New Windows 95 sales figures
Bill Oconnor
In article <marvinlD...@netcom.com>,
mar...@netcom.com (Marvin Lichtenthal) wrote:
> PC Data has some new sales figures out today thru Sept 20.
> They are down again, but are still significant.
What are they down to? Are the returns factored in yet?
Where are the numbers?
> However reality may be finally settling in. Goldman Sachs has a
> quote on Moneyline today.
Microsoft doesn't want to play games with Goldman Sachs. Guaranteed.
> They have reports that some resellers have a 6 month supply of
> Windows 95.!!
I can only wonder what this 6 month supply really represents. Is
it based on the old "expectations", or on the revised new and improved
"expectatios" version 3.1.
> However MS will try to sell the product at all costs.
There's that deperation factor again. At ALL costs!
>BOB which has not sold well is getting some special promotion.
It probably wasn't up to "expectations".
>The price has been cut to around 50 dollars and will probably be
>lower at actual retail/mail order.
Probably.
>They are offering a free BOB Plus.
Yippee!
> If you want to get BOB for nothing that can be arrange also.
> MS's PR firm will send a copy if you email or fax a suggestion
> for improving BOB.
Do you have an e-mail address for them. <g>
>Marvin Lichtenthal
Bill Oconnor
* When the NEWS is bad! -- SHOOT the messenger! *
James A. Dahl
: In article <marvinlD...@netcom.com>,
: mar...@netcom.com (Marvin Lichtenthal) wrote:
: > PC Data has some new sales figures out today thru Sept 20.
: > They are down again, but are still significant.
: What are they down to? Are the returns factored in yet?
: Where are the numbers?
Here are some sales figures from PC Week (with my comments):
PCWeek article: Win 95 sales still strong, but coming down to earth
PCW> Microsoft Corp. is still ringing up strong sales of Windows 95, but
PCW> the pace has ebbed since the furious first few days immediately
PCW> following the product's Aug. 24 launch.
PCW> For the seven days ended Sept. 20, Microsoft sold about $33 million
PCW> worth of Windows 95, according to PC Data, a market-research firm
PCW> in Reston, Va., that surveys retailers.
Okay, lets estimate $100 per copy (upgrades are $85-$89, new copies are
$200, so I'm estimating like 90% upgrades, way high). That means MS
sold 330,000 copies last week.
PCW> The sales numbers have trended down since the product's debut.
PCW> Retailers sold $108 million worth of Windows 95 in the first week
PCW> the much-anticipated operating system was on the shelves, according
PCW> to PC Data. During the week ended Sept. 6, Windows 95 accounted for
PCW> $53 million in sales; the following week, the number fell to
PCW> $46 million.
So total MS has sold 2.4 million copies in a month (by my conservative
price estimate).
PCW> Despite the slide, Chris LeTocq, the principal analyst at
PCW> SoftTracks in Los Altos, Calif., said he expects demand for
PCW> Windows 95 to pick up again later this fall.
Uh, huh. Looks like a clear downward trend to me, 108 -> 53 -> 46 -> 33.
Let's be VERY generous and assume MS continues selling 330,000 per week
for the rest of the year. that would result in 13 weeks * 330,000 or
about 4.3 million copies, sum total, 6-7 million copies this year! That
is atrocious. MS was guaranteeing 25 million. IDC was predicting
50 million. Those figures would make Win95 the most dismal failure
(compared to expectations) since NT (and OS/2 before that).
PCW> "What you're seeing is that after the initial bump, there's a
PCW> slowdown as the market absorbs the impact, and then it goes up
PCW> again. The height of the bump depends on the promotion and
PCW> merchandising."
Uh huh.
PCW> And in this case it has been substantial. Microsoft is spending
PCW> just over $100 million on Windows 95 promotions, according to
PCW> company insiders.
PCW> "We'll see 11 million upgrades and about 10 million new units,"
PCW> LeTocq said.
Woah, jump back. Though the 20 million seems quite, it is important to
note that he is guessing half upgrades, half new. Let's adjust my math
to go with that estime. New average cost of Win95 is $145. That means
to date Microsoft has sold 1.7 million copies (OUCH!). Continuing
at the $33 million per week (very generous assumption) MS will sell
3 million more copies this year, for a sum total of 4.7 million. OUCH!
PCW> International Data Corp. predicts that Microsoft will ship 20 million
PCW> units by the end of the year. Dataquest Inc. says the number will
PCW> hit 30 million.
Both known for their unerring accuracy :) Time will tell, thirteen weeks
from now, I guess! Just for fun, though, lets see what it would take
to sell 30 million copies this year. With 1.7 million sold already by
the above estimate: 28.3 million to go/13 weeks MS needs to sell
2.2 million copies per week to make that estimate. MS, in each week after
now, needs to sell more copies than they sold in the first month! Let's
go with 90% upgrades figure that 2.4 million copies have been sold. MS
then needs to sell 2.1 million copies per week. As much each week as
they've sold in its first "big blowout" month! Hehehehe ROTFL.
PCW> Meanwhile, it remains unclear how many copies of Windows 95 are
PCW> being returned. Distributors and resellers report some returns
PCW> but chalk it up to the normal cycle that accompanies any product
PCW> introduction.
If we factor returns in things are only going to get worse...
PCW> "Some of our [retail]customers have taken product back because
PCW> their customers were confused," said Vannesa Frei, a senior product
PCW> manager for Merisel, a distributor in El Segundo, Calif.
Customers were confused by commercials that said they'd be able to
multitask :)
PCW> Microsoft officials, in Redmond, Wash., were not immediately
PCW> available for comment.
Gee, no kidding?
trueba
>==========James A. Dahl, 9/22/95==========
Well if you call the fastest-selling (so far) product that
Microsoft has EVER produced a dismal failure, then I suppose you
are right. I don't presume to tell you that the sales will
continue or increase. But before you say that the 6-7 million
sold this year will constitue a dismal failure, remember that
that only accounts for four months of sales. Sure it probably is
not going to sell at the same rate that it sold in the first
four days. And it will probably continue to decrease to a
certain extent. All the predictions that Microsoft and IDC made
were based on pure hype, and nothing more. You can't compare
reality in sales of any operating system (including OS/2 WARP)
with the hype and spin that the manufacturer uses to try to pump
up future sales. However, I don't think any company would mind a
product that sold 6-7 million copies in it's first four months
after release.
William F. Mullin
>
>>Let's be VERY generous and assume MS continues selling 330,000 per week
>>for the rest of the year. that would result in 13 weeks * 330,000 or
>>about 4.3 million copies, sum total, 6-7 million copies this year! That
>>is atrocious. MS was guaranteeing 25 million. IDC was predicting
>>50 million. Those figures would make Win95 the most dismal failure
>
>Microsoft has EVER produced a dismal failure, then I suppose you
>are right. I don't presume to tell you that the sales will
>continue or increase. But before you say that the 6-7 million
>sold this year will constitue a dismal failure, remember that
>that only accounts for four months of sales. Sure it probably is
Of course, you realize that the Win96 upgrade (bugfix) will be
released 2Q96. Back again on the round-about. There is currently
10 million copies of Win95 in the channels. If MS only sells 6-7 million
copies, who get burned by the unsold remainder? Are you fool enough
to believe that MS will happily buy back the worthless excess
inventory, truebs?
>not going to sell at the same rate that it sold in the first
>four days. And it will probably continue to decrease to a
>certain extent. All the predictions that Microsoft and IDC made
>were based on pure hype, and nothing more. You can't compare
Hype that MS was all too happy to delight in... up until the release
date approached. Then, it was time to backpedal from the original
claims, and to pull the Chicago carrot away from the user.
>reality in sales of any operating system (including OS/2 WARP)
>with the hype and spin that the manufacturer uses to try to pump
>up future sales. However, I don't think any company would mind a
>product that sold 6-7 million copies in it's first four months
>after release.
Does this include the company that spent $500 million on an ad campaign to
promote this OS/GUI kludge?
Waiting for Cairo... (since June 20, 1995); Win95 = Chicago = DOS 7.0 + Win 4.0
--
William F. Mullin (author of "TROLLOGY") bi...@balrog.aecom.yu.edu
OS/2 Gamers! Go to http://www.io.com/~desantom for information about
REXX ADVENTURE, the Interactive Fiction development system for OS/2.
TROLL 0: The Stealer Of Souls | TROLL 2: Evil On Queen Street -- COMING SOON
TROLL 1: Kill The King | TROLL 3: Holy Diver -- TBA
Bill Oconnor
Jim, your estimate may not be too far off the mark, but noone has
really factored in the returns yet. All indication are saying
they are "sky high".
Back to your estimates, the following is an excerpt from the
Wall St. Journal:
begin excerpt -------------------------------------------------------
From the Wall Street Journal, Friday Sept 22 1995
Page B2.
Excerpts only to avoid copyright infringement.
"Retail Stores Have Overstock of Windows 95"
by Don Clark.
"Some software retailers were too bullish about Windows 95, analysts say.
'What happened is that the channel overbought,' one person close to MS said.
Rick Sherlund, an analyst at Goldman, Sachs estimated that about 2.5 M
copies of Windows 95 have been sold since its Aug 24 launch. That pace
is consistent with Wall Street expectations tht 10 to 12 million copies
will be sold over 12 to 18 months... But he believes resellers ordered
8 to 10 million copies in advance, far more than needed so far.
'I think MS will wind up taking some of that inventory back,' he said.
end excerpt ---------------------------------------------------------
For those who don't know, Goldman Sachs is one of the most prestigious
financial institutions in the world. There are NOT some paid stooge
for Microsoft.
Look at what they are saying the long term street projection is.
If Microsoft is "lucky", Win 95 may catch up to OS/2 someday, but
right now that goal in "nowhere" in sight.
Where are all of the "shills" who were spouting that 4 million
number just 2 days ago? Are they doing a "recount"?
[snip]
>PCW> Microsoft officials, in Redmond, Wash., were not immediately
>PCW> available for comment.
>Gee, no kidding?
Bill Oconnor
trueba
>==========William F. Mullin, 9/24/95==========
>
>In article <DFDxD...@falcon.daytonoh.attgis.com>
>Barry...@DaytonOH.NCR.COM (trueba) writes:
>>
>>>Let's be VERY generous and assume MS continues selling
330,000 per week
>>>for the rest of the year. that would result in 13 weeks * 330,000 or
>>>about 4.3 million copies, sum total, 6-7 million copies this
>year! That
>>>is atrocious. MS was guaranteeing 25 million. IDC was predicting
>>>50 million. Those figures would make Win95 the most dismal failure
>>
>>Well if you call the fastest-selling (so far) product that
>>Microsoft has EVER produced a dismal failure, then I suppose you
>>are right. I don't presume to tell you that the sales will
>>continue or increase. But before you say that the 6-7 million
>>sold this year will constitue a dismal failure, remember that
>>that only accounts for four months of sales. Sure it probably is
>
> Of course, you realize that the Win96 upgrade (bugfix) will be
>released 2Q96. Back again on the round-about. There is currently
>10 million copies of Win95 in the channels. If MS only sells
6-7 million
>copies, who get burned by the unsold remainder? Are you fool enough
>to believe that MS will happily buy back the worthless excess
>inventory, truebs?
>
As far as the 10 million figure is concerned, I believe that
that includes the copies that have been pre-loaded on new
computer systems and not just the copies sold directly to
consumers. The 6-7 million that is being batted around is
speculation about how many copies will be sold in the first four
months (i.e., until the end of the year) directly to consumers.
Actually, I think that, at best estimates which are shaky at
best, around 2-1/2 to 4 million copies have been sold directly
to consumers. Still a pretty good figure for a product that has
only been in production for four weeks. Not as good as Microsoft
would have hoped, however, but as I said, I wouldn't be crying
to hard over the current sales figures. It is still their
fastest selling product.
>>not going to sell at the same rate that it sold in the first
>>four days. And it will probably continue to decrease to a
>>certain extent. All the predictions that Microsoft and IDC made
>>were based on pure hype, and nothing more. You can't compare
>
> Hype that MS was all too happy to delight in... up until the release
>date approached. Then, it was time to backpedal from the original
>claims, and to pull the Chicago carrot away from the user.
>
Since when do the actual sales of product match the hype that
any vendor uses to sell it? Of course, Microsoft tends to do a
very poor job of predicting actual sales, but who does?
>>reality in sales of any operating system (including OS/2 WARP)
>>with the hype and spin that the manufacturer uses to try to pump
>>up future sales. However, I don't think any company would mind a
>>product that sold 6-7 million copies in it's first four months
>>after release.
>
> Does this include the company that spent $500 million on an ad
>campaign to
>promote this OS/GUI kludge?
>
Again, the proof is already there. Whether it was hype that
actually got 2-1/2 to 4 million (or whatever the "actual" sales
figures are) consumers to actually buy Windows 95 in the first
four weeks, it is still Microsoft's fastest selling product.
However, as has been posted many times, popular software or
hardware products aren't always the "best" products for
everyone. It remains to be seen whether this early popularity
will continue. We'll just have to wait and see.
Darren J Gour
>Well if you call the fastest-selling (so far) product that
>Microsoft has EVER produced a dismal failure, then I suppose you
>are right. I don't presume to tell you that the sales will
>continue or increase. But before you say that the 6-7 million
>sold this year will constitue a dismal failure, remember that
>that only accounts for four months of sales. Sure it probably is
>not going to sell at the same rate that it sold in the first
>four days. And it will probably continue to decrease to a
>certain extent. All the predictions that Microsoft and IDC made
>were based on pure hype, and nothing more. You can't compare
>reality in sales of any operating system (including OS/2 WARP)
>with the hype and spin that the manufacturer uses to try to pump
>up future sales. However, I don't think any company would mind a
>product that sold 6-7 million copies in it's first four months
>after release.
I don't think you'll find anyone here that disagrees it has sold a lot
of copies.
However, Microsoft no longer needs to build a market as it did with
Win 3.1. It now has the customers in its fold and has only to
*upgrade* them. In this light, and with the two years of hype and
speculation, the sales rates have been a dismal failure.
If the press hadn't conditioned everyone to believe that Win 95 would
be a blowout, if people hadn't said it would outsell OS/2 in days or
weeks, we could all look at the sales figures in another light.
This is certainly no the case. Win 95 is a product that in its
release form will have many Microsoft users looking at the options
which OS/2 and even Linnux provide. It is for nearly any serious
computer user a failure.
+-------------------------------------------
Darren J Gour - Calgary, AB.
Problem Solved! PC Solutions
OS/2 WARP with included Internet Access Kit
I work on them all, but run OS/2 WARP!
go...@cadvision.com
djg...@acs.ucalgary.ca
+--------------------------------------------
Jeff Williams
>This is certainly no the case. Win 95 is a product that in its
>release form will have many Microsoft users looking at the options
>which OS/2 and even Linnux provide. It is for nearly any serious
>computer user a failure.
Give me a break. I always have to laugh when I see an OS/2 user implying
that their OS is for "serious users." OS/2 is at best midway between
Win3.1 and OS's like NT and SCO Unix in terms of raw power. Get rid of the
damn superiority complex. You're no more running a "serious" OS than
anyone running Win95.
// Jeff Williams
// NYU U.G. Film and Television/Cinema Studies
// jmw...@is2.nyu.edu
// http://pages.nyu.edu/~jmw8863
Alain Southiere
>go...@cadvision.com (Darren J Gour) wrote:
>Give me a break. I always have to laugh when I see an OS/2 user implying
>that their OS is for "serious users." OS/2 is at best midway between
>Win3.1 and OS's like NT and SCO Unix in terms of raw power. Get rid of the
>damn superiority complex. You're no more running a "serious" OS than
>anyone running Win95.
While I agree that Un*x and to some extent, NT are real 'power' OSes,
I have to disagree with you on OS/2 and Win95. Win95 is a step forward
from Win3.1, but it's still way behind all other platforms. OS/2 is in the
same ballpark as Un*x and NT. The main problem OS/2 has is with the
WPS, which is also it's biggest asset...
---
Alain Southiere | You can't always get what you want,
als...@cam.org | But if you try sometimes,
------------------| You might find you get what you need
OS/2 Warp ! | - Rolling stones
Don Edwards
>
>go...@cadvision.com (Darren J Gour) wrote:
>
>
>>release form will have many Microsoft users looking at the options
>>which OS/2 and even Linnux provide. It is for nearly any serious
>>computer user a failure.
>
>that their OS is for "serious users." OS/2 is at best midway between
>Win3.1 and OS's like NT and SCO Unix in terms of raw power.
If this is true, then it means that OS/2 is a major upgrade from Win95.
Having never used OS/2, I can't say if it's true or not -- but I note
that it is coming from a person who is *not* impressed by OS/2, so
it has more credibility than if it came from a Team OS/2 advocate who
can't even find the advocacy newsgroups.
> Get rid of the
>damn superiority complex. You're no more running a "serious" OS than
>anyone running Win95.
Make up your mind.
<I'm not paid to have opinions. I do that on my own time.>
Jeff Williams
>In article <445r9v$2...@cmcl2.NYU.EDU>, jmw...@is2.nyu.edu (Jeff Williams) says:
>>
>>go...@cadvision.com (Darren J Gour) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This is certainly no the case. Win 95 is a product that in its
>>>release form will have many Microsoft users looking at the options
>>>which OS/2 and even Linnux provide. It is for nearly any serious
>>>computer user a failure.
>>
>>Give me a break. I always have to laugh when I see an OS/2 user implying
>>that their OS is for "serious users." OS/2 is at best midway between
>>Win3.1 and OS's like NT and SCO Unix in terms of raw power.
>If this is true, then it means that OS/2 is a major upgrade from Win95.
Why's that? It appears you're basing this on a personal bias, rather than
facts or experience.
>Having never used OS/2, I can't say if it's true or not -- but I note
>that it is coming from a person who is *not* impressed by OS/2, so
>it has more credibility than if it came from a Team OS/2 advocate who
>can't even find the advocacy newsgroups.
I not only have used OS/2, I own OS/2, I ran OS/2 for a year. OS/2 is no
great OS. Win95 is no NT (though it's faster and runs certain programs
better), but I CERTAINLY do not feel inferior to *anyone* running OS/2.
And, as one who has also run "real" OS's using computers other than my own,
I find it laughable that anyone would consider OS/2 suited to anything but
the same user demographic that Win95 is (if it's even suited to that
demographic).
>> Get rid of the
>>damn superiority complex. You're no more running a "serious" OS than
>>anyone running Win95.
>Make up your mind.
What part of that didn't you understand?
Dmitry V. Irtegov
>I don't think you'll find anyone here that disagrees it has sold a lot
>of copies.
>However, Microsoft no longer needs to build a market as it did with
>Win 3.1. It now has the customers in its fold and has only to
>*upgrade* them. In this light, and with the two years of hype and
>speculation, the sales rates have been a dismal failure.
These sale rates show much more interesting things:
1. Wast majority of DOS/Windows users do not need (or do not want)
to upgrade. It explains "poor" sales of Warp and other 32-bit OSes.
32-bit systems and DOS/Windows are sold to different markets.
DOS/Windows market is bigger, but so what? Car market is bigger
than pickup truck market, but nobody say pickup trucks are dead :).
On "pickup truck" (low end 32-bit) market OS/2 rulezz and none
of Win9x/2000 can change it.
2. Win95 doesn't seem to fill the gap between 32-bit and 16-bit
markets. It doesn't force 32-bit users to downgrade en masse, and it is
drop in the bucket in 16-bit market. Actually, it is unsatisfactory for both
markets. 16-bit users do not have enough hardware and/or do not want to
upgrade apps; 32-bit users are just educated enough :).
Also, when you force users to upgrade, you might unintentionally force
them to think. Surge in OS/2 sales happened 6 weeks after NT release.
4 weeks have passed since Win95 release...
Cheers,
Fat Brother.
Fatal Error: Couldn't enter Windows, use Doors.