or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google Nexus One components estimated at $174.15 cost
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google Nexus One components estimated at $174.15 cost

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
Internal components of Google's new Nexus One smartphone are estimated to cost about the same as the iPhone 3GS when it launched last year, a new analysis has concluded.

After conducting a teardown of the Nexus One, iSuppli has estimated taht the cost of parts in the handset is $174.15. The dollar amount includes hardware and component costs, but does not take into consideration expenses like manufacturing, software, box contents, accessories and royalties.

"Items like the durable unibody construction, the blazingly fast Snapdragon baseband processor and the bright and sharp Active-Matrix Organic Light Emitting Diode (AM-OLED) display all have been seen in previous phones, but never before combined into a single design," said Kevin Keller, senior analyst of competitive analysis for iSuppli.

"This gives the Nexus One the most advanced features of any smart phone ever dissected by iSupplis Teardown Analysis Servicea remarkable feat given the products BOM is similar to comparable products introduced during the past year."

The estimate is about on par with the costs associated with the iPhone 3GS from a similar review last year. iSuppli estimated that the 16GB iPhone 3GS cost $178.96, slightly higher than the $174.33 in parts found in the 8GB iPhone 3G.

The Nexus One's Snapdragon processor, which allows 720p video playback, is estimated to cost $30.50, making it the most expensive component of the phone. The 3.7-inch AM-OLED display is estimated at $23.70. The phone also has 512MB of DDR DRAM and 512MB of NAND flash memory, along with a 4GB MicroSD card. The memory, supplied by Samsung, is said to cost $20.40.

Source: iSuppli Corp., Jan. 2010

Google's handset, built by HTC, can be purchased direct from the company unlocked and contract-free for $529. It can be bought subsidized by T-Mobile for new customers with a two-year contract for $179. A CDMA version of the handset will also be available for Verizon this spring.

Last week, a teardown of the Nexus One found the 0.45-inch-thick device was easy to disassemble. It has a removable battery, features 802.11n Wi-Fi, and was shown to be "colorful" on the inside.

Following its launch last week, Google faced some criticism from customers. Support is not available by phone, only via e-mail. In addition, some have complained that they can't find answers for support issues from Google, and that they have been passed back and forth between the search giant, HTC and T-Mobile for assistance.

For more on the Nexus One and how it stacks up against Apple's iPhone 3GS, see an in-depth comparison from AppleInsider.
post #2 of 46
When this site became GoogleInsider?
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
post #3 of 46
Hmm, iPhone $600 - $179 = $421

Lets assume Apple is figuring on replacing each iPhone once under warranty plus shipping, so that's $200/$200 and the last $200 is profit.

So if the iPhone works correctly under warranty, that's $400 profit.

Plus the kickback from the carriers...

Plus the kickback from the App Store and iTunes...


Nice margins and multiple income streams there Apple...


I'm not playing, because outside of a few apps used occasionally, the iPhone is mostly a gaming device as proven by the TOP APPS.

The way I figured it, a iPhone with contract costs as much as a MacBook Pro MORE than a regular cell phone with a $30 a month contract.


I guess it's assumed we should give up one for the other, and a lot of people are doing just that.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #4 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post



I'm not playing, because outside of a few apps used occasionally, the iPhone is mostly a gaming device as proven by the TOP APPS.

The way I figured it, a iPhone with contract costs as much as a MacBook Pro MORE than a regular cell phone with a $30 a month contract.

your argument leads me to believe you base your purchasing decisions on the cost of the device. naturally there is nothing wrong with that. however cost alone is not the determining factor for most people who buy apple products; apple products are luxury devices, i expect that most people who visit these forums are rich enough to pay extra for prestige or pleasure.

on another note, the iphone is obviously implemented for various uses and tasks, i'm sure it's used for gaming by some people, for me however it is a mobile office while on tour and taking care of business; i have never played a single game on this device in the 2 years i've had it, nor do most of the people i know who use it. ie: app-store stats are not automatically an indication of what the iphone is being used for. i use it all day every day - for office work, and have only downloaded about 5 apps in 2 years, my needs are covered by mail, ical, safari, maps etc. no need for a any more.
post #5 of 46
This article is comparing current N1 parts costs with last year's 3Gs. Don't the costs of the parts decrease over time as manufacturing methods are made more efficient and additional suppliers come online? I'm very curious what the CURRENT cost to manufacture a 3Gs is. Anyone have any info on this?
post #6 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


I'm not playing, because outside of a few apps used occasionally, the iPhone is mostly a gaming device as proven by the TOP APPS.

Top Apps prove that games happen to be popular, not that the iPhone is a "gaming device." The iPhone also has the highest-quality apps in each class across the board, from IM clients to utilities, etc.

However, the iPhone is the premiere device for mobile (smartphone) gaming. This is because it has the best games. Great games for any device will always be popular, regardless of whatever else the device does. If a device has good games for it, games will always feature very high on the popularity lists. You can have several great VNC apps or amazing navigation apps, but games tend to have mass appeal.

The iPhone is an everything device. It does a variety of things and it does most of them quite well. The popularity of games, however, does not mean it is a "gaming device" (whatever that means) as opposed to a (fill in the blank) device.
post #7 of 46
Hardware prices plumet pretty fast. This means that Apple can assemble a decent slate for a decent price. And this in combination with a contact will of course make it available to the masses. I wonder how Apples' slate will shape the market. And how the iPhone will evolve to a stable and iPod-like dominance.
Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
Posted by the door post at the post office the post man posted his last post-millennial post card with a Penny Black postage stamp via the Royal Post.
Reply
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

outside of a few apps used occasionally, the iPhone is mostly a gaming device as proven by the TOP APPS.

Well, actually the top free app right now in the US store is a virtual roll of toilet paper that you unroll. I wouldn't exactly call that a "game"
post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Hmm, iPhone $600 - $179 = $421

Lets assume Apple is figuring on replacing each iPhone once under warranty plus shipping, so that's $200/$200 and the last $200 is profit.

So if the iPhone works correctly under warranty, that's $400 profit.

Plus the kickback from the carriers...

Plus the kickback from the App Store and iTunes...

Actually your math is off. Apple only gets 200 from the customer initially. Then there's some kickbick from the carriers to bring it up to an estimated 600. So your profit margins are off by $200! If they replace an iPhone during warranty, it's probably break-even, maybe slight profit. Really, it doesn't benefit Apple to produce faulty iPhones And App Store isn't really making a huge profit margin, Apple executives said that they run it as a purely break-even operation, which explains even though it's multiple billion downloads in, it's barely made a couple million in profit. Which is nothing compared to the many many millions Apple rakes in with hardware profits on everything else. Are you trying to replace Teckstud, because I see a similarity here...
post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidT View Post

apple products are luxury devices, i expect that most people who visit these forums are rich enough to pay extra for prestige or pleasure.

Only inasmuch as any smartphone or properly working laptop is a "luxury device". Most of the planet can't afford such a thing, and there are a lot of cheap knockoffs that you can cajole into some level of usefulness. But to call Apple products "luxury devices" imply an insensitivity to a cost/benefit analysis, which I don't think is valid.
post #11 of 46
Yeah it's cheap because there's no internal memory like in iPhone. Users have to spend extra $70 for 32GB micro card. And the screen is AMOLED but its cheaper than custom made touch screen of iPhone.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #12 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post

When this site became GoogleInsider?

When Google decided to become competitor to Apple.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post

When this site became GoogleInsider?

Seriously...
post #14 of 46
And obviously software on it is not on list of items. So everybody assumes it is free?

Show me those robots that write software for free and do not need maintenace in form of food, place to live.


I am one of those that write "software for free" for corporations like Google.

If someone still thinks software engineering is easy then be my guest write software for yourself.


Now Google developers have PhD in CS. They are not free workforce and I am not sure if you can easily develope such products with self-educated teenager geeks doing this for fun only. So far experiments like that (creating software product - not hacking someones product or solution) have failed.


BTW human work is the most expensive one than automated silicon line so, software is more expensive than hardware (usually). Also designers of hardware do not work for free.



Good luck with cost estimations. Those are not profits margins for Google that you suggest (difference between pricing and cost of hardware components).
post #15 of 46
And yet, Google is giving this software away, aren't they? If I wanted to create my own Adroid phone it's the hardware that costs money. The software comes free from Google with only customization required and maybe a few outsourced drivers, doesn't it? If Google isn't going to value software higher than $0 why should anyone else? If you write customer-facing software for Google, you're their loss-leader, not their bread-and-butter.
post #16 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Hmm, iPhone $600 - $179 = $421

Lets assume Apple is figuring on replacing each iPhone once under warranty plus shipping, so that's $200/$200 and the last $200 is profit.

So if the iPhone works correctly under warranty, that's $400 profit.

Plus the kickback from the carriers...

Plus the kickback from the App Store and iTunes...


Nice margins and multiple income streams there Apple...

And your math is off further than bartfat says...

The cost of the hardware is not the only part of the cost of the device. It costs money for developers to design hardware and write & debug software, for people to assemble and test individual phones, for electricity to keep the lights on (and computers running) while they do that, for water and janitorial services for the bathrooms, etc, etc (this is mentioned in the second paragraph of the original post).

All this is wrapped up in the cost of the device. If Google expects to sell 1 million of the Nexus One, each Nexus One includes 1 millionth of the cost to pay people to develop the Nexus One.

Google's current profit margin is 27.57%, so you can estimate that 165.42 USD is profit. This is almost certainly low, since Google offers so many other products and services for free.
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

And yet, Google is giving this software away, aren't they? If I wanted to create my own Adroid phone it's the hardware that costs money. The software comes free from Google with only customization required and maybe a few outsourced drivers, doesn't it? If Google isn't going to value software higher than $0 why should anyone else? If you write customer-facing software for Google, you're their loss-leader, not their bread-and-butter.

android is free, but the application to access gmail and other services are licensed by google and google gives an advertising kickback to the licensee making it a better proposition than WinMo. Google is doing the same thing as MS did since the CEO was a victim of that strategy. and it's the same thing as MS going Bing Cashback deals and buying users
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jglavin View Post

Well, actually the top free app right now in the US store is a virtual roll of toilet paper that you unroll. I wouldn't exactly call that a "game"

What would you call it? It's placed under the games catagory.
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Hmm, iPhone $600 - $179 = $421

Lets assume Apple is figuring on replacing each iPhone once under warranty plus shipping, so that's $200/$200 and the last $200 is profit.

So if the iPhone works correctly under warranty, that's $400 profit.

I'm just going to "+1" everyone else's reply to this faulty math. Design, assembly, shipping, inventory management, sales expenses, support costs, etc, etc, etc.
post #20 of 46
I love seeing tear down costs like this. For all companies.
I then like to compare it to the price of the device "off contract".
And then I question "Why exactly do I let the telecom companies take all this money for the lousy services they provide?"

Seriously, can any one give me a GOOD reason as to why the "off contract" prices are so very different from the build prices? I can understand margins of the devices, but this is something else altogether.


Also, I'm all in favor of NOT locking handsets to a particular carrier. Choose your handset SEPARATE of your carrier, would make competition better, and the actual service better. Most commercials I see for VZW,ATT,Sprint,T-Mobile, are for the handsets, not their services! Something is VERY wrong with this picture.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

Only inasmuch as any smartphone or properly working laptop is a "luxury device". Most of the planet can't afford such a thing, and there are a lot of cheap knockoffs that you can cajole into some level of usefulness. But to call Apple products "luxury devices" imply an insensitivity to a cost/benefit analysis, which I don't think is valid.

true, but i wonder how many buyers of eg. laptops study cost/benefit analysis?

i have not observed anybody who had to save up for a mac.

if course i have no figures, but form observing those around me:
apple products do NOT get bought because after extensive research the prospective consumers have discovered that a mac is not more expensive in the long run, has better specs than competing products etc.

apple products DO get bought because 1- friends recommend it, 2 - lovely device, a status symbol etc. 3 - consumer was happy with previous apple device (and service etc).

and to buy an expensive machine based on these merits qualifies it as a luxury item, which happens to come with nice side effects (integrated hard/software, nice user experience, good serivce etc)

all the first iphones i saw were not being bought by people who study cost/benefit analysis, they were owned by rich kids who were out to impress. i and my colleagues researched & waited 18months, the rich kids had theirs the day the device went on sale.

best
-D
post #22 of 46
OK, you don't calculate net profit of selling a device based on the bill of materials. What that buys you is a pile of parts, not a finished product. Net profit requires taking out a lot of expenses that aren't part of the BOM, and those expenses are a little harder to estimate. I also wonder how much faith they really have putting the BOM total out to five significant figures, we never see the original report, so we don't know how confident they are, I wouldn't be surprised if they were off as much as 5% on the total on occasion, I think they probably should not have the coinage in the final figure, round to the nearest dollar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

Only inasmuch as any smartphone or properly working laptop is a "luxury device". Most of the planet can't afford such a thing, and there are a lot of cheap knockoffs that you can cajole into some level of usefulness. But to call Apple products "luxury devices" imply an insensitivity to a cost/benefit analysis, which I don't think is valid.

I think it's fair to call any smartphone a luxury device unless it's bought for business use, then it might be a necessity. I think it's not just about cost/benefit, it's about whether it is really necessary to have one.

Laptops aren't necessarily so, you can buy a decent laptop in the range of the cost of an unsubsidized smart phone and can be a lot more productive than with a smartphone, the main significant drawbacks being less portable and shorter battery life.
post #23 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I love seeing tear down costs like this. For all companies.
I then like to compare it to the price of the device "off contract".
And then I question "Why exactly do I let the telecom companies take all this money for the lousy services they provide?"

Seriously, can any one give me a GOOD reason as to why the "off contract" prices are so very different from the build prices? I can understand margins of the devices, but this is something else altogether.


Also, I'm all in favor of NOT locking handsets to a particular carrier. Choose your handset SEPARATE of your carrier, would make competition better, and the actual service better. Most commercials I see for VZW,ATT,Sprint,T-Mobile, are for the handsets, not their services! Something is VERY wrong with this picture.

it could be margins. smartphone market is still immature and in the 1990's Dell had some nice margins due to their logistics pipeline.

second possibility is that there are a log of other costs other than price of the parts. build cost, development, etc. cell phones aren't built by robots like cars. still need human hands to stuff all the parts in there

and look at the price of a 15" MBP compared to a Dell with similar specs. it's twice as much, because people are willing to pay it. yet all the apple fanboys think that's OK
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

and look at the price of a 15" MBP compared to a Dell with similar specs. it's twice as much, because people are willing to pay it. yet all the apple fanboys think that's OK

im waiting for the reply with "but its a much better value" comment for this.

in all serious, is anyone surprised by the cost of the components in the nexus? im not. thats close to what i estimated it'd be when i first saw the phone.
post #25 of 46
Shouldn't that read:

Quote:
For more on the Nexus One and how it stacks up against Apple's iPhone 3GS, see an in-depth comparison from someone who has never seen one in the flesh.

post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

im waiting for the reply with "but its a much better value" comment for this.

in all serious, is anyone surprised by the cost of the components in the nexus? im not. thats close to what i estimated it'd be when i first saw the phone.

not really surprised at all, thats what i assumed it would cost (was thinking 180s myself) but the snapdragon and amoled screen really add to the price tag, as well as using a wifi-n chip without supporting i officially.

Having removable media is a love hate thing. You'd hate it when you have to buy it, but if you switch phones, or use more than one, you can keep all your digital stuff without missing a beat (jumped from a Storm to a Bold, took all of 10 seconds to move my stuff over) if you stay on the same platform.
post #27 of 46
delete
post #28 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

it could be margins. smartphone market is still immature and in the 1990's Dell had some nice margins due to their logistics pipeline.

second possibility is that there are a log of other costs other than price of the parts. build cost, development, etc. cell phones aren't built by robots like cars. still need human hands to stuff all the parts in there

and look at the price of a 15" MBP compared to a Dell with similar specs. it's twice as much, because people are willing to pay it. yet all the apple fanboys think that's OK

My only argument, is the iPod Touch. The device which (minus a camera, microphone and cell phone chipset) is really close to the iPhone, then why does it cost so much less? I'm not saying that the iPhone is solely to blame in terms of exorbitant handset costs, but at least we have something to compare it to in the non-cell phone world.

My only reason would be, is the iPod Touch a loss leader? But it still has a decent margin!
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Hmm, iPhone $600 - $179 = $421

Lets assume Apple is figuring on replacing each iPhone once under warranty plus shipping, so that's $200/$200 and the last $200 is profit.

So if the iPhone works correctly under warranty, that's $400 profit.

Seriously, Dude? Youve been here since May of last year. You should know that the BOM (Build of Materials) is not even close to everything that needs to be considered for the cost of the device to even equal a null profit on the device.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #30 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

My only argument, is the iPod Touch. The device which (minus a camera, microphone and cell phone chipset) is really close to the iPhone, then why does it cost so much less? I'm not saying that the iPhone is solely to blame in terms of exorbitant handset costs, but at least we have something to compare it to in the non-cell phone world.

My only reason would be, is the iPod Touch a loss leader? But it still has a decent margin!

has it ever been confirmed that the iphone gives apple $600 - $700 per unit in revenue?

and the iphone also carries a higher royalty cost. you have to pay patent royalties to qualcomm, GSM consortium and i don't know who else.
post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

has it ever been confirmed that the iphone gives apple $600 - $700 per unit in revenue?

and the iphone also carries a higher royalty cost. you have to pay patent royalties to qualcomm, GSM consortium and i don't know who else.

I should start working for Qualcomm or GSM or someone who all these companies pay these royalties to. Ah, the joys of licencing. Per hand set (all handsets, not just apples), that's a pretty scrap of cash.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #32 of 46
Why stop at components?

The Nexus was probably made from less than a few dollars worth of rocks, oil and sand.

All you gotta do is find the right ones, dig them up, refine them and assemble them into phone components.

This is why these things are stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I love seeing tear down costs like this. For all companies.
I then like to compare it to the price of the device "off contract".
And then I question "Why exactly do I let the telecom companies take all this money for the lousy services they provide?"

Seriously, can any one give me a GOOD reason as to why the "off contract" prices are so very different from the build prices? I can understand margins of the devices, but this is something else altogether.


Also, I'm all in favor of NOT locking handsets to a particular carrier. Choose your handset SEPARATE of your carrier, would make competition better, and the actual service better. Most commercials I see for VZW,ATT,Sprint,T-Mobile, are for the handsets, not their services! Something is VERY wrong with this picture.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zep View Post

im waiting for the reply with "but its [Apple Computers] a much better value" comment for this.

Actually, before I got my MBP I configured a dell studio laptop with close specs and features to that of the 15" low end MBP, dell was slightly more expensive.

Edit: I just put one together, only about 250$ cheaper than the 15"MBP, and even then, the MBP has some of the best engineering and reliability, plus OSX and the iLife suit.
post #34 of 46
Well, it would be interesting to see what the actual wholesale price of these phones is to Google, not just the cost of materials.

Does the cell phone market exercise the same markup rates as typical retail, which is 300%?

If Google really wanted to shake up the cell phone industry business model, this Nexus One is a very very small start, but a start nonetheless.

I think many folks expected Google to really give a good incentive to buy direct from them by offering the hardware at a low cost. It doesn't appear that they're doing that, but without knowing how much they're pocketing off each device, you can't really say one way or the other.

Actually, maybe they are. $530 off contract certainly isn't on the high-end of what you pay out of pocket for something like an iPhone or high end Crackberry or Nokia, is it? Problem is, it doesn't seem particularly cheaper either.
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

My only argument, is the iPod Touch. The device which (minus a camera, microphone and cell phone chipset) is really close to the iPhone, then why does it cost so much less? I'm not saying that the iPhone is solely to blame in terms of exorbitant handset costs, but at least we have something to compare it to in the non-cell phone world.

My only reason would be, is the iPod Touch a loss leader? But it still has a decent margin!

Apple sells nothing at a loss, word is they might for Apple TV to make it back in itunes sales, but i find that unlikely.

The iPhone costs like 170ish (16GB) as well to make, so the iPod is going to be cheaper because it doesnt need to utilize a radio chip. Also with no radio chips comes no royalties that need to be paid out to respective owners of the GSM people or Qualcomm (the CDMA folks everyone loves to hate) and it doesnt need to have as much R&D time because it doesnt need the extra work the iPhone needs to make sure everything plays with the network fine.

I'm not sure what the profit margin is on the iPod touch but im sure its probably around the usual 20-25%.
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

Well, it would be interesting to see what the actual wholesale price of these phones is to Google, not just the cost of materials.

Does the cell phone market exercise the same markup rates as typical retail, which is 300%?

If Google really wanted to shake up the cell phone industry business model, this Nexus One is a very very small start, but a start nonetheless.

I think many folks expected Google to really give a good incentive to buy direct from them by offering the hardware at a low cost. It doesn't appear that they're doing that, but without knowing how much they're pocketing off each device, you can't really say one way or the other.

Actually, maybe they are. $530 off contract certainly isn't on the high-end of what you pay out of pocket for something like an iPhone or high end Crackberry or Nokia, is it? Problem is, it doesn't seem particularly cheaper either.

Its higher than the iPhone and Blackberry and Nokia (i think...some of their phones are outrageous)

You would expect to be getting a cheaper price though. You cut out the middle man of having to go into a store and buy one. It would be more impressive if it were at 449 or something.

What was a big deal about Google selling an unlocked phone...isnt. T-Mo charges the same price for on contract service (500 mins, unlimited data/text) as it does for its flexpay, so unless your credit is screwed, there is ZERO point. If carriers start actually showing cheaper prices for service if you bring in your own phone, then it might be a bigger of a deal. Until then, ill sign a contract and only pay 200 out of pocket.
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifail View Post

Its higher than the iPhone and Blackberry and Nokia (i think...some of their phones are outrageous)

You would expect to be getting a cheaper price though. You cut out the middle man of having to go into a store and buy one. It would be more impressive if it were at 449 or something.

What was a big deal about Google selling an unlocked phone...isnt. T-Mo charges the same price for on contract service (500 mins, unlimited data/text) as it does for its flexpay, so unless your credit is screwed, there is ZERO point. If carriers start actually showing cheaper prices for service if you bring in your own phone, then it might be a bigger of a deal. Until then, ill sign a contract and only pay 200 out of pocket.

According to my calculations, using the 500 minute plan, the cost of ownership over two years is $130 LESS if you buy the N1 off contract.

Contract rate: $179 + 24mos*$79 vs non-contract of $529+24mos*$59.

After 18 months you're break even on the initial outlay, so I guess how long you plan on sticking around with that phone and TMo, and what the cancellation fee is are the deciding factors.

By the way, did anyone else notice that Google's removed the link to the Nexus One purchase site from their home page today? Is that significant?
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Seriously, Dude? Youve been here since May of last year. You should know that the BOM (Build of Materials) is not even close to everything that needs to be considered for the cost of the device to even equal a null profit on the device.


No not seriously, just talking off the top of my head, but it makes good Apple discussion and I learned something too.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistortedLoop View Post

According to my calculations, using the 500 minute plan, the cost of ownership over two years is $130 LESS if you buy the N1 off contract.

Contract rate: $179 + 24mos*$79 vs non-contract of $529+24mos*$59.

After 18 months you're break even on the initial outlay, so I guess how long you plan on sticking around with that phone and TMo, and what the cancellation fee is are the deciding factors.

By the way, did anyone else notice that Google's removed the link to the Nexus One purchase site from their home page today? Is that significant?

I guess T-Mo charges less then unless its a BB then cause i pulled up 79 just for the basic 500 min and unlimited data/text plan if you bought the 9700 outright.
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Why stop at components?

The Nexus was probably made from less than a few dollars worth of rocks, oil and sand.

All you gotta do is find the right ones, dig them up, refine them and assemble them into phone components.

This is why these things are stupid.

And the rocks, oil, and sand are just a bunch of protons, neutrons, and electrons. My $1 bottle of water probably has enough of those to make a couple of iPhones. Who cares that it would take several billion dollars and many years to rearrange the the particles into an iPhone. That's just manufacturing costs, which we don't count.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google Nexus One components estimated at $174.15 cost