/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Chinese smartphone brands Vivo and Oppo make up roughly 15% of domestic shipments, gained by a focus on traditional retail

Josh Horwitz / Quartz : Tweets: @iankar_ and @jonrussell Tweets: Ian Kar / @iankar_ : 2 small smartphone co's are taking market share in China using traditional methods like retail sales & print ads http://qz.com/... Jon Russell / @jonrussell : Once again, mystery over whether (and how) Oppo, OnePlus and (now) Vivo are related http://qz.com/...

Quartz Josh Horwitz

Context & Ripple Effects

In August 2015, Vivo and Oppo were still being framed as 'small' players holding roughly 15% of Chinese shipments through an unfashionable bet on brick-and-mortar retail and print advertising, even as reporters puzzled over whether Oppo, OnePlus, and Vivo were corporately connected. The follow-on coverage confirms the bet compounded fast: within a year the two brands, both owned by BBK Electronics, had surged to second and third place in China on the strength of their store networks.

The trajectory kept running — Reuters traced how OPPO reached number one in China through savvy marketing and sales tactics, and by January 2021 Counterpoint had Oppo topping China's market at 21% share, with Vivo right behind at 20%. This 2015 data point is where that offline-first playbook first showed up in the numbers.

First-order effects

  • Online-led Chinese rivals cede ground in tier-two and tier-three cities, where Vivo's and Oppo's retail presence converts walk-in customers that e-commerce-first competitors cannot reach.
  • BBK Electronics gains a growing dual-brand footprint in China while the corporate ties between Oppo, Vivo, and OnePlus remain opaque to buyers and press alike.

Second-order effects

  • Rivals are forced into expensive channel-building of their own, competing for the same storefronts and sales staff rather than just for online ad inventory.
  • Print ads and in-store promotion re-emerge as premium media buys in China's handset market, repricing marketing spend away from the digital channels the leaders favored.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds, Chinese smartphone competition settles around physical distribution as a durable moat — a structure later reflected in Counterpoint's 2021 ranking, where the two BBK-owned brands held the top two spots ahead of Huawei, Apple, and Xiaomi.

The trend: China's smartphone market rewards whoever owns the last mile of distribution, and Vivo and Oppo's retail-first buildout turned them from fringe players into the country's dominant vendors.