More Napkin Numbers? (FCPX Units)

[Craig Seeman]

A while ago (a few months I believe) it was reported that FCPX passed 2.5 million downloads. I can’t recall if it was from Apple or SCRI. I remember that number being quoted at the Blackmagic Roadshow in NYC a few months back.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

Craig,

Was it an announcement – or just someone else’s napkin numbers?

I mean, Tim Wilson thinks it’s 10 million units, but that doesn’t make it so.
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/36498

It also doesn’t explain the rankings.

Franz.

Also Craig – I knew you’d be first in on this one …

[Joseph Owens]

Is FCX the application running on the MacBook on the new retina display Apple broadcast ads? Or is it iMovie? Can’t tell while all the glitzy stock footage of somebody’s family vacation is being edited by an ADD person on bennies… Hmmm… shooting curls in iceberg alley, a little shopping run to get some blankets up at Macchu Picchu, and a few shots of the Aurora Borealis… probably just grabbed with the iPhone. Yeah, pretty ordinary weekend for me, can’t think why I’d have to edit a big deal YouTube video of it though. But definitely something I’d want to use Final Cut X for! Lot of data to relationalize to have it make that much sense.

jPo

“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.

[Jeremy Garchow]

In another post, Tim said you have to think in terms of Apple numbers.

Apple = volume, big big volume.

Just the other day in the earnings conference call or whatever it’s called, a question was asked about the AppleTV and if it was still a hobby.

The answer was at 4 million units sold this “fiscal year”, yes, it’s still a hobby.

Despite earning 8.8 billion dollars in the best third quarter ever for the company, and probably teeing up the best year ever, the quarter was seen as a miss.

I’m sorry, but that is completely messed up. I don’t understand financial analysts at all. Nothing is good enough and it forces the leaders of companies to do weird things, and the leaders have no qualms about doing weird shit, like keep your money in offshore accounts. I am not talking about Apple only, the managemt at other large tech companies are just as suspect.

Sorry for the language, it’s frustrating to me, but I’m sure it’s becuase I don’t understand operations at that level.

[Eric Santiago]

[Joseph Owens] “Is FCX the application running on the MacBook on the new retina display Apple broadcast ads? Or is it iMovie? “
Ummm I think so….

[Bret Williams]

It’s mail, aperture, and FCP X.

[Chris Kenny]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “Wrong math? Wrong estimates? Misleading ranking?”

The exact methodology of App Store rankings isn’t known (ranking algorithms are routinely kept secret to make manipulation more difficult), but they’re certainly not measuring cumulative sales since release. They seem to be heavily weighted toward recent downloads. One analysis I ran across suggested they’re only looking at the last four days worth of data, and even within that window they’re giving more weight to more recent days.

So all we know is that Mountain Lion has brought in more revenue than FCP X over the last couple of days, which isn’t very surprising given that it’s brand new and probably has more mass-market appeal than a $300 specialty market app like FCP X.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Gary Huff]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Despite earning 8.8 billion dollars in the best third quarter ever for the company, and probably teeing up the best year ever, the quarter was seen as a miss.”

They were probably holding out for eleventy billion dollars!

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Chris Kenny] “The exact methodology of App Store rankings isn’t known …”

[Chris Kenny] “So all we know is …”

Chris,

I think you have to choose one of those statements or the other.

I’d go with the first – as I’ve stated above (and before): we really don’t know what the rankings of the App Store mean. As far as I have been able to determine, Apple makes no claims about them anywhere.

Frankly, I think 134K is an unlikely, low number. But the exercise is useful as a negative proof. It suggests that absent a known methodology, App Store rankings are not a viable source on which to base sales numbers.

It would follow that Craig Seeman‘s original speculation about 600K (from 9 months ago) is equally meaningless:

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/19507#19507

Until we have an announcement from Apple or a more fact-based estimate, the numbers are a mystery.

Franz.

[Chris Kenny]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “I think you have to choose one of those statements or the other.”

The fact that we don’t know the exact ranking algorithm doesn’t mean we can’t establish some things about it (like what sort of time period it reflects) with a fair degree of accuracy.

[Franz Bieberkopf] “Frankly, I think 134K is an unlikely, low number. But the exercise is useful as a negative proof. It suggests that absent a known methodology, App Store rankings are not a viable source on which to base sales numbers.”

Sure, they’re mostly just useful for establishing relative sales (e.g. that FCP X is probably one of the bestselling apps on the platform) and for ruling out extremes (e.g. ruling out that FCP X is a horrible failure in the market).

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.