Well, not to get all 'technical', but you need 8 of those parts, so 8x$3.12 = $24.96, and 8x$9.39=75.12, so it's a $50 difference, not a $6 difference.
Though even then it sure would be nice if it was + $50 to the 32GB and + $100 for the 64GB at least instead of the current $100/$200 spread...
Yeah I'm still wiping the egg off my face for that one
I gotta say, everyone who thinks apple is screwing you with the price of the 64 GB iPad, I'm just going to have to disagree. Sure, the margins are higher for the 64 than the 16, but as someone pointed out, in the end, apple views the iPad market as a sum total, and the margins for the entire product line are actually lower than is their standard. If there was less of a difference in prices, the line would run from 600-700 not from 500-600. As it is, I think apple is making a very smart move. Put the smallest device at ridiculously low margins, and most people will buy the middle product (32) which is about average margins. If you look at the sales, the vast majority of 64 GB sales are for the 3G models, and so price isn't really a limiting factor for this market. It's pretty much accepted that those with more means will be expected to pay more (see sliding scale offers and our tax structure). 64 GB in an iPad is seen as a luxury (and as an iPad owner, I can agree with that) and luxury goods have way higher margins. If the costs more closely matched the cost of the hard drives, it'd be the little 16Gb users getting screwed, not easing the burden on the high end users.
I gotta say, everyone who thinks apple is screwing you with the price of the 64 GB iPad, I'm just going to have to disagree. Sure, the margins are higher for the 64 than the 16, but as someone pointed out, in the end, apple views the iPad market as a sum total, and the margins for the entire product line are actually lower than is their standard. If there was less of a difference in prices, the line would run from 600-700 not from 500-600. As it is, I think apple is making a very smart move. Put the smallest device at ridiculously low margins, and most people will buy the middle product (32) which is about average margins. If you look at the sales, the vast majority of 64 GB sales are for the 3G models, and so price isn't really a limiting factor for this market. It's pretty much accepted that those with more means will be expected to pay more (see sliding scale offers and our tax structure). 64 GB in an iPad is seen as a luxury (and as an iPad owner, I can agree with that) and luxury goods have way higher margins. If the costs more closely matched the cost of the hard drives, it'd be the little 16Gb users getting screwed, not easing the burden on the high end users.
Edit for Gb to GB, stupid bits
Oh absolutely agreed and well put. Ironic you screwed up with the Gb and GB cause that's where my gripe originated. The original article wasn't as clear as it now is post-edit.
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
It's called business! As a consumer, it's your responsibility to decide if the product you're getting is worth the money you're paying for it. If you don't like it, choose another product. No one is forcing you to buy an iPad.
3090% is more like the markup for movie theater popcorn lol
Yeah! And people keep buying it at the theater. Just try to get a boycott to lower the price of popcorn at the theater. Not going to happen. It's futile. It's the same with the Ads and commercials. We just keep allowing it. Makes me disgusted with the weakness of people when it comes to things they like.
It's called business! As a consumer, it's your responsibility to decide if the product you're getting is worth the money you're paying for it. If you don't like it, choose another product. No one is forcing you to buy an iPad.
Well, I don't want to offend you, but it's YOUR attitude that IS forcing me to buy it. People that hold your position make it hard for us to fight for fair pricing, like scabs of the union, you will brake our strike every time. Oh! Well, like P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every day." I guess there are more of you.
Yeah! And people keep buying it at the theater. Just try to get a boycott to lower the price of popcorn at the theater. Not going to happen. It's futile. It's the same with the Ads and commercials. We just keep allowing it. Makes me disgusted with the weakness of people when it comes to things they like.
To be fair to theater owners, concessions are what they make money on. The majority of the money from ticket sales goes to the studio.
To be fair to theater owners, concessions are what they make money on. The majority of the money from ticket sales goes to the studio.
I would imagine they a good amount of their profit from advertising to a captivated audience, since I have to sit through 20 minutes of that crap while eating the *golden* popcorn and $5 fountain sodas. If people refused to go along with this extortion, they might have a reason to renegotiate profit contracts with the studios. The studios need them as much as the theaters need the movies. Collusion is the name of that game!
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
Easy. The product is priced based on it's perceived value, rather than it's actual value.
If the consumer's choice is only between iPhone A and iPhone B (since you can't use iOS on any other phone) then Apple are not subject to the same types of competition as the manufacturer of a phone using a generic operating system.
This is what PC enthuisiasts refer to when they reference the term "Apple Tax". In reality it happens everywhere from pharmaceuticals to skin care to popcorn.
I think a lower capacity iPad, with an iCloud subscription, and a $25/month unlimited data plan (for those who already had it before it was yanked) - is possibly a better deal than getting a higher capacity iPad.
You anyway need the data plan for both iPads, and you anyway would like to get an unlimited plan. The only difference is, you will get your data slightly slower from the cloud, compared to when it is on your device.
I think Apple might be setting itself up for lower margins - but much higher sales, as a result of the iCloud initiative - which might not be such a bad thing, actually.
I think Apple needs to consider the merits of moving down the price chain - they need to leverage their scale benefits into ecosystem benefits as well, the same way they get scale benefits on hardware volumes, etc. For instance, with a greater marketshare, it will be unthinkable for any magazine to not be available on the iPad.
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
As has already been pointed out in other comments, it is a 64 Gigabit module, not Gigabyte. A 64 Gigabit module correspond to 8 Gigabyte. So if Apple puts 8 modules of 64 Gigabit each in an iPad, it would cost them 8 times $6.27 = $50.16 for the flash storage in the 64GB iPad model.
But who says they put 8 modules of 64 Gigabit in the 64 Gigabyte iPad model?
In the iPod touch for example, there is only room for two modules. So to create a 64GB iPod touch, they use 2 modules of 256 Gigabits each.
And I can imagine that higher density modules cost more.
If Apple only puts two modules in the iPad, then the real price may be closer to the $200 more they ask for the 64GB iPad.
A car trim package is not a good analogy. Storage is fundamental to the very function of the iPad. A car trim package is for vanity, not function. A better comparison would be the size of the car's engine. I'm European so you might find the engine sizes strange!
That's no different than an iPad. A 16 GB iPad is fully functional. You can pay more money and get more storage which gives more convenience (less need to move things from your home computer to the iPad and so on ). Similarly, you pay extra for convenience or performance in a higher end car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac
If I got a 1,000cc engine in my car for $10,000 but had to pay $14,000 for a 1,200cc engine you bet your bottom dollar I'd be arguing with the dealer! And what's more, I'd have a chance of getting a deal out of it.
Which simply proves that you haven't looked at cars lately.
Mercedes C300 sport (3.0 L engine) starts at $33,990
Mercedes C350 sport (3.5 L engine) starts at $39,990 - almost no difference between the cars other than engine size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac
Another flaw in this argument is that it assumes market forces affect the iPad at this point. The competition is so at sea that the iPad is the only option for any sensible tablet consumer at the moment. That leaves Apple with a pseudo-monopoly position in this segment.
That's not a flaw in the argument - it's simply your inability to think logically that is showing.
Ignore the other brands of tablets and look only at the iPad. A consumer can choose from 18 different models. Let's look only at black WiFi models for simplicity. Consumer can buy 16 GB for $499, 32 GB for $599 or 64 GB for $699. The only difference is the amount of RAM. So consumer says "is the extra RAM worth the extra money?" and makes a choice.
If Apple set the differential too high, fewer people would buy the high end model and there would be a majority of 16 GB models. If the differential were too low, a much larger number of people would buy the 64 GB model. Clearly, the market drives the price.
(In reality, Apple reportedly sells roughly equal numbers of all three models. Apple presumably knows whether that meets their objectives or not).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo
Well, I don't want to offend you, but it's YOUR attitude that IS forcing me to buy it. People that hold your position make it hard for us to fight for fair pricing, like scabs of the union, you will brake our strike every time. Oh! Well, like P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every day." I guess there are more of you.
I don't mean to offend you, but you don't get to dictate what 'fair pricing' is.
Every consumer gets to decide for themselves how much an added feature is worth. If the price is higher than most consumers will pay, the product either fails or the manufacturer has to lower the price. If the price is less than the consumer is willing to pay, then the manufacturer will sell a ton of them. The manufacturer may be willing to leave some money on the table in order to gain rapid penetration. Of course, if the price is TOO far below what the market would pay, the manufacturer goes out of business.
It is the MARKET that dictates prices, not any one person. You don't get to say what a fair price is any more than I do. Each of us gets to choose what we would pay. Then, based on millions of potential consumers, a market price is set.
No one is forcing you to buy anything. That's just a stupid statement. If the price is below what you are willing to pay, then you buy it. If the price is above what you are willing to pay, you don't. No force involved.
I don't mean to offend you, but you don't get to dictate what 'fair pricing' is.
Every consumer gets to decide for themselves how much an added feature is worth. If the price is higher than most consumers will pay, the product either fails or the manufacturer has to lower the price. If the price is less than the consumer is willing to pay, then the manufacturer will sell a ton of them. The manufacturer may be willing to leave some money on the table in order to gain rapid penetration. Of course, if the price is TOO far below what the market would pay, the manufacturer goes out of business.
It is the MARKET that dictates prices, not any one person. You don't get to say what a fair price is any more than I do. Each of us gets to choose what we would pay. Then, based on millions of potential consumers, a market price is set.
No one is forcing you to buy anything. That's just a stupid statement. If the price is below what you are willing to pay, then you buy it. If the price is above what you are willing to pay, you don't. No force involved.
You won't offend me and if you did, I probably deserved it. Your market explanation is right on the money and I agree with it totally. All my post on the topic show that, but my comment spoke to the weakness of the individual consumer having to buy popcorn at extortive prices. I haven't come across many who don't complain about the practice.
IMO these people complain about the extortion but won't or can't do anything about it. If they won't it's usually because, like me, due to the weakness of the majority of movie goers not being able to effectively boycott the product. If they can't, it's probably because they brought a couple of their kids to see a movie and they don't want to be the cheap dad, mom or date.
The market does and should set the price, but price fixing, coercion, and extortion is a morally illegal practice in most markets. Why do the theaters get away with it. Theoretical free market principles sound nice but they need regulation or effective boycott in real life to balance greed and fairness.
The market does and should set the price, but price fixing, coercion, and extortion is a morally illegal practice in most markets. Why do the theaters get away with it. Theoretical free market principles sound nice but they need regulation or effective boycott in real life to balance greed and fairness.
Baloney. What evidence do you have that the theaters are guilty of price fixing or extortion?
The fact is that they theaters learned that consumers are willing to pay $7 for a tub of popcorn and $5 for a soda, so that's what they charge. There is absolutely nothing illegal about a theater owner going into another theater and seeing that they're charging $0.50 more than him - and then raising his price. In fact, that's how the market sets prices.
"The news of fewer orders for NAND flash comes as iPhone sales are said to remain strong, and demand for the new iPad 2 is also significant, making it unclear why orders are less than expected."
Oh, it's VERY clear: the drop in demand has nothing to do with Apple and is due entirely to reduced PC desktop and portables sales and a total failure of non-iOS tablets to gain any traction in the market.
This gets my vote.
Why is it writers twist and turn the obvious to try and make things sound like something else? The story should read; Spot prices for NAND Flash down, as orders for non-Apple products slump. There is just now getting to be quick turn-around for iPad 2s, and the Galaxy Tab needs deals with Microsoft to get businesses to stock large orders.
>> The OTHER thing I suspect, is that electronic devices that might use NAND flash, are not getting produced as much due to Japan's nuclear meltdown.
Comments
Well, not to get all 'technical', but you need 8 of those parts, so 8x$3.12 = $24.96, and 8x$9.39=75.12, so it's a $50 difference, not a $6 difference.
Though even then it sure would be nice if it was + $50 to the 32GB and + $100 for the 64GB at least instead of the current $100/$200 spread...
Yeah I'm still wiping the egg off my face for that one
Edit for Gb to GB, stupid bits
I gotta say, everyone who thinks apple is screwing you with the price of the 64 GB iPad, I'm just going to have to disagree. Sure, the margins are higher for the 64 than the 16, but as someone pointed out, in the end, apple views the iPad market as a sum total, and the margins for the entire product line are actually lower than is their standard. If there was less of a difference in prices, the line would run from 600-700 not from 500-600. As it is, I think apple is making a very smart move. Put the smallest device at ridiculously low margins, and most people will buy the middle product (32) which is about average margins. If you look at the sales, the vast majority of 64 GB sales are for the 3G models, and so price isn't really a limiting factor for this market. It's pretty much accepted that those with more means will be expected to pay more (see sliding scale offers and our tax structure). 64 GB in an iPad is seen as a luxury (and as an iPad owner, I can agree with that) and luxury goods have way higher margins. If the costs more closely matched the cost of the hard drives, it'd be the little 16Gb users getting screwed, not easing the burden on the high end users.
Edit for Gb to GB, stupid bits
Oh absolutely agreed and well put. Ironic you screwed up with the Gb and GB cause that's where my gripe originated. The original article wasn't as clear as it now is post-edit.
Exactly what I was going to say... Right down to admonishing AI for botching it again.
While I won't expect a 512GB SSD for $80 next week, lol, I do hope this price drop trickles into the SSD market quickly.
I agree 100% on the SSD's. I want at least one real bad, but until that price comes down I have to wait.
400%? We're talking about 3090% here. Not extraordinary?
EDIT: Apologies, I read the article before it had been made clearer that the units were Gigabits not Gigabytes.
3090% is more like the markup for movie theater popcorn lol
Though even then it sure would be nice if it was + $50 to the 32GB and + $100 for the 64GB at least instead of the current $100/$200 spread...
It would probably be a bad business idea to have just a $50 difference between the models. The $100 spread is there for a reason.
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
It's called business! As a consumer, it's your responsibility to decide if the product you're getting is worth the money you're paying for it. If you don't like it, choose another product. No one is forcing you to buy an iPad.
3090% is more like the markup for movie theater popcorn lol
Yeah! And people keep buying it at the theater. Just try to get a boycott to lower the price of popcorn at the theater. Not going to happen. It's futile. It's the same with the Ads and commercials. We just keep allowing it. Makes me disgusted with the weakness of people when it comes to things they like.
It's called business! As a consumer, it's your responsibility to decide if the product you're getting is worth the money you're paying for it. If you don't like it, choose another product. No one is forcing you to buy an iPad.
Well, I don't want to offend you, but it's YOUR attitude that IS forcing me to buy it. People that hold your position make it hard for us to fight for fair pricing, like scabs of the union, you will brake our strike every time. Oh! Well, like P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every day." I guess there are more of you.
Yeah! And people keep buying it at the theater. Just try to get a boycott to lower the price of popcorn at the theater. Not going to happen. It's futile. It's the same with the Ads and commercials. We just keep allowing it. Makes me disgusted with the weakness of people when it comes to things they like.
To be fair to theater owners, concessions are what they make money on. The majority of the money from ticket sales goes to the studio.
To be fair to theater owners, concessions are what they make money on. The majority of the money from ticket sales goes to the studio.
I would imagine they a good amount of their profit from advertising to a captivated audience, since I have to sit through 20 minutes of that crap while eating the *golden* popcorn and $5 fountain sodas. If people refused to go along with this extortion, they might have a reason to renegotiate profit contracts with the studios. The studios need them as much as the theaters need the movies. Collusion is the name of that game!
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
Easy. The product is priced based on it's perceived value, rather than it's actual value.
If the consumer's choice is only between iPhone A and iPhone B (since you can't use iOS on any other phone) then Apple are not subject to the same types of competition as the manufacturer of a phone using a generic operating system.
This is what PC enthuisiasts refer to when they reference the term "Apple Tax". In reality it happens everywhere from pharmaceuticals to skin care to popcorn.
You anyway need the data plan for both iPads, and you anyway would like to get an unlimited plan. The only difference is, you will get your data slightly slower from the cloud, compared to when it is on your device.
I think Apple might be setting itself up for lower margins - but much higher sales, as a result of the iCloud initiative - which might not be such a bad thing, actually.
I think Apple needs to consider the merits of moving down the price chain - they need to leverage their scale benefits into ecosystem benefits as well, the same way they get scale benefits on hardware volumes, etc. For instance, with a greater marketshare, it will be unthinkable for any magazine to not be available on the iPad.
Can someone explain to me how a 64Gb module that costs Apple just $6.27 more than the 16Gb module costs the consumer $200.00 more!?!
That's not taking into account the savings Apple makes by pre-buying in bulk.
I love Apple's products but disgraces like this do leave a bad taste in the mouth.
As has already been pointed out in other comments, it is a 64 Gigabit module, not Gigabyte. A 64 Gigabit module correspond to 8 Gigabyte. So if Apple puts 8 modules of 64 Gigabit each in an iPad, it would cost them 8 times $6.27 = $50.16 for the flash storage in the 64GB iPad model.
But who says they put 8 modules of 64 Gigabit in the 64 Gigabyte iPad model?
In the iPod touch for example, there is only room for two modules. So to create a 64GB iPod touch, they use 2 modules of 256 Gigabits each.
And I can imagine that higher density modules cost more.
If Apple only puts two modules in the iPad, then the real price may be closer to the $200 more they ask for the 64GB iPad.
I'll ignore the patronising tone.
A car trim package is not a good analogy. Storage is fundamental to the very function of the iPad. A car trim package is for vanity, not function. A better comparison would be the size of the car's engine. I'm European so you might find the engine sizes strange!
That's no different than an iPad. A 16 GB iPad is fully functional. You can pay more money and get more storage which gives more convenience (less need to move things from your home computer to the iPad and so on ). Similarly, you pay extra for convenience or performance in a higher end car.
If I got a 1,000cc engine in my car for $10,000 but had to pay $14,000 for a 1,200cc engine you bet your bottom dollar I'd be arguing with the dealer! And what's more, I'd have a chance of getting a deal out of it.
Which simply proves that you haven't looked at cars lately.
Mercedes C300 sport (3.0 L engine) starts at $33,990
Mercedes C350 sport (3.5 L engine) starts at $39,990 - almost no difference between the cars other than engine size.
Another flaw in this argument is that it assumes market forces affect the iPad at this point. The competition is so at sea that the iPad is the only option for any sensible tablet consumer at the moment. That leaves Apple with a pseudo-monopoly position in this segment.
That's not a flaw in the argument - it's simply your inability to think logically that is showing.
Ignore the other brands of tablets and look only at the iPad. A consumer can choose from 18 different models. Let's look only at black WiFi models for simplicity. Consumer can buy 16 GB for $499, 32 GB for $599 or 64 GB for $699. The only difference is the amount of RAM. So consumer says "is the extra RAM worth the extra money?" and makes a choice.
If Apple set the differential too high, fewer people would buy the high end model and there would be a majority of 16 GB models. If the differential were too low, a much larger number of people would buy the 64 GB model. Clearly, the market drives the price.
(In reality, Apple reportedly sells roughly equal numbers of all three models. Apple presumably knows whether that meets their objectives or not).
Well, I don't want to offend you, but it's YOUR attitude that IS forcing me to buy it. People that hold your position make it hard for us to fight for fair pricing, like scabs of the union, you will brake our strike every time. Oh! Well, like P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every day." I guess there are more of you.
I don't mean to offend you, but you don't get to dictate what 'fair pricing' is.
Every consumer gets to decide for themselves how much an added feature is worth. If the price is higher than most consumers will pay, the product either fails or the manufacturer has to lower the price. If the price is less than the consumer is willing to pay, then the manufacturer will sell a ton of them. The manufacturer may be willing to leave some money on the table in order to gain rapid penetration. Of course, if the price is TOO far below what the market would pay, the manufacturer goes out of business.
It is the MARKET that dictates prices, not any one person. You don't get to say what a fair price is any more than I do. Each of us gets to choose what we would pay. Then, based on millions of potential consumers, a market price is set.
No one is forcing you to buy anything. That's just a stupid statement. If the price is below what you are willing to pay, then you buy it. If the price is above what you are willing to pay, you don't. No force involved.
I don't mean to offend you, but you don't get to dictate what 'fair pricing' is.
Every consumer gets to decide for themselves how much an added feature is worth. If the price is higher than most consumers will pay, the product either fails or the manufacturer has to lower the price. If the price is less than the consumer is willing to pay, then the manufacturer will sell a ton of them. The manufacturer may be willing to leave some money on the table in order to gain rapid penetration. Of course, if the price is TOO far below what the market would pay, the manufacturer goes out of business.
It is the MARKET that dictates prices, not any one person. You don't get to say what a fair price is any more than I do. Each of us gets to choose what we would pay. Then, based on millions of potential consumers, a market price is set.
No one is forcing you to buy anything. That's just a stupid statement. If the price is below what you are willing to pay, then you buy it. If the price is above what you are willing to pay, you don't. No force involved.
You won't offend me and if you did, I probably deserved it. Your market explanation is right on the money and I agree with it totally. All my post on the topic show that, but my comment spoke to the weakness of the individual consumer having to buy popcorn at extortive prices. I haven't come across many who don't complain about the practice.
IMO these people complain about the extortion but won't or can't do anything about it. If they won't it's usually because, like me, due to the weakness of the majority of movie goers not being able to effectively boycott the product. If they can't, it's probably because they brought a couple of their kids to see a movie and they don't want to be the cheap dad, mom or date.
The market does and should set the price, but price fixing, coercion, and extortion is a morally illegal practice in most markets. Why do the theaters get away with it. Theoretical free market principles sound nice but they need regulation or effective boycott in real life to balance greed and fairness.
The market does and should set the price, but price fixing, coercion, and extortion is a morally illegal practice in most markets. Why do the theaters get away with it. Theoretical free market principles sound nice but they need regulation or effective boycott in real life to balance greed and fairness.
Baloney. What evidence do you have that the theaters are guilty of price fixing or extortion?
The fact is that they theaters learned that consumers are willing to pay $7 for a tub of popcorn and $5 for a soda, so that's what they charge. There is absolutely nothing illegal about a theater owner going into another theater and seeing that they're charging $0.50 more than him - and then raising his price. In fact, that's how the market sets prices.
"The news of fewer orders for NAND flash comes as iPhone sales are said to remain strong, and demand for the new iPad 2 is also significant, making it unclear why orders are less than expected."
Oh, it's VERY clear: the drop in demand has nothing to do with Apple and is due entirely to reduced PC desktop and portables sales and a total failure of non-iOS tablets to gain any traction in the market.
This gets my vote.
Why is it writers twist and turn the obvious to try and make things sound like something else? The story should read; Spot prices for NAND Flash down, as orders for non-Apple products slump. There is just now getting to be quick turn-around for iPad 2s, and the Galaxy Tab needs deals with Microsoft to get businesses to stock large orders.
>> The OTHER thing I suspect, is that electronic devices that might use NAND flash, are not getting produced as much due to Japan's nuclear meltdown.