Um, yes it was. Otherwise you have no reason to talk about Chinese phone makers “eating Samsung’s lunch.”
This is just a baseless assumption on your part. Do you have any evidence that most of the stuff coming from home grown Chinese manufacturers such as Huawei are being exported to other countries, versus most of their phones being sold in their home market?
Again, this is just your opinion. If you have evidence that Chinese headquartered handset makers are exporting most of their stuff and companies like Huawei aren’t primarily selling handsets in the Chinese market, please produce those.
No, it’s a deductive assumption for which I laid out the reasoning. I don’t have numbers to back it up, but nor do you have any to back up the assumptions you’ve made. That’s a two way street. If I can’t make logical deductions about figures, you certainly don’t get to say “China is an export market” over and over without some evidence to back up the idea that companies like Huawei or ZTE are actually eroding Samsung’s sales in the global market. An entirely possible conclusion from the figures you presented is they are simply growing in their home market and have exported few handsets abroad. Without actual evidence to the contrary, it’s just as valid an assumption as anything else. Simply repeating the phrase “China is an export economy” does not change that.
Actually what would be incorrect is to assume your figures have anything to do with the handset market. Huawei is a massive producer of networking equipment that sells all kinds of telecom stuff not related to handsets. Your figures just talk about total corporate sales for Huawei, and since handsets are not at all their largest business we have no idea from those figures how many handsets they are selling outside of China.
ZTE is similar, it’s smaller than Huawei but it also sells a ton of products (Huawei is the world’s largest network equipment manufacturer, ZTE is in the top ten), so we can’t really conclude anything about the handset market in particular from your numbers.
I’m not married to the idea that most of Huawei’s handset growth has been in China, maybe it hasn’t. But no one has actually presented evidence that the reason Samsung’s share of global handset sales decreased by 1% if because of competition from manufacturers like Huawei. It is entirely possible that all of the growth shown in deltasigma’s chart for the Chinese handset makers came in their home market, and since Samsung has grown in China over the same period that means it didn’t lose any share to those companies. Which would then mean you’d have to look elsewhere to explain Samsung’s 1% drop in market share.
That you thought the world’s largest market cap was laugh-worthy? No, I think I got the point. I actually suspect you were unaware that despite its share price decrease Apple was still the most valuable company in the world.
How many times are you going to change what you’re talking about? So what you’re really talking about with Apple is their hardware? After all your talk of platforms that makes no sense in the context of your other posts.
This comment of yours makes no sense in response to what you are (ostensibly) responding to, I noted that in regard to your claim that smartphones are a “platform market” that Samsung’s competitors who you assert are “eating its lunch” run the same platform. This is a non-response to that point.
I think that’s because you’re a combative person, that doesn’t really know much about anything you talk about and relies on furious Google searches to fill in ignorance on virtually every issue that you talk about on these forums. You combine this with an extremely combative personality and it leads to you just throwing out a bunch of poorly connected, incoherent points that change with the shifting wind.
I’d say this entire thread is you trying to pretend otherwise.
Don’t be a child and say “you’re welcome” when no thanks was offered. I referenced a study and included the date involved, I chose not to provide a convenient hyperlink but I gave more than enough information to find the report the number came from. The fact that you actually found the exact number I mentioned, proves I was in fact not pulling anything out of my ass but referencing the exact same report that you later found. We are not writing research papers here, minor figures that are not really a significant part of the point being made do not need to be cited unless someone takes issue with them.
Why would I give a shit? It’s people who don’t have any actual money to invest that pay attention to stats like that. I look at information that can make me money like what are the most liquid option trades. Do you even know where to go for information like that. Better yet, what an iron condor is or how to trade one?
Whatever you say dude, whatever you say
Yes, I’m familiar with the concept of the non-response from many of your posts.
You both need to dial it down a little. There are two other forums that are better suited for what your argument is starting to become and this isn’t one of them.
Cool it down some, both of you.
