^ Ill say it again.. the second table is for adults aswell as teens.

*reads kids 6-12, scrolls down and hits reply*

They only use about 2000 respondents in presidential elections, and those numbers are pretty accurate within a *" "*/-2% margin of error

Edit: why won't a plus sign show up?

Random sampling always has the chance to be inaccurate. Just choosing 2000 people doesn't remotely guarantee that you get an accurate spread. You are just very likely. Laws of probability dictate that eventually you get a bum group. In your example eventually you get 2,000 hardcore partisans one way or the other and get a completely skewed result. The difference being it would be immediately obvious what happened and the results thrown out and try again. If the perceived demand does not match actual sales then the poll is obviously just wrong due to random sampling error.

I understand that. That's just how statistics work. Hell, even at the 100K level that was proposed, you *could* get 100K partisan people (not out of the question since these consoles sells 200K a week). 

But if I've learned anything from my statistics courses, anything above 2000 is asking too much. It takes too much time and effort (and money) to gather that many samples, and calculate accordingly. However, most of the time, at around 2000, it's damned accurate.

But, yes, I do understand that any time you do random sampling, there's the potential for random sampling error. Unless you can sample an entire population ("sample" isn't the correct word when referring to a population, I know) you will never always be automatically correct. But then again, those high are numbers are simply not feasible

I agree that the number sampled is valid. I am not trying to attack their methodology on this one. The results are just an anomaly that eventually happens. It is the only logical explanation if we assume they correctly performed their job. It could be that they intentionally led people to choose certain options with how the questions were phrased, but it seems unlikely.

Although it actually might be just that they phrased it more as a wish list than an intent to buy. The end justification then being the items that end up lower than expected would be priced higher than the general consumer is willing to pay. I am reluctant to believe any of the items are still viewed as over priced right now save for perhaps the iPad.

That's true, and it's because the companies that do those official polls try very hard to get a sample group that's representative of the entire population.  Not just any 2000 people will cut it...

I know Nielsen is legit.  I was just commenting on samples and surveys in general...

I'm sorry, you're wrong. The people who intend to purchase a PS3 just lost both jobs. So now it's an intent like my intent to buy a Ferrari and a BMW, yeah I intend to buy them once I win the lottery.

Research companies are trying to avoid picking a stupid sample, though. Let's say in a phone surves they accidentally call 2000 males at the age of 40 with roughly the same income. Obviously that would affect the survey's results. But research companies know preferences of certain demographics and social groups.

For instance prior to the 2005 elections in Germany polls showed the conservatives polling around 45%. They only got 35% of the votes, though. The reason for this was not random polling, though (because research companies know about this and know how to meassure a screwed sample). They had simply underestimated the number of swing voters.

As long as you know what you're doing there is no "random sample". VGChartz does the same. They don't get data from all stores so they have to calculate store preferences, obviously. Just like Media Create and NPD.

Sales /= Demand does not apply to Apple products. It could be they have a "God tier marketing department" as a previous poster pointed out. Furthermore, if marketing was everything, then Kinect would be at the top of both lists due to the sheer amount Microsoft poured in to create the demand. I have to agree that sales /= demand with the exception being a product from Apple.

I think for kids it comes down to what they can fit in their backpack and hide within a book during class. With an iPad, kids and teenagers can surf the Internet or play Farmville with it hidden in their open textbook. I also think the iPad and iPod are more status symbols to show off and brag about during recess.

The smartphone and television set for ages 13 is pretty much self explanatory in that these products symbolize independence during a rebellious era in one's life. With your own television set, you can watch what you want to watch instead of whatever channel dad turns it to while channel surfing in between commercial breaks. The smartphone is there so mom can't pick up the other line and gossip on your conversation.

I am surprised that they did not include "car" on the list for 13 . A car would have placed within the top 10. due to granting more independence from those pesky, boring adults we call our parents.

The Blu-ray player is another status symbol. It is entirely unnecessary with digital distribution via Hulu or Netflix nowadays, but knowing kids, having something which shows greater clarity and produces greater sound in movies is another 1-up on their friends.

As for the rest...meh.