Well, in this case we agreed, even for me XB1 is at 10.5 million.

I never said I disagreed. I said I had issue with your methodology. 

Also note that we don't have an accurate IDG number, all we know is 29m-30m was the install base of PS4 + X1 worldwide at the end of 2014. 18.5m+ was for PS4 so we can estimate approximately 10.5m+ for X1, this is not a definitive number. 

It is really hard to take you seriously when your critisize the very sales page you are visiting to discuss sales :). I stand by my guesswork, just like you stand by yours. Difference is, I am not condescending to your way of reasoning.

I don't make guesses like people on chartz do. That's why I'm criticising both yourself and chartz. 

And you're right, I don't know why I'm wasting time on this forum. Only reason I joined is because any time I make a thread on GAF which talks about sales or the in depth reports I write it's instantly posted here on Chartz by some random people who don't bother to credit me. 

Personally, i'm on VGChartz for the comunity, and because usually i don't like the ioi numbers and i want say my point... i agreed with you that VGChartz is not a source, indeed i never used VGChartz numbers (Well, recently, last year i was still naive...)

I will become a gaffer soon. :)

Please don't. 

I knew you wan't... :P

Just, why???

Because we VGchartz peasants are not worthy enough to become part of the noble Gaf community.

I reconize a lot of people on Gaf, so I doubt that.  

Now I find your analysis very deep and respect that but...

Do you understand how arrogant it sounds when you claim you don't make guesses? Closest thing to no guesswork would probably be if you were very deep inside the industry. It is possible but is it true? If it was true, then it is not fair to criticize people analyzing with the limited data they have on their hand.

NPD and GfK provide very accurate and reliable data but in the end there are still "hard guesses" and very real error margin involved. Sold through data will never be as accurate than publisher/manufacturer shipped data, simply because sold through data is collected from thousands of retailers but shipped data collected on from few. Thus the possibility of human error is considerably lower on shipped data. Problem lies within NPD data usage, it is very rarely questioned in sales talk. I am 100% sure there have been many significant errors within NPD data over the years, however it has "earned" pretty much absolute status.

If you take a critical look on your methology, do you still claim there are no guesses? I bet it is full of guesses. If it is a guess of probability of 99% being true and there are 5 of them, the end result will be very accurate most likely. But the assumptions are there.

Like I said, your analysis is high level, I don't deny that and I agree with the result you end up. Still you act like you have been blinded by your own approach being the one and mighty, to the point you don't anymore accept other people's different approach on the matter. Methology itself does not matter when the goal is to end up as close to the truth as possible. What is the objective proof that your methology is superior? Start with providing objective truth...