Android a big winner in smartphone war

[rpm]

Android a big winner: survey

The Google Android system was used on 78.9 percent of smartphones sold globally in 2013, a survey showed Wednesday.

 

[[)roi(]]

This appears to be yet another baseless stat's article (i.e. provided without any supporting data)

With both Samsung and Apple having had record revenues for 2013 -- this alone be enough to question the accuracy of this report.

Especially when you consider Apple (an company that is supposedly bleeding market share), has again also achieved the highest revenue / profit for the year.

 

[Syphonx]

This appears to be yet another baseless stat's article (i.e. provided without any supporting data)

With both Samsung and Apple having had record revenues for 2013 -- this alone be enough to question the accuracy of this report.

Especially when you consider Apple (an company that is supposedly bleeding market share), has again also achieved the highest revenue / profit for the year.

The overall market grows by 100% in a year, Company A needs 100% growth to maintain its current marketshare, however it only grows 50% and its marketshare decreases, it however will still have better revenue/profits than previous years because it grew, just not as fast as the overall market did. The numbers are sound.

 

[[)roi(]]

The overall market grows by 100% in a year, Company A needs 100% growth to maintain its current marketshare, however it only grows 50% and its marketshare decreases, it however will still have better revenue/profits than previous years because it grew, just not as fast as the overall market did. The numbers are sound.

Big statement there re "The numbers are sound"; the article certainly provides no insight into, for example: how these numbers were sourced / compiled, what constitutes a smartphone, etc...

So unless you're privy to more factual data, it's certainly not sound at all.

The problem with this type of market share analysis is that it can be "presented"/manipulated to justify almost any opinion, for example:

http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/1/28/market-share

Android is certainly by any measure far more prolific than iOS, but that alone isn't a definitive measure of a company's success. The only real Android winner is Samsung, everyone else (including Google) is bleeding a lot of capital.

So if we're to assume that Android is such a sure bet, then why has only Samsung turned a big profit? + why is Apple generating more revenue and profit from an apparently diminishing market share?

Basically these comparisons are pointless!

 

[ngwe23]

Big statement there re "The numbers are sound"; the article certainly provides no insight into, for example: how these numbers were sourced / compiled, what constitutes a smartphone, etc...

So unless you're privy to more factual data, it's certainly not sound at all.

The problem with this type of market share analysis is that it can be "presented"/manipulated to justify almost any opinion, for example:

http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/1/28/market-share

Android is certainly by any measure far more prolific than iOS, but that alone isn't a definitive measure of a company's success. The only real Android winner is Samsung, everyone else (including Google) is bleeding a lot of capital.

So if we're to assume that Android is such a sure bet, then why has only Samsung turned a big profit? + why is Apple generating more revenue and profit from an apparently diminishing market share?

Basically these comparisons are pointless!

I would post a reply but you really have no clue on anything, so whatever...

 

[[)roi(]]

I would post a reply but you really have no clue on anything, so whatever...

Did I hit a nerve? Ps. This has nothing to do with either camp, but rather questions the merits of such comparisons.

 

[Maverick Jester]

This appears to be yet another baseless stat's article (i.e. provided without any supporting data)

With both Samsung and Apple having had record revenues for 2013 -- this alone be enough to question the accuracy of this report.

Especially when you consider Apple (an company that is supposedly bleeding market share), has again also achieved the highest revenue / profit for the year.

Remember, Apple's profit margins are not absolutely tied to their market share. They command a vast majority of smartphone profits, despite their smaller market share.

 

[[)roi(]]

Remember, Apple's profit margins are not absolutely tied to their market share. They command a vast majority of smartphone profits, despite their smaller market share.

That's the point of contention around these stats. Having market share is in no way a reflection of financial success; a fact demonstrated more than once in the past few years.

I'm not really sure what the value of these types of comparison are -- naturally I have my doubts that they count for anything except some unquantifiable bragging rights.

Both Samsung and Apple's financial prowess is unbound to their market share, for example: losing market share does not equate to any financial loss, actually in most cases it's proven to be just the opposite.

 

[Syphonx]

That's the point of contention around these stats. Having market share is in no way a reflection of financial success; a fact demonstrated more than once in the past few years.

I'm not really sure what the value of these types of comparison are -- naturally I have my doubts that they count for anything except some unquantifiable bragging rights.

Both Samsung and Apple's financial prowess is unbound to their market share, for example: losing market share does not equate to any financial loss, actually in most cases it's proven to be just the opposite.

Of course it's important, bigger platforms have more apps, more accesories and more support etc. Anyway why do you care about financial success? Are you a shareholder? I'm concerned with how well the platform is doing which indicates if I should support it or not. Buying a Blackberry would not be a good idea, it's marketshare is almost non existant and thus app developer support etc is likely to be lacking. Android is huge and has significant developer support for apps and ROMs.

 

[Fingolfin]

>> Android a big winner in smartphone war

Indeed. And the humans lost.

https://medium.com/p/4c66984abd7d

 

[Syphonx]

Big statement there re "The numbers are sound"; the article certainly provides no insight into, for example: how these numbers were sourced / compiled, what constitutes a smartphone, etc...

So unless you're privy to more factual data, it's certainly not sound at all.

The problem with this type of market share analysis is that it can be "presented"/manipulated to justify almost any opinion, for example:

http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/1/28/market-share

Android is certainly by any measure far more prolific than iOS, but that alone isn't a definitive measure of a company's success. The only real Android winner is Samsung, everyone else (including Google) is bleeding a lot of capital.

So if we're to assume that Android is such a sure bet, then why has only Samsung turned a big profit? + why is Apple generating more revenue and profit from an apparently diminishing market share?

Basically these comparisons are pointless!

Im not talking about how they were sourced etc. You said the conclusions were not correct because apparently its not possible for a company to lose marketshare but still increase revenue/profits. This is indeed possible as I showed you. And as to whether the numbers are 100% correct, thats irrelevant because the overall picture and conclusions they provide would still be the same if the numbers were off by a few percent.

 

[Maverick Jester]

That's the point of contention around these stats. Having market share is in no way a reflection of financial success; a fact demonstrated more than once in the past few years.

I'm not really sure what the value of these types of comparison are -- naturally I have my doubts that they count for anything except some unquantifiable bragging rights.

Both Samsung and Apple's financial prowess is unbound to their market share, for example: losing market share does not equate to any financial loss, actually in most cases it's proven to be just the opposite.

I agree. Have never been a fan of such comparisons, especially because the business models employed by Google and Apple differ vastly, to a point where these types of comparisons are actually moot. It's basically the emboldened part of what I have quoted.

 

[Maverick Jester]

Of course it's important, bigger platforms have more apps, more accesories and more support etc. Anyway why do you care about financial success? Are you a shareholder? I'm concerned with how well the platform is doing which indicates if I should support it or not. Buying a Blackberry would not be a good idea, it's marketshare is almost non existant and thus app developer support etc is likely to be lacking. Android is huge and has significant developer support for apps and ROMs.

You could counter this by stating that Apple take two-thirds of the smartphone profits, meaning that there would be more developers for the platform due to the greater scale of profitability afforded to them.

I still think that is basically boils down to a statistic employed to assert a form of bragging rights.

 

[Syphonx]

You could counter this by stating that Apple take two-thirds of the smartphone profits, meaning that there would be more developers for the platform due to the greater scale of profitability afforded to them.

I still think that is basically boils down to a statistic employed to assert a form of bragging rights.

I don't know if ios has more developers than android does but in the very least ios would have more developers than android if you adjusted for marketshare. Of course the figures are bragging rights but they are useful to some people.

 

[Maverick Jester]

I don't know if ios has more developers than android does but in the very least ios would have more developers than android if you adjusted for marketshare. Of course the figures are bragging rights but they are useful to some people.

Not necessarily. If developing for Android is a more profitable option, methinks that it would go the other way.

 

[Syphonx]

Not necessarily. If developing for Android is a more profitable option, methinks that it would go the other way.

Definitely, but I'm not sure if it is more profitable yet, it certainly has more volume though.

 

[Crowley]

naturally I have my doubts that they count for anything except some unquantifiable bragging rights

Unless the article is pro Apple. Then we can take it as gospel.

 

[[)roi(]]

Of course it's important, bigger platforms have more apps, more accesories and more support etc. Anyway why do you care about financial success? Are you a shareholder? I'm concerned with how well the platform is doing which indicates if I should support it or not. Buying a Blackberry would not be a good idea, it's marketshare is almost non existant and thus app developer support etc is likely to be lacking. Android is huge and has significant developer support for apps and ROMs.

I'm not but the financial discrepancies serve to highlight that market share stats alone are not by any measure an accurate reflection of the health of a platform.

At a point in time; both Blackberry and Nokia had the largest portions of market share, but were at the same time crashing ito their popularity / overall platform health.

The point being that focusing only on a single metric would be a mistake; no developer in their right mind should singularly base their decisions on market share alone.

 

[[)roi(]]

Definitely, but I'm not sure if it is more profitable yet, it certainly has more volume though.

Unfortunately Google doesn't share details about payments to developers vs. app downloads; which means conjecture is all we have, for example: with Android we have no way to extrapolate average revenue for per app download, let alone developer payouts for store purchases.

 

[[)roi(]]

Unless the article is pro Apple. Then we can take it as gospel.

Nope, it's a silly stat; so it doesn't matter who is using it. I'd argue that financial success (revenue / profit) is a far better representation of platform's success than market share in this new paradigm.

In comparison with Windows; high market share typically always equated to increased revenue as a license payment was required for each instance. Android and iOS of course don't work this way.

In terms of measuring financial success; unfortunately not that much is known about Android: Google doesn't reveal any financial details about it's Android business (cost vs. revenue), so it's impossible to know how they're doing (Google is profitable, but is Android?)

Samsung similarly doesn't single out it's mobile efforts in too much detail, but if we consider that Samsung has dedicated a considerably large portion of its resources on mobility, then it's fairly reasonable to equate that their recent financial successes are being driven off the back of Android -- so yes it appears Android is a win for them.

As you know this hasn't been the case for every Android linked manufacturer; many of which have see their financial portfolios crash during their Android adoption; for example: It could be argued that HTC enjoyed greater revenue during the heydays of Window Mobile than now with Android.

So with that in mind (Android winners & losers); the question I ask is how much of the success that Samsung has achieved is really due to Android vs. their own technical and marketing prowess.