A report by Barrons compared the predictions of analysts from Citigroup, FBR Capital Markets and Gartner; reports from each differ widely on the number of tablets that will be sold next year, but all agree Apple will lead the pack.
Citigroup's estimates say 35 million tablet devices will ship in 2011, with Apple's iPad representing three quarters of the total (around 26 million), giving it a share of the market similar to the company's dominant position in music players with the iPod.
Citigroup sees 400 million PCs being sold next year, but estimates that growth in tablets will come at the expense of 11 million PCs (which would have been sold had the iPad not shaken up the market). That's enough to have prompted the group to reduce its expected growth of the PC market from 12 percent to just 9 percent over this year's sales.
Craig Berger of FBR Capital Markets says Apple will sell 40 million iPads next year, and that other makers will mange to sell another 30 million. He indicates that every 2.5 tablets sold will result in a lost PC sale, or a total of 28 million fewer conventional PCs.
While often missing the mark on its reports, DigiTimes has reported Apple is gearing up manufacturing to reach annual production of 70 million iPads, and expected other makers to contribute an additional 30 million to tablet sales.
Gartner noted that the last quarter of PC sales was "the weakest in several years," but does not include iPads in its definition of PCs sold.
Weathering the iPad storm
Apple's sales of iPads are cutting into PC makers' profit margins, including Apple's own. Of course, Apple also enjoys the fattest profit margins of PC makers, thanks to its ability to attract buyers to machines with a higher average sales price.
Company executives began warning about more aggressive prices on upcoming products, a ruthless strategy intended to keep the iPad from repeating the mistake of isolating a leading product into an upscale market niche as it did with the Macintosh in the late 80s.
By leveraging the vast economies of scale inherent in building tens of millions of iPods and iPhones, Apple can sell the nearly 10 inch iPad for the same price or less than competitors can afford to sell their much smaller 7 inch tablets, which Apple insists can't deliver a differentiated experience over existing smartphone-class devices the way that the iPad can.
While Apple's successful growth in entering the existing smartphone business has been duplicated and in some cases exceeded in sales volumes by Android, Googles operating system hasn't produced competitive music players or tablets, both markets that were largely defined by Apple with the iPod and iPad and, in the case of the iPod, a market Apple maintained a dominant position in for years even under the onslaught of supposed "iPod-killers" promised by Creative, Sony, Microsoft, and others.
iPad contenders
Meanwhile, rival PC makers are left to use Microsoft's Windows 7, which hasn't done well in the Tablet PC/Slate PC market before; or adopt Google's current Android OS, which the company itself doesn't yet recommend for tablet-sized devices but is already being sold on devices such as the Galaxy Tab; or use Google's still unfinished Chrome OS, which delivers a browser-centric experience.
Other companies, including RIM and HP, have decided to build their own iOS competitors, with RIM embarking on a new tablet environment for its PlayBook that pairs the QNX kernel with Adobe's AIR (a derivative of Flash) to provide a development environment for apps and the overall system.
HP's acquisition of Palm and its WebOS promises to bring another option to the tablet market sometime next year, sporting the web-based environment that didn't help Palm remain self sufficient in its efforts to rebuild its smartphone business with the Palm Pre. HP's previous attempt to deliver a Slate PC running Windows 7 failed miserably.
120 Comments
Company executives began warning about more aggressive prices on upcoming products, a ruthless strategy intended to keep the iPad from repeating the mistake of isolating a leading product into an upscale market niche as it did with the Macintosh in the late 80s.
Right strategy, wrong rationale. The Mac was never a leading product and was released into a market already dominated by IBM-PC clones. This wasn't a mistake, it was just the way the market was preconfigured. For the iPad, Apple has a clear field. The company is signaling a similar strategy to the one they've taken with the iPhone. Apple will challenge competitors or potential competitors on price, and will not provide them with a price overhang to squeeze under.
I'm not sure why this idea keeps cropping up, that is that Apples profit margin is thin with the iPad. Everything I've seen seems to indicate a margin larger than what is seen on Apples PC hardware.
As to the competitors and their seven inch devices, I see nothing to indicate that they can't compete on price. If anything they are offering product with more features. Besides there is a thought in the industry that Apple screwed up in two respects. One is the issue of aspect ratio and the other is that iPad is to damn big. The only way to know for sure is to offer up the smaller wide screen devices. Frankly I think apple will be forced to offer a sub seven inch iPad/iPod to remain competitive.
Anybody that wants to argue the point should pick up a kindle and experience the device a bit. Put iOS on a similarly sized device and watch students and others adopt the machine in a mad rush.
By the way when I referenced a sub 7" iPad/iPod above it was due to the idea that there is a signifact difference in how the two device families are used. A sub 7" could be the video iPod that many of us would like to have.
As for the contenders; Apple is more open to aggressive competition than many want to admit. I still see Android as a loosing proposition with Blackberries approach possibly the only solid play coming. Even then RIM has a long was to go and needs a native toolkit ASAP as Flash is a huge error. Like it or not Apple needs to a more feature complete iPad. That is expected in iPad 2 but the exact composition of the additions to iPad 2 are not known yet so we don't know if the platform will be able to keep share up against the competition.
I'm not sure why this idea keeps cropping up, that is that Apples profit margin is thin with the iPad. Everything I've seen seems to indicate a margin larger than what is seen on Apples PC hardware.
I didn't see anything in the article to suggest that margins on the iPad are thin, only that Apple can use economies of scale to be as aggressive on price as they need to be.
They have, iPod Touch and iPhone.
The 7" Galaxy Tab is not a very good size, having used one it's too big for a pocket so you need a bag, then you may as well get the superior iPad.
My iPhone 4 is in for repair, so I've been using a few Android phones an underwhelming and annoying experience, it's like the difference between Coca Cola and a no name brand of Cola, sort of the same but different, I want my "real thing" back.
By the way when I referenced a sub 7" iPad/iPod above it was due to the idea that there is a signifact difference in how the two device families are used. A sub 7" could be the video iPod that many of us would like to have.
I think in iPad 2 Apple will further bury the hatchet by lowering its price and by adding features like FaceTime, larger capacities, and even better battery performance. The competition will not be in a position to match Apple's offerings.
Competitors will have to sell their tablets at a loss in order to move units. And even then, because of the feature disparity, it will be an arduous task.