Analyst: June MacBook sales boost overall Mac numbers
Apple's decision to cut prices across its MacBook lineup is about to be validated, according to an analyst's estimate.
(Credit:
Apple)
After several months of declining Mac sales compared against 2008 numbers, Apple looks to be back on track with its June Mac shipments, says Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster. His firm initially estimated that Apple would sell 2.2 million Macs during its third quarter of 2009, which ended in June. Munster now says he's "increasingly confident" in that report because Apple is having trouble keeping its new 13-inch MacBook Pro in stock.
The 13-inch MacBook was rechristened the 13-inch MacBook Pro at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference on June 8, and at the same time, Apple lowered the price of its Mac notebook lineup, bringing the cost of the cheapest MacBook Pro, the 13-inch model, to $1,199.
Either because Apple didn't plan well enough, or customers were encouraged by the price, Apple's Web site shows that it's now a 7- to 10-day delay to order one of the 13-inch MacBook Pro configurations.
"We track product lead-times and our records show that Apple has never had a 7-10 day delay on its most popular 13" model, with the most recent significant delay being 5-7 days over 2 years ago in 9/08," Munster wrote in a research note Monday evening. "We see this as a sign that demand is outpacing the company's build expectations, and it may take several weeks to reach a supply demand equilibrium."
Some brick-and-mortar Apple stores were also showing shortages of the same model, he reports.
That's encouraging news for Apple, which up until June had seen its Mac sales slowly slide, albeit more gently than the rest of the PC industry. Apple desktops and laptop sales dropped in February and April, by about 1.8 percent from the same quarter a year ago. Munster now says he believes once June sales are tallied, Macs will have actually increased 1 percent for the third quarter.
We'll know for sure in two weeks. Apple is set to report its third quarter 2009 earnings on July 21.
Erica Ogg is a CNET News reporter who covers Apple, HP, Dell, and other PC makers, as well as the consumer electronics industry. She's also one of the hosts of CNET News' Daily Podcast. In her non-work life, she's a history geek, a loyal Dodgers fan, and a mac-and-cheese connoisseur. E-mail Erica. 
It's the chip that is in short supply, not the computers.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro?mco=MTE3NDg
I would think that he doesn't have a MacBook and is using the OS that came with his PC notebook/netbook
Shouldn't it be Second quarter?
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090707/microsoft-laptop-hunters-campaign-having-no-effect-whatsoever-on-13-inch-macbook-pro-sales/
This argument below is an excerpt taken from http://macmatte.wordpress.com where the raw poll data is found.
Most online polls show that 40% prefer matte, but 20% would still buy glossy if forced to do so. This means that 20% of past Apple users refuse to buy glossy Macs.
Skeptics have tried to dismiss the poll results by asserting that, if that many Mac purchasers really did prefer matte, then Apple?s sales figures would be falling, so the argument goes. That is not true.
Those people ? who point to Apple?s upward growth as vindication of the glossy-only policy ? are not taking into account that most of the impetus to switch to Apple comes from other factors, namely: the window of opportunity created by Microsoft Vista?s inadequacies, the halo effect of the iPod/iPhone, and from OSX?s perceived advantages over Windows Vista/XP. All these factors combined mean that, even if a substantial number of people detest glossy screens, Apple?s sales figures would still show an upward trend ? not because everyone loves glossy screens ? but in spite of it.
Read the user comments at http://macmatte.wordpress.com Many users said they?ll be forced to keep using their existing matte hardware rather than upgrading now. Therefore, a deleterious effect on sales may only become noticeable until around 3-5 years later when these holdouts are forced to replace hardware, and then have to make the choice of whether to stick with Apple.
Others dismiss the matte-trend in the polls by rationalizing that the type of people who post comments on websites tend to be professional computer users and computer geeks, i.e. by inference, not representative of the total, overall market that Apple is trying to reach. In other words, what they?re arguing is that even if the polls indicate 40-75% like matte, that?s a minority because the majority of Apple users don?t read Mac website or post comments on Mac websites.
I would argue differently. In sales & marketing, the Pareto principle ? 80/20 Rule ? applies, namely that most sales come from a core of users. Equal sales are not generated equally across the population. The 80/20 Rule says that 80% of your sales come from 20% of your clients. Therefore, I would argue that people who post comments on Mac websites are more representative of this minority that generates the most sales. Why do we read Mac websites? So we can buy the stuff that interests us. Mac website readers would tend to be more representative of this core of high-volume purchasers who get multiple Mac?s not just one, and who upgrade more frequently than the peripheral buyers. Any marketing-savvy person will laugh if you think you can ignore the core minority who are fanatical about your products ? because they?re the minority that bring the bulk of your sales. For this reason, the online polls are telling Apple that their core, fanatical minority are crying out loudly for a matte screen option on all Macs.
In other words, Apple?s figures could have been better, if the matte option had been there. Example: if Apple?s profits increased to $6 billion, when it might have increased to $7.2 million ? the glossy people argue the increase to $6 billion proves everyone loves glossy ? whereas, the matte crowd argue it could have instead been $7.2 billion in higher sales, if not for the people turned away because of all-glossy screens.
Where do I get the hypothetical increase from $6 billion to $7.2 billion potential? At comment No. 88 at the http://macmatte.wordpress.com website, the polls indicate that close to 20% will not buy Macs with glossy screens ? this includes people like myself who outright refuse, and also those who did buy glossy but later regretted it. Therefore, $6 billion x 1.2 = $7.2 billion. (Of course this is just a rough calculation for the sake of argument, and I haven?t factored in what percentage of Apple?s sales are made up of Macs.)
And since when does it require sales figures to slope downwards before a company listens to the needs of its customers? Let?s be reasonable: any company that would require its sales chart to head downwards before it heeds the calls of its customers will not be in business for long. The converse is true: any company that refuses to listen to its customers? needs, simply because its sales figures are climbing, is ?..
1. The glossy-only option for the 15" model
2. The ability to edit photographs satisfactorily on a 15" screen
I suspect that I'm going to be sticking with a 17" model next time but I am consistently amazed that Apple does not at least offer the Build To Order option of an anti-glare display for the 15" model despite customer demand for one. By all means offer the 15" MBP with a glossy display by default but at least provide the option of an anti-glare one for those that need it.
- by NKND200 July 7, 2009 8:46 PM PDT
- Online:
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by ikramerica--2008 July 7, 2009 9:44 PM PDT
- Ah, you are so right!
- Like this
-
(20 Comments)13" 2.53 250G HD : 7 ~ 10 days
All other combinations including SSD , 1 ~ 3 days
13" 2.26 The only option that is 7 ~ 10 days is 250G HD.
i.e. the issue is maybe the 250G HD and not the machine itself.
So it's not be the 2.53GHz Core2Duo at all, but the 250GB SATA 1 drives Apple is using. (Fujitsu?). Because the 15.4" 2.53GHz standard model also uses the 250GB drive and takes 7-10 days, but if you configure it with any othe drive, it's 1-3 days, the typical CTO time for Apple. I looked at the chip, when it's the HDs in short supply.
Dell usually overcomes these shortages by giving customers "free upgrades" to configurations that aren't in short supply. Then again, Dell still takes 2 weeks to deliver a computer most of the time. I got a stock configuration Vostro A90 and it still took 10 days...