Wolverton ham-handedly tries to concoct his usual Apple angst

&ot“Apple’s fans were expecting big things from the company’s special event today in San Francisco, and CEO Steve Jobs didn’t disappoint,” Troy Wolverton reports for The San Jose Mercury News.

Blah, blah, blah… tells us all nothing we don’t already know… and then ends with a typical Wolverton-esque fabrica…, er, flourish:

The announcements came as Apple’s lineup was starting to look long-in-the tooth and sales were starting to slow. Apple’s revenue from iPod fell year-over-year for the first time ever in the first quarter this year and grew less than five percent in the second quarter. Meanwhile, a survey by research firm iSuppli released Tuesday suggested that iPhone sales had slowed markedly after their first days on store shelves and were not on pace to meet Apple’s own forecast for current quarter sales.

Full article, Think Before You Click™, here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “B. H.; for the heads up.]

Let’s look behind Wolverton’s sloppily-executed sleight-of-hand, shall we?

Facts: Apple’s iPod lines continue to offers richer mixes with each passing year and consequently offer lower price points. And comparing sequential quarters ignores seasonality in favor of sensationalist tripe (which, by the way, also happens to be Troy’s nickname here in the palatial MDN headquarters). What Wolverton neglects to mention are that iPod unit sales continue to grow year-over-year in each quarter:

Q1:
• 2007 (ended 12/30/06): 21.066 million iPods
• 2006 (ended 12/31/05): 14.043 million iPods
• 2005 (ended 12/25/04): 04.580 million iPods
• 2004 (ended 12/27/03): 733,000 iPods

Q2:
• 2007 (ended 03/07/07): 10.549 million iPods
• 2006 (ended 04/01/06): 08.526 million iPods
• 2005 (ended 03/26/05): 05.311 million iPods
• 2004 (ended 03/27/04): 807,000 iPods

Q3:
• 2007 (ended 06/30/07): 09.815 million iPods
• 2006 (ended 07/01/06): 08.111 million iPods
• 2005 (ended 07/13/05): 06.155 million iPods
• 2004 (ended 06/26/04): 860,000 iPods

Q4:
• 2006 (ended 09/30/06): 08.729 million iPods
• 2005 (ended 10/11/05): 06.451 million iPods
• 2004 (ended 09/25/04): 02.016 million iPods

Facts have a way of cutting through, don’t they?

In addition, the survey by research firm iSuppli released Tuesday would have been deemed ludicrous had it not stated that iPhone sales had slowed after the initial hordes of camped-out line-waiters abated. It’s only logical. Right, Troy? Oh, sorry, we forgot.

Finally, the survey by research firm iSuppli released Tuesday stated that Apple’s iPhone outsold all smartphones in the United States in July, its first full month on sale, accounting for 1.8 percent of all U.S. mobile handset sales. In the survey, iSuppli reiterated its forecast that Apple would sell 4.5 million iPhones this year, rising to more than 30 million in 2011. iSuppli also stated that Apple’s iPhone sold more than Research in Motion’s Blackberry series, the entire Palm portfolio and any individual smartphone model from Motorola, Nokia or Samsung. iSuppli also said that it’s likely that the speed of the iPhone’s rise to competitive dominance in its segment is unprecedented in the history of the mobile-handset market. Apple’s own forecast (really, a goal more than a forecast) is for 1 million iPhone units by the end of September (they also have a goal of selling 10 million iPhone units in 2008). Apple today actually stated in a press release that they are on track to sell their one millionth iPhone before the end of September.

So, something’s wrong with Wolverton’s report. And that something would be Troy Wolverton.

Contact Info:
Sensationalist Tripe: twolverton@mercurynews.com
Sensationalist Tripe’s boss, Managing Editor, David Satterfield: dsatterfield@mercurynews.com
Sensationalist Tripe’s boss’s boss, Executive Editor and Vice President, Carole Leigh Hutton: chutton@mercurynews.com

29 Comments

  1. That guy has been sucking too much MS coolaid for too long.

    Its the usual hack with the hidden grudge against Apple or for that any successful organisation.

    His inaccurate comments just show how ignorant he is and that he does not do any research.

    But then again why should he do any reserarch into the facts? – he is a hack on the internet that can get away with anything through hiding his identity.

  2. Troy Wolverton said:
    Apple’s revenue from iPod fell year-over-year for the first time ever in the first quarter this year.

    Apple said (2007Q2 is the first quarter in 2007 for Apple):
    http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q207data_sum.pdf
    Ipod revenue 2006Q2: $1,714 M
    Ipod revenue 2007Q2: $1,689 M

    Anders calculates: revenue 2007Q2 minus 2006Q2
    1,689 – 1,714 = -25
    It is a negative number, the revenue fell.

    Facts have a way of cutting through, don’t they?

    Friendly advice to MDN: revenue is how much money, unit sales is how many items. Selling 20 expensive items can bring in more money than selling 30 cheaper items. Amazing, isn’t it!

  3. Anders,

    Read the Take again:

    Apple’s iPod lines continue to offers richer mixes with each passing year and consequently offer lower price points.

    With that sentence, which you obviously don’t understand, MDN explains why the revenue declined. They’re not disputing that fact, they’re explaining it (unlike Wolverton).

    It’s highly doubtful that you could teach MDN anything about revenue and unit sales that they don’t already know inside out.

    What are you, about twelve?

  4. @Reading Comprehension
    Sorry, I was concentrating on the sentences:

    “And comparing sequential quarters ignores seasonality in favor of sensationalist tripe (which, by the way, also happens to be Troy’s nickname here in the palatial MDN headquarters).”
    Wolverton was not comparing sequential quarters.

    “So, something’s wrong with Wolverton’s report.”
    No, there wasn’t.

  5. Unit number, revenue….decline– whatever
    The salient point is that Apple/SJ&Co;are riding the dominant marketing/product up curve with more skil and aplomb than anyone else in the industry… Most pundits/critics/bloggers are just scrambling to appear cogent and relevant. Trouble is that the Mind of Jobs is inscrutable.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.