Log in

View Full Version : Motorola Shipments Jump, but Q Sales Lackluster


Jerry Raia
10-08-2006, 06:00 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=22348' target='_blank'>http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=22348</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Motorola Inc.’s smartphones are getting better reception overseas than in the United States. Sales of the manufacturer’s Q, which combines a traditional mobile phone with Microsoft Windows-based programs, have been lackluster in the United States compared to its Ming smartphone, which is going gangbusters in China, according to a Gartner Inc. report released Thursday."</i><br /><br />This surprises me somewhat, considering how many Q's I have been seeing at the airports etc. Perhaps if Verizon wasn't the only one carrying the Q it would be doing better.

Stinger
10-08-2006, 06:30 PM
I think the following quote from the article hits the nail on the head:

"In the United States, there is a very small smartphone market," Mr. Kort said. “The United States is only 6% of the smartphone market."

By making the Q a Verizon exclusive, Motorola have limited its sales to perhaps 3% of the world-wide smartphone buying public. Even if they do very well within this limited market, the sales must be relatively small.

Kris Kumar
10-08-2006, 06:51 PM
I think the following quote from the article hits the nail on the head:

"In the United States, there is a very small smartphone market," Mr. Kort said. “The United States is only 6% of the smartphone market."

By making the Q a Verizon exclusive, Motorola have limited its sales to perhaps 3% of the world-wide smartphone buying public. Even if they do very well within this limited market, the sales must be relatively small.

Not only that, but the need for $80 plan. :evil:

The other interesting aspect is that RIM/BlackBerry is doing incredibly well. The stock I believe rose by almost $20 recently. 8O I hope the Microsoft camp is able to do a better job in the coming months.

Jerry Raia
10-08-2006, 06:54 PM
They really need to get the Q to the other carriers.

raulr
10-09-2006, 03:37 AM
It seems to be a little early to talk about wether or not the Q is selling well. The numbers they quoted were based on all of a single month that the Q was out. Remember, for the first half of the year, the Q was only out in June. Motorola still hasn't announced it's 3rd quarter results. I think it would be more appropriate to assess the Q's success or failure at that point. It may not be getting sales like the RAZR, but like Jerry, I've seen quite a few Q's out and about.

Once they expand to GSM, it may have a better shot at increasing sales. The only problem, is that carriers are already carrying the HTC, the Samsung, and the Nokia that offer a similar form factor. I don't know how willing the carriers will be to add another smartphone that doesn't bring much more to the table.

Jerry Raia
10-09-2006, 03:43 AM
The exclusive deal with Verizon might not have been such a great idea.

Kris Kumar
10-09-2006, 04:10 AM
The exclusive deal with Verizon might not have been such a great idea.

I am sure it was for Verizon.

I wish we knew why Moto went with CDMA version first, instead of GSM, which would have had a bigger market. Given that Smartphones and especially the ones with keyboard are not a mass market commodity, why did they target CDMA first?

Jerry Raia
10-09-2006, 04:20 AM
It could have just been an overly cautious mistake. Maybe in the wake of the Mpx220 fiasco which ran on GSM, they wanted tighter control when they rolled it out. I'm just guessing here.

Stinger
10-09-2006, 08:20 AM
Didn't Motorola also have some issues with its GSM chipsets at about the time that the Q was being developed? If I remember correctly, EDGE caused some pretty serious instabilities and had to be disabled on a number of products.

MacVicta
10-09-2006, 09:49 AM
Motorola had a problem with the EDGE chipsets within their slim handsets. Their gameplan was to miniaturize the chips from "Triplets" series handsets (letter followed by three digits, V557, V400, etc.) such as the V635 in order to put them in the original RAZR V3. It didn't happen and strangely enough the problem still wasn't corrected by the time the RAZR V3i arrived.

It was going to effect the Q as well. The GSM Q was going to ship as a GPRS-only device. This was unacceptable on so many levels. Motorola did, however, have no problem shrinking Qualcomm's EV-DO chipsets. So while the GSM Q was taken back to the drawing board, the CDMA variant was up for grabs and of course Verizon had the longest reach. I'm not even sure if Sprint was a player, Motorola and Sprint were still iffy at the time.

It's obvious why sales suffer: you can't get the $199 2yr contract price without dishing -at least- $80 a month for combined EV-DO data/talking minutes. This will be a different story when the Q launches on Sprint at not only a cheaper price for the hardware itself but with Sprint's cheaper data pricing. Should be by the beginning of 2007.

Of course you can't be a global sales success without GSM. Imagine how the RAZR would've done had it just stayed a Verizon exclusive. The newly revamped GSM model will appear as a 3.6mbps HSDPA variant likely with 2mp camera and other improvements. Backed with EDGE as the chipset issue is corrected with these latest models KRZR, RIZR, RAZR maxx and RAZR xx available or shipping shortly.

The sales trajectory quoted by Motorola officials takes this all into consideration. The first month's sales were only off by about 100,000. As the price of the hardware itself begins to decline and you see it offered elsewhere, the Q show really begins. Ron Garriques leaked details earlier this year (http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2006/06/12/q-fans-good-news-itll-cost-50-and-have-umts-by-2007/) such as a rapid decline in price to $50. Let's also not forget how Motorola talks up this being the first of a family of devices including PPC models. The Q itself is not a BlackBerry killer, just Motorola getting in the door and leaving behind so many failed attempts such as MPx.

Jerry Raia
10-09-2006, 03:50 PM
Interesting info. Thanks. :)