I don't always understand what some people are arguing about. I like to compare two things that are about the same in their attempt to serve the same potential customer.
Sometimes we get someone who doesn't want (or can't afford) the higher prices or rates, and so they argue that they don't make good economic sense. Sometimes it takes a while to get what they're saying sorted out, because of that. So we're arguing past one another.
+1! Rule is - If you cannot afford Apple's premium priced products, then you have a wide variety of products you ( the other guy ) can opt to buy. I can safely assure that the user experience will not be the same. It's just not Apple to create something of lousy quality.
In America all apple products are so much cheaper for example in Britain the iPhone 3G is £96.89 which is equivalent to $164. So we pay an extra $60 dollars for what?
In America all apple products are so much cheaper for example in Britain the iPhone 3G is £96.89 which is equivalent to $164. So we pay an extra $60 dollars for what?
Everyone is wrong. Concerning the word overpriced.
Apple charges the exact correct price every time.
No one ever over or undercharges for long.
They go out of business.
In todays world of split second info shooting back and forth.
and all around trillions of times a second
Any person can compare a price between products
ANYBODY.
Verizon has a war with TIME WARNER FOR the bundle of tv/dsl/phone
VERIZON claims a monthly cost of 79 dollars to 99 dollars a month
Time warner charges me over 160 a month for the triple play of services. VERIZON has a ton of ads placed everywhere.
SO million's of people attempted to save 70 bucks or more a month by getting fios triple bundle
Guess what ??? VERIZON WAS MORE $ than time warner
>>>>>>>> Just like dell or any other box maker is more money than any APPLE computer. Those same mililons saw thru the bullshit dell ads and bought apple . Or they saw their needs werel filled by a lesser box .
So if anyone says apple is over priced then you a very stupid person
So stupid because after all the decades of bullshit selling hype every one should be a savvy shopper by now .
Msft sells all of its SW to apple and the dells of the world .
So why do so they say apple is over priced ??TO keep all you dolts confused about true market REALITY . MSFT IS over priced because many have no choice in a MONOPOLY SW market . MSFT CAN DO WHAT EVER IT WANTS . A 3bn euro fine was sneezed at by msft.
And it an incredible market down turn, the worst in 50 yrs >>how can apple increase there sales by 9 percent while the p/c market declines by 4 percent.? OVERPRICED and sales increased? what mind control apple bot secret formular does apple have to fool milions of us.
if apple is over priced then how can they sell tens millions upon scores of millions of pods phones and computers. Billions of songs.
1.5 bn apps .
APPLE does not have a heart . GET over it . They don;t care . Only shareholders count .
Apple knows that perfect product's sell more>get returned less >
Apple know's that fantastic customer service is a great way to do business .
APPLE knows that by being 100 percent GREEN is good for the health of the world and good for buisness. My 15" MBP 3.02GHz uni HAS A glass sccreen !!
Apple knows having a small product line up is cheaper> clearer and allows them to turn on a dime . Look at have fast apple took over podcasts.
What apple computers are for many people is over powered
many dolts who surf the net and do light home accounting only
go out and buy a $2800 laptop instead of a STRIPPED white MB
Or even a $600 DELL. THAT is what maybe some people mean to say.
When i bought my MB i went frim 13 " stripped to 15" 3.02ghz 7400rpm in a heart beat. COD4
APPLE is cheaper than any other computer maker in the world.
No one comes close .
DELL is over priced > the market place is telling us that even with there extremely low cost razor thin profit machines are still too expensive for them to buy .
I think misunderstood my post, since my comment was at least you get a premium well bulit product from Apple. MS are selling crappy products at permium price. I do not know if it is overpriced or NOT, only FACTS will tell us that not opinions!
Overpricing does not stop a company from making money until the company has competition that sells a product of similar or better quality for a lower price. There is not a BRAND in the market that provides steller combination of Apps/music/movie/audio etc Store and Ipod/iPhone like Apple.
I am a Apple man, but also not blinded and understand that Apple do parctice same ethics has other comapnies or Apple would not be in business today.
You seem to be in fit of rage, when running your message, go do some yoga, no need for name calling, it does not help our agrument about Apple products.
I looked at the RIM report; I'm not sure what you wanted me to see. RIM claims 40% margin overall; their report does not break out the margins for devices (83%) vs services (13%) vs software (2%). Services and software should have higher margins. But since devices is dominant, one might guestimate that the gross margins for devices is in the high 30s.
Mark,
I am not questioning 'GAAP'.
I based my concern that unless you know the protocol that was used to derive the figures, one really can't make the assumption that they are accurate enough for someone to suggest that Apple is overcharging for the iPhone.
My point in the begining excluding the GAAP factor was that Apple does not disclose or breakdown product sales or their related costs.
In addition, neither do any of the companies sited. Analysts only have sales trends, some of which are unclearly posted by the manufacturers and others from legit research based on projections on buying patterns. Cost of goods/manufacturing/operations is even more nebulous. And we are more than evidenced by their lack of accuracy.
As for RIM, your guestimate of "?high 30's?" if more accurate than reported here, certainly would change the report significantly. More important, to me it raises more questions on the overall accuracy of all the numbers tabled.
Mind you, they may be extremely accurate, but unless we are apprised of how and when the data was collected, formulated and tabulated, I will remain suspicious.
I guess that is what my 4 decades involved in scientific research has done to jaundice my brain.
My point in the begining excluding the GAAP factor was that Apple does not disclose or breakdown product sales or their related costs.
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
I think misunderstood my post, since my comment was at least you get a premium well bulit product from Apple. MS are selling crappy products at permium price. I do not know if it is overpriced or NOT, only FACTS will tell us that not opinions!
Overpricing does not stop a company from making money until the company has competition that sells a product of similar or better quality for a lower price. There is not a BRAND in the market that provides steller combination of Apps/music/movie/audio etc Store and Ipod/iPhone like Apple.
I am a Apple man, but also not blinded and understand that Apple do parctice same ethics has other comapnies or Apple would not be in business today.
You seem to be in fit of rage, when running your message, go do some yoga, no need for name calling, it does not help our agrument about Apple products.
+1. To the other guy you quoted: This is just a forum, if you're angry, follow the forum rules. Count to 100 and relax. If you are angry, don't post. Simple as that.
+1! Rule is - If you cannot afford Apple's premium priced products, then you have a wide variety of products you ( the other guy ) can opt to buy. I can safely assure that the user experience will not be the same. It's just not Apple to create something of lousy quality.
I can't speak for other countries, it can be different depending on locale, but iPhone offers a lot for the money. Most of the models that I can find either have smaller screen or less storage for the same money.
At least in the US, those yearning to spend less money on a smart phone than the iPhone 3G would be relegated to a Moto Q, a few Blackberry models or refurbs. If you want a touchscreen model, I see Blackberry Storm, $99, has 1GB available for media storage, and it can't be upgraded with a MicroSD card. I know the iPhone can't be upgraded either, but at 8GB, for the low end model, there's not as much pressing need as there would be with only 1GB.
Blackberry Tour is $199 with 2GB of MicroSD storage. $50 at newegg can bump it up to 16GB, making it more expensive.
ATT and T-Mobile offers some Nokias at $79 to $100 too, but the screens are pretty small.
I can't speak for other countries, it can be different depending on locale, but iPhone offers a lot for the money. Most of the models that I can find either have smaller screen or less storage for the same money.
At least in the US, those yearning to spend less money on a smart phone than the iPhone 3G would be relegated to a Moto Q, a few Blackberry models or refurbs. If you want a touchscreen model, I see Blackberry Storm, $99, has 1GB available for media storage, and it can't be upgraded with a MicroSD card. I know the iPhone can't be upgraded either, but at 8GB, for the low end model, there's not as much pressing need as there would be with only 1GB.
Blackberry Tour is $199 with 2GB of MicroSD storage. $50 at newegg can bump it up to 16GB, making it more expensive.
ATT and T-Mobile offers some Nokias at $79 to $100 too, but the screens are pretty small.
Yep. And I think the N97 is a pretty ugly iPhone 3GS knock off.
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
I agree with your point. As I said to jfanning earlier, overcharging is determined based on value not margins. One can buy something from the dollar store and still be overcharged because the item is worthless (value judgement).
That said, Apple has huge gross margins on the iPhone (and almost all of its other products, excepting digital goods like music and apps).
After some thought, I think Sacconaghi's table does estimate and subtract out a portion of Apple's R&D, SG&A, and income taxes for the iPhone in order to arrive at its profit number. And it does this for every manufacturer. Otherwise, I can't explain how RIM's profit is only 21% when it reports gross margins of 40%.
I agree with your point. As I said to jfanning earlier, overcharging is determined based on value not margins. One can buy something from the dollar store and still be overcharged because the item is worthless (value judgement).
That said, Apple has huge gross margins on the iPhone (and almost all of its other products, excepting digital goods like music and apps).
After some thought, I think Sacconaghi's table does estimate and subtract out a portion of Apple's R&D, SG&A, and income taxes for the iPhone in order to arrive at its profit number. And it does this for every manufacturer. Otherwise, I can't explain how RIM's profit is only 21% when it reports gross margins of 40%.
Admittedly, I haven't been fully following this discussion, but RIM does depend a lot on other areas as well. It's possible that RIM's 40% margins are being helped by its software and services agreements that companies need. That could skew the results.
Comments
I don't always understand what some people are arguing about. I like to compare two things that are about the same in their attempt to serve the same potential customer.
Sometimes we get someone who doesn't want (or can't afford) the higher prices or rates, and so they argue that they don't make good economic sense. Sometimes it takes a while to get what they're saying sorted out, because of that. So we're arguing past one another.
+1! Rule is - If you cannot afford Apple's premium priced products, then you have a wide variety of products you ( the other guy ) can opt to buy. I can safely assure that the user experience will not be the same. It's just not Apple to create something of lousy quality.
In America all apple products are so much cheaper for example in Britain the iPhone 3G is £96.89 which is equivalent to $164. So we pay an extra $60 dollars for what?
Could it be taxes?
Could it be taxes?
Yeah $60 dollars lining Gordon Browns pockets.
LOOK I know many skip my posts. Your loss.
Everyone is wrong. Concerning the word overpriced.
Apple charges the exact correct price every time.
No one ever over or undercharges for long.
They go out of business.
In todays world of split second info shooting back and forth.
and all around trillions of times a second
Any person can compare a price between products
ANYBODY.
Verizon has a war with TIME WARNER FOR the bundle of tv/dsl/phone
VERIZON claims a monthly cost of 79 dollars to 99 dollars a month
Time warner charges me over 160 a month for the triple play of services. VERIZON has a ton of ads placed everywhere.
SO million's of people attempted to save 70 bucks or more a month by getting fios triple bundle
Guess what ??? VERIZON WAS MORE $ than time warner
>>>>>>>> Just like dell or any other box maker is more money than any APPLE computer. Those same mililons saw thru the bullshit dell ads and bought apple . Or they saw their needs werel filled by a lesser box .
So if anyone says apple is over priced then you a very stupid person
So stupid because after all the decades of bullshit selling hype every one should be a savvy shopper by now .
Msft sells all of its SW to apple and the dells of the world .
So why do so they say apple is over priced ??TO keep all you dolts confused about true market REALITY . MSFT IS over priced because many have no choice in a MONOPOLY SW market . MSFT CAN DO WHAT EVER IT WANTS . A 3bn euro fine was sneezed at by msft.
And it an incredible market down turn, the worst in 50 yrs >>how can apple increase there sales by 9 percent while the p/c market declines by 4 percent.? OVERPRICED and sales increased? what mind control apple bot secret formular does apple have to fool milions of us.
if apple is over priced then how can they sell tens millions upon scores of millions of pods phones and computers. Billions of songs.
1.5 bn apps .
APPLE does not have a heart . GET over it . They don;t care . Only shareholders count .
Apple knows that perfect product's sell more>get returned less >
Apple know's that fantastic customer service is a great way to do business .
APPLE knows that by being 100 percent GREEN is good for the health of the world and good for buisness. My 15" MBP 3.02GHz uni HAS A glass sccreen !!
Apple knows having a small product line up is cheaper> clearer and allows them to turn on a dime . Look at have fast apple took over podcasts.
What apple computers are for many people is over powered
many dolts who surf the net and do light home accounting only
go out and buy a $2800 laptop instead of a STRIPPED white MB
Or even a $600 DELL. THAT is what maybe some people mean to say.
When i bought my MB i went frim 13 " stripped to 15" 3.02ghz 7400rpm in a heart beat. COD4
APPLE is cheaper than any other computer maker in the world.
No one comes close .
DELL is over priced > the market place is telling us that even with there extremely low cost razor thin profit machines are still too expensive for them to buy .
I think misunderstood my post, since my comment was at least you get a premium well bulit product from Apple. MS are selling crappy products at permium price. I do not know if it is overpriced or NOT, only FACTS will tell us that not opinions!
Overpricing does not stop a company from making money until the company has competition that sells a product of similar or better quality for a lower price. There is not a BRAND in the market that provides steller combination of Apps/music/movie/audio etc Store and Ipod/iPhone like Apple.
I am a Apple man, but also not blinded and understand that Apple do parctice same ethics has other comapnies or Apple would not be in business today.
You seem to be in fit of rage, when running your message, go do some yoga, no need for name calling, it does not help our agrument about Apple products.
Yeah $60 dollars lining Gordon Browns pockets.
Haha
I looked at the RIM report; I'm not sure what you wanted me to see. RIM claims 40% margin overall; their report does not break out the margins for devices (83%) vs services (13%) vs software (2%). Services and software should have higher margins. But since devices is dominant, one might guestimate that the gross margins for devices is in the high 30s.
Mark,
I am not questioning 'GAAP'.
I based my concern that unless you know the protocol that was used to derive the figures, one really can't make the assumption that they are accurate enough for someone to suggest that Apple is overcharging for the iPhone.
My point in the begining excluding the GAAP factor was that Apple does not disclose or breakdown product sales or their related costs.
In addition, neither do any of the companies sited. Analysts only have sales trends, some of which are unclearly posted by the manufacturers and others from legit research based on projections on buying patterns. Cost of goods/manufacturing/operations is even more nebulous. And we are more than evidenced by their lack of accuracy.
As for RIM, your guestimate of "?high 30's?" if more accurate than reported here, certainly would change the report significantly. More important, to me it raises more questions on the overall accuracy of all the numbers tabled.
Mind you, they may be extremely accurate, but unless we are apprised of how and when the data was collected, formulated and tabulated, I will remain suspicious.
I guess that is what my 4 decades involved in scientific research has done to jaundice my brain.
My point in the begining excluding the GAAP factor was that Apple does not disclose or breakdown product sales or their related costs.
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
So we pay an extra $60 dollars for what?
Higher cost of doing business due to more onerous government over-regulation?
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
Higher cost of doing business due to more onerous government over-regulation?
Possibly..
I think misunderstood my post, since my comment was at least you get a premium well bulit product from Apple. MS are selling crappy products at permium price. I do not know if it is overpriced or NOT, only FACTS will tell us that not opinions!
Overpricing does not stop a company from making money until the company has competition that sells a product of similar or better quality for a lower price. There is not a BRAND in the market that provides steller combination of Apps/music/movie/audio etc Store and Ipod/iPhone like Apple.
I am a Apple man, but also not blinded and understand that Apple do parctice same ethics has other comapnies or Apple would not be in business today.
You seem to be in fit of rage, when running your message, go do some yoga, no need for name calling, it does not help our agrument about Apple products.
+1. To the other guy you quoted: This is just a forum, if you're angry, follow the forum rules. Count to 100 and relax. If you are angry, don't post. Simple as that.
+1! Rule is - If you cannot afford Apple's premium priced products, then you have a wide variety of products you ( the other guy ) can opt to buy. I can safely assure that the user experience will not be the same. It's just not Apple to create something of lousy quality.
I can't speak for other countries, it can be different depending on locale, but iPhone offers a lot for the money. Most of the models that I can find either have smaller screen or less storage for the same money.
At least in the US, those yearning to spend less money on a smart phone than the iPhone 3G would be relegated to a Moto Q, a few Blackberry models or refurbs. If you want a touchscreen model, I see Blackberry Storm, $99, has 1GB available for media storage, and it can't be upgraded with a MicroSD card. I know the iPhone can't be upgraded either, but at 8GB, for the low end model, there's not as much pressing need as there would be with only 1GB.
Blackberry Tour is $199 with 2GB of MicroSD storage. $50 at newegg can bump it up to 16GB, making it more expensive.
ATT and T-Mobile offers some Nokias at $79 to $100 too, but the screens are pretty small.
I can't speak for other countries, it can be different depending on locale, but iPhone offers a lot for the money. Most of the models that I can find either have smaller screen or less storage for the same money.
At least in the US, those yearning to spend less money on a smart phone than the iPhone 3G would be relegated to a Moto Q, a few Blackberry models or refurbs. If you want a touchscreen model, I see Blackberry Storm, $99, has 1GB available for media storage, and it can't be upgraded with a MicroSD card. I know the iPhone can't be upgraded either, but at 8GB, for the low end model, there's not as much pressing need as there would be with only 1GB.
Blackberry Tour is $199 with 2GB of MicroSD storage. $50 at newegg can bump it up to 16GB, making it more expensive.
ATT and T-Mobile offers some Nokias at $79 to $100 too, but the screens are pretty small.
Yep. And I think the N97 is a pretty ugly iPhone 3GS knock off.
The rest of the Apple's corporate empire --- mac computers, software and ipods --- are well understood by Wall Street analysts because they don't involve in some kind of hardware subsidies or contracts. Apple has been selling computers for 30 years --- so it's a well understood business. So whatever that is left is going to be the iphone.
But if you want to be picky about it --- most of the handset makers are not listed in the US stock exchanges and don't use American accounting standards. Some of them may not be even publicly listed at all (i.e. Sony Ericsson). So even if they publish financial numbers --- you will never know how detailed they are and how accurate they are. For example, are you going to trust South Korean accounting rules when you look at Samsung and LG reports? At the very least, RIM is listed on the Nasdaq and subject to American accounting rules.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
Price is a function of supply and demand --- not a function of how much the competitors are making in profits.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
Exactly. Apple does not overcharge. It just charges more for better stuff that we consumers ARE HAPPY WITH.
My point exactly. That is why I said one can't accuse Apple of overcharging, 'as some have done here,' based on this analyst's report.
I agree with your point. As I said to jfanning earlier, overcharging is determined based on value not margins. One can buy something from the dollar store and still be overcharged because the item is worthless (value judgement).
That said, Apple has huge gross margins on the iPhone (and almost all of its other products, excepting digital goods like music and apps).
After some thought, I think Sacconaghi's table does estimate and subtract out a portion of Apple's R&D, SG&A, and income taxes for the iPhone in order to arrive at its profit number. And it does this for every manufacturer. Otherwise, I can't explain how RIM's profit is only 21% when it reports gross margins of 40%.
I agree with your point. As I said to jfanning earlier, overcharging is determined based on value not margins. One can buy something from the dollar store and still be overcharged because the item is worthless (value judgement).
That said, Apple has huge gross margins on the iPhone (and almost all of its other products, excepting digital goods like music and apps).
After some thought, I think Sacconaghi's table does estimate and subtract out a portion of Apple's R&D, SG&A, and income taxes for the iPhone in order to arrive at its profit number. And it does this for every manufacturer. Otherwise, I can't explain how RIM's profit is only 21% when it reports gross margins of 40%.
Admittedly, I haven't been fully following this discussion, but RIM does depend a lot on other areas as well. It's possible that RIM's 40% margins are being helped by its software and services agreements that companies need. That could skew the results.
Amazing numbers for a cell phone newcomer.
3 years and Apple has already gone so far. Brilliant indeed!