or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Briefly: Simon & Schuster settles; 9M Galaxy S III preorders; 10.1" Kindle Fire
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Briefly: Simon & Schuster settles; 9M Galaxy S III preorders; 10.1" Kindle Fire

post #1 of 79
Thread Starter 
Publisher Simon & Schuster has settled an e-book antitrust lawsuit brought by attorneys general from 29 states in the U.S., while a new report claims Samsung achieved nine million preorders for its Galaxy S III smartphone. Also, a rumor claims Amazon is suspending plans for an 8.9-inch Kindle Fire in favor of a 10.1-inch model due out later this year.

Simon & Schuster

Simon & Schuster became the third of five major publishers to reach a settlement with an antitrust lawsuit that now counts 29 states as its plaintiffs, CNet reported on Thursday.

The complaint had accused the publishers of colluding with Apple on an e-book price fixing scheme. According to the report, attorneys general from Texas and 15 other states filed the complaint and were later joined by several other states.

Apple and some of the publishers also face an antitrust complaint from the U.S. Department of Justice and a class-action lawsuit from consumers. The iPad maker has said it is looking to go to trial in the DoJ case because it wants to validate that the suit is "not an appropriate case against" it. Hachette, Simon & Schuster and HarperCollins have each reached settlement agreements with the Justice Department.

The price fixing allegations arise from talks that Apple and the publishers held to decide to switch e-books from the wholesale model that Amazon was using for its Kindle to an agency model for iBooks that would let publishers set their own prices. Shortly after the launch of the iBookstore, e-book prices rose from Amazon's subsidized price of $9.99.

Galaxy S III

A Samsung official reportedly told the Korea Economic Daily off the record that customers had placed roughly nine million preorders of the company's Galaxy S III handset across over 100 carriers globally, as noted by Reuters.

The South Korean electronics maker first unveiled the Galaxy S III earlier this month. The smartphone has a quad-core processor, 1GB of RAM and a 4.8-inch Super AMOLED screen.

Galaxy S III


According to one recent analysis, the device's predecessor, the Galaxy S II, is the most popular Android phone. Among nearly 681,900 devices tracked by OpenSignalMaps, the Galaxy S II made up 9 percent of the total. Overall, Samsung represented roughly 40 percent of Android devices monitored by the app maker.

Apple and Samsung have been in close competition for the top spot among global smartphone makers. Though Samsung has stopped providing specific figures on smartphone sales, market research estimates proclaimed the company as the leader in the first quarter of 2012.

In comparison to the alleged Galaxy S III preorder numbers, the iPhone 4S, Apple's most-recent smartphone, had record first-day preorders of one million units last October. Apple declined to say exactly how many advance orders it took overall, but it did announce that the first weekend of iPhone 4S sales set a record with four million units.

10.1-inch Kindle Fire

DigiTimes cited "the latest market rumors" on Friday as saying that Amazon will likely release a 10.1-inch Kindle Fire in the third-quarter of 2012. The company also was believed to be "tentatively suspending" the launch of a rumored 8.9-inch model.

Kindle Fire


Amazon is reportedly making the move to "focus its competition against Apple's iPad," the publication cited industry sources as saying. The insiders also said that the 8.9-inch model had been meant to challenge Samsung's Galaxy Note tablets.

Sources went on to estimate that Amazon could attain 30-40 million tablet PC orders this year. It should be noted, however, that DigiTimes' sources have a spotty track record.

Though the Kindle Fire got off to an impressive start late last year, sales may have slowed going into 2012. Data released by IDC earlier this month showed that Kindle Fire sales dropped to just 4 percent of sales in the first quarter of this year, down from 16.8 percent in the holiday quarter of 2011. Apple's share of global tablet sales was estimated to be at 68 percent in the March quarter.

Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo told AppleInsider last year that Amazon was working on a 10.1-inch Kindle tablet codenamed "Coyote" alongside development of an 8.9-inch tablet. However, suppliers were believed to have experienced difficulty with Amazon's requirements for the 8.9-inch device.
post #2 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Galaxy S III

Look, she's having a hot flash!

Oops, no, it's just a lousy Sammy AMOLED display.

post #3 of 79
I would imagine those Samsung pre-orders are from customers who are sick of their current Samsung phones seeing the new one is quad core and all. Just to get them phones working with all the demands of processing, battery life and what not from rooting. Or rmaybe those customers are actually resellers for stock taking. Doesn't matter, 9 mil worldwide anyway. iPhones numbers are only for certain countries. With publishers settling, I think Apple might get a better chance defending alone for reasons that Apple is only a middle man and they are selling other people's works i.e authors/publishers set the price.
post #4 of 79

In few days we will have a statement from Samsung saying "he meant really smooth" not "9 millions"!

post #5 of 79

Super AMOLED HD but just Pentile. :sigh: Is this a false advertising?

post #6 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Galaxy S III
A Samsung official reportedly told the Korea Economic Daily off the record that customers had placed roughly nine million preorders of the company's Galaxy S III handset across over 100 carriers globally, as noted by Reuters.

 

Since the various carriers are Samsung's customers and not the end user are the preorder numbers being reported from the various carrier's or from the end user? Sold to a carrier for inventory is very different from sold to the end user, End users represent an immediate sale yet carrier inventory could take months to get sold to an end user, if ever. That information would be important to truly gauge how well it is doing.

 

Updated: The Reuters article cited says the orders are from carriers but AI's article is worded to make it seem like the orders are from end users. Another poorly written AI article.


Edited by Realistic - 5/18/12 at 12:07am

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

Reply
post #7 of 79
Preorders from whom?

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #8 of 79

Attorneys General

post #9 of 79
New spelling:
4.8" = humongously huge
7.8" = nail-file-requiredly small
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #10 of 79

Dear Apple,

 

Please fight that DOJ antitrust suit to the end.  It needs somebody with enough cash to stand up to the government and tell it to get the ***** out of the markets.  there is nothing inherently better or worse about the agency model as opposed to Amazon's and nothing "conspiratorial" about persuading the publishers to use the agency model.  These regulators are way over-reaching.  Punch them in the face!

post #11 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

Updated: The Reuters article cited says the orders are from carriers but AI's article is worded to make it seem like the orders are from end users. Another poorly written AI article.
But carriers are the true customers of handset vendors. While Apple is one of the few vendors that sell directly to end users they still sell the majority of their handsets to carriers and still bend over backwards to accommodate vendors. This isn't likely to change soon.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #12 of 79
The equivalent Apple number is probably also about 2 months of production or about 25M. More Samsung unattributable fiction regarding numbers no one else reports.
post #13 of 79

Let's not be in denial about how well Samsung is doing with the sales of their smartphones. I see big screen Samsung phones all over Asia - including here in China where I'm traveling for business. Samsung is killing the likes of Nokia, Motorola, Sony/Ericsson, and LG that I used to see more of in the past. Apple's iPhone presence is notable but a distant number two to Samsung in terms of visibility. There's no doubt that the Galaxy SIII will sell in the tens of millions once it's released.

 

The world is big. It's way beyond your circle of friends and work colleagues in the town or city you live in. Consider that China alone has population of two United States and all of Europe combined. And it won't be long before the population of India surpasses that of China. The combined economy of China, Japan and Korea alone is larger than the entire Euro zone or the US. This region has become the epicenter of world economy and it will continue to grow at a much faster rate than that of the US and Europe.

 

Apple has to focus on this region in a big way if they're going to stay ahead of Samsung and other fast-rising electronics giants of China. I'm doing the best I can to spread the Apple gospel wherever I go over here. I just convinced a business associate from Taiwan to completely switch from his Windows/Android setup to all-Apple after I demoed my MBA/iPad/iPhone rig working seamlessly together with the iCloud. There's a lot of interest in Apple over here but many are very cautious about making the switch.

 

Apple has a lot of work to do here but I feel confident that Apple will make sustained inroads and gain market share for a long time to come. The growth potential for Apple here is just mind-boggling. Apple has barely scratched the surface here.

post #14 of 79

So what does this settlement mean for consumers? Will these three go back to the wholesale model, resulting in lower priced ebooks across all venues, or does it simply mean they'll pay a fine to the government, and keep pricing as they have been?

post #15 of 79

It may mean lower prices for those who want to buy from Amazon until they run everyone else out of business, again. This would mean, less reasons for writers to write and publishers to publish. The truly great artist would prefer to sell their creations by themselves than support a system where they make one company rich and not even have access to the rest of the market or even be able to sell their own product for a reasonable price themselves because Amazon wants to use it as a loss leader. 

post #16 of 79

9 million would be an impressive number, regardless of whether it's to the carriers or individuals, or a combination. Carriers won't buy them unless they can sell them. The Galaxy SIII is a bit too big for me, but it does seem to be popular. Hopefully Apple is taking notice and has some nice plans for IOS 6 in store for us next month. It isn't really Android vs. IOS so much anymore as it is Samsung vs. Apple. Samsung is the only other company besides Apple who can sell premium smartphones at premium prices in large numbers.

post #17 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post

9 million would be an impressive number, regardless of whether it's to the carriers or individuals, or a combination. Carriers won't buy them unless they can sell them. The Galaxy SIII is a bit too big for me, but it does seem to be popular. Hopefully Apple is taking notice and has some nice plans for IOS 6 in store for us next month. It isn't really Android vs. IOS so much anymore as it is Samsung vs. Apple. Samsung is the only other company besides Apple who can sell premium smartphones at premium prices in large numbers.

Yes, 9 M would be an impressive number either way. However, I'm very skeptical of the number. We have a rumored report from an unnamed official.

1. If Samsung really had 9 M preorders, it is extremely likely that there would be an official announcement.

2. Apple got a few million preorders for the iPhone 4s (I don't remember the exactly number, but it was less than half of the alleged 9 M for the Galaxy S3. Think back to the iPhone 4S launch, though. It was on every major news outlet world wide. EVERYONE was talking about it - extensively. The S3, OTOH, was briefly mentioned when it was announced and then largely disappeared form the media. Heck, in their radio ads, US Cellular is still advertising the S2 as the most advanced phone they offer with no mention of the S3. If Apple only got a few million with the massive media frenzy that surrounded the iPhone 4S, I can't see how Samsung got more than twice as many with a relatively silent media.

Let's wait until we have real numbers, not some fourth hand rumor.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #18 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

...

1. During the unveiling, they already said that they had a record amount of preorders from carriers, although they didn't specify a number. Why are the carriers preording so many phones? Because they expect them to sell. In terms of sales, Galaxy S line is unmatched in Android world. 9M worldwide is not unrealistic at all.

2. Officially, there is no Galaxy S III for the US - yet, that's why there's no advertising. It'll be announced in late May/early June.
iPad 3, Galaxy S4
Reply
iPad 3, Galaxy S4
Reply
post #19 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Youarewrong View Post

1. During the unveiling, they already said that they had a record amount of preorders from carriers, although they didn't specify a number. Why are the carriers preording so many phones? Because they expect them to sell. In terms of sales, Galaxy S line is unmatched in Android world. 9M worldwide is not unrealistic at all.
2. Officially, there is no Galaxy S III for the US - yet, that's why there's no advertising. It'll be announced in late May/early June.

It doesn't matter. My points still apply.

1. If they had sold that many, this would be an official press release rather than a fourth hand report.

2. When the iPhone 4S was released it had less than half as many preorders in spite of worldwide hype. You couldn't open a newspaper or magazine without seeing something about the iPhone 4S. It is implausible that the G3 would have sold as well with essentially no mention in the media at all.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #20 of 79
Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo told AppleInsider last year that Amazon was working on a 10.1-inch Kindle tablet codenamed "Coyote" alongside development of an 8.9-inch tablet. However, suppliers were believed to have experienced difficulty with Amazon's requirements for the 8.9-inch device.

should be renamed from "coyote" to "peyote" because amazon is "higher-than-a-kite" if it thinks it can make a better tablet than the 399 iPad2... for 299.. Is amazon inc. a socialist company? ... a so-called-NO-profit? LOL... Not a "know" profit (where you know the profits will come latter) or a not-profit (making products for the benefit of people) BUT a NO-profit? how can people believe in a company that is no-profit instead of a company that is "non-profit" Because they are cheap
post #21 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

It is implausible that the G3 would have sold as well with essentially no mention in the media at all.

 

Umm there was a lot of hype about the S3.

post #22 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


It doesn't matter. My points still apply.
1. If they had sold that many, this would be an official press release rather than a fourth hand report.
2. When the iPhone 4S was released it had less than half as many preorders in spite of worldwide hype. You couldn't open a newspaper or magazine without seeing something about the iPhone 4S. It is implausible that the G3 would have sold as well with essentially no mention in the media at all.

 

You're still missing the point and no your points don't apply. 

 

To your 1: That's solely based on your goal posts. Samsung could do a release when they hit 10 million, or after x number of days since announcement. Just because an exec said something ahead of a potential announcement doesn't mean it's wrong, your argument doesn't hold up.

 

To your 2: Get out a little more. The US isn't even the largest smartphone market anymore, and there is no US marketing (other than a hidden signup) as it's not here yet so again your logic doesn't hold water. There IS marketing all over Asia for it and the phone doesn't even release until the 29th. alexkhan2000 has it absolutely right in his post. Samsung also still sells phones in more countries than Apple does.

 

I'm not saying the number is accurate, but given it's carrier driven, not consumer, it's also NOT implausible. Just because you can't see it from your window, doesn't make it real. 

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #23 of 79

That phone is hella ugly. 

post #24 of 79

Ugly fills a niche the market. Just look up and see majority of "me too" devices out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

That phone is hella ugly. 

Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
Originally Posted by Granmastak: Labor unions managed to kill manufacturing a long time ago with their unreasonable demands. Now the people they were trying to protect, are out of a job.
Reply
post #25 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Yes, 9 M would be an impressive number either way. However, I'm very skeptical of the number. We have a rumored report from an unnamed official.
1. If Samsung really had 9 M preorders, it is extremely likely that there would be an official announcement.
2. Apple got a few million preorders for the iPhone 4s (I don't remember the exactly number, but it was less than half of the alleged 9 M for the Galaxy S3. Think back to the iPhone 4S launch, though. It was on every major news outlet world wide. EVERYONE was talking about it - extensively. The S3, OTOH, was briefly mentioned when it was announced and then largely disappeared form the media. Heck, in their radio ads, US Cellular is still advertising the S2 as the most advanced phone they offer with no mention of the S3. If Apple only got a few million with the massive media frenzy that surrounded the iPhone 4S, I can't see how Samsung got more than twice as many with a relatively silent media.
Let's wait until we have real numbers, not some fourth hand rumor.

 

I tend to agree. So many stories/rumors lately have been refuted practically before they are out of the gate.

post #26 of 79

Whether the 9M number is accurate or not, it is clear as day that Samsung is the real competitor to Apple, and not Google. The Galaxy is the only product standing up to the iPhone. What is impressive about this is the fact that Samsung is the manufacturer of key components for the two smartphone lines that collectively outnumber the rest of the industry. Very impressive capacity.

post #27 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

Whether the 9M number is accurate or not, it is clear as day that Samsung is the real competitor to Apple, and not Google. The Galaxy is the only product standing up to the iPhone. What is impressive about this is the fact that Samsung is the manufacturer of key components for the two smartphone lines that collectively outnumber the rest of the industry. Very impressive capacity.

 

Without Google's Android system would Samsung be doing so well.

 

I think Google and Samsung are equally Apple's competitors.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #28 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdfetof View Post

Dear Apple,

Please fight that DOJ antitrust suit to the end.  It needs somebody with enough cash to stand up to the government and tell it to get the ***** out of the markets.  there is nothing inherently better or worse about the agency model as opposed to Amazon's and nothing "conspiratorial" about persuading thgye publishers to use the agency model.  These regulators are way over-reaching.  Punch them in the face!

That's not the problem. Apple and the publishers are free to whatever business model they want to. The problem arises is when the publishers turn around and try to change their agreement with Amazon all of a sudden and collectively. The vast majority of people don't know nor care about wholesale or agency models, all they know is the they used to pay $9.99 for ebooks and since Apple started selling ebooks the prices jumped up to $22.99 and they wanna know why. Prices either go down or remain static whenever there's competition but prices instead went up causing many to demand an investigation.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #29 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's not the problem. Apple and the publishers are free to whatever business model they want to. The problem arises is when the publishers turn around and try to change their agreement with Amazon all of a sudden and collectively. The vast majority of people don't know nor care about wholesale or agency models, all they know is the they used to pay $9.99 for ebooks and since Apple started selling ebooks the prices jumped up to $22.99 and they wanna know why. Prices either go down or remain static whenever there's competition but prices instead went up causing many to demand an investigation.

The bolded is incorrect. Amazon had a near- monopoly and kept prices low via predatory pricing. Introduction of competition is what caused the prices to rise.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #30 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


The bolded is incorrect. Amazon had a near- monopoly and kept prices low via predatory pricing. Introduction of competition is what caused the prices to rise.

Amazon raised their prices to compete with Apple pricing? Interesting theory. . .

 

You keep claiming Amazon practices predatory pricing, an illegal act, yet give no supporting proof. Do you have some or just "making stuff up"?  If it's simply your opinion you should say so, and if not then offer some proof that your assertion is factual. I've never seen any evidence and would look forward to yours.


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/18/12 at 8:25am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #31 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

It may mean lower prices for those who want to buy from Amazon until they run everyone else out of business, again. This would mean, less reasons for writers to write and publishers to publish. The truly great artist would prefer to sell their creations by themselves than support a system where they make one company rich and not even have access to the rest of the market or even be able to sell their own product for a reasonable price themselves because Amazon wants to use it as a loss leader. 

How do you figure? The agency model is actually worse for the publishers because if Amazon and Apple both sell a ebook for $9.99 they get their full asking price from Amazon but will only get $6.99 from Apple. So in order for the agency model to work for them the price had to be raised to accommodate Apples 30% cut but because of the most favored nation clause they had to either accept $6.99 from Apple or get Amazon to raise their price. I'm curious what the settlement entails.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #32 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Amazon raised their prices to compete with Apple pricing? Interesting theory. . .

You keep claiming Amazon practices predatory pricing, an illegal act, yet give no supporting proof. Do you have some or just "making stuff up"?  If it's simply your opinion you should say so, and if not then offer some proof that your assertion is factual. I've never seen any evidence and would look forward to yours.

The evidence is quite clear. Amazon had a near monopoly at 80% market share.

They publicly admit that they were selling an entire category of products at below their cost.

That's predatory pricing.

As to why they stopped? Maybe the DOJ was making noises in their direction. Maybe their board got tired of losing money on every sale. Maybe Barnes and Noble sent them a letter saying that if they didn't stop predatory pricing that they'd file a complaint with the DOJ. The reason doesn't matter.

So what's your explanation for Amazon just happening to sell an entire product line at below their cost and then stopping the practice after it is clear that the DOJ is snooping around the industry? It will be interesting to see your explanation for the prices going up.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #33 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

Without Google's Android system would Samsung be doing so well.

 

I think Google and Samsung are equally Apple's competitors.

 

It's a good point. But Motorola, Samsung, HTC, Sony, etc. are all on equal footing when it comes to Android (although Moto will soon have an inside track). Yet, Samsung has assumed a gargantuan lead. So I don't think it's Android that's giving Samsung the advantage to go head to head with Apple.  I suspect Samsung would be where it is now if Windows Mobile 7/8 had come out earlier and had assumed the place where Android is today.

post #34 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

They publicly admit that they were selling an entire category of products at below their cost.
That's predatory pricing.

I've not seen that. What's your link to the statement that Amazon made? I'd like to read it for myself.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #35 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


The evidence is quite clear. Amazon had a near monopoly at 80% market share.
They publicly admit that they were selling an entire category of products at below their cost.
That's predatory pricing.
As to why they stopped? Maybe the DOJ was making noises in their direction. Maybe their board got tired of losing money on every sale. Maybe Barnes and Noble sent them a letter saying that if they didn't stop predatory pricing that they'd file a complaint with the DOJ. The reason doesn't matter.
So what's your explanation for Amazon just happening to sell an entire product line at below their cost and then stopping the practice after it is clear that the DOJ is snooping around the industry? It will be interesting to see your explanation for the prices going up.

 

I don't quite get the theory that Amazon is selling at a great loss. They'd have to sell quite a few eBooks and songs to make up the difference. Even then, they'd never have the margin that Apple has. However, this loss-leader theory becomes truly suspect in cases where a Kindle owner is also a Prime member. Amazon reportedly loses $11 per Prime member. So how does it make up for this loss and the loss in hardware costs?

 

Something doesn't add up. Bezos is not an idiot. Perhaps analysis about its loss leader modus operandi is not accurate.

post #36 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

The bolded is incorrect. Amazon had a near- monopoly and kept prices low via predatory pricing. Introduction of competition is what caused the prices to rise.

Most people couldn't care less if Amazon had a near-monoploy and how or why they kept prices low. They wanna know why the "introduction of competition caused prices to rise" when its supposed to lower them. Its pretty hard to convince them that a 30% price increase is better when you're not offering a better service or product than the competition.
Edited by dasanman69 - 5/18/12 at 9:01am
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #37 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

I don't quite get the theory that Amazon is selling at a great loss. They'd have to sell quite a few eBooks and songs to make up the difference. Even then, they'd never have the margin that Apple has. However, this loss-leader theory becomes truly suspect in cases where a Kindle owner is also a Prime member. Amazon reportedly loses $11 per Prime member. So how does it make up for this loss and the loss in hardware costs?

Something doesn't add up. Bezos is not an idiot. Perhaps analysis about its loss leader modus operandi is not accurate.

It might be a problem if it was just kindle owners but anyone with the kindle app can benefit regardless of hardware and platform.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #38 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


I don't quite get the theory that Amazon is selling at a great loss. They'd have to sell quite a few eBooks and songs to make up the difference. Even then, they'd never have the margin that Apple has. However, this loss-leader theory becomes truly suspect in cases where a Kindle owner is also a Prime member. Amazon reportedly loses $11 per Prime member. So how does it make up for this loss and the loss in hardware costs?

Something doesn't add up. Bezos is not an idiot. Perhaps analysis about its loss leader modus operandi is not accurate.

Amazon's business model is about driving volume to create a business without competitors. Their logistics infrastructure is impressive to say the least, and this is made possible by creating huge volumes of sales. Prime builds loyalty, and Amazon is willing to lose money on loyal customers in the short term if it helps them create the base for long-term domination. I believe the $11 figure was from 3 years ago; I would expect it is less now.

If you didn't take the long-term perspective on it, why would they be trading with a 3 digit multiplier.
post #39 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
...
Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo told AppleInsider last year that Amazon was working on a 10.1-inch Kindle tablet codenamed "Coyote" alongside development of an 8.9-inch tablet. However, suppliers were believed to have experienced difficulty with Amazon's requirements for the 8.9-inch device.

 

I do hope "Amazon's requirements" mean more ambitious hardware, addressing the few concerns that the smaller Kindle Fire raised (placement of on-off switch, small storage). That way they could sell it worldwide, instead of US only, and make a decent profit out of it.

post #40 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


Amazon's business model is about driving volume to create a business without competitors. Their logistics infrastructure is impressive to say the least, and this is made possible by creating huge volumes of sales. Prime builds loyalty, and Amazon is willing to lose money on loyal customers in the short term if it helps them create the base for long-term domination. I believe the $11 figure was from 3 years ago; I would expect it is less now.
If you didn't take the long-term perspective on it, why would they be trading with a 3 digit multiplier.

 

Long view is fine. Their impressive infrastructure is impressive.

 

But if they are losing money on the hardware and on the contents (the $11 number is from last year but let's say they're down to $5), how long would it take for them to make that up? Hardware like Kindle has a life of 2-3 yrs max. If Prime builds loyalty, that means they lose money for a longer period of time! Something doesn't compute, unless they're counting on these members buying scores of other products. But Kindle is their top selling item!

 

I'm 100% certain Amazon accountants and MBAs have figured out how they will eventually make money out of this. But perhaps all the estimates and analysis of how they will do this are wrong (as they usually are). Perhaps the assumption of a loss leader model is not entirely accurate. Just sayin' ...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Briefly: Simon & Schuster settles; 9M Galaxy S III preorders; 10.1" Kindle Fire