Apple passes Samsung at European carriers as budget phones thin out

Which phone makers win when memory chips get scarce? Counterpoint Research's Q2 numbers for Europe point to the ones whose customers pay monthly. Apple took 37% of the continent's carrier channel and passed Samsung, while the open market, where cheaper phones tend to be sold, fell 11%.

Counterpoint estimated about 35 million smartphones shipped in Europe in the second quarter, according to GSMArena. Sales through mobile operators fell 4% from a year earlier. Open-market sales, which covers retailers, fell 11%. AppleMagazine put the whole European market down 8%.

The reason is mix. Counterpoint analyst Jan Stryjak, quoted by MacTech, said operator sales "are also more skewed towards more premium brands like Apple, Samsung, and Google." Rising memory costs have hit entry-level phones hardest, so the channel that sells fewer of them lost less. 9to5Mac quoted the same logic from the report: smartphone sales through operators in Europe "are typically more high-end than through the open market."

9to5Mac and iGeeksBlog both report Apple's carrier-channel share rising from 33% to 37% and Samsung's falling from 39% to 34%. GSMArena prints Samsung at 33% for the quarter. The sources do not explain the one-point gap, and the headline conclusion survives either number, since Apple leads by three or four points. Anyone quoting the margin should say which source they are using.

Across all European sales, iGeeksBlog reports, Apple and Samsung each held 34%. That figure matters because it limits the claim. Apple's lead exists inside the operator channel. That does not identify a winner in open-market sales: rounded shares across different channel measurements are not enough to do so. AppleMagazine makes the narrower point about scope: the carrier ranking does not establish iPhone leadership across all countries or all ways of buying.

Counterpoint quoted by iGeeksBlog framed it this way: "Apple took 37% of Europe's carrier channel in Q2, passing Samsung as operator sales proved more resilient than the broader phone market."

The fastest-growing brands were not the two giants. 9to5Mac reports vivo up 90% year over year and Motorola up 27%. MacTech notes a change from Q2 2025, when Google and HONOR led growth. GSMArena also names vivo and Motorola as the fast risers in the channel. iGeeksBlog quotes Counterpoint's wording that "vivo and Motorola helped the operator channel, with both brands growing faster than the market," without percentages in the public report.

Both brands gained in the channel where an operator contract carries the price. The sources say nothing about whether operators or the brands paid for that placement, so the incentive is inference, not reporting: a carrier selling a phone on a monthly contract can absorb a higher component bill more easily than a shopper paying it in one go at a retailer.

Counterpoint expects the operator channel to keep gaining on retail, according to GSMArena, as long as budget phones stay squeezed. AppleMagazine adds that global smartphone revenue reached $109 billion in the quarter, a Q2 record, on fewer units. For the market as a whole, Android Headlines, citing Counterpoint, reports global shipments down 11% year over year to the lowest second-quarter level since 2013, with Samsung at 24% share, Apple at 20%, Xiaomi 12%, Oppo 11% and vivo 8%. Counterpoint's own words there: "The industry is expected to remain under pressure throughout 2026."

AppleMagazine adds context for Samsung: it notes the S26 series launched late enough that some of its sales shifted into Q2, and that first-quarter Counterpoint research had the S26's Western Europe launch "4% ahead of the equivalent launch period for the S25." That is context from AppleMagazine's write-up, not a forecast that Samsung will take the lead back.

For brands, the channel split is a strategy question. A maker whose lineup leans on cheaper phones sold through retailers is exposed to the 11% side of the table. A maker with contract placement and premium mix sits on the 4% side. For shoppers, the practical read is narrower: component-cost pressure is hitting the lower-priced part of the market hardest, and carrier offers may matter more when comparing an upfront price with a monthly plan. Whether that holds past Q2 depends on memory costs, which none of the cited reports claim to forecast.