Quote:
Originally Posted by PatNY
I can't disagree more. It all depends on who repeats it. If it's repeated solely by blogs, and commentators such as you and me on forums like this, sure, I'd say it's just gossip. But if it's picked up by virtually every mainstream reputable media outlet that exists -- all while the story goes unchallenged -- and gets independently "confirmed," then it has a great deal of credibility.
|
The mainstream media outlet didn't report on the story, they reported on WSJ's report of what Nikkei reported. Did you see any quotes from the Nikkei article?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatNY
As I said in my reply to murray a few posts earlier, perhaps "confirmed" is a better word. So, yes, this story has been independently confirmed by two major media outlets. The stories do not contradict each other -- or at least they are close enough in substance that they are consistent with each other, IMO. When the first story says "half" it is saying roughly 50%. Meanwhile the range for the cuts in the second story is up to 43%. Close enough, I think.
|
What exactly are you counting? There was the original story by Nikkei, there was the independent report by the analyst that contradicts original story on how the parts are ordered (monthly vs. quarterly). There is no direct quote from either Nikkei (on the 65 million halved) or Paul Semenza (on the 19 million down to 11-14 million).
If you would be interested in
quotes:
Quote:
"We started hearing indications of cutbacks before the new year," Paul Semenza, senior vice president, analyst services, at DisplaySearch, told CNET today.
That said, he doesn't exactly have a negative take on demand for the iPhone 5.
"It was a very quick ramp up. The Q4 [estimate] was originally about 61 million displays [for the iPhone 5]...that may be dialed back, but anything near that number is still huge," he said.
"That would support the theory that the ramp was too much to sustain."
|
This would mean that Paul Semenza denies the original story that the demand for iPhone 5 was low.