Huawei Sold Almost Twice as Many Smartphones as Apple in Q1

Posted on May 1, 2019 by Paul Thurrott in Android, iOS, Mobile with 56 Comments

The market researchers at IDC have weighed in on the struggling smartphone market, but one company saw a massive sales boost. Huawei is now closing in on Samsung for the top spot in the industry, and its first-quarter unit sales were almost double those of the distant number three, Apple.

“Huawei is laser-focused on growing its stature in the world of mobile devices, with smartphones being its lead horse,” IDC’s Ryan Reith says. “The overall smartphone market continues to be challenged in almost all areas, yet Huawei was able to grow shipments by 50 percent, not only signifying a clear number two in terms of market share but also closing the gap on the market leader Samsung. This new ranking of Samsung, Huawei, and Apple is very likely what we’ll see when 2019 is all said and done.”

IDC reports that Huawei sold 59.1 million smartphones in the first quarter of 2019. (I’m still waiting on Gartner’s numbers to write up a general overview of the quarter.) This compares to 71.9 million units for Samsung, the current market leader, and 36.4 million units for Apple.

As noted, Huawei’s market share grew by 50 percent in the quarter. But Samsung’s sales declined by 8.1 percent, and Apple feel through the floor, by an incredible 30.2 percent.

A year ago, Huawei’s and Apple’s positions were basically reversed: In the first quarter of 2018, Apple was in second place with 52.2 million units sold and 15.7 percent market share. And Huawei was in third place with 39.3 million units sold and 11.8 percent market share.

What’s interesting about Huawei’s continued rise is that some other China-based smartphone makers, like Xiaomi and Oppo, have run into roadblocks: Each firm experienced year-over-year sales shortfalls, according to IDC, of 10.2 percent and 6, respectively. But another China-based handset maker, Vivo, saw sales rise 24 percent in the quarter.

“Huawei is now within striking distance of Samsung at the top of the global market,” IDC notes. “In China, Huawei continued its positive momentum with a well-rounded portfolio targeting all segments from low to high. Huawei’s high-end models continued to create a strong affiliation for the mid to low-end models, which are supporting the company’s overall shipment performance.”

Tagged with

Join the discussion!

BECOME A THURROTT MEMBER:

Don't have a login but want to join the conversation? Become a Thurrott Premium or Basic User to participate

Register
Comments (56)

56 responses to “Huawei Sold Almost Twice as Many Smartphones as Apple in Q1”

  1. the mail items guide

    Thanks for this information and it is a very great post.


  2. provision l-3

    Totally unrelated to Huawei. Using IDC's numbers the average selling price of the iPhone jumped to $850 from $793. If accurate then the narrative that the higher pricing of the new iPhones caused iPhone sales to slip is demonstrably false. It is the cheaper phones that aren't selling as well.

    • jrickel96

      In reply to provision l-3:

      Not necessarily true. The inflated cost at the top has an impact. One of the things we've heard is the XS Max was selling well while the XS was not.


      I have a feeling the iPhone 8 may be the top seller by volume, followed by the XS Max then the XR.

      • provision l-3

        In reply to jrickel96:

        Okay, I'm simple minded. Please lay out the math/product mix where the best selling phone costs 599, the second best is 1099 and the third is 749 and you end up with an AP of 850? Because if the XS Max and 8 sold at a 1:1 you still would come up under the 850 number. Considering every other phone Apple sells costs less than the Max what you are describing is pretty much impossible.

        • jrickel96

          In reply to provision l-3:

          You're assuming everyone bought the base model. I paid $1249 more my XS Max.


          You also forget that the 8 has a Plus variant and that the XS still does sell. Averages aren't just built on the top three in sales.


          The XS Max, XS, and XR dominate revenue, I'm sure.


          There will also be plenty who will inflate the price for 256GB of storage. That brings the 8 to $749 and the 8 Plus to $849.


          That's how they average that much. Reports are the most common model sold of the XS Max was the $1249 256GB version.


          So please, tell me how $850 isn't possible here. The 8 and 8 Plus might lead in unit sales but they don't lead in revenue.

          • provision l-3

            In reply to jrickel96:


            Okay, so you are not going to provide the math/product mix to back your assertion. Noted.


            I didn't forget about the 8 had a plus. You said "I have a feeling the iPhone 8 may be the top seller" So I used the iPhone 8 as the example not the plus.


            "tell me how $850 isn't possible here"

            I didn't say it was impossible. I said if the the ASP was 850 then the claim that the newer phones weren't selling well wasn't accurate.


            What I suspect is actually the case is the ASP is lower than 850 and IDC got unit numbers wrong.

            • jrickel96

              In reply to provision l-3:

              I'm not going to go create a potential breakdown of iPhone sales - that's a waste of time. As I said above, would not be surprised if the iPhone 8 is the top seller - doesn't mean it is. It's more complicated than just the model breakdowns because there is variability in storage.


              A 512GB model of the XS Max is $1449. Between the base price $1099 model and the extra cost for those that want more storage, it's not hard to envision a higher average pricepoint, even if the iPhone 8 is the top selling overall model. I also would not be surprised if the sales of all XS, XS Max, and XR models outpaces the iPhone 8 by a decent amount.


              It's not difficult to envision those models making up more than 50% of the sales mix - and that makes the possibility of a $850 price very real.

              • provision l-3

                In reply to jrickel96:

                Then you are agreeing with what I said in the first place. Which is for the the ASP to have a big jump year over year then the newer phones weren’t rejected on price. It would be the lower end where you see the drop off the iPhone 7/7+ and the markets that still sell the iPhone 6.

  3. Rob_Wade

    Huh, and all while this idiotic administration restricts Huawei's access to our market. Imagine how well they'd do if they could be freely marketed in the U.S.

    • jrickel96

      In reply to Rob_Wade:

      Not much. The market already has most users entrenched with a brand, primarily Samsung or Apple. Their only growth segment in the US would be in the low margin, inexpensive phone market.


      And that's where most of Huawei's growth comes from. They leverage cheap labor and subsidies to make inexpensive phones more profitable then sell them in the few developing markets left.


      Apple still owns the high price point phone market globally by a large margin.

      • wright_is

        In reply to jrickel96:

        Europe was the same 3 years ago, Samsung and Apple, now it Huawei is right up there, taking market share from the big names.

        • jrickel96

          In reply to wright_is:

          Not really. Samsung and Apple are still on the same trajectory they were. Huawei has climbed to almost 18% of smartphone sales in Europe by eliminating the other competition like LG, HTC, Motorola, etc. That's what the statistical data based on tracking suggests.


          Globally Xioami and Huawei have charted the same path. They actually have largely by knocking out UNKNOWN devices - phones like Blu or other cheap Android products that are just rebranded by different local distributors.


          Huawei is just consolidating the bottom of the market.


          For reference, Apple had 26.55% of European marketshare in April 2016. They have 26.23% now. Samesung had 35.5% and is now at 34%, so a bit of a loss, but hardly catastrophic. Huawei was at 5.6% and is now 17.7%. Impressive growth, but not at much of the expense of Apple or Samsung.


          They are winning with the people that want to spend less money on phones. Betcha their high end handset sales are WAY behind Apple and Samsung.

          • wright_is

            In reply to jrickel96:

            Around here, you see more Huawei and Xiomi high end phones than Samsung or Apple at the moment. They are also advertised by the carriers much harder than Apple or Samsung at the moment.

            Apple gets relatively little airtime in carrier advertising. Samsung had a week or 2 with the Galaxy S10, which knocked the Mate 20 (Pro) away from the limelight, until the P30 (Pro) came out and knocked it out of the advertising top spot.

            What makes a big difference is the headline prices for Huawei high-end phones is around the same as Samsung and Apple... For the first month. After 3 - 4 months, the prices have dropped by 50% or more. Samsung prices drop 30% in that time and Apple don't drop at all. If you are willing to wait a couple of months after release, Huawei phones make huge sense.

            And given that more and more people are moving away from contract phones and buying them outright, whether you fork out less than 500€ or over 1000€ makes a big difference.

          • Jorge Garcia

            In reply to jrickel96:

            Well, by getting rid of the small fish...they are slowly making a name for themselves with the average consumer. Over time...that can give them - and is giving them - brand awareness and credibility when it comes time for someone in say Europe to buy a new phone.

      • skane2600

        In reply to jrickel96:

        I think many iPhone users are entrenched but I don't think one can say the same thing about Samsung. Of course, you can buy a Samsung phone for under $100 so Samsung is not an exclusively a high-end smartphone maker the way that Apple primarily is. With the trend toward keeping smartphones longer we wouldn't expect a big flip toward Huawei to happen quickly. What's driving Huawei's growth is better price/performance and not even Apple is entirely immune from the effects.

        • jrickel96

          In reply to skane2600:

          Apple owns a disproportionate amount of revenue in the smartphone market.


          Should be noted that Huawei's entire profit as a company in 2018 is only 60-70% of a quarterly profit for Apple.


          Even globally, Samsung currently sits at 31% smartphone marketshare. They were art 32% three years ago.


          Apple is presently 23% globally. They were 20% three years ago.


          Whether in Europe or worldwide, Huawei is not making much of a dent in Samsung or Apple. They are making a dent in HTC, LG, Motorola, and smaller vendors.


          There are other factors too. Nokia was 5% three years ago, so Huawei has probably gotten a lot of old school Nokia users because they are 1% now. LG was over 4.3% and now they are under 3%.


          And Unknown was huge in the past. That made up 16% of all smartphones and now is at 4%. Huawei may have made those at lower profit in the past and vendors rebranded them, so now they just brand them and sell them instead of being just a supplier.


          There's not much about Huawei's rise that is all that impressive when you look at the numbers. They are just cannibalizing the low marketshare brands. There growth is likely to stop by the end of this year because there are fewer brands for them to get conquests from.

          • skane2600

            In reply to jrickel96:

            The discussion is about sales, not about revenue.


            It makes sense that Huawei would displace the minor players first, but there's no magic that will protect Apple and particularly Samsung from the reality of Huawei's better value proposition. Of course there is nothing preventing Apple or Samsung lowering prices to compensate.

            • jrickel96

              In reply to skane2600:

              Un, sales is revenue.


              Units sales are meaningless if they generate less revenue in comparison. So what, Huawei sold more phones for a lower price.


              Let's talk about sales of movie tickets. Ever notice how they report their revenue, not how many tickets were sold?


              So let's say Movie X sold 10 million tickets and generated $25 million in revenue whole Movie Z sold 5 million tickets and generated $60 million in revenue.


              Would the production company that made Movie X really be able to crow about their success when they likely had to discount the ticket to get the sale?


              Revenue IS sales, in fact it is far more important than unit sales.


              Huawei's total company net profit was less than the net profit for Apple for a quarter by a wide margin (Apple ad $14B in profit for final quarter of 2018 while Huawei had a total profit of $8.8B for all of 2018).


              Huawei doubling up iphone sales is meaningless. They have no subscription services to get recurring revenue from those sales, so all they do is a low margin single sale.


              Huawei is going nowhere. They are consolidating the bottom of the market. The numbers over three years bear that out. Huawei offers nothing compelling in way of services that will create any brand loyalty. People just see cheap phones.


              Again, statistically real inroads against Apple or Samsung anywhere. Even in China, Huawei has just grown faster than Apple, not cannibalized sales. Samsung never had much of a hold in China. And Huawei is no where to be seen in India. Not impacting Samsung or Apple in Europe either.


              The evidence doesn't support your claim no more than it supports Paul's perpetual assertion that ChromeOS is a danger to Windows.


              Huawei's growth is already slowing rapidly. Beware of a lot of people bring disappointed that they failed to reach projections by the time we get to 2020.

              • skane2600

                In reply to jrickel96:

                "Un, sales is revenue"


                Revenue is the money that results from sales, but these terms obviously don't mean the same thing, which is why we use two words instead of one.


                What the movie industry reports or thinks is important is entirely irrelevant to this conversation. The fact that tech companies (including Apple until very recently) report how many of a particular product is sold indicates that they have different figures of merit than does the movie business.


                This is probably because buying a ticket for a movie is a transitory event while buying a technology product has the potential to create more revenue opportunities in the future.

                • Jorge Garcia

                  In reply to skane2600:

                  Extremely well said. Apple's marketshare in China is actually 7.4%...not "25%" and if you're Apple and you're trying to shift to a "services" model...it's going to be real hard to do when only 7.4% of the people are holding your device in their hands.

                • wright_is

                  In reply to JG1170:

                  Apple tend to hamstring themselves a little as well. We have had contactless payment with debit and credit cards for about 6-8 years, we've had contactless payment with smartphone for over 3 years (local banks' apps on Android) and GooglePay for nearly as long.

                  Apple only launched ApplePay at the end of last year! And it only gets credit card support from 1 big bank, a couple of smaller, regional banks and a couple of foreign banks. So, a phone with <20% market share and a payment system supported by <15% of national banks... That's going to be a roaring success in a country that still prefers to pay cash for transactions under 50€ and doesn't have large credit card penetration.

                  The Android apps work with the debit cards of the individial banks (and most seem to be on board). I can certainly pay with my Sparkasse App on my 'phone, although I don't use it very often.

                  If I switch to iPhone, I would have to switch banks and I still couldn't use my bank's app to make payments, I'd have to use the Apple app.

                  Interestingly, the "future" banks that will also work with Apple Pay in Germany are all foreign banks with small market share, none of the major banks are currently working with Apple. In fact, the Sparkasse want access to the NFC chip on the iPhone so that its customers can use the iPhone for wireless payments using the Sparkasse app.

                • jrickel96

                  In reply to skane2600:

                  You really have no clue here. Sales figures always include revenue figures - ALWAYS. Having worked in tech, I can tell you this.


                  Please stop trying to make Huawei's numbers more impressive than they are. They are low margin sales as the revenue reveals.


                  Hardware sales indicate little of future sales. Buying tech products may have the potential to create opportunities, but it can also hinder them if the experience is not satisfactory.


                  Sales figures just in units are meaningless. You have to gauge revenue, customer perception, customer satisfaction, and the willingness of your customer base to be willing to grow their investment in your products. Talk to the Sales and Marketing people at your company - they'll tell you how it works.


                  Future revenue opportunities are not good if they all come from low margin areas. If Huawei can not grow their margins by increasing the amount of money people pay for a product then they are fighting a losing battle.


                  This has happened time and time again in the tech field. Low margins are a killer and the average transaction price for a non-Samsung phone is under $200 in the Android space. That means Huawei is selling phones on the cheap. REVENUE matters.


                  If you sell 50 million units and generate $200 a pop, you generate $10B in revenue - but if your margin is slim (it's usually about 5% for Huawei and Xiaomi) then your net is only $500M.


                  So please tell me how sales figures in numbers really matter? You have to push volume to have any decent shot at good profit numbers. Meanwhile Apple has margins that average 50%+.


                  Here's a FACT: Huawei would KILL to sell fewer phones and have Apple's margins. So would Samsung.


                  So stop saying garbage about sales not being revenue. Revenue matters and NET profits matter even more.


                  If Huawei is not pushing their margins, it's a game that will not end in world dominance for them. They have other aspects of their business that are FAR more profitable than phones. For them the phones just help push that side.


                  But I doubt they will continue to see staggering growth. It will slow drastically soon in sales figures and profits will stall for their phones.

                • skane2600

                  In reply to jrickel96:

                  "Sales figures always include revenue figures"

                  So what, pancakes usually include syrup but it doesn't make them the same thing.


                  BTW I worked in tech for over 30 years so your can't pull that "so I can tell you this" crap on me.


                  "So stop saying garbage about sales not being revenue. Revenue matters and NET profits matter even more."


                  Sorry that the facts about the difference between sales and revenue don't match your narrative. I never claimed that sales are more important than revenue but that seems to be the straw argument you wish to stick in my mouth.


                  It's rather absurd to claim that sales and revenue are the same thing and then go on to claim that revenue is more important.


                • wright_is

                  In reply to jrickel96:
                  Please stop trying to make Huawei's numbers more impressive than they are. They are low margin sales as the revenue reveals.

                  You are trying to make it sound like ripping customers off is a good thing.

                  As to the rest, I sort of agree. But have you ever used a Huawei product? How do you know whether their quality and customer service is good or not? Their customer service in Germany is at least as good, if not better than Apple.

                  If my contract phone fails, the carrier sends me a replacement Huawei phone and picks up the old one next day. I only get an invoice if it is a cracked display. If an iPhone fails, the carrier collects the iPhone, takes it away and brings it back repaired 2 weeks later (Apple's policy precludes the carrier exchanging damaged phones).

                  That automatic replacement covers nearly all Android phones, from cheap 100€ phones up to flagships. To get the same level of service as a 100€ Android phone, an Apple user has to take out additional Apple Care on the device, which costs more than the Android phone in the first place!

                  Huawei's support has been excellent so far and has let to us investing even more in their equipment.

                  I got burned by Apple, when I bought my iPhone, it spent 6 of its first 7 weeks of ownership flying back and forth between the repair center. The longest period I had use of the phone was the first 2 days, the shortes was less than an hour, before it was returned to the carrier for repair, because the Apple service center hadn't found a fault and returned it unrepaired. It was only after the third time it failed, and a VERY loud conversation about how unreliable the iPhone was in front of a queue of people waiting to buy iPhones that Apple actually "miraculously" found the RAM error in the phone and replaced it.

        • wright_is

          In reply to skane2600:

          I agree about people holding onto their phones for longer, my brother-in-law and his wife are still running around with Galaxy S3 and S4 minis. My daughter's friend is still using an iPhone 4s, which he plans to replace by the end of this year.

  4. glenn8878

    I almost considered ditching my iPhone with the Intel modem fiasco. Qualcomm will keep iPhone from 5G disaster. Samsung is in trouble. Not a good look with the folding phone.

  5. chrishilton1

    Its simple economics that 12 year old's are taught, Price Elasticity of Demand. Apple raises prices, the market responds, Google, Samsung all follow suit, unit sales decline, because no one wants a $1000 device with an iterative feature set. Nimble competitor brings something new and fresh to market, lowers the price to what consumers will expect to pay, dominates the market. Simples. Paul's rationale for buying the Google Pixel 3 XL fits the economic model perfectly.

  6. PeterC

    If Huawei decided to ditch android, or offer an alternative to it, google would have serious trouble. If Samsung joined in too they would be stuffed...... like a turkey at Christmas,


    Does anyone else think there maybe some western based PR campaign ongoing to try and smear Huawei as a brand? Anyone?


    Huawei does have have its own OS people. How and when they implement it will be fascinating to watch.

    • Paul Thurrott

      In reply to PeterC:

      There's no maybe about it. The US government is engaging in an evidence-free PR campaign against a corporation because it's from China.

      • wosully

        In reply to paul-thurrott:

        Are you kidding me? Paul, evidence free? Just because you have not viewed the evidence would not mean it's evidence free. Usually our stance on issues is more open to the truth. Would you have the government release possibly classified documents for evidence? Also, if they exist, would the Chinese then admit they are legitimate? Do you think the government is just trying to hurt a Chinese company and you are being lied to?

        • lvthunder

          In reply to wosully:

          Yes, that's exactly what he thinks. He has called our government xenophobic over this issue multiple times.

          • wosully

            In reply to lvthunder:

            The U.S. is not against people or cultures, it's against compromising our devices and spying against American citizens. That's very simple for me. I will never understand individuals that can't see that.

            • PeterC

              In reply to wosully:

              Wosully. Maybe take a breath and think about what you just said. “ the US is against compromising our devices and spying against American citizens “. .... seriously mate. The NSA, CIA FBI etc and other us agencies do exactly that through android, windows prevelance. They also do it to everyone else. They spy on allies... remember spying on the German chancellor? Your government is pro actively abusing US tech software dominance to spy on everyone it can. Now they’re aggressively defending that position so they don’t lose that potential. Huawei is the latest in a long line.


              I’ve no love for any country that abuses power China or US or Russia etc etc. It’s all politics and power obsessed nutters mate. East and West.



              • wosully

                In reply to PeterC:

                I know what you are saying and good points. I realize governments invade privacy for different reasons and we try to minimize that. I won't recommend these phones because their government does it for financial gains for their companies.


            • wright_is

              In reply to lvthunder:
              The U.S. is not against people or cultures, it's against compromising our devices and spying against American citizens. That's very simple for me. I will never understand individuals that can't see that.

              Except... https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/05/02/cisco_vulnerabilities/

              At least with Huawei, we are talking about possible backdoors (that the US government hint at, but won't confirm), with US kit we are talking about actual known backdoors and security holes. Heck, Cisco has spent the last 18 months or so closing one backdoor after another, HPE kit was intercepted on route to customers by the NSA and had extra NSA goodness added to its firmware... And we should take the US Governments word for it, that Huawei are even worse than the NSA?

              Well, if a non-internet-facing undocumented diagnostic Telnet daemon is reason enough to kick Huawei kit out of Western networks, surely this doozy from Cisco is enough to hoof American equipment out of British, European and other non-US infrastructure? Fair's fair, no?

        • wright_is

          In reply to wosully:

          Except the UK spymasters have listed some bad coding in Huawei products, but no backdoors (and they have the source code), whilst the US government is saying, "its a security risk!"

          The rest of the world asks for some proof and the US answers, "if you use Huawei, we won't share any intelligence with you in the future!" That isn't proof.

          Then the was the fake news from the Bloomberg yesterday, saying that Vodafone Italy had found a backdoor in its Huawei kit. They didn't. The Telnet port had been left open on some kit - but was blocked at the firewall, found as part of an external security audit.

      • cheetahdriver

        In reply to paul-thurrott:

        If you forget for a minute the consensus of the Five Eyes countries on the problems with their equipment and ownership, they still should be banned for trying to go around the Iranian Sanctions, and bringing banks with them, the issue the founder's daughter is being held by Canada on.

        • wright_is

          In reply to cheetahdriver:

          Well, 3 eyes at least. 2 of them are still undecided or are urging for cautious use of Huawei kit in non-critical parts of the network.

          The rest of the world is demanding evidence before making a decision, with Huawei giving governments access to the source code and the US blustering hot air and not providing any evidence for their claims...

      • Xatom

        In reply to paul-thurrott:

        There you go again reflecting your ignorance of totalitarian regimes. The phones sell in China because the Chinese people understand every breath they take is monitored and controlled by the state so what difference does it make. I guess that's why your down on iphone-they are taking a stand for privacy rights.

    • anderb

      In reply to PeterC:

      ”If Huawei decided to ditch android, or offer an alternative to it, google would have serious trouble.”


      Google has an app store with apps. Huawei don’t. How did no apps work out for Windows Mobile?

      • PeterC

        In reply to anderb:

        Windows mobile didn’t have a “home market users base” as high as China/ India/Asia does. It’s huge. Remember it’s easy to mistakenly just see a western perspective here. Huawei Already have a specific OS offering that meets their business needs prepared, works with EMUI, and technically they already have their own App Store in China as google play store is blocked....

      • wright_is

        In reply to anderb:

        Huawei has an app store with apps. It regularly recommends new apps on Huawei handsets, unless you disable it.

  7. lvthunder

    So is Apple still making the most amount of money from the iPhone?

  8. toukale

    In a mature market, the leaders typically go for the areas with the most ROI. In this case, the smartphone market is no longer growing, it has become a replacement market, outside of places like India and Africa. The only parts of the market that is growing is basically India and Africa, places where iPhones and Galaxy S10 are too expensive. Apple do not play in those price segments so it is to be expected. ASP's tells you everything you need to understand what's going on. Most of Huawei sales are not coming from their line of P20/30. It is coming from much cheaper phones, basically what Samsung have done all those years past (galaxy A, J).

  9. provision l-3

    Can't help but think that if Huawei were able to enter the U.S. market in a meaningful way they would quickly overtake Samsung. Not being being in the world's largest economy has to have some impact.

    • jrickel96

      In reply to provision l-3:

      Why? They haven't overtaken Samsung anywhere else except China. And Samsung hasn't led in China for a long time. Apple still leads in China and looks like it has solidified at 25% of the market.


      Funny thing is, Huawei is nowhere to be found in India. Xiaomi is the threat to Samsung there. Also falling behind Samsung again in Japan. Apple is at almost 70% there.

      • provision l-3

        In reply to jrickel96:

        In theory a company could be the largest smartphone maker in the world without being the best seller in any country. So calling out the order by a few counties is somewhat irrelevant. Not to mention you are ignore the vast population disparity of places like Japan and China.


        Any, why do I think the US market matters and why do I think Huawei could take the lead?


        Samsung sales are declining.

        Huawei sales are growing.

        The difference per IDC is 12 million units.

        The US is the largest economy in the world and the largest or second largest buyer of smartphones.

        I don't know that the US alone could cover the 12 million units but if Huawei could sell in a meaningful way in the US then it could put a huge dent in that number.

        The rest would come from their current trajectory.


        • jrickel96

          In reply to provision l-3:

          Who cares about $12M units when you trail in revenue and profits?


          Huawei is about done. They can't sell high priced phones en masse. Their margins are bad - and that's why they sell.


          I used the example above. Movie X sells 10 million tickets for $25 million in revenue while Movie Z sells 5 million for $60M. Who is the bigger success? Let's also assume that Movie Z cost 15% more as well. It still is doing better.


          Apple also sells recurring revenue services which Huawei does not have.


          Huawei sales are born off of Chinese subsidies that allow for lower cost. That only lasts for so long.


          Huawei will collapse sooner than Samsung ever will. They will see declines or flat sales in the next year and no longer be much of a factor. Xiaomi will become next Chinese darling.

          • skane2600

            In reply to jrickel96:

            It occurred to me at first you were making a bold verifiable prediction but then I realized that "declines or flat sales" is exactly what the rest of the industry is experiencing now, so if Huawei experiences the same in the next year it will just mean they are competing equally with the competition rather than beating them.


            Determining whether Huawei is "much of a factor" next year will be subjective judgement but I predict we will continue to hear positive things about Huawei in the market.

            • jrickel96

              In reply to skane2600:

              Huawei's market impact has been minimal to this point. I hear only good things about their high end phones and sales of those are terrible. Just as they are for most every major handset maker of Android not named Samsung.


              The phone market does not favor Huawei. Samsung still does sell a decent amount of higher end phones and has the higher average sale price of any Android maker by a very wide margin (over $50 per phone). Apple has an average transaction price about TRIPLE Samsung's.


              So Apple will continue to dominate revenue in the market - and that is ALL that matters. I would not be surprised to see Huawei begin to lose marketshare in a year or so as another company jumps up to eat the bottom of the market. Samsung has the high end Android market cornered. Apple has the high end market overall cornered.


              All that's left are cheap phones with a flagship that they hope will be a halo.

          • provision l-3

            In reply to jrickel96:

            I think I know where this is getting confused. When I said that if Huawei could sell in the U.S. they would overtake Samsung I was simply talking about marketshare. Revenue is a totally different kettle of fish.



Leave a Reply