Slashdot Mirror
Side-Effect of the Apple v. Samsung Trial: Increased Sales for Samsung
New submitter jbernardo writes "There seems to be an interesting side-effect of the flawed jury verdict of last Friday — Samsung sales have surged. Even with the approach of the launch of Apple's new iPhone, the Galaxy SIII is sold out in many stores, and there is a measurable increase in sales, according to Trip Chowdhry, the managing director of equity research at Global Equities Research, cited in Forbes. Maybe Apple really managed to convince its customers that Samsung phones are equivalent or better, so they are being overcharged? Or is it a rush to buy the currently best smartphone in the market in case there is an injunction on its sale in the U.S. any time soon?"
Law of unexpected consequences: Perhaps people are worried that Samsung devices will become unavailable?
Excuse for why is your room always messy?
Fairly sure it's not because of the trial.
There's a lot of factors to consider.
flawed jury verdict
Apple's new shinny
the currently best smartphone in the market
Whoever wrote this made it a touch too clear their loathing for Apple and preference for Samsung.
galaxy s 3 shouldn't be under the banhammer - however it's been on the news due to this a lot.
it's more likely it's something to do with start of school year though.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Maybe Apple really managed to convince its customers that Samsung phones are equivalent or better, so they are being overcharged? Or is it a rush to buy the currently best smartphone in the market in case there is an injunction on its sale in the US any time soon?"
It's the latter. Hell, I have been asked (as someone who is known for reading a tech blog or two) if one should worry about their *existing* handset being taken away or somehow immobilized, thanks to the verdict. People just don't get what is going on, and some of them who interpreted the news coverage as an ad for Samsung, saw the "banned sales" headlines and rushed out to buy devices. Hey, if they are worth banning, they must be good right? Just like (make-believe) gun bans threatened in the wake of certain political parties, or bans on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. People react strangely, and they almost NEVER react in favor of whatever it is that the government/courts/etc. threaten to, they do the opposite.
The trial was only one of the factors to consider here. The overall growth of the android ecosystem should be accounted for. Also keep in mind that smartphone sales are surging overall ( http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/08/more-than-half-of-all-handsets-will-be-smartphones-in-2013/ ) so it makes sense for Samsung's phones to sell more.
It would help to see the recent sales figures of other notable android manufacturers like HTC and LG to decide if the exposure from the trial had a noticeable effect
Title says it all. How many people did you know bought a Wii because they "saw it in stock somewhere" and figured they should get it while they had the chance?
Apple's trying to slam down the banhammer on Samsung so of course it drives up perceived scarcity (or scarcity-to-be). Same reason every single sale is 'limited time, act now or miss out' and so on.
Also keep in mind Apple gave Samsung tons of free publicity. I'm comfortable saying that anyone who uses a cell phone knows what an iPhone is, but until now not as many people knew Samsung sells such 'obviously similiar' products. They sure do now. Oh, and they're cheaper? Wait...maybe I should run out and get one while I still can. People who follow tech trials are also plenty fed up with patent nonsense so heck, let's support the underdog. They tend to innovate better anyhow.
So really, I'm not surprised at all.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
kettle? black much?
Calling hyperbole on something that could be true, then upping that hyperbole by asserting people who would vote with their wallets are mentally deficient seems a bit.. erhm.... Tacky. No?
Me? I havent liked Apple, ever. Nothing about their products strikes me as being desirable. Then again, I am a total nerd. I would go back to a clamshell too if the only touch devices on the market were made by Apple. I would do it out of spite. Since I exist, it is likely that others exist, so the OP's statement may not be such hyperbole.
What I take exception to is being called mentally deficient. I dont care if Apple's phone came with a hotline app straight to God himself. I wouldn't buy it. My choice to do so is motivated by Apple's (VERY LONG) history of spurious barratry and legal shenanigans. I believe that such litigiousness is the root cause of many of my country's problems, and will not willingly support that behavior. If that means buying an inferior phone, so be it.
This is a classic example of the 'post-hoc' ergo 'propter-hoc' fallacy.
The fact that the trial was against Samsung really has very little to do with how many units they sold. People buy stuff mostly because it responds to a (perceived) need, not because some judge in California thinks they stole something from Apple.
If anything it only gave them free advertising, but that doesn't necessarily lead to sales, especially since the advertising is somewhat negative.
Also, consumers selling old samsung phones does not contradict consumers buying new samsung phones.
In fact, I would guess that many of those people bought a Galaxy S3 and then sold their Galaxy 1 or 2.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Why do you think Samsung phones being popular is a trend or fad? Maybe they're actually making good phones that do what people want.
Long term, pretty much everything is a fad.
My Galaxy Nexus has none of those issues and is a solid phone that I'm very happy with. Since my personal anecdote trumps random person on the Internet's anecdote, Q.E.D.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace