How do you get "INFLATED" market share by using number of units sold? From the replies to this thread you can tell who ones what brand by their replies. I have owned a lot of John Deere tractors over the years but they have shot themselves in the foot by not producing their own small tractors made in the United States. Also, they have forced many old, smaller dealers out of business and small rural areas. Instead of traveling 20-30 minutes to a dealer you now have to travel 2 hours to a dealer in my area.
"Inflated" isn't the right word. But, as some one who deals with market share data all day every day the point he is making is valid. The data is accurate (not inflated) but you can draw multiple conclusions. Here is an example of why "units" lead to a different conclusion than "dollars".
Company A sells 100 tractors at an average price of $100.
Company B sells 50 tractors at an average price of $1,000. (Because their tractors are either bigger or nicer or just more expensive because their brand can command it)
In this "market" there have been 150 unit sales. Company A sold 100 of them and therefore has 66% share of the market (100/150) based on units. Company B has 33% share of the market based on units. Those numbers are not "inflated" they are true. But they are only half the story.
If we look at the same market in terms of dollars: Company A did $10,000 worth of sales (100x$100). Company B did $50,000 worth of sales (50x$1,000). So now Company A has a 16% share of the market ($10,000/$60,000) based on dollars. Company B has a 83% share of the market ($50,000/$60,000).
It really isn't a commentary on the quality of either company's products or business results. If anything, it speaks more to their strategies and opportunities...
