If Microsoft is being coy about revealing Surface sales data, it may be for good reason. Early demand for the company’s first tablet is lousy. How lousy? Put it this way: If Microsoft really did manufacture three million to five million Surface tablets to sell in the fourth quarter, it’s going to have between two million and four million left over at quarter’s end.
Estimates from the analyst are 500,000-600,000 for the quarter.
Hey, look! Microsoft has its very own PlayBook!
I can’t say this is coming as a shock. Even given the lackluster reviews they would have sold more units if they had bothered to make them available at a variety of retailers rather than just Microsoft stores. Still it’s Microsoft we’re talking about here, they never really seem to get products right until the 3rd iteration. They have the money and tenacity to stay in the fight. It will be intersting to see how things go in the next couple of years. It seems to me they need to decide on what sort of the product the Surface is going to be, a laptop replacement or an easy to use consumer device. They tried to have it both ways and got neither right this time.
I’ve owed both and playbook is way better than this Piece of gutter trash.
I smell another Motorola Xoom-like fire sale in the wind.
They’ve already decided what the product is going to be. Now they’re probably trying to decide how to change it.
“If Microsoft is being coy about revealing Surface sales data, it may be for good reason. Early demand for the company’s first tablet is lousy.”
Would the same logic be used to explain why Amazon hasn’t/doesn’t announce Kindle sales figures?
Good point, I was thinking of Microsoft promising a “no compromises” tablet. There is no such thing.
They often and repeatedly commit the mistake of believing that Sales-meeting mantras work on anyone outside the company.
Wouldn’t Amazon brag loudly about huge sales if they were theirs to brag about?
Duh
Hell yes they would.
Zune?
Preeeeecisely.
The actual Reality Distortion Field.
Both? You have my sympathies sir.
Boom.
Correct conclusion, Surface sales probably not great. What made me comment was that was an awful, awful article. At least one factual mistake: The Surface is sold online, not just in Microsoft Stores. I don’t know how they came up with the idea that Microsoft had planned to only sell them in Microsoft Stores, but I don’t believe Microsoft has ever said that they would only be sold in their stores. All they said was that initially they would only be sold in their stores. Lastly, the author asks if it’s time for Microsoft to change their mind and expand distribution. Steve Ballmer has already said they would do this in a recent interview. Once again, awful, awful article.
While you are technically correct, your justification for labelling the article as “awful” is not valid. The author’s point was that people who don’t know what they want are not going to see the Surface and thus, decide to buy it. Do you think that technical neophytes are going to buy them online? Or are they going to go their local electronics store and look at all the tablets there?
While he is technically incorrect, his point is perfectly valid. If people can’t see and try out the Surface, they’re not going to buy it.
Even if Steve Ballmer expands distribution later, that doesn’t help now. The Christmas season sales are going to be awful and that will not look good for the Surface. If a neophyte sees one in a Best Buy in February, they’ll think to themselves “Oh, I heard those weren’t very popular. Where are the iPads?”
All I said was correct conclusion, poor justification. Neophytes don’t keep up with sales numbers, whether or not they buy one will have little to do with previous sales, at least in the near future.
The information is from an analyst. What more needs to be said?
All you said was it was an awful awful article and used a meaningless error to try to justify it.
True, neophytes don’t keep up with sales numbers, but if the performance is poor enough to get reported by the mainstream press, they’ll hear about it.
Lets be clear, three errors. They’re not meaningless. 1. Surface is not only sold in their brick and mortar stores. False. 2. The original Surface strategy was to only sell in their brick and mortar stores. Unknowable. 3. Questioning whether Microsoft will change their minds about 2. Already has been announced.
What’s clear is that if the MS manufacturing numbers are correct, sales are disappointing and the errors are irrelevant.
I already said that the gist of the article was correct. I’m judging the article based on one criterion: Factual errors. This is All Things D. They need to get facts right.
fair enough
Cool, maybe I wasn’t as eloquent in saying what I wanted to say. Sorry.
Yeah, that sounds like masochism. Or maybe he’s just a collector of failed products. Hey Smooth, do have a Pre too?
I was incorrect in my original statement. Apparently Microsoft never did say that they would ever expand availability of the Surface beyond their stores, physical and online.