or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expected to produce 6 million second-gen iPads per month
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple expected to produce 6 million second-gen iPads per month

post #1 of 83
Thread Starter 
Apple reportedly believes its anticipated second-generation iPad will be even more popular than the first model, as the company is expected to order production of 6 million per month.

If true, that number would be significantly higher than the 4 million per quarter produced for the current iPad, according to DigiTimes. Overseas sources indicated that Apple added two additional touch panel makers, Chimei Innolux and Cando, for production of the "iPad 2."

The two new suppliers are in addition to current suppliers Wintek, Sintek Photronics, and TPK Touch Solutions. The expanded number of partners will reportedly allow Apple to produce even more iPads per month, reaching the 6 million target.

Sources indicated that suppliers will begin shipments to Apple in January or February. That's consistent with previous reports that the device would begin shipping within 100 days to allow Apple to stock up for a launch by April.

Suppliers also indicated that Apple has no interest in producing a 7-inch iPad, smaller and lighter than the current 9.7-inch model. The news is noteworthy because it was DigiTimes that repeatedly reported for months that Apple was set to release a 7-inch iPad.

Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs poured water on those rumors in October during his company's fourth-quarter conference call. He said that he believes competing products, like the 7-inch Samsung Galaxy Tab, have chosen a smaller size to reduce costs rather than usability.

"When we make decisions on 7-inch tablets, it's not about cost," Jobs said. "It's about the value of the product when you factor in the software."
post #2 of 83
Wow, that sounds awfully optimistic - if anywhere near true. 6 million a month? There would have to be some purdy fancy new bells and whistles and much less weight on the iPad2 to create that kind of demand, but then ONLY Apple really knows how many units are actually being sold right now and how desirable the new model (probably) will be . . .

As a shareholder, sounds good to me.
post #3 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedK View Post

Wow, that sounds awfully optimistic - if anywhere near true. 6 million a month? There would have to be some purdy fancy new bells and whistles and much less weight on the iPad2 to create that kind of demand, but then ONLY Apple really knows how many units are actually being sold right now and how desirable the new model (probably) will be . . .

As a shareholder, sounds good to me.

I hope it is true.

As a share holder I had to run to the bathroom
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #4 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedK View Post

Wow, that sounds awfully optimistic - if anywhere near true. 6 million a month? There would have to be some purdy fancy new bells and whistles and much less weight on the iPad2 to create that kind of demand, but then ONLY Apple really knows how many units are actually being sold right now and how desirable the new model (probably) will be . . .

As a shareholder, sounds good to me.

If one thinks of global demand, six million units per month is not that far-fetched. I'd bet money that Apple will once again find itself unable to meet demand. That is one part that seems to be common with Apple.

Apple has me waiting two buy two of those!
post #5 of 83
I'd like to know who these people are actually talking to. Six months ago we were told that Apple raised their production to two million a month, but last quarter's sales were 4.19 million in total, and we then read that Apple could have sold more if their production was up to it.

Then we read that Apple's production was three million a month. Why? If it was two million a month, and they only sold four million because they couldn't make more, then something was screwy. If they don't sell nine million this quarter, and it isn't expected they will, then why ramp to six million next year? That would be an absurd 72 million tablets sold next year. That's crazy!

As much as I would like to see Apple sell as many of these as possible, I can't believe numbers like that.
post #6 of 83
So they won't make a 7 inch ipad, but they will probably make a 7 inch ipod touch Hey, they made a netbook when they said they would not.
post #7 of 83
6 million per month = 72 million per year. That would be AMAZING and totally beyond what I would have thought possible.

6 million per quarter = 24 million per year. That would be good, and not surprising.

Surely they must have meant per quarter...
post #8 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'd like to know who these people are actually talking to. Six months ago we were told that Apple raised their production to two million a month, but last quarter's sales were 4.19 million in total, and we then read that Apple could have sold more if their production was up to it.

Then we read that Apple's production was three million a month. Why? If it was two million a month, and they only sold four million because they couldn't make more, then something was screwy. If they don't sell nine million this quarter, and it isn't expected they will, then why ramp to six million next year? That would be an absurd 72 million tablets sold next year. That's crazy!

As much as I would like to see Apple sell as many of these as possible, I can't believe numbers like that.

I actually think that Apple sold between 9-10 million iPads this quarter. Regardless... 6 million a month next year when iP2 is released??!!... somebody is looking for a stock bump by giving it a little pump (imo)...
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #9 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

If one thinks of global demand, six million units per month is not that far-fetched. I'd bet money that Apple will once again find itself unable to meet demand. That is one part that seems to be common with Apple.

Apple has me waiting two buy two of those!

me too, i cannot wait to get a new ipad2 and a macbook pro with Lion
post #10 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

6 million per month = 72 million per year. That would be AMAZING and totally beyond what I would have thought possible.

6 million per quarter = 24 million per year. That would be good, and not surprising.

Surely they must have meant per quarter...

There is a mistake in the article.... the current build rate is 4 million per QUARTER. Going to 6 million per month would be a huge change (16 million per year vs 72 million per year!).
post #11 of 83
How about Apple take the current iPad, drop the price $100, and only make two version of the new iPad (memory size not 3G / WiFi)? That way they can have a product that is in between and does what a lot of users (especially corporate users) need the thing to do.

And it puts it in direct competition with the smaller tablets like the Galaxy Tab.

I think the next iPad should have an integrated GSM & CDMA chip, so it works on any network...and they can call it the iPad World or something like that.
post #12 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by nokin50 View Post

There is a mistake in the article.... the current build rate is 4 million per QUARTER. Going to 6 million per month would be a huge change (16 million per year vs 72 million per year!).

Here is the quote from the digitimes article

"Apple's orders of iPad 2 are expected to top six million units a month compared to a volume of four million units a quarter for the current version, pushing Apple to expand the number of touch panel suppliers, the sources noted."
post #13 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedK View Post

Wow, that sounds awfully optimistic - if anywhere near true. 6 million a month? There would have to be some purdy fancy new bells and whistles and much less weight on the iPad2 to create that kind of demand, but then ONLY Apple really knows how many units are actually being sold right now and how desirable the new model (probably) will be . . .

As a shareholder, sounds good to me.

China is building out, nation-wide hundreds of thousands of tower stations and WIFI access.

6 million/month in a nation of > 750 million smartphone subscribers is not much.
post #14 of 83
This sounds just a a bit like a game of fantasy to me - much as I would love for it to be true. Perhaps they are preparing for peak capacity of 6M/month. That I might believe.
post #15 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

I actually think that Apple sold between 9-10 million iPads this quarter. Regardless... 6 million a month next year when iP2 is released??!!... somebody is looking for a stock bump by giving it a little pump (imo)...

You actually think that? Based on what? I thought they sold 6.5 million last quarter, but they didn't.
post #16 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by crustyjusty View Post

How about Apple take the current iPad, drop the price $100, and only make two version of the new iPad (memory size not 3G / WiFi)? That way they can have a product that is in between and does what a lot of users (especially corporate users) need the thing to do.

And it puts it in direct competition with the smaller tablets like the Galaxy Tab.

I think the next iPad should have an integrated GSM & CDMA chip, so it works on any network...and they can call it the iPad World or something like that.

I think keeping the current iPad around would make a ton of sense for the education market. I'm sure there are plenty of school districts that hate the idea of putting a video camera in an iPad.
post #17 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I'd like to know who these people are actually talking to. Six months ago we were told that Apple raised their production to two million a month, but last quarter's sales were 4.19 million in total, and we then read that Apple could have sold more if their production was up to it.

Then we read that Apple's production was three million a month. Why? If it was two million a month, and they only sold four million because they couldn't make more, then something was screwy. If they don't sell nine million this quarter, and it isn't expected they will, then why ramp to six million next year? That would be an absurd 72 million tablets sold next year. That's crazy!

As much as I would like to see Apple sell as many of these as possible, I can't believe numbers like that.

My take on the last call was that they had been ramping to 2MM per quarter, starting in July, but didn't hit the 2MM mark until September. I thought they should have sold an extra 500k units, but that might be explained by lag time in the cycle. There is a delay between ordering equipment to produce more screens, getting it installed, starting production, and getting them to the final customer.

I don't remember the 3MM/month number. But, applying the same logic, there are two likely scenarios: Christmas rush/building inventory for the new version, or a ramp-up that takes a full quarter. Either way, we shouldn't see more than 6.5-7.5MM iPads for FQ1.
post #18 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You actually think that? Based on what? I thought they sold 6.5 million last quarter, but they didn't.

I have to admit that it's a gut feeling... if they sold 4.2 million in the last quarter, and I believe they were on their heels, then I think it's more than possible to easily double that number now that supply has been increased and demand has skyrocketed for probably the #1 (or close to it) Christmas present.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #19 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I think keeping the current iPad around would make a ton of sense for the education market. I'm sure there are plenty of school districts that hate the idea of putting a video camera in an iPad.

I agree. A camera in an iPad for the education market would generally not make sense and even open school districts up to potential lawsuits. Keep the current middle-of-the-road-Pad available for schools.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #20 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyemo View Post

So they won't make a 7 inch ipad, but they will probably make a 7 inch ipod touch Hey, they made a netbook when they said they would not.

I woild love it if my iPod Touch had a 7 inch screen!
post #21 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by crustyjusty View Post

How about Apple take the current iPad, drop the price $100,
And it puts it in direct competition with the smaller tablets like the Galaxy Tab.



I would buy 2 iPads at that price!
post #22 of 83
6 million per month and most likely DEMAND will outpace SUPPLY at least for the first few months.
post #23 of 83
I can see Apple selling 6M units per month, but like Melgross stated, there is something screwy with the numbers.
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 #24 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLoveMYiPhoneAndWantToGetaMAC View Post

I woild love it if my iPod Touch had a 7 inch screen!

I could handle a 10-15% increase in the iPod touch size, but much bigger would make it impractical as a pocket-size device.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #25 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If they don't sell nine million this quarter, and it isn't expected they will, then why ramp to six million next year? That would be an absurd 72 million tablets sold next year. That's crazy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

6 million per month = 72 million per year. That would be AMAZING and totally beyond what I would have thought possible.

First of all ramping up production to 6 million a month before release does not necessarily mean they plan on making or selling 72 million units next year.

Apple could simply be ramping up initial production to meet high early demand and then scale back production once they determine that demand has leveled out. Apple has a two month period to push as many iPads onto the market before the product is released; 12 million devices out of the gate would seem like a good start.

They did this with the holiday season by (reportedly) upping production to 3 million units a month in November. So if they were 2 million in October, and 3 million for November and December, then the most they could sell this quarter is 8 million, which isn't unreasonable in the holiday quarter. After the new year, they will probably switch just about all production over to the new model and scale current production way back to just a trickle. Tales of shortages will pop up all over starting in February.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #26 of 83
6 million/month suggests a lower price point, which perhaps means subsidies through cell carriers for the cell enabled models. Certainly there will be a model of iPad 2 for Verizon's network. The Mifi adapter has to be a temporary answer.
post #27 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

My take on the last call was that they had been ramping to 2MM per quarter, starting in July, but didn't hit the 2MM mark until September. I thought they should have sold an extra 500k units, but that might be explained by lag time in the cycle. There is a delay between ordering equipment to produce more screens, getting it installed, starting production, and getting them to the final customer.

I don't remember the 3MM/month number. But, applying the same logic, there are two likely scenarios: Christmas rush/building inventory for the new version, or a ramp-up that takes a full quarter. Either way, we shouldn't see more than 6.5-7.5MM iPads for FQ1.

There's a difference between what Apple says, and what we read as rumors, but which are often written as fact, as is this six million per month figure. The three million figure was also not an Apple number, but a third party estimate. It's these "guesses" I'm questioning. I understand production lags, as I was a manufacturer back when.
post #28 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I could handle a 10-15% increase in the iPod touch size, but much bigger would make it impractical as a pocket-size device.

Remember When we were all debating whether Apple should make a 6"-7" tablet, or a 10" model? Now that they've made the 10", I don't see 6"-7" as being the cards now. If 7" seems very popular with Android models (likely because of cost issues), then maybe Apple will follow.

But I think Apple wants to make a clear distinction between the two sizes. We know that Apple doesn't want people to be confused over product differences.
post #29 of 83
Here's an interesting speculation:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Is-The....html?x=0&.v=1

From what I've read, the $499 iPad parts costs are roughly $230, with major component costs

-- $80 Display
-- $30 SSD
-- $20 A4
-- $10 Case

If we assume that Apple's economies of scale have improved, manufacturing and yields have improved, and aggressive pre-orders/pre-payments and investments in mfg's plants -- I suspect that, say, 3 mm units per month the current $499 iPad could be manufactured for, let's say $150-$170.

If they could hit the $150 cost, then a sell price of $199 would yield 25%; $229 would yield 35% Gross Profit... not the best, but certainly acceptable.

There are several additional things that could be done:
-- Other A4/SSD based products (web server, home server) to further reduce overall parts costs across several product lines
-- Bundling with higher profit apps, content, subscriptions and accessories
-- iPad carrier subsidies - say, $25 per unit for the base iPad
-- Tethering plans
-- special direct sales to education / enterprise
-- Special promotions

In the special promotions I would suggest that they target the OLPC project with an iPad -- Buy 1, Give one, and offer the iPad at cost to participating countries/communities -- lots of workable possibilities here. BTW, some of those communities are in US and Europe.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #30 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

First of all ramping up production to 6 million a month before release does not necessarily mean they plan on making or selling 72 million units next year.

Apple could simply be ramping up initial production to meet high early demand and then scale back production once they determine that demand has leveled out. Apple has a two month period to push as many iPads onto the market before the product is released; 12 million devices out of the gate would seem like a good start.

They did this with the holiday season by (reportedly) upping production to 3 million units a month in November. So if they were 2 million in October, and 3 million for November and December, then the most they could sell this quarter is 8 million, which isn't unreasonable in the holiday quarter. After the new year, they will probably switch just about all production over to the new model and scale current production way back to just a trickle. Tales of shortages will pop up all over starting in February.

I don't believe it. It's only a rumor they ramped to three million a month. No more than that. This is a rumor as well. I can tell you from the view of someone who was a partner in a manufacturing company that you don't ramp up that much, and then ramp down that much. You try to build inventory up over time before the heavy sales period without ramping up much. Ramping up costs a lot of money, and usually involves more production lines. It then costs a lot to ramp back down. apple, like most other companies, builds inventory up over time, before release.

Apple has always been one of the most conservative companies I know, with or without Jobs. Back in early 1992, when I ordered my Quadra 950, it was backordered almost 6 weeks. This has been a constant for them. I doubt they would actually make 6 million a month for a new product, and then cut back. Don't forget that Apple doesn't have their own production. They would have to convince Hon Hi to do this.
post #31 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

If we assume that Apple's economies of scale have improved, manufacturing and yields have improved, and aggressive pre-orders/pre-payments and investments in mfg's plants -- I suspect that, say, 3 mm units per month the current $499 iPad could be manufactured for, let's say $150-$170.

If they could hit the $150 cost, then a sell price of $199 would yield 25%; $229 would yield 35% Gross Profit... not the best, but certainly acceptable.

While I agree that they have some economies of scale in using the A4 in different products, I think it benefits the AppleTV more than iPhone/iPad. If the next generation iPad is using an A8 based processor rather than the A9, and without a significant boost in RAM then they might be in for some backlash.

But, the display cost is not likely to have come down, since that is the most constrained part in the assembly. To make it worthwhile to produce enough screens, price would stay fairly flat.
post #32 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Here's an interesting speculation:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Is-The....html?x=0&.v=1

From what I've read, the $499 iPad parts costs for are roughly $230, with major component costs

-- $80 Display
-- $30 SSD
-- $20 A4
-- $10 Case

If we assume that Apple's economies of scale have improved, manufacturing and yields have improved, and aggressive pre-orders/pre-payments and investments in mfg's plants --I suspect that, say, 3 mm units per month the current $499 iPad could be manufactured for, let's say $150-$170.

If they could hit the $150 cost, then a sell price of $199 would yield 25%; $229 would yield 35% Gross Profit... not the best, but certainly acceptable.

There are several additional things that could be done:
-- Other A4/SSD based products (web server, home server) to further reduce overall parts costs across several product lines
-- iPad carrier subsidies - say, $25 per unit
-- special direct sales to education / enterprise
-- Special promotions

In the special promotions I would suggest that they target the OLPC project with an iPad -- Buy 1, Give one, and offer the iPad at cost to participating countries/communities -- lots of workable possibilities here. BTW, some of those communities are in US and Europe.

Those are parts prices, not cost to manufacture. That's appreciably higher, and must include packaging and transportation. According to indirect statements From Apple on "new" product costs, the iPad has lower margins than most of their other products, which is why Apple's margins have fallen the past two quarters, and why Apple is estimating it will remain lower. Their gross margins on this could be 30%. we certainly don't want it below that.

I also don't believe the $10 cost for the case. I think it cost more than that. A good $20, if not more. When Apple first began to make machined cases for the notebook line, Jobs admitted that they cost $100 more than the old cases to make. He said that cost would come down over time, and I'm sure it has. But still, it's expensive.

I think they could drop the old model (16GB, no 3G or GPS) to perhaps $399. Maybe even to $349. But they wouldn't want to cut too much into the new model's sales. Remember that unlike with the iPhone, these aren't subsidized prices, so we can't get a deal like Apple offers with the older model phone, where most of the price is still being given to them by the cell company. There, they're likely cutting the actual price by 15-20% to take $100 off the customer price. Maybe we will see a $199 subsidized price for the old iPad, as some companies are now beginning to subsidize them.
post #33 of 83
Ever since the iPad was first introduced... oh so long ago...

I've had this funny feeling in my gut that we're missing something here.

Something like the iPad is so inexpensive at $500 -- that someone will give it away to get you to buy their product. The prize in the cereal box, if you will.

I don't know whether that's someone selling language courses, wine/gourmet food of the month, real estate courses, subscriptions to whatever, home security, college degrees, automotive repair, woodworking...

I don't know what it is -- but I feel that there are uses we "computer guys" just don't see.

Maybe Apple sees them!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #34 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

But, the display cost is not likely to have come down, since that is the most constrained part in the assembly. To make it worthwhile to produce enough screens, price would stay fairly flat.

Perhaps unlikely, but still far from impossible, is the initial cost of more IPS displays increasing per unit if theyve had to source them from new manufacturers or plants.


Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I also don't believe the $10 cost for the case. I think it cost more than that. A good $20, if not more. When Apple first began to make machined cases for the notebook line, Jobs admitted that they cost $100 more than the old cases to make. He said that cost would come down over time, and I'm sure it has. But still, it's expensive.

A month ago I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly, but with the new MBAs having a milled aluminium top casing for the LCD, I wonder just how far Apple has come to shave off what Id think is a fraction of a mm that increases the strength only a little. Its certainly stiffer and thinner, but to go to that level for the top case shell seems extreme if the cost is still high. Then there is the Mac Minis solid aluminium casing which one could easily define as over engineered.
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 #35 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Ever since the iPad was first introduced... oh so long ago...

I've had this funny feeling in my gut that we're missing something here.

Something like the iPad is so inexpensive at $500 -- that someone will give it away to get you to buy their product. The prize in the cereal box, if you will.

I don't know whether that's someone selling language courses, wine/gourmet food of the month, real estate courses, subscriptions to whatever, home security, college degrees, automotive repair, woodworking...

I don't know what it is -- but I feel that there are uses we "computer guys" just don't see.

Maybe Apple sees them!

There are lot's of uses for these things. We've seen articles showing just how many. I used my iPhone, and now my iPad to do audio measurement and recording. This replaces thousands of dollars of equipment I used to take with me. Now, a company has come out with a barbecue thermometer that has a Bluetooth radio in it that shows up on your screen remotely. Some of these things seem silly, but people like this stuff.
post #36 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

While I agree that they have some economies of scale in using the A4 in different products, I think it benefits the AppleTV more than iPhone/iPad. If the next generation iPad is using an A8 based processor rather than the A9, and without a significant boost in RAM then they might be in for some backlash.

But, the display cost is not likely to have come down, since that is the most constrained part in the assembly. To make it worthwhile to produce enough screens, price would stay fairly flat.

I was proposing that the current $499 be carried forward with most of the existing parts -- much like the 3GS iPhone is currently offered.

My hypothesis suggested 3 mm month current iPads; 3 mm month new iPad 2s.

The R&D costs, and the production setup costs on the A4 have been spent. I suspect that this years iP4 will be sold as the 3GS is currently being sold.

So if Apple can squeeze a few more years and maybe 50-100 mm more A4-based devices that's largely profit.

Don't know about display costs -- except the R&D and production setup have already been done them, too.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #37 of 83
+Retina(esque) Display
+FaceTime camera
+Cheaper prices (-$100? -$200?)
+Redesigned physical buttons (volume, lock)
+Better battery life
+Faster processor
+Greater storage capacities
+Built-in SD slot and/or mini USB
+Better speakers

I don't know if these are necessarily "iPad 2" features but some software I'd like to see:
+Built-in iWork to promote its office functionality
+Basic iPhoto or other iLife apps re-tooled for MultiTouch
post #38 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post



A month ago I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly, but with the new MBAs having a milled aluminium top casing for the LCD, I wonder just how far Apple has come to shave off what Id think is a fraction of a mm that increases the strength only a little. Its certainly stiffer and thinner, but to go to that level for the top case shell seems extreme if the cost is still high. Then there is the Mac Minis solid aluminium casing which one could easily define as over engineered.

And a MacBook Air starts at $999. How much for the case? I wouldn't be surprised it it costs $100, remembering that the Air is a smaller machine. So I don't think $20-25 is out of line for the iPad. CNC machining is expensive, even when great numbers of product is being made. It costs up to $400 a minute for complex designs. Obviously Apple isn't paying that, but like everything else, costs don't infinitely drop with volume. There is a lower cost below which things can't be made.
post #39 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Those are parts prices, not cost to manufacture. That's appreciably higher, and must include packaging and transportation. According to indirect statements From Apple on "new" product costs, the iPad has lower margins than most of their other products, which is why Apple's margins have fallen the past two quarters, and why Apple is estimating it will remain lower. Their gross margins on this could be 30%. we certainly don't want it below that.

I also don't believe the $10 cost for the case. I think it cost more than that. A good $20, if not more. When Apple first began to make machined cases for the notebook line, Jobs admitted that they cost $100 more than the old cases to make. He said that cost would come down over time, and I'm sure it has. But still, it's expensive.

I think they could drop the old model (16GB, no 3G or GPS) to perhaps $399. Maybe even to $349. But they wouldn't want to cut too much into the new model's sales. Remember that unlike with the iPhone, these aren't subsidized prices, so we can't get a deal like Apple offers with the older model phone, where most of the price is still being given to them by the cell company. There, they're likely cutting the actual price by 15-20% to take $100 off the customer price. Maybe we will see a $199 subsidized price for the old iPad, as some companies are now beginning to subsidize them.

I agree! I heard mfg costs of $10-20. But these are other people's numbers. Who can say how much Apple pays Samsung for the A4 -- since the A4 made it possible for Samsung to build their own chip and production facility at minimal cost.

Elsewhere, there is an article about a recent patent for an inexpensive case. So. I don't know:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...cess.html#more

A $199 subsidized price would be acceptable, with the right data plan, or a slight premium to your smart phone plan for tethering.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #40 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I think keeping the current iPad around would make a ton of sense for the education market. I'm sure there are plenty of school districts that hate the idea of putting a video camera in an iPad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I agree. A camera in an iPad for the education market would generally not make sense and even open school districts up to potential lawsuits. Keep the current middle-of-the-road-Pad available for schools.

Bingo! In a high school it might not make as much difference, but would be bad news for elementary and middle schools, where you have young kids.

My fear is that Apple, in their need to keep the # of SKUs down, may ignore this problem. There's a cost associated with managing additional models, as well as the game with "best seller" sales #s, which are higher when you have less models to choose from. The question is, is the K-12 market big enough in Apple's eyes to offset the other aspects?

Remember, in the past Apple has made certain models available only to educational channels. Personally, I hope they don't do that, and keep the existing model for sale to the general public at a reduced price, but I guess we'll find out in a few months.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expected to produce 6 million second-gen iPads per month