Friday 17 February 2006

IDC misses forecast by 1900%

Interesting read on IDC un-prediction in today's El Reg:

  • Le Misancalculation: A one act Itanium tragedy by IDC (The Register 17/02/06)

  • Extracts:
    "As the artist's rendering points out, IDC does not have a sparkling track record where Itanium sales prediction are concerned. In fact, its 2004 prediction was 1,900 per cent above the actual sales mark. Some analyst firms can survive on results like that, and some can't."
    "IDC never explores these issues. Instead, it relies on flaky data and embarrassing conclusions to create a study that could outdo its 2004 effort - a feat we thought impossible."

    WOW, this seems to be a hard one to get away from...


    Unknown said...

    Perhaps you are missing the point:

    Anonymous said...

    So I was AR with a vendor and worked with the data collecting analysts and their assistants.

    Any number that is not public disclosed in SEC financials is suspect.

    Privately held company totally fabicate their numbers- we had a private competitor that passed us in a category and their numbers were total crap (the number they gave IDC was x2 actual). Also we were in discussions to buy a company in a different segment (so roughly knew their internals) and their IDC number was x3 actual.

    Then IDC tries to break out business within a major player and really just guesses.

    If you get close to analysts at IDC they will confess that the numbers are not good.

    Phil Payne said...

    ARonaut said...

    Yes, very nice Phil

    working URL:


    You're giving forecaster excuses but here they have little else to offer as basic fact checking (and a bit of honesty) would have been the solution.

    Unknown said...

    If you have suggestions about how basic fact checking can help us to predict five years into the future, then I suggest you share them.