tl;dr the estimates are really low because I told you so.

What a terrible article. Scott Moritz is well known to spread complete BS over Apple sales figures so I'd treat this with Valleywag level credibility. When the iPhone came out he said Apple was disappointed they didn't meet their 1-million units sold sales goal. Too bad he couldn't cite anyone that had mentioned that estimate.

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis/techtelecom/103...

I read all shallow financial blog posts in the context of stock price manipulation. Right after the article there is an ad for how you could have made 300% return by following their "under $10" stocks.

Flagged for total lack of content.

This is disappointingly content-free.

"An industry analyst" who declines to be identified in any way shape or form says that the estimate is significantly lower than the actual figures and then won't even anonymously comment further on what he thinks the numbers actually are, nor how he arrived at his conclusions?

I think the logic behind the original statement of these as optimistic figures is more sound, that being due to the fact that the estimate was made by the difference between web order numbers in a given period, which almost certainly included many more products than just the iPad, and the methodology for restricting that down to just iPad numbers was not clear.

Full disclosure; I'd like the iPad and it's ilk to die in a fire.