Amazon to launch at least three new Kindle Fire models this fall, report says
A new report claims that Amazon will begin production of follow-up models to its Kindle Fire in late summer ahead of a possible fall rollout that is expected to bring new screen resolutions and 4G wireless compatibility to the 7-inch tablet.
NPD Display Search senior analyst Richard Shim (via CNET) said that the internet retail giant will bring at least three models of what is being called the "Kindle Fire 2" to market and could potentially have a 8.9-inch version in the works for the fourth quarter of 2012.
Citing "supply chain" sources from a number of different parts manufacturers Shim expects three distinct 7-inch models to show up in time for the holiday season:
The next-generation Fires are expected to use either Texas Instruments OMAP chips or Nvidia's quad-core Tegra 3 processors. The screens will reportedly boast a pixel density of 216 pixels per inch, identical to the Nexus 7 but short of the third-generation iPad's 264 PPI Retina display. Amazon's first Kindle, for comparison, touted a density of around 170 PPI.
Pricing is as yet unknown, however it is likely that Amazon will put the devices in low-end of the market as it did with the original Fire in order to drive content sales through its online store.
The new rumors are consistent with rumblings in June as far as screen resolution is concerned, however that report diverges with Shim's analysis of a possible 8.9-inch model.
Amazon is also rumored to have a smartphone in the works to compete with the iPhone. It is unclear what mobile operating system the company will use if and when it decides to enter the market, but the unit is expected to be sold at a loss like most of Amazon's self-branded offerings.
NPD Display Search senior analyst Richard Shim (via CNET) said that the internet retail giant will bring at least three models of what is being called the "Kindle Fire 2" to market and could potentially have a 8.9-inch version in the works for the fourth quarter of 2012.
Citing "supply chain" sources from a number of different parts manufacturers Shim expects three distinct 7-inch models to show up in time for the holiday season:
- 1,024-by-600 display, no camera; August production.
- 1,280-by-800 display with camera; August production.
- 1,280-by-800 display with camera and 4G connectivity; September production.
The next-generation Fires are expected to use either Texas Instruments OMAP chips or Nvidia's quad-core Tegra 3 processors. The screens will reportedly boast a pixel density of 216 pixels per inch, identical to the Nexus 7 but short of the third-generation iPad's 264 PPI Retina display. Amazon's first Kindle, for comparison, touted a density of around 170 PPI.
Pricing is as yet unknown, however it is likely that Amazon will put the devices in low-end of the market as it did with the original Fire in order to drive content sales through its online store.
The new rumors are consistent with rumblings in June as far as screen resolution is concerned, however that report diverges with Shim's analysis of a possible 8.9-inch model.
Amazon is also rumored to have a smartphone in the works to compete with the iPhone. It is unclear what mobile operating system the company will use if and when it decides to enter the market, but the unit is expected to be sold at a loss like most of Amazon's self-branded offerings.
Comments
Looks like they're adding more kindling to the fire that's going out, in an attempt to bring back those flames...
I know. THREE models. We can lose money even faster!
I wonder how many of the first generation Fires are being used regularly after only 6 months from anecdotal evidence, not as many as Amazon would have hoped.
So who will buy them this time around? A lot of people bought these as gifts and the recipients concluded they either didn't need or want a tablet, it didn't have the right OS or ecosystem on it, or it just wasn't an iPad!
For prospective customers they may still not want a tablet, they are still on the 'wrong' OS and it still isn't an iPad. Even worse there may well be an iPad more within their price range and the Nexus will have got there before Amazon.
This could be a very costly move for Amazon who would on pretty thin margins anyway. Pleased I don't hold any of that over-priced stock!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh
I know. THREE models. We can lose money even faster!
Just update the eInk Kindle with a backlight and keyboard.
[*] Good. Luck. With. That.
[*]
[*]
[/LIST]
How about fixing what's already there, instead of adding to the current letdown?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
How about fixing what's already there, instead of adding to the current letdown?
Don't be silly. That's not the Android way. Instead of fixing what's broken and actually trying to make good devices that have a reasonable life, Android companies just release a new version. That's much easier than trying to make something good that lasts. As far as the OS goes, hardly anybody who uses Android is currently on ICS, and they're already releasing Jelly Bean, the whole thing is quite tragic and also very hilarious. By the time that 10% of Android users are on Jelly Bean, Google will probably already have released the next version, whatever that's going to be called, probably Key Lime Pie, or some other similar lame name. At this rate, they're going to reach "Z" mighty quickly, and a whole bunch of unfortunate bums will still be stuck on "A".
As for the hardware devices, they're practically already obsolete by the time that somebody gets home and opens the box.
The first Kindle eReader looked like a miss but they really shored up their weak points with the 2nd model and each additional eReader. If they follow the same path for the Kindle Fire they could be onto something.
Plus, if Asus/Google can come out with a much faster and better $200 tablet less than a year after the Fire launched I have confidence that Amazon is getting ready to step up their game as well. I doubt they have been resting on their laurels for the past year.
That said, Amazon is still not a company I would invest in but, for arguments sake, they were to start to making HW with a decent margin that turn their overall business around there stock might be very valuable in the long run for their current investors. I know I certainly buy something from them pretty much every week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That said, Amazon is still not a company I would invest in but, for arguments sake, they were to start to making HW with a decent margin that turn their overall business around there stock might be very valuable in the long run for their current investors. I know I certainly buy something from them pretty much every week.
I don't have anything in particular against Amazon, and I do order from them sometimes, if they have the product that I'm looking for and the price is right, but I find it outrageous that Amazon has a P/E of 186 while Apple has a measly 14.8.
A P/E ratio of 186 is not usually a good thing. It means that the company either has a very high expected future growth in earnings (less likely), or it is the subject of a speculative bubble (very bad).
A P/E ratio of 14.8 is quite healthy, it generally means that the company's stock is considered a fair value and accurate (and not likely to nose dive as what happened to many companies in the year 2000 dot-com bubble).
Remember it's a ratio, "Market Price per Share" divided by "Annual Earnings per Share"
This ratio can also be looked at as the number of years it would take for the earnings to equal the purchase price. Though I don't know exactly why 186 years of earnings to break even sounds ok, I suppose it's just a lot of hope for major growth!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatortpk
A P/E ratio of 186 is not usually a good thing. It means that the company either has a very high expected future growth in earnings (less likely), or it is the subject of a speculative bubble (very bad).
A P/E ratio of 14.8 is quite healthy, it generally means that the company's stock is considered a fair value and accurate (and not likely to nose dive as what happened to many companies in the year 2000 dot-com bubble).
Remember it's a ratio, "Market Price per Share" divided by "Annual Earnings per Share"
This ratio can also be looked at as the number of years it would take for the earnings to equal the purchase price. Though I don't know exactly why 186 years of earnings to break even sounds ok, I suppose it's just a lot of hope for major growth!
I'm a newcomer to stocks, so that's all interesting info for me, and I still have lots to learn. I just got involved in the past year or so.
186 years to break even? I'm glad that I don't own any Amazon stock.
Apple sounds like a far, far safer bet. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I had any money invested in Amazon.
OMFG!!!!!
LMAO bro!!!
OH NO YOU DIDN'T with those periods.
Y'all crazy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatortpk
A P/E ratio of 186 is not usually a good thing. It means that the company either has a very high expected future growth in earnings (less likely), or it is the subject of a speculative bubble (very bad).
A P/E ratio of 14.8 is quite healthy, it generally means that the company's stock is considered a fair value and accurate (and not likely to nose dive as what happened to many companies in the year 2000 dot-com bubble).
Remember it's a ratio, "Market Price per Share" divided by "Annual Earnings per Share"
This ratio can also be looked at as the number of years it would take for the earnings to equal the purchase price. Though I don't know exactly why 186 years of earnings to break even sounds ok, I suppose it's just a lot of hope for major growth!
P/E ratio is a very bad measure of how a company is doing, since earnings are affected by capital expenditures. For example, if Apple was to one quarter decide to aggressively expand their stores, they would end up spending a lot of money, which would cause their earnings per share to decline, which in turn would cause their P/E ratio to skyrocket. It would be the same Apple as it was the quarter before (albeit with more stores), yet their P/E ratio would be much much higher. So basically, P/E ratios are incomplete information - it could mean that the company has a lot of people speculating on future growth, or it could mean that they are aggressively spending money to expand.
By the same measure, a low P/E ratio is not necessarily a good thing either. RIM's P/E ratio was somewhere around 4 before they declared a loss this quarter (which is not always a bad thing, although in the case of RIM it certainly is). I think that Apple's low P/E ratio, while healthier, shows that investors don't expect the earnings per share to increase very much (which would lower the P/E ratio), which is typically the case of companies with higher P/E ratios.
So basically, P/E ratios are a meaningless way to tell how healthy a company is. If you really want to know, read these companies SEC filings - it will give you a much more complete picture of the state of the company (and in my humble opinion, they are much more interesting than you might expect).
Why do we assume we know better than Jeff Bezos, one of the most successful entrepreneurs of the internet era? Micro-analyze P/E, profit margins all you want, he is one of the few leaders who has reinvented his company repeatedly. Why do we assume he doesn't know what he is doing? And why are we dissing his company based on rumors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatortpk
Remember it's a ratio, "Market Price per Share" divided by "Annual Earnings per Share"
This ratio can also be looked at as the number of years it would take for the earnings to equal the purchase price. Though I don't know exactly why 186 years of earnings to break even sounds ok, I suppose it's just a lot of hope for major growth!
That's what some *experts* say, but they always fail to show a few examples where this has been borne out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
3 more and it won't change a thing
and selling it outside of the states this time would help those sales numbers too . . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Why do we assume we know better than Jeff Bezos, one of the most successful entrepreneurs of the internet era? Micro-analyze P/E, profit margins all you want, he is one of the few leaders who has reinvented his company repeatedly. Why do we assume he doesn't know what he is doing?
Because the past 3 years have shown that outside of retail, he really doesn't.