Perhaps you find it hard to believe because you refuse to actually engage in the conversation. You maintain that any numbers coming from MS must be infallible because they're based on actual sell-through data from organizations such as NPD and GfK. You steadfastly refuse to acknowledge the Day One statement, as it clearly negates your claim that these numbers are invariably accurate and well-considered. Instead, you simply disregard it, in much the same way I disregard the 2013 figure.
Ok. I've had enough now. I'm going to break down your post, answer it and then that's it.
Firstly, yes. Any data coming from Microsoft and Sony is official data. They don't just make up a number. Suggesting that Microsoft or Sony over inflate numbers for the sake of it is just absurd.
So lets go back and look at Microsoft's original announcement. The press release as you say was released before the end of the day. But did you actually read the title? It clearly states that Microsoft sold through 1 million in "LESS" than 24 hours.
There are multiple ways that Microsoft could get these numbers (welfare's post provides one example), notice how they don't claim 1.1m or 1.2m or 1.5m. They just say over 1 million because at 4:30pm on day 1 they were able to see more than 1 million users had bought their system. Microsoft of course know how many units they shipped (prob less than 2m) and so they know the announcement they wanted to make would be 1m+ sold and so once they had the figures they announced it.
Anecdote from me. As I said I work in telecommunications. (ask me anything about this market and I'll get back to you in less than 5 seconds with an answer, that's how much I know off the top of my head). Xiaomi are a smartphone manufacturer from China that have great sales. On one such day (singles day in china) they dropped the prices across their entire portfolio.
Xiaomi confirmed to us and the world that by midday they had sold through more than 720,000 units and by the end of the day more than 1,160,000 units had been sold. Yes, they were able to provide an update at midday... if some company in China can do it I'm sure MS and Sony can provide accurate sell through figures on the same day.
As I said, I look at everything. Looking at Sony's numbers and finding them reasonable while finding Microsoft's numbers less so doesn't make me a fanboy. Being hesitant to use possibly-inflated numbers to determine minimum sell-through in wild extrapolations more than a year out from launch doesn't make be a fanboy either.
Yes it does, by definition that makes someone a fanboy. Whether it's disregarding Sony's numbers or Microsoft's numbers. And who exactly are we to say what is "reasonable" or what is "possibly inflated". The numbers are the numbers. In fact Microsoft said "over" 3 million implying more. Yet I've taken it as exactly 3 million in order to find out the minimum sell through possible.
Another anecdote from me. Apple were projected to sell 60 million smartphones in Q4 CY2014. Our team as well as a number of analysts worldwide were given the heads up this may be more so a number of analysts revised their prediction to 65m+, even 70m. In the end Apple recently announced 74.5m. I don't know if you know but that is all kinds of record breaking whilst there and whilst we were given the heads up, no one expected it to b that high.... literally no one. Yet it's from Apple so we need to take it as it is.
Except we don't know anything of the sort. That's simply your estimate, largely based on a very small slice of data, estimated by MS more than a year ago.
Again, You can't just disregard Microsoft's sell through figures yet champion Sony's or Nintendo's as being correct.
If you're going to say Microsoft are lying or have over inflated figures then.
1. That means you have to say the same as others as they use the same tracking companies.
2. You need to be able to prove it.
(You can't just say "I think" sales in country X will be lower than Microsoft claims.)
MS had at least 1M more unsold units than Sony coming out of 4Q14. Now, do we know this, or is it merely my estimate based on the Official Figures provided for 4Q13? Since it's based on the official figures, it can't be wrong, right?
What do you mean here? That MS had 900k unsold as of Q42013? Sony had 300k unsold as of Q42013?
We can't say anything concrete about Q42014 for either so not sure where you're getting this info from.
That's another thing I take issue with; you act as though your estimates somehow offer proof of minimum sell through — "we know" — and graciously concede they're only estimates by admitting sell through could be much higher than you estimate.
I'll say again, they are estimates based on official NPD/GFK numbers. The figure I've worked out is an "absolute minimum" estimate based on hard data as well as estimating against prior year performance as well as factoring in how many units MS shipped.
Sorry, I may have gotten lost. I thought T2 was providing the 300k needed to get to the "base" of 10M from the 9.7M we were at from the 600k T1.5 sold in 2014 based on the 600k they sold in 2013.
Actually, I guess that's not right, because 8.7+0.6=9.3, so I'm not entirely sure how we got from 9.3M to 9.7M before moving on to 10M minimum. And I'm still not sure how all of these reasonable guesses add up to form a bare minimum. So yeah, I guess I got lost somewhere, sorry.
You have got lost somewhere. 8.7m is the base with all the hard data we have. 8.9m is low balling Germany and UK numbers for December 2014. 9.5m is low balling the rest of tier 1 for CY2014. 10.0m is low balling all countries for CY2013 and 2014. Have a read through my original post again.
Anyway, I'm just proposing that looking at stock levels can help us do a sanity check on the world-wide, 14-month extrapolations you've done based entirely on an estimate of launch sales provided by MS more than a year ago. I'm starting to get the impression you feel >10M is immune to any such sanity checks, because it is the One True Estimate*, as it is born from the mouth of Microsoft.
I'd hardly say that most is an estimate. The fact that we're able to prove 8.7m sold through alone using hard data from GFK and NPD (MS use this data btw, just want to say that again) is again showing you that I'm not estimating any of that. The 8.7m is based on hard data. All I've estimated is the further 1.3m as a minimum based on December sales for UK and Germany, 12 months tracking period for the remaining 9 tier 1 countries and 4 months tracking period for 28 tier 2 countries.
You can again read my original post if you want more clarity on this.
It seems like you've already decided a large shipment from Sony will only serve to prove the insanity of attempting to determine stock levels through observation. After all, Sony could have 1.3M warehoused in Burma, while MS have 300k in the US and their remaining 100k in Germany. Seriously, I don't really see how I'm clinging to my beliefs any more stubbornly than you are here.
What does Sony stock level have to do with Xbox One stock level?
All I've said is that I don't want to put an exact figure on Sony sold in figures as we'll find it out shortly anyway. At a minimum it should be over 19.5m.
Like I've said, I won't be estimating MS channel stock as it's impossible to have an accurate number. I can give you an estimate if you want but it'll be very very broad. (error gap of a 500k each way)
Like I said before, we can work out that X1 shipments will be 11.5m-12.0m. You yourself said 11.8m I believe.
Also we can work out that at a minimum, sell through to end users will be 10m or higher at the very least.
I don't see why the 3M figure would be any more credible than their 1M figure, so I disregard it. You don't find my argument credible, so you disregard it. I see no reason to use hard-to-believe numbers as the basis for wild extrapolations to determine the floor for demand. I'm not seeing a lot of need for much extrapolation at all, really. Not if there's other stuff we can look at instead, like current stock levels.
What right do you have to call this a hard to believe number. If this is the argument you'e using (even after reading the stuff I've written above in this same post) then you're either just trolling or you don't understand what an official announcement is.
What you're quite literally saying is "Microsoft are lying, I only trust Sony's numbers". Even though they both use the same methods and companies to get these sell through figures.
There is no wild extrapolations.
Please expand on stock levels, and no, using a german retailer + US retailer as evidence doesn't count. Whilst I agree that stock levels will be high, using two retailers as evidence for a worldwide channel number is a case of "wild extrapolations" where as my calculations are nothing of that sort as... once again.... it's based on official hard data, not anecdotal data. Unless you have hard data from GFK and NPD to prove it (as has been posted previously) then you can't claim anything else as a fact. Only as an idea of what we might see.
And this isn't "official data." It's a press release. Sony's releases actually say they're based on NPD, GfK, and "SCEI internal estimates." I believe I've only ever seen MS cite themselves, actually. Besides, this stuff isn't part of their SEC filings, right?
4 answers.
1. It's official if it's in a press release.
2. Sony do not say they base their figures on NPD or GFK. They only say SCEI internal estimates.
3. Microsoft have access to the same data.
4. Neither Sony nor Microsoft will ever include sell through data in their financials.
So as you can see, If you say Microsoft don't quote NPD in their press release, and neither do sony (even though they both use them), then you can't go around saying Microsoft is wrong and Sony is right.
The smartest minds thought the world was flat for years. Don't be one of those people.
Here is the Sony press release so you can double check no mention of NPD and GFK.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ss-185-million-units-worldwide-300016034.html
I'll accept if you don't want to believe that minimum sell through is at 10m+. What I have issue with is calling out Microsoft as lying and saying that sell through must be lower because you don't trust what Microsoft is telling us. That's just absurd.
It's like me saying Sony are lying to us and sell through must be higher because PS4 is selling like crazy.... or do you think that as well?
