or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › RBC: Apple would only launch low-cost iPhone if it had 'category-killer' experience
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RBC: Apple would only launch low-cost iPhone if it had 'category-killer' experience

post #1 of 36
Thread Starter 
After a meeting with two of Apple's top executives, RBC Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky said the company's primary requirement for launching a lower-end iPhone is whether the handset would provide an "innovative, category-killer experience."

Abramsky revealed the information through a set of "key takeaways" from his meeting with Apple COO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppenheimer on Wednesday, though he did not provide any direct quotes from the two executives. "Apples primary criterion for launching a lower-end iPhone is an innovative, category-killer experience," he wrote.

Though those familiar with Apple's design philosophy and strategy may dismiss the statement as seemingly obvious, it does run against the grain of recent assertions that Apple would release a contract-free iPhone for primarily financial reasons. For instance, Deutsche Bank analyst Chris Whitmore set off a round of speculation in June when he speculated that "it's time for a mid-range iPhone," largely based on the assumption that Apple is looking to reach the pre-paid market, which makes up two-thirds of the world's 1.5 billion mobile customers.

On Wednesday, Ticonderoga Securities analyst Brian White relayed recent Chinese reports suggesting China Telecom could release a "simplified" and more economical iPhone 4 alongside the iPhone 5 later this year. It is not known, however, whether the rumored device would require a two-year contract or would be the contract-free iPhone.

Several major media outlets (1, 2, 3) suggested earlier this year that Apple has been hard at work on a cheaper version of the iPhone that wouldn't require a carrier subsidy.

In addition to details surrounding Apple's interest in a cheaper iPhone, another takeaway from Abramsky's meeting was that Apple has maintained "sustained advantages" over Android, including an integrated approach to hardware and software, oversight of user experience and application ecosystem curation. These advantages should help the company weather the "expected explosion of low-priced Android smartphones" that will be detrimental to Nokia, Research in Motion and others, he said.

Abramsky added that he sees Apple's current legal disputes with Android vendors such as HTC and Samsung as likely to result in a settlement. Apple recently won a battle in its legal disagreement with handset maker HTC, which has said it's interested in settling outside of court.

The analyst also noted that iCloud is expected to be ready for "significant scale," with Apple having learned its lesson from the MobileMe service.

He came away from the meeting with an overall positive outlook on Apple. The executives affirmed Apple's "untapped global opportunity," especially in China, which has seen tremendous growth in recent years, the analyst said. Other emerging markets such as Latin America, the Middle East and India also provide Apple with a significant opportunity for expansion.

RBC maintains a price target of $500 for shares of Apple stock, reiterating its Outperform rating for the company.
post #2 of 36
Apple has rarely released a product unless it has been a category killer. The times they have released a product which has not been a category killer they have failed (e.g. iPod Boombox…yeah, I know most don't even remember that travesty, and the original Apple TV).

However, I don't know about this point of view. The fact is that the iPod Touch is indeed a category killer (this is evident from the complete absence of any competitors). Why wouldn't Apple be able to add a cellular chip to the iPod Touch and sell it for $120 more without contract (i.e. $350?). It would only extend the category defining aspect of the iPod Touch.

They could sell iPod Touches the way they do iPads. WiFi only for a base price of $229, and with a 3G chip for an additional $119 ($129 for the iPad, but I think Apple could afford to reduce the markup by $10).

The point is that Apple does not need a new product. They need an iPod Touch + 3G..
post #3 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

After a meeting with two of Apple's top executives, RBC Capital Markets analyst Mike Abramsky said the company's primary requirement for launching a lower-end iPhone is whether the handset would provide an "innovative, category-killer experience."

The killer experience is the iPhone itself. If it can beat the high end smartphones it can certainly beat the lower end smartphones.
So is Apple considering to strip important features from it's iPhone?
The fact of the matter is that Apple sells it's iPhone 4 contract free for 600 and it's iPod counterpart for 230. And even if you add 25 for the missing parts the price difference is more than 300 and thats a huge difference.
So Apple could easily drop the price to 350 or so without compromise and still earn 40% or more.

J
post #4 of 36
The article mentions the need for a contract free iPhone. The author seems to ignore the fact that in several countries the iPhone has been unlocked from day 1 (don't let yourself be pinned down by the US situation only). When I got my 3GS, I just put my prepaid SIM card in the iPhone, and it worked (after registering, I guess). Occasionally, when I expect to be out of range of my usual WiFi networks, I purchase a month's worth of data (€10 for 500MB). My carrier is Base (Belgium).

It is true, however, in the prepaid situation where the entry price is unsubsidized, that a more affordable model would create an additional market for people who mostly look at the up-front price.
post #5 of 36
Apple Inc. generally goes after profit, not marketshare.

They are raking in about two-thirds of the cellular handset industry's profits even though their marketshare is about six percent.

If Apple wants to delve into the "low-cost" smartphone market, they will do it in a way where they still maintain their margins, much in the same way they drove down into the MP3 player market's bottom end.

Today, one can purchase a 4GB MP3 player for half the price of the 2GB iPod shuffle, yet no one essentially bothers. Apple isn't going to play the cost competition game.
post #6 of 36
Slightly thicker than iPod Touch form factor Mini SD

(r)evolutionary quality camera/HD video capability

Telephony only

One screen UI with permanent set of apps: Clock/alarm, notes, calculator, voice recorder, calendar, iPod Lite? etc.

BoM $75, sell price: $300
Prepaid market

$25 phone to consumer w/phone plan

Covers low end market, 9-15 year olds


Am I crazy or stupid?

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply
post #7 of 36
As always, I'll chime in. Softbank in Japan has always been offering the lower of the two available capacities of iPhone for free with a two year contract. There is no need for Apple to be doing this for the carrier unless Softbank is eating major margins with this offer. iPhone should offer a great experience, period. It doesn't need to be fractured like Android.
post #8 of 36
Has anyone considered taht Apple Inc may just coninue making the iPhone 3Gs insted of thinking of another cheap version of an iPhone?
post #9 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by vixfix View Post

Has anyone considered taht Apple Inc may just coninue making the iPhone 3Gs insted of thinking of another cheap version of an iPhone?

That makes a lot of sense.

R&D has already been amortized fully.
Tooling costs have already been amortized fully.
Packaging and shipping costs can be reduced greatly if they eliminate the fancy boxes and bulk pack the product.

The marginal cost of production is likely to be very low at this point.
post #10 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Apple has rarely released a product unless it has been a category killer. The times they have released a product which has not been a category killer they have failed.

I'm not sure how many products Apple have launched in the last 35 years or so, but by my reckoning exactly 2 have been category killers. The iPod and the iPad. Each of these achieved more than 50% market share (quite a remarkable achievement).
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
post #11 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Apple has rarely released a product unless it has been a category killer. The times they have released a product which has not been a category killer they have failed (e.g. iPod Boomboxyeah, I know most don't even remember that travesty, and the original Apple TV).

However, I don't know about this point of view. The fact is that the iPod Touch is indeed a category killer (this is evident from the complete absence of any competitors). Why wouldn't Apple be able to add a cellular chip to the iPod Touch and sell it for $120 more without contract (i.e. $350?). It would only extend the category defining aspect of the iPod Touch.

They could sell iPod Touches the way they do iPads. WiFi only for a base price of $229, and with a 3G chip for an additional $119 ($129 for the iPad, but I think Apple could afford to reduce the markup by $10).

The point is that Apple does not need a new product. They need an iPod Touch + 3G..

$350 is pretty steep for the prepaid market... most prepaid phones range from $20-$150. i think apple would have to get pretty close to $200 to take out the "premium" prepaid market.
post #12 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Apple has rarely released a product unless it has been a category killer. The times they have released a product which has not been a category killer they have failed (e.g. iPod Boomboxyeah, I know most don't even remember that travesty, and the original Apple TV).

However, I don't know about this point of view. The fact is that the iPod Touch is indeed a category killer (this is evident from the complete absence of any competitors). Why wouldn't Apple be able to add a cellular chip to the iPod Touch and sell it for $120 more without contract (i.e. $350?). It would only extend the category defining aspect of the iPod Touch.

They could sell iPod Touches the way they do iPads. WiFi only for a base price of $229, and with a 3G chip for an additional $119 ($129 for the iPad, but I think Apple could afford to reduce the markup by $10).

The point is that Apple does not need a new product. They need an iPod Touch + 3G..

Agreed. With the introduction of an iPod Touch 3G and a low-cost iPhone for use on prepaid (and free with 2 year contract), Apple could lock up a larger section of the market. May folks get Android phones because they are $50 or less when they sign their contracts. This would allow Apple to take part of the low cost market. In addition, using an iPhone on as a GoPhone works well. I did it for two months (as an experiment), one month using only minutes/texting/wifi and the next month using only 3G data/wifi/Skype. Both months cost me $27.xx and worked flawlessly.

The kicker would be release the iPod Touch 3G. Apple could slightly gimp it with no GPS (I hope not) and no ability to act as a wifi hotspo as well as continue to give it substandard cameras/displayt so as to separate it from the iPhone. This idea would bring in potential, future iPhone users without really cannibalizing the iPhone sales. Toyota has done this forever by getting kids interested in Toyota by first selling them Scions, later Toyotas and finally Lexus.

I am part of a small minority who (contract is finished) is ready to drop my plan and switch back to a dumbphone and use an iPod Touch for my iOS needs. But IF Apple released a 3G enabled iPhone Touch I will buy that instead. I can use Skype on 3G & wifi, iMessage to iOS users and Google Voice free SMS to those non-iOS folks.

I guess we will see.
post #13 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

Slightly thicker than iPod Touch form factor Mini SD

(r)evolutionary quality camera/HD video capability

Telephony only

One screen UI with permanent set of apps: Clock/alarm, notes, calculator, voice recorder, calendar, iPod Lite? etc.

BoM $75, sell price: $300
Prepaid market

$25 phone to consumer w/phone plan

Covers low end market, 9-15 year olds


Am I crazy or stupid?

I know some people here have speculated that they might make a Nano based phone, which I think would be really cool. They phone could rely heavily on Nuance based speech-to-text technology because it would lack a full keyboard and it would primarily be a Clock/alarm, calculator, voice recorder, calendar, iPod phone. That would be an interesting type of device they could sell for $200, but I don't know how useful a 3 inch by 3 inch phone would be.

I've always thought of a lower priced iPhone being a full featured iPhone minus the latest processor and specs, but would that be a phone that could be qualified as "category-killing"?
post #14 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Agreed. With the introduction of an iPod Touch 3G and a low-cost iPhone for use on prepaid (and free with 2 year contract), Apple could lock up a larger section of the market. May folks get Android phones because they are $50 or less when they sign their contracts. This would allow Apple to take part of the low cost market. In addition, using an iPhone on as a GoPhone works well. I did it for two months (as an experiment), one month using only minutes/texting/wifi and the next month using only 3G data/wifi/Skype. Both months cost me $27.xx and worked flawlessly.

The kicker would be release the iPod Touch 3G. Apple could slightly gimp it with no GPS (I hope not) and no ability to act as a wifi hotspo as well as continue to give it substandard cameras/displayt so as to separate it from the iPhone. This idea would bring in potential, future iPhone users without really cannibalizing the iPhone sales. Toyota has done this forever by getting kids interested in Toyota by first selling them Scions, later Toyotas and finally Lexus.

I am part of a small minority who (contract is finished) is ready to drop my plan and switch back to a dumbphone and use an iPod Touch for my iOS needs. But IF Apple released a 3G enabled iPhone Touch I will buy that instead. I can use Skype on 3G & wifi, iMessage to iOS users and Google Voice free SMS to those non-iOS folks.

I guess we will see.

I hear a lot of people on Apple tech blogs are interested in an iPod Touch 3G but in reality how many regular consumers are and how many people would really buy such a device outside of tech users?

I think a lower cost iPhone would have FAR more market appeal than a 3G iPod Touch, but I could be wrong.
post #15 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

I hear a lot of people on Apple tech blogs are interested in an iPod Touch 3G but in reality how many regular consumers are and how many people would really buy such a device outside of tech users?

I think a lower cost iPhone would have FAR more market appeal than a 3G iPod Touch, but I could be wrong.

MANY MANY kids (for one example) whose parents cannot/will not set up an iPhone contract, but want to be able to run iOS devices, do text messaging (iMessage), social networking, etc. While you may not want it...there is a huge market for this. The iPad 3G doesn't fit the bill here because it is not pocketable.....
post #16 of 36
The 3GS is in a good spot to be pushed down a price spot. Keep the specs mostly the same (update where it can without impacting financially), update the casing to be more in line with modern iterations, and you're done. There's lots of people out there who don't need front-facing video or high-resolution camera or a Retina Display.
post #17 of 36
Yeah, i see no reason to abandon the 3GS.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #18 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

MANY MANY kids (for one example) whose parents cannot/will not set up an iPhone contract, but want to be able to run iOS devices, do text messaging (iMessage), social networking, etc. While you may not want it...there is a huge market for this. The iPad 3G doesn't fit the bill here because it is not pocketable.....

Yes! Our household has 2 adults and 3 children

The adults have iPhones, the kids have various junk phones (cost $75-$95 each subsidized).

ATT charges monthly:

$60 iPhone 1 with data - includes $30 for family plan)
$30 iPhone 2 with data
$30 3 junk phones with no data (3 x $10)

...unlimited texting and other stuff


The iPhones never come close 2 using their data

What we would like is some sort of combined data plan or other arrangement where the kids could use iPhones instead of junk phones at the same monthly cost.

We all have iPads and the kids each have an older SIMless iPhone as a portable game device in lieu of a Nintendo or Sony.

We can share apps, why can't we share a data plan?

There's an opportunity here!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #19 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post

The 3GS is in a good spot to be pushed down a price spot. Keep the specs mostly the same (update where it can without impacting financially), update the casing to be more in line with modern iterations, and you're done. There's lots of people out there who don't need front-facing video or high-resolution camera or a Retina Display.

Something like this indeed. Price need to be 199$ or below. And I would upgrade the CPU to A4 or if you prefer current iphone minus one CPU gen.
post #20 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

I'm not sure how many products Apple have launched in the last 35 years or so, but by my reckoning exactly 2 have been category killers. The iPod and the iPad. Each of these achieved more than 50% market share (quite a remarkable achievement).

You wouldn't include the iPhone in that list? Apple completely redefined the smartphone with the release of the iPhone. After all the crap they took about daring to compete with Motorola, Nokia, etc., they stood the market on its ear.
post #21 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post

The 3GS is in a good spot to be pushed down a price spot. Keep the specs mostly the same (update where it can without impacting financially), update the casing to be more in line with modern iterations, and you're done. There's lots of people out there who don't need front-facing video or high-resolution camera or a Retina Display.

How far can you push down the 3GS? They're already giving them away with 2-year contract.
post #22 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

MANY MANY kids (for one example) whose parents cannot/will not set up an iPhone contract, but want to be able to run iOS devices, do text messaging (iMessage), social networking, etc. While you may not want it...there is a huge market for this. The iPad 3G doesn't fit the bill here because it is not pocketable.....

They can do all those things on Wifi.

Most non-techie people will still have a dumbphone and will be paying that phone bill plus a separate 3G bill for their iPod Touch 3G, which would negate most of the savings. I'm sure most teens that had a 3G Touch would rarely ever activate the 3G anyway because of the addition $20 a month the 3G would cost them.

We're thinking and talking about 2 completely different demographics. You're talking about techies that know they can replace 99% of their phone functions with Google Voice, Skype, etc, and I'm talking about the average joe (and teen) that would probably still carry a phone around with them even if they had an iPod Touch 3G.

That's why I say a low cost iPhone would probably have broader appeal because it makes more sense to people. You pay less for the phone and you have 1 bill in the mail for service.
post #23 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post

The 3GS is in a good spot to be pushed down a price spot. Keep the specs mostly the same (update where it can without impacting financially), update the casing to be more in line with modern iterations, and you're done. There's lots of people out there who don't need front-facing video or high-resolution camera or a Retina Display.

There are rumors Apple is winding down 3GS production, but in general I agree that the 3GS would be a sufficient low cost iPhone. If they drop the price down to $299, freshened up the case as you said, and somehow made a CDMA version that would be an extremely popular phone on Virgin Mobile, MetroPCS, and Cricket.
post #24 of 36
Like others have suggested we already have a lost-cost iPhone option. It's called buying the older model. In other words buying a 3GS when the 4 is out. If you consider the number of storage options and colors and networks Apple already has 12 SKU's plus the older models. 2 colors x 3 storage options x 2 networks. That's more than enough to manage.
post #25 of 36
Apple does not do cheap. That is a one way ticket to the bottom. Dell anyone?...
post #26 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Agreed. With the introduction of an iPod Touch 3G and a low-cost iPhone for use on prepaid (and free with 2 year contract), Apple could lock up a larger section of the market. May folks get Android phones because they are $50 or less when they sign their contracts. This would allow Apple to take part of the low cost market. In addition, using an iPhone on as a GoPhone works well. I did it for two months (as an experiment), one month using only minutes/texting/wifi and the next month using only 3G data/wifi/Skype. Both months cost me $27.xx and worked flawlessly.

The kicker would be release the iPod Touch 3G. Apple could slightly gimp it with no GPS (I hope not) and no ability to act as a wifi hotspo as well as continue to give it substandard cameras/displayt so as to separate it from the iPhone. This idea would bring in potential, future iPhone users without really cannibalizing the iPhone sales. Toyota has done this forever by getting kids interested in Toyota by first selling them Scions, later Toyotas and finally Lexus.

I am part of a small minority who (contract is finished) is ready to drop my plan and switch back to a dumbphone and use an iPod Touch for my iOS needs. But IF Apple released a 3G enabled iPhone Touch I will buy that instead. I can use Skype on 3G & wifi, iMessage to iOS users and Google Voice free SMS to those non-iOS folks.

I guess we will see.

Would a lot of people pay $30 a month for data on a 3G iPod Touch?
post #27 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedarts View Post

Apple does not do cheap. That is a one way ticket to the bottom. Dell anyone?...

Agree. Apple dominated the music player and high end smartphone business because the market was fairly new, there weren't that many choices, and no one had really got it right.

The low end phone market is very mature. There are lots of choices. And many of these burners do their little job quite well. People don't buy these phones just because they are small. They get them because they are dirt cheap (free mostly).

I agree with the premise of this article. Apple won't enter the low end market unless they can do something no one can, and do what they can do better. Unless and until some kind of revolutionary new technology emerges that can change everything in this market, Apple won't enter it. And even then they won't unless they can either patent it or corner the market on it. Why go to all that trouble only to have Google or HTC immediately copy and give it away?
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #28 of 36
I think we will see the 4 mostly as-is with two minor changes:
1. It will be cheaper and available at a reasonable price off contact.
2. combined CDMA/GSM radio/antenna.
The 3GS no longer makes sense for one simple reason, China. China Telecom uses CDMA and their customers can do nothing with a GSM phone. But, a $350 CDMA/GSM world phone would sell so well it would be like printing money. You could activate such a phone on any network. Also, all the current accessories/cases don't require a redo.

I think the iPhone 5 will be a quad-band world phone with an upgraded processor and slightly bigger screen. Basically, all the same goodness with a little newer/bigger sprinkled on top. This would be the dream phone for people looking to upgrade on-contract. The form factor will probably be different just to create a Toyota<Lexus or Nissan<Infiniti vibe.

That is what I think will happen.
post #29 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

Would a lot of people pay $30 a month for data on a 3G iPod Touch?

Probably not, but there could be a variety of plans, including one cheaper one.

The entry level 3G data plan for the iPad is $15. I've bought it twice in the ten months I've owned an iPad.

The primary demographic of iPod touch users is the younger 13-24 age group whereas iPhone owners are the very desirable 25-49 age group. There might be some opportunity in offering a cheaper plan, something in the ten dollar range.
post #30 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlord View Post

The 3GS no longer makes sense for one simple reason, China. China Telecom uses CDMA and their customers can do nothing with a GSM phone.

But no one uses China Telecom's mobile service. OK, OK, so they have 108 million subscribers (12% of the mobile market), but that's "no one" here.
post #31 of 36
Apple could and should do this but they can't and won't for now due to the very entity they were battling when they started with the iPhone in the first place, the telecom providers.

Apple has gone the way things ought to everywhere else in the world but it is clear they have conceded defeat to the U.S. telecom model of subsidized phones on radically overpriced plans.

I have two sons that are 11 and 9 respectively. They each have an iPod touch and a prepaid cellphone. I've gotten them both a Google Voice number and when they are around wifi (home or friend's house) the iPod will ring and they can talk and text as much as they desire. When they are not around wifi, their Google Voice number rings their cellphone and they answer it if it is clearly someone they need to talk to about whereabouts, being picked up, etc.

The prepaid phone costs $25 for 400 minutes worth of talk or text time and it is good for 4 months. They don't go anywhere near using it all up because they are often around wifi.

Obviously this would work easily with an iPod with celluar chip and telephony type service.

However it means the lay person could drop their $200+ cell bills for multiple smartphones and just use what they need instead of what they are scared into buying by cell providers.

So what is the likelihood of that happening given how AT&T, Verizon and others operate.

I'd say less than zero.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #32 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedarts View Post

Apple does not do cheap. That is a one way ticket to the bottom. Dell anyone?...

The entry level iPad, iPod touch lines are cheap.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #33 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

Apple has rarely released a product unless it has been a category killer. The times they have released a product which has not been a category killer they have failed (e.g. iPod Boomboxyeah, I know most don't even remember that travesty, and the original Apple TV).

1. It was called the iPod Hi-Fi, not "boombox."

2. The Apple TV was not and is not a disaster. It's a good example of Apple releasing and sticking to a product that is NOT a segment killer. It's niche product, and they even say as much.

Quote:

However, I don't know about this point of view.

You just agreed with it! What do you mean you don't know?


Quote:
The fact is that the iPod Touch is indeed a category killer (this is evident from the complete absence of any competitors). Why wouldn't Apple be able to add a cellular chip to the iPod Touch and sell it for $120 more without contract (i.e. $350?). It would only extend the category defining aspect of the iPod Touch.

They could sell iPod Touches the way they do iPads. WiFi only for a base price of $229, and with a 3G chip for an additional $119 ($129 for the iPad, but I think Apple could afford to reduce the markup by $10).

The point is that Apple does not need a new product. They need an iPod Touch + 3G..

They "need" that like they need a hole in the head. Your analysis is utterly flawed as well.
  • Why focus on the contract free price? This is not how they sell most of their hardware in this category.
  • Do you realize that price point cannabilizes the iPhone and vice versa?
  • This would not be a new market segment. It would be nearly the same as the iPhone, have the same screen size, etc.
  • Re #2...why would anyone buy an iPod Touch+3G for say, $200 when they can buy an iPhone 4 for the same price with contract?

If Apple does this, it needs to be a truly new market segment. The iPhone starts at $200. So, you want me to pay maybe $150-200 for an "iPod Touch 3G." Brilliant. \
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #34 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

You wouldn't include the iPhone in that list? Apple completely redefined the smartphone with the release of the iPhone. After all the crap they took about daring to compete with Motorola, Nokia, etc., they stood the market on its ear.

Yes they redefined the smartphone with the iPhone; no, it's not a category killer in the way the iPod or iPad have been. In fact not even close.
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
post #35 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

Yes they redefined the smartphone with the iPhone; no, it's not a category killer in the way the iPod or iPad have been. In fact not even close.

By that token, iPod might not have been a category killer. Even if it had 70% of the market in several markets, it had 25% of worldwide market share.
post #36 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

I'm not sure how many products Apple have launched in the last 35 years or so, but by my reckoning exactly 2 have been category killers. The iPod and the iPad. Each of these achieved more than 50% market share (quite a remarkable achievement).

Apple popularized the graphical user interface. That's three. Otherwise you'd still be typing DOS or CPM commands.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • RBC: Apple would only launch low-cost iPhone if it had 'category-killer' experience
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › RBC: Apple would only launch low-cost iPhone if it had 'category-killer' experience