JP Morgan: Kindle Fire is 'noise,' won't compete with Apple's iPad 2 - Page 2

How could they not sell well.
A poor man's iPad. Sure Amazon is targeting purchasers for their market. But they are also giving out enough for simple interests.
They will have an Internet connection. Okay so they need WiFi. There are quite a few places that have free WiFi. McDonalds won't bother you if you hang out there. Plenty of Libraries out there.
Amazon has Music, Movie, and also they have their very own Android App Store (simplified)

And with Internet, you should be able to use all of Googles' free stuff too.

Or am I not understanding what the 'Fire' or all the other tablets from them offer.

I can see a scenario with people dropping $199 on the Kindle Fire when they wouldn't have splurged for the iPad, and then wanting a more sophisticated, refined, and more powerful device for their 2nd tablet purchase. For this reason I think Amazon needs to be working on a more suitable 10" tablet if they don't want to eventually lose customers to Apple.

Man, this guy's name must be remembered. This has got to be one of the most, if not THE most foolish claim by an "analyst" yet. And there are some doozies!
I need to get me one of these analysts jobs. These guys are always wrong and never get fired.

OOPS! I forgot an "analysts" job is just stock manipulation. My bad.

Netbooks price: ~$400, Feature rich laptop $1000 like a Macbook. <--divide both numbers by 2. What price points do you get?

It makes wonder why they think that people will spend $200 just so they can get Amazon's content. I'd say sell the shit out of the e-ink devices and forget about the Fire... but I'm no Bezos.

Hmmm... I just think that the target market is too small. It sounds to me that Amazon is making very little if anything* on these devices with the hope that enough people will buy them to affect their content sales. It'll be interesting to see if that turns out to be true.

* I won't say they are losing money on each device just to keep a few people happy.

Yeah, it's nonsense. Amazon doesn't make any money selling content. They turn a minor profit and I suspect it's mostly from AWS and Kindle. There's no way they're selling this device at a loss. They can sell it cheap because they made it cheap (7 inch display, no cameras, etc) and because they only sell direct.

I understand his caution given how badly they have been burned by predicting potential success for the previous competitors. I think he underestimates the potential of the fire. Amazon also hangs out in the top 10 of the Admired companies list. I was out-of-town yesterday and was going to try and convince my wife she wanted one when I got home. She had already pre-ordered. This is not some geek focused Android talet trying to make its way on specs alone.

I also don't think it matters to Apple. The customers may not have really been candidatesnfor the current iPad. I do think this locks everyone else out of the 7" space. If amazon and Apple play nice they can completely control their parts of the tablet market for years.

Amazon, like Apple, has a proud history of vocal detractors. Those people who all to quickly try and point out what is missing, instead of what is there. In the case of this story, I think being blind to the big picture is a fairly big deficiency for an analyst.

My top 3 electronics purchases in the past 20 years are my iPad 2, my kindle, and my slingox. Sling has unfortunately gone to crap since being taken over by a clueless company. Apple and Amazon are still going strong. Amazon struggle a bit with the original kindle. They had production problems, it was priced to high, it had a few software issues. With all tha, it was still great. They have come a long way.

P.S. I already pre-ordered my kindle touch, what a nice traveling companion for my iPad.

HP has no way to make revenue on the backend, Amazon has been doing exactly that for a couple years now. In any case, I don't think they are selling at a loss. Maybe a thin margin.

They only sell direct for now, but they dosell kindles in stores. I suspect it is not being sold at a loss, but Amazon is verge different than Apple. They are a retailer and used to making money on thin margins.

They also have somemcontent revenu streams Apple has yet to try and tap into, like streaming video.

Whereas a year ago it was difficult to find a device under $200, these days it seems there are many more affordable options (even free) as long as you're signing a contract.

Android's wide reach is probably the reason for this, as it has increasingly been found on budget smartphones. That is the reason why Google's mobile operating system was able to log such quick growth.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/23482...tml#tk.mod_rel

Amazon should offer their streaming service separate and not combined with the shipping. What if somebody doesn't buy stuff from Amazon and only wants the streaming service?

I don't buy stuff too often from Amazon anymore, since they started charging tax where I live.

Do you believe this? How much storage will be needed?

You do realise that you were supposed to pay that tax before Amazon started charging it (I'm assuming you are in the US)?

The Kindle Fire is a very good ebook reader, not an iPad competitor. Everyone focuses on the price, but conveniently leave out the smaller screen, lack of camera, etc. Samsung tried a 7 inch tablet and only sold a few, and it had many more features (but cost slightly more than the Fire).

The Fire will take market share from other Android tablets, but mostly the Nook. I would consider it as an ebook reader for my kids to use while I use an iPad, but then again I'd probably go for the lower price e-ink based Kindle. I don't see a Fire as a replacement or direct competitor to the iPad. The Fire occupies an odd market segment between e-ink kindles and full featured tablets.

I suspect all the new Kindles will do well in the marketplace as ereaders, as the iPad dominates the post-PC market.

I am in the US and I believe that tax should not be charged as long as the business is not physically located in the same state that somebody resides in. Each state has different rules in place about that. I use every legal loophole possible to avoid giving any more tax money to the corruptocrats than I must.

No storage will be needed at all. It can all be accessed through Amazon's cloud service.

The lack of a camera is a problem? Seriously? How many people do you see walking around taking photos with their ipad without looking like a <insert any unfashionable term>? A front facing camera + mic, that I can understand (the ability to skype etc.). But just a normal camera?
Otherwise, the Fire will do well because it's Amazon and more importantly connected with all things Amazon.

You can get a Samsung GT 7 free from Lowes if you buy a major appliance.

I had a vision of the next iPad commercial:

Camera zooms in past a sign which reads "Outback Village: Assisted Living for your Golden years."

The camera now enters into a room, filled with a bunch of elderly gentlemen sitting in rocking chairs.

One of the elderly men begins swearing while using what looks to be some kind of miniature plasticky tablet.

Old Man: "f@#%@#$g mini iPad! I dont see what all the fuss is about!"
Aging Crocodile Dundee: "Thats not an iPad. [smirks, and whips out a glistening Apple iPad] This is an iPad!!!

Cue Crocodile Dundee Theme Song.

How long before we see an Amazon Fire with Special Offers? $169.99. Place your bets.

Black Friday - $149.99

What is the Amazon cloud made of? Do you really think there are 16 million commercially available song created by human beings?

Amazon store already have many Android 7" tablets for well under $199.

Everyone else seems to love it. Mainstream news media and most analyst. Says better deal than iPad.

What if you are at the beach, a park, etc.

That won't be possible. They'll all end up sitting inside a McDonalds with the old ladies and the other regulars who like to hang out there.

Groan.... let go of it already. You're really tiresome.

It's certainly cheaper than the iPad, but it's also a lot less functionality. How that equates to being a better deal isn't universal. The iPad has iTunes, Netflix, and Kindle apps and can be a replacement for a standard PC by the time the Kindle Fire will arrive. The same can't be said for the Kindle Fire.


PS: The Silk browser has its benefits, but being a replacement for a secure browser isn't one of them. I don't want my emails shared with Amazon. I don't want my bank account data shared with Amazon. This is a major drawback to a server-side browser.

...The sole purpose of the device is to be a front end to Amazon media subscriptions, so why should a customer pay for the device?

Time will tell.

I think they would be more successful by speading the cost of the device over two years via contract. This contract would include a monthly subscription to Prime. . Unlimited streaming to their limited set of free movies/shows, one free book per month, one free music track per month.

Content:
$79/year free shipping and limited movies = ~ $6.50/mo + $0.99 song + $1.99 cheap book = ~ $10/mo

Fire Device:
now spread the cost of the $199 over two years and you get ~$8/mo with 2 yr contract.

giving you grand total of about $18/mo for the Fire with limited free movie, music and books, + free shipping with Amazon.

That would sell like hotcakes, IMHO.

For someone who cant afford $500 for an iPad, I dont think $200 is a no brainer either. I know plenty of people who live from month to month. $200 is not easy come up with for these people. However, make it a monthly fee of $20-30/mo and you get a ton of people who are willing to do that. I think this is why Android Phones out sell iPhone. The cost of the upgrade for current generation Android phone is typically less than a current generation iPhone. At least that appears to be the case in the US.

I also think this is why Android tablets have not taken off. No month contract structure.

"Everyone Else" and all the pundits gushing over the Fire really should wait until they have the real thing in hand to test and review in detail. a demo at a press conference is never the complete story - haven't they learned that hard lesson yet, after so many other hypes at the announcement phase have turned to flops in real life? just how good a user experience the Fire is in all the ways that matter, and how well the hardware performs in real life, remain to be seen. or should Everyone Else always just swallow the hype they are spoon fed at these press events?

one thing that is really disappointing about all that gushing is how blind Everyone Else is to the plain fact there already is a low-priced "iPad Mini" tablet and has been for several years - it's the iPod touch of course. forget what Apple named it, that's just marketing. for just $229, $30 more than a Fire, Everyone Else can get right now everything the Fire has to offer and more. in a beautiful package, i might add, not the Fire's clunky modified Playbook chassis.

the only real advantage of the Fire vs. the touch is of course the Fire's 7" screen is twice the touch's 3.5" size, with 4X the screen area. that makes the Fire easier to use for most, altho too big for most pockets. both are running smartphone apps, the Fire just scales them up - not great.

i'd agree if Everyone Else suggested Apple should come out with a larger model of the iPod touch, like 5.5," to address the same "convenience tablet" market. with about 2X the screen area of a 3.5" model this size has been used by Sony for its PGP's, and it works really good for users (but Sony has other problems). it's more pocket-friendly too.

simply enlarging the size of the iPod touch would not add that much to its manufacturing cost, as all the stuff inside would be the same except a larger battery. Apple could sell one for $299.

so if Everyone Else had a lovely $299 slim and light 5.5" Apple iPod touch on a store table next to the dowdy $199 thick and heavy 7" Amazon Fire, which would they buy?

one thing Everyone Else might take in to account making that choice is that the touch could use its Amazon app to scan bar codes in that store and comparison shop at Amazon for better prices on the web. but having no camera, Amazon's own Fire could not (and that's a really dumb V.1 mistake).

I disagree! One of the big appeals of the iPad (even the cell models) is that you pay for it and have no obligation to buy anything else -- no monthly fee!

I am in agreement with you from my financial position. I am just saying, many people would rather just deal with a month fees because they live month to month and can never come up with any significant saving. This is now our society is unfortunately.

Absolutely not true. There are millions of IT employees - and I've never met one who didn't go out of their way to denigrate Apple products.

Add in a few million Linux fans and a few million people who are apparently being paid by Google to hype Android (at least it appears that way) and the numbers start to become significant.

Then, from that core, you extrapolate the FUD. I can't tell you how many people have told me they couldn't use a Mac because it's "not compatible" even though all they do is email, browsing the web, and an occasional Word document.


There are two reports. First, there's the analyst who said that his estimates are $50 per unit that Amazon loses. Then there's the supply chain report that says that the components alone are $180 per unit. If the components alone are $180, it's not hard to believe that it's $250 for components plus assembly plus QC plus returns plus rework plus shipping plus packaging plus overhead.


The funny thing about the entire report that no one has mentioned is that JP Morgan isn't saying anything new. NO ONE has said that the Kindle Fire will compete with the iPad. Amazon has certainly never made that claim - in fact, they've gone out of their way to say that it's NOT competing with the iPad. At best, it's somewhere between a Kindle and an iPad.

That is most likely his point. He is tasked with explaining whether or not the Fire will impact Apple. He says no. He isn't insulting your favorite sports team, he is telling people their investment won't be impacted...

You are probably right... sigh!

My generation was instilled with the discipline to not buy things we could not afford -- and not buy anything rather than settle for something inferior (that wouldn't satisfy you). Save for what you want rather than compromise for second rate.

It is interesting that a purchasing technique from WWII seems to be gaining popularity...

Lay-away!

Why would you buy an AppleTV then? Can you buy a movie from anywhere else to play on it either?

Are you aware that Apple has both the first and second most popular phones? Ever? In the world?

God I wish i could get my "butt kicked" like that. Maybe have the first and second most popular books in the world. Ever.

Stupid, it isn't a lifestyle choice, try fixing it.

With iCloud, you should be able to, I believe.

Or maybe iCloud doesn't do TV/Movies yet. I don't remember.

At any rate, it eventually will. I'd say easily before the end of next year.

Am an Apple fanboy and investor, and I just pre-ordered a Kindle Touch and a Fire.

KSO (Kindle Special Offers) is slick as heck, and I'm a long time Amazon customer. I suspect I'll get my $ out of the Kindle Touch

As far as the Fire, it'll play the stuff Amazon streams for movies, tv shows, etc, am already an Amazon Prime customer, so I have access to lots of content.

Will I be selling my iPad 2? hell no, it will have to be pried from my cold dead hands.

No one has said it yet, so here goes, how about a Kindle phone on a forked version of Android?

I'm inclined to agree. This device is not in the same audience as the iPad. It will catch all the folks that aren't in the iPad group and could do well. But it wont be an iPad killer