x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Samsung's ad budget of $14 billion tops Iceland's GDP

0. phoneArena posted on 28 Nov 2013, 08:46

Here's some information giving you something else to chew on today besides turkey. Samsung is expected to spend $14 billion this year on advertising and promoting its devices. That is the largest percentage of revenue that any of the top 20 companies (by revenue) spends on spreading the word about its products. While the Korean based OEM shells out 5.4% of its revenue on advertising, rival Apple spends just .6% on promotion...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 08:51 12

1. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

And is the amount Sammy paid to commenters around the world included?

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:05 12

4. fanboy1974 (Posts: 1345; Member since: 12 Nov 2011)

Well they did give me $50 play money for owning a Note 3 so I guess your correct. So here it goes;

Samsung is awesome!!! The Note 3 is the best phone on the planet. Samsung kills all the competition. Apple sucks rotten eggs!

Not bad for $50.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 12:16 5

23. joey_sfb (Posts: 6600; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)

Samsung also give me a free Extra Battery Kit and Desktop dock worth $100 for pre-ordering a Note 3.

So here it goes;

Samsung is simply awesome, a great Smartphone with a high value pack for loyal customer that willing to pre-order a Note 3.

Apple also do the pre-ordering of iPhone 5s and 5c during the same period. No free gift, charge an arms and a legs during launch only to drop $100 after the first month. Ouch!!
Apple middle finger to their fans. LOL!!! And yes! Note 3 price remain the same till today while Apple drop $100 when buy from our local telcos.



posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:42

14. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

Lmao good one dude +1

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 13:36 1

29. yudi.nemesis (Posts: 1127; Member since: 14 Mar 2013)

Hahaha +1 for you because their marketing strategy is also included paid reviewers, commenters and some other dirty moves.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 16:02

34. Long1 (banned) (Posts: 399; Member since: 18 May 2013)

I guess , no dime of this huge budget goes to the menial tech media. Right?
Great move from Samsung. Let Apple feed them.
That explain their endless "love" to Samsung. LOL

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 17:48

38. joey_sfb (Posts: 6600; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)

I do think Samsung spend alot paying media famous celebrity and director to come up with great commercial. Its just that Apple holds a lot of appeal to their fans including fans in media industry.

Once you become a Apple fan its hard to be unbiased. While i use Samsung products now i don't feel loyal to them 100%. Samsung need to give a great deal for me to bite. While i am a Apple fanatics Apple can charge whatever amount i will still pay them.

posted on 29 Nov 2013, 06:16

49. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)

Instead of spending havily on marketing, why not drop the prices? it will help making the price under the budget of most people... 4 billion for marketing and 10 billion for price cut, it will help making the phones within the reach of people to buy

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 08:52 1

2. Finalflash (Posts: 3527; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)

That is way too much money on advertising. But on the comment, since when was Android a brand in the same category as Samsung. I get Apple is since they are a company, but last I checked Google was the company largely behind Android and I am pretty sure it has a greater strength than the Samsung brand. On another note, do they even double check these articles before posting them? At least have someone else read them for errors maybe?

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:04

3. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 2236; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)

Valid points, but I think what he meant to say, rather poorly, is that Samsung IS the Android brand, eclipsing Google for ownership of the brand. That is true, at least to the average customer.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:09 2

5. avin007 (Posts: 139; Member since: 28 Feb 2013)

It is really mind numbing to see what Samsung has accomplished at this point in time.....it is really a rags to riches story..

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 13:05

25. orca99 (Posts: 87; Member since: 05 Oct 2013)

You clearly do not know Samsung's history.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 20:47

41. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

After WWII, the two biggest industries in S. Korea was rice and sugar. Recall Korea (before being split into North and South) was a colony of Japan from 1905 to 1945.

The Koreans copied the Japanese in many ways, being a cheap labor source, going into electronics, and they even copied the Japanese conglomerate corporate structure.

Many people don't remember how Apple advanced billions of dollars to help Samsung become a giant in Flash Memory industry. For a long time (even today), Samsung depends on its relationship with Apple.

So yes, many of us know Samsung's history because there was no electronics industry in S. Korea after WWII.

posted on 29 Nov 2013, 06:28

50. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)

What it has to do with current status of samsung? I know the history of IKEA, from one man's furniture making to a big company... well Apple doesnt help them, Apple was just looking for a cheap and capable manufacturer... Sumsang is such a giant now that it doesnt relia on apple's orders, please correct you information. May be you statement was correct decades ago but now big NO. Samsung has a capacity to build each n every single component on their own which hard anyother company has, even samsung is not quite efficient in few areas like processor s but still it can do it on its own... while on the other hand apple doesnt have a capacity to handle everything on its own, thats why apple dont risk manufacteruring anything and this is the most prime reason apple only feel so much affraid from samsung and put cases in icourts, only against samsung. Although apple could put cases against many other manufacterers and win easily but they dont bcoz no other is in a position to threaten apple's superemacy and no other can give tough challenge to apple at the moment

posted on 29 Nov 2013, 17:33

54. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

Sugar at latitude 38?

You are a moron.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 14:04

31. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

When were they ever rags?

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 16:04

35. Owlet (Posts: 450; Member since: 21 Feb 2011)

Well, in the cellphone world, they were cheap, budget phones for as long as I can remember. At least since I had my first cell phone about 15 years ago. This is the first time they got this close to be a "premium" smartphone brand. They definitely accomplished a lot by going from meh phones to where they are now.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 21:01

42. ardent1 (Posts: 2000; Member since: 16 Apr 2011)

Samsung is not premium -- despite all their advertising dollars. Just pick up the SIII, S4 et al and feel the cheap plastic on the device. Even the Note 3 has faux leather backing.

Samsung could use better materials for their prices or just lower their prices if they want to use plastic or faux leather. While Apple also use plastic for the 5C - the build quality, the reinforced frame, etc is an attempt give customers a premium feel. In contrast, Samsung doesn't even attempt to get to a premium build quality. Again, Apple's fix and finish with its plastic shell is light years ahead of Samsung. If you hold the 5C in your hand, it feels solid while a SIII feels like it can break if you hold it too hard.

Lastly, about 70% of the smartphone Samsung builds are junk quality for the tracfones of the world.

The problem with Samsung is it's brand -- it wants to be a Lexus but it also sells Yugo's. Most people associate Samsung with cheap junk because so much of their smartphone is just junk.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:10 1

6. fouadqr (Posts: 326; Member since: 21 Nov 2012)

s5 will fail :-)

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:44 1

15. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

How and why will it fail? It's not even out yet, and it'll build on an already great lineup up phones. Where's the failure?

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 10:24

17. Finalflash (Posts: 3527; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)

I think he is being sarcastic or joking.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 10:45

18. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

I don't, I really wanna know too.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 10:53

19. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

If GS5 comes with a 64-bit chip -as promised-, Sammy is digging its own grave.

64-bit is dead end for Android.

Sammy better stick to 32-bit until Google launches 64-bit Nexus.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 11:46 1

21. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

Why don't you think they should use 64 Jake?

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 13:23 4

26. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

It's something in-depth.
Many self-claimed tech experts were busy discounting Apple's move to 64-bit just as marketing fluff mentioning 64bit Windows' marginal gain in performance. The field experts however were pointing out they are wrong on this.

There are some reasons. Intel/AMD's 64-bit(x64) ISA (instructions set) is just an extension of their old 32-bit(x86) ISA.
You can run 32-bit app on 64-bit Windows. The app and Windows interact seamlessly. The app uses ISA32 while Windows using ISA32 plus 64-bit extension.

It's different on ARM (the mobile CPU).
Aarch64's ISA is a separate one from Aarch32's ISA.
Therefore, states change has to be done every time when switching between 32-bit and 64-bit mode.
And this states change is quite costly both in performance and power consumption.
It's comparable to an assembly line in a factory going to full stop, removing all the unfinished parts on the line, and restarting from scratch.

iOS has been very restrictive regarding to multitasking which turns out to be favorable in this case : states change only occurs between the active 32-bit app and 64-bit iOS, and even this is heavily reduced through dedicated 32-bit iOS modules.

Android's so proud "true" multitasking now backfires : each app running claims its share of processing time. If you run 32-bit apps together with 64-bit ones, a good portion of processing power is wasted changing states.

While this might not stutter the system significantly, the battery life suffers heavily.

Worst case however is when 32 and 64-bit apps want to share the display. This occurs via a module called Surface Flinger, and it has to do the states change multiple times with each frame. It will stutter so bad that the whole device is rendered useless.

If you want to see how bad, run a 32-bit game on 5s, receive an SMS notification. The notification animation rendered by 64-bit iOS will almost crush the poor 32-bit game while it lasts.

Fortunately, there are not many 32-bit-only apps on AppStore. If you download an app, take a look at the required iOS version : If it's iOS6 or above, the app will run in 64-bit on 5s, guaranteedly.
Twitter got updated last week with the requirement raised to iOS6(from iOS5), so it now runs in 64-bit.

The only "major" app still running in 32-bit is SnapChat.


Read this above.

For iOS users, the transition phase is almost over thanks to Apple's excellent control, but Android will really suffer hard for extremely long due to the fancy multitasking nature (which has always been pointless) and even worse, heavy fragmentation.

Assuming Google launches 64-bit Android5, and only apps targeting 4.4 or higher are 64-bit feasible, how long do you think it will take til the app devs start targeting 4.4 or above?
Currently almost half Android devices still run the 3+years old 2.x

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 14:02 2

30. darkkjedii (Posts: 24908; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)

Wow dude, it looks like you've really done your research. Expect a lot of childish, pointless, stupid responses to this excellent piece of commentary though. I'm not as well versed in chip architecture as you seem to be, and won't even lie and pretend like I am. It sounds like you really know your stuff though, could this be why apple talks so much about forward thinking in relation to the 64 bit chip? +1

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 16:09 2

37. Long1 (banned) (Posts: 399; Member since: 18 May 2013)

The real reason every phone company to go 64-bit , is to change the whole phone-park again. To milk the ALL ppl again.
Not real need for 64-bit on the phones yet. NOT AT ALL
Even on the PC is still 32-bit producing.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 19:43 1

40. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

If you knew ARM, you wouldn't even mention PC.

ARM is a RISC architecture, x86 a CISC one.
Hiding behind the CISC ISA, Intel has been improving the performance/power efficiency under the surface which is STILL possible.

ARM on the other hand, due to the RISC nature, has to live with the 14 32-bit architectural registers, and the Cortex-A15 is quite the dead end with this old design up to ARMv7.

ARMv8 has 31 64-bit registers. This sheer amount of registers grants decent performance boost in addition to the increased power efficiency by reducing costly memory accesses and filling a whole cache line per iteration when dealing with a large chunk of data.

So, the 64-bit ARM has this power efficiency out of the box, and the increased performance per clock means it can be even more power efficient by running at a lower clock rate.

And what are people asking for now?


Should the first 64-bit OEM phone arrive with 32-bit Android, whatever excuses/promises they might have, THEY ARE LYING because all those benefits of 64-bit ARM requires a *64-bit OS* to be effective.

That's the major difference to x86/x64 where the enhancements in a new chip don't necessarily need a 64 bit OS.

Don't be fooled.

ARM is a different animal, and whoever compares it to Intel/ARM regarding 64-bit computing, he/she is just disgracing himself/herself.

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 14:42 4

32. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)

There are two ways developing Android apps : SDK and NDK

Granted, SDK apps will run automatically in 64-bit on 64-bit Android. That's really really fine, theoretically.

The bitter truth is however, SDK apps are much slower than NDK ones - no exceptions.

For example, an NDK app runs much faster on GS2 than an SDK app with the same functionality on Note3 which means that almost all performance sensitive apps like photo editing, media player, and games are NDK apps to start with.

Quite a dilemma for NDK devs : Stick to 32-bit? Too bad. It will stutter to no end in addition to draining the battery like crazy on 64-bit Android.
Convert to 64-bit? Too bad. Targeting 4.4 or higher is suicidal at current fragmentation level.

They are more or less forced to develop both 32 and 64-bit versions separately which isn't as simple as for iOS.
The devs of established apps could afford this additional burden/costs(not willingly though), but what about startups?
Either they completely omit Android version, or they resort to SDK (if the app is not very demanding)

Either way, Android is scroogled when it comes down to the quality/quantity of the apps.

Those tech expert wannabes are now admitting that 64-bit ARM brought much more than expected.
Roughly 30% performance advantage on the very same A7 chip is quite impressive. - A luxury Android cannot claim for itself given that situation.
And you might have noticed that 5s' battery lasts quite a bit longer than 5's and what the benchmarks suggested. It's all thanks to the 64-bit's power efficiency that was initially not shown due to 32-bit apps/benchmarks at that time.

A research in June showed 93% of iOS users running iOS6 or higher. It must have increased by a huge margin by now thanks to iOS7 and 5s/5c. I guess it currently lies around 98% or so.

Apple can declare anytime " We only approve apps targeting iOS6 or higher from next month on". No problem at all.
And this means Apple's transition is 100% completed.

And the best thing is : Apple will remove 32-bit logic from its upcoming A8/A9 chip.
When 32-bit silicon is removed, the chip's cost/design/power efficiency is massively increased.
Neither Qualcomm nor Samsung can afford doing this, again, due to the fragmentation.

Scroogled - Game Over

posted on 28 Nov 2013, 09:14

7. Duketytz (Posts: 534; Member since: 28 Nov 2013)

I dont really get how it is more than norway's GDP?

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories