Research firm claims Essential Phone sold only 5,000 units in the US
by Cosmin Vasile / Sep 27, 2017, 12:12 PM
Andy Rubin's company, Essential has been recently valued at roughly $1.2 billion, but its first product might be considered a flop if we take into consideration the latest report coming from research firm BayStreet.
BayStreet is known for tracking shipments of phones in the United States. According to the research company, only 5,000 Essential Phone units were sold in the country since its launch.
The number is ridiculously low, but not impossible to “achieve.” The Essential Phone should have been released on the market back in June, but it only started shipping earlier this month. Moreover, the smartphone is exclusive to Sprint in the United States, although the unlocked model can be picked up from Best Buy and Essential's online store.
The Essential Phone is priced at $699.99, while the 360-degree camera add-on is up for purchase for $200. Sprint customers can buy the Essential Phone for $14.58 a month over 18 months, and $0 down.
Our own Maxwell R. tested the Essential Phone and found that it “misses some of the fundamentals altogether.” Even though the Essential Phone is a beautifully crafted device, “beauty is only skin deep,” is one of the conclusions of our full review.
source: BayStreet via FierceWireless
- Display 5.7" 1312 x 2560 pixels
- Camera 13 MP / 8 MP front
- Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 835, Octa-core, 2450 MHz
- Storage 128 GB
- Battery 3040 mAh
Posts: 3948; Member since: Oct 03, 2015
Well that is what happens when you launch a phone with buggy software and a piss poor camera even though both of those were suppose to be top notch and since your name isn't Apple that front panel design probably put some people off.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 12:14 PM 11
Posts: 614; Member since: Jul 28, 2010
The real issue is they made it exclusive with SPRINT.. WTF were they thinking.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 12:43 PM 6
Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017
Because Sprint or TMO are the carriers to test demand vs getting higher sales potential with ATT and VZW. The problem is, I don't think the phone production could have handled a higher demand if for example, it was exclusive to ATT and ATT was to sell 5M+
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 12:48 PM 3
Posts: 2151; Member since: May 04, 2015
Rubin and the Softbank owner are pals and Softbank = Sprint is an investor. Sentiments overtaking business sense there. Meanwhile wtf does “misses some of the fundamentals altogether.” mean? The f*king iPhone 8 can't make a decent phone call. That's more "fundamental" than anything else if you want to call it a phone!!
posted on Sep 28, 2017, 3:05 AM 1
Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017
All phones that run Vanilla Android, simply suck. So glad not all of them went that way. The Essential to me is boring for $700. Its a $400 phone pretending to be of flagship quality. We have enough of that with other OEM's. I don't think we need another smartphone player. Rubin should have just stayed at Google.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 12:46 PM 0
Posts: 496; Member since: Aug 20, 2017
Being that there was a massive security breach on the pre orders maybe it's safer this way. But really now, Samsung had been more Andy Rubin than Andy Rubin for quite some time, even making a phone with minimum bezels AND a rugged design (S8 Active). Bonus a headphone jack. Bad karma is seriously haunting (one of) Android's inventor(s).
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 1:23 PM 1
Posts: 701; Member since: Nov 24, 2013
DUH... 1. Essential who? 2. Too expensive 3. Sprint??? 4. Essential who?? Yeah, people who follow phonearena, and other tech sites know who Andy is, but, for essentially (no pun intended) a "no name device" who would fork that much on a chance?
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 2:07 PM 1
Posts: 617; Member since: Jun 10, 2015
Not only that, but tech nerds are impossible to please. Something is always missing for them in every product. Anyone who ever work on a product knows, it's all about compromises, you can't include everything in any product. Otherwise that product would never ship. If you are a vendor that wants to move any meaningful number of any product, then forget the niche/nerd crowd and cater to the largest part of the market, the 80%. That's where the money/volume is. Unless you are a small shop that wants to cater to that niche group.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 2:24 PM 1
Posts: 1804; Member since: Mar 02, 2017
If it was all-screen and no lower bezel, I would have bought it on the first day, regardless of any other issues. It would have been just too tempting. But the lower bezel makes it similar to the other phones on the market, so there is no reason to choose the Essential phone.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 2:45 PM 0
Posts: 1526; Member since: Jul 12, 2016
The essential phone has the feature set up a mid range phone with flagship processor and build quality. Then they delay it, and the process of early adopters getting theirs was rough. It shipped with buggy software, which is sad since it's stock Android, and a terrible camera app powering a mediocre camera. They foolishly partnered with Sprint, and unlocked phones don't sell well in the U.S. I don't wish failure upon the company, but they NEED to do better or won't last long. They are competing with Pixel, LG, Samsung, Apple, and others who have far more experience and the ability to afford mistakes.
posted on Sep 27, 2017, 3:56 PM 1
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):