Research firm claims Essential Phone sold only 5,000 units in the US

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.

Related phones

  • 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



1. Arch_Fiend

Posts: 3951; 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.

11. You_Dont_Say

Posts: 431; Member since: Jan 26, 2015


18. donnieroc unregistered

I totally agree with you. Who's going to pay $700 for those specs?!?!? smh

2. slannmage

Posts: 289; Member since: Mar 26, 2013

Most of those sold to drop testers on YouTube.

3. kiko007

Posts: 7513; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Damn. Just... damn.

4. Whitedot

Posts: 832; Member since: Sep 26, 2017

Largely thanks to PA score of.

5. Whitedot

Posts: 832; Member since: Sep 26, 2017


6. Bondurant

Posts: 784; Member since: Jun 04, 2014

PA still bitter they don't get payed by Essential.

7. cdgoin

Posts: 614; Member since: Jul 28, 2010

The real issue is they made it exclusive with SPRINT.. WTF were they thinking.

9. uncle_gadget

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+

22. TheOracle1

Posts: 2340; 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!!

8. uncle_gadget

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.

10. PhoneInQuestion

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).

12. toukale

Posts: 648; Member since: Jun 10, 2015

Damn, that one hurts, it's a gut wrenching punch that will take me a while to recoup from.

13. p51d007

Posts: 705; 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?

15. toukale

Posts: 648; 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.

20. L0n3n1nja

Posts: 1579; Member since: Jul 12, 2016

They have commercials, but no mention of the phone being unlocked. The advertising leads me to believe it's a Sprint only phone as I think it's Sprint doing the advertising.

14. kennybenny

Posts: 218; Member since: Apr 10, 2017

14.58/month? That's probably a mistake because it would cost 262 when multiplyed by 18 months. Edit: nevermind I saw a 50% off sale!

16. Cat97

Posts: 1933; 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.

17. fyah_king unregistered

I have the phone and I like it.

19. L0n3n1nja

Posts: 1579; 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.

21. IronTech

Posts: 153; Member since: May 27, 2016

No headphone jack = average camera = no money

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.