of the hardware and integration with a serious operating system became a factor, the smaller and less organized companies were doomed, mistakes or not.
The success of Samsung is due to a confluence of factors, mainly size, forethought, and lucky timing of high levels decisions. The breadth of the rest of the company also gave it cover during this build up as they didn't have to hit it out of the park every time. Many of the other companies were left betting their future on the next product and the smallest delay would be the difference between being the market leader or an also ran.
Shut up about Microsoft, this article doesn't reference them at all.
The real competition for Samsung is Apple and to be honest the support you get with Apple is much better. You can take the phone back to the shop and get it replaced. Try that with Samsung who have sent the same faulty phone back to someone I know twice now.
oh dear, the standard of The Register reporting reaches new lows, with a headline in no way supported by the data (10 million in a month versus 5 million over a weekend is a hopeless comparison for so many reasons its ridiculous).
"Samsung's Galaxy S4 has become the South Korean firm's fastest selling smartphone after shifting some 10 million units since its launch in April."
So by *shifting* I expect you are hoping to justify the spurious headline by obscuring that Samsung only ever provides "sold to channel" figures, which includes pre-stocking by suppliers and is always going to be significantly higher than actual sales to end customers (by anything from 10 - 40%). Over time, sales to channel evens out. But certainly not at a product launch.
When Ferrari bring out a stunning new model, Lamborghini don't go bankrupt.
Ahem, Lamborghini did go bankrupt back in the 1970s. Now it's part of Volkswagen which has deep enough pockets to steer through any troubles and, more importantly, access to modern technology to stay competitive. This would make it similar to the phone division within Samsung and suggest further parallels about the market such as the advantages of having access to inhouse technology.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
"What rot. The market can support multiple top-end phones at once, not only one. When Ferrari bring out a stunning new model, Lamborghini don't go bankrupt."
What rot. The market can support multiple top-end phones at once, not only one. When Ferrari bring out a stunning new model, Lamborghini sales don't take a dive.
Fixed that for you. Now 1000% more heckler-proof.
The HTC One seems to please reviewers with its design and IPS screen. As Alun Taylor noted, Samsung have styled the S4 to look like an updated S3, and while they won't win awards for the design of either, this is pretty much what Apple does. The S3 has been the leading non-I-Phone for the last few months and is well-recognised. The "updates" in the S4 have been well publicised and I think that a great many punters prefer the sheer intensity of the colours on OLED screens. Many have argues that the I-Phone 5 didn't offer a lot to really encourage upgrade sales and total sales since launch give some credence to that argument: sales are still very strong but not perhaps as strong as they might have been.
"If it wasn't for the lack of SD slot..."
That and no removable battery. I traded to an S4 from a Sensation, which served me very well. I wanted to like the HTC One, I really did, but in the end, expandable storage and a replaceable battery (along with the slightly faster processor) made the S4 more future-proof in my mind.
I have a Samsung phone, my wife a HTC.
She had a long hard look at the S4 for the reasons you say (lack of SD card and removable battery on the HTC One) but, having looked at the way she has used her Desire S for last 2yrs and how well she got on with her Sense GUI she went with the HTC One. (which she absolutely adores and the battery does last a full day of "proper" use, thus for her, negating the removable battery issue). I of course want an S4 when I'm due my upgrade!
"37.4 million in sales of all iPhone models over three months"
Considering that will have been made of mostly, 1 handset, maybe a couple of million 4s's (i cant imagine many 3g's, 3gs's 4's are still being sold) that's over 10m a month.
Take into consideration that that's in its Last quarter, when it didn't have any New handsets on the market, and many people who might be wanting an iPhone may well be waiting another month or 2 for the next one. I think they have very little to worry about at all, for now at least.
When the 5s launches to less that 10m in the first month, then yes, Apple may have cause for concern.
indeed. Taking into account the massive amounts of different handsets that Samsung offer, I would expect them to be doing at least a little bit better, than their (closest?) competitor, who has 1 'current' handset on the market.
I stand by what I said. Considering Apple have 1, maybe 3 if we are being really generous handsets on the market, and are still able to knock out 35m+ sales in a quarter in which they both didn't have a big release, and are also (most probably) approaching a big release.
I feel that when things start looking bleak for Apple, we will suddenly see this long rumoured cut price iphone on the shelves, and maybe even a third slightly larger sized model to go up against the Note series. They have the options, there must be a reason why their handset portfolio has stayed pretty static since release of the original iPhone.
indeed. Taking into account the massive amounts of different handsets that Samsung offer, I would expect them to be doing at least a little bit better, than their (closest?) competitor, who has 1 'current' handset on the market.
Please be logically consistent. "Indeed" indicates agreement with the previous comments: firstly, that Apple something to fear (lower growth and lower margins) and that the 37 million sales include a lot of 4's and 4S'. If so, you cannot stand by what you said.
None of this means that things are about to start looking bleak for Apple. It still creams most of the profits out of all sales because it provides a compelling offer of hardware and software and, with the I-pod has demonstrated it came remain competitive even in a cut-throat market. It may just be coming down to earth and really ought to do something about new models.
Something similar to what you are suggesting happened with their computer ranges back in the 90's. Apple ended up with this bewildering array of models each trying to target a certain part of the market and it nearly destroyed them.
It was only the return of Steve Jobs and his consolidation of the product lines that pulled them out of the tailspin. This time round it's unlikely he's going to be able do the same.
T-Mobile is a major carrier, one of the first to sell the S4, and it doesn't do contracts directly. They use hire-purchase (installments) to lower the sticker shock. Walmart also sells the T-Mobile version of the phone, and its phone plan is contract-free post-paid, so it sells all its phones at face value.
Something I have never really understood is why anyone, other then business, even care about how many phones were sold by Apple, Samsung or Nokia.
I, personally, find it a little bit off-putting knowing that I currently possess the 1st, 2nd or 3rd best selling phone on the market. Kind of makes me feel like a brainless sheep.....
Why are the premises that leave people being "proud" that they have the same phone as 50 Million other people ?
More devices sold means more developer attention and therefore more apps for the platform. So there is some benefit to customers in being on a popular platform. Also the sustainability and long term life of the platform (and linked app and content purchases) also depends on ongoing sales of devices although this isn't really an issue for iOS or Android at the moment it is a question mark over Blackberry and Microsoft still (and Meego, FirefoxOS, Tizen etc. to an even greater degree).
I, personally, find it a little bit off-putting knowing that I currently possess the 1st, 2nd or 3rd best selling phone on the market. Kind of makes me feel like a brainless sheep.....
Ah, so you're a hipster. :-p
I get your point though, and I do agree. I always buy whatever hardware I think is best, and sod the brand. If some fanboy then wants to tell me why I'm wrong, I can justify the purchase with something demonstrable, rather than just saying "nu uh, mine's cooler."
Sure, my current phone is Android, but I bought that one because it's supposed to be getting Ubuntu....at some point. And I really wanted an evolved N900, but keyboards and a low-level OS are apparently now illegal or something. Buy whatever you think is best for you.
That said, if you then turn around as a fanboy and say extremely stupid things to me (like the person last night who tried to tell me that smartphones didn't exist before the iPhone), then I'm going to call you on your crap. ;-)
Apple restricts supply and then says "hey, we've sold out".
Microsoft announces "100m Win8 licenses sold" when the real figure is closer to 60% of that.
Now Samsung says they've "sold 10m units in a month".
It's all a load of bollocks.
Samsung fail. Apple fail. And, of course, ....
MICROSOFT FAIL!
Seems you've been sucked in like many in the press.
I don't give a rats abut who sells half a million phones more than whom, however.
Samsung SHIPPED 10M in 1 month to distributors and retail. That DOES NOT equate to SOLD.
Apple's figures for 3 days were 5M SOLD. Their quarterly figures show they are selling roughly on par to Samsung's shipping.
For all of Samsung's many 10's of millions more spent in marketing, their flagship phone is far from defeating Apple.
Samsung and Apple own the mobile phone market between them, however telling point, Samsung make less profit from 20 times as many models....
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022
