Best Buy to give away Galaxy Tabs as Apple seeks ban across all of EU

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Best Buy this weekend will kick-off an aggressive promo that offers a free Galaxy Tab 10.1 to buyers of certain HDTVs, possibly hinting that yet another iPad rival is in need of a stimulus to combat poor sales, assuming Samsung can keep it on the market.



The offer, which starts August 21 and runs through August 27, promises a free, 16GB Wi-Fi version of the Android tablet to any customer who purchases a 46-inch or 55-inch, LED-lit 3D TV worth $1,500 or $2,000.



Electronista notes that the deal isn't as drastic as the $100 TouchPad price drop that lasted a week before HP on Thursday ultimately waved the white flag in defeat, but is nonetheless unusual for a $500 device that's been on the market for just a few weeks.



As the nation's largest specialty electronics retailer, Best Buy has been placing big bets on sales of tablet devices following the success of the iPad but hasn't seen the reception it was expecting for some of the non-Apple devices.



For instance, a report from earlier this week noted that big-box retailer took delivery of 270,000 HP TouchPads and but only managed to sell 25,000 units, or less than 10 percent of its inventory. A $100 price cut on the 9.7-inch devices did little to spur demand, with one analyst vouching his belief that the discount actually backfired by prompting customers to wait for further savings.



Disgruntled over the matter, Best Buy reportedly refused to pay for the remaining tablets and asked that HP take them back. But after pleading with the retailer to be patient, HP shocked the tech world on Thursday when it announced plans to scrap the TouchPad and all of its existing and future webOS devices entirely, essentially conceding the tablet market to Apple.



As part of the restructuring, HP said it would take a $.05 charge per share to account for the stockpile of unsold TouchPad, which, given the company's 2.07 billion outstanding shares, amounts to just over $100 million.







The discontinuation of its mobile device initiative is part of a broader move that may see HP exit the hardware business entirely, likely spinning off its low-margin PC business as part of a shift in strategy that will see it challenge IBM on the software and services front rather than battle Apple on its highly-profitable hardware sales.



For its part, Samsung is not only challenged with making its Galaxy Tabs appear as viable alternatives to the iPad, it's also fighting Apple to keep the devices on the market. Following a series of patent infringement lawsuits filed by Apple, a German court last week barred the sale of the Galaxy Tab across all of Europe, except for the Netherlands, where a separate complaint was pending.



Although the ban was partially suspended by a judge earlier this week, the separate suit filed in the Netherlands was revealed Friday to have Apple seeking an injunction banning Samsung's entire Galaxy series throughout the European Union. This reportedly includes both smartphones -- the Galaxy Ace, Galaxy S and Galaxy SII -- as well as tablets: the Galaxy Tab 7 and Galaxy Tab 10.1.



As part of the complaint, Apple is demanding that Samsung and its subsidiaries send a "letter of request" to all their European clients, ordering them to recall all of the infringing stock "within 14 days" and offer compensation of the purchase price as well as transportation costs.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 70
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Sort of like when Apple was giving away a free iPod Touch (and now an iTV) with the purchase of a Mac "possibly hinting... need of a stimulus to combat poor sales" \



    As for the rest of this 'article', my position has always been that the chances of someone walking into an electronics store and purchasing a Samsung Galaxy device somehow thinking it was an Apple product are nearly infinitesimal, if for no other reason than the fact that the device is clearly labeled SAMSUNG on its surface, start-up screen, and packaging, in addition to running a completely different operating system.



    Actions such as these should be seen for exactly what they are, anti-competitive attempts to stifle the competition by any means...legal, ethical or otherwise.
  • Reply 2 of 70






    Why a picture of an iPad in a story about a Samsung product?
  • Reply 3 of 70
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    No other tablets are selling much at all. 94.5% of people want iPads, according to that newest survey.



    I'm not surprised that they now are attempting to give away free Galaxy Tabs with the purchase of certain TV's.
  • Reply 4 of 70
    "Disgruntled over the matter, Best Buy reportedly refused to pay for the remaining tablets"



    Whenever I hear about someone who's disgruntled, I wonder why I never hear about anyone who's been gruntled. I'm not entirely kidding - 'gruntled' is a real word. But you never hear of anyone getting their gruntle on - only losing it.



    Something must be done about this. I'm doing my part.
  • Reply 5 of 70
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,171member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    For its part, Samsung is not only challenged with making its Galaxy Tabs appear as viable alternatives to the iPad, it's also fighting Apple to keep the devices on the market. . .



    Although the ban was partially suspended by a judge earlier this week, the separate suit filed in the Netherlands was revealed Friday to have Apple seeking an injunction banning Samsung's entire Galaxy series throughout the European Union. This reportedly includes both smartphones -- the Galaxy Ace, Galaxy S and Galaxy SII -- as well as tablets: the Galaxy Tab 7 and Galaxy Tab 10.1.



    And again faking images to make the Galaxy S phones appear as identical to the iPhone as possible. If Apple is so convinced that Samsung smartphones are "copies" of their iPhone, why manipulate images to convince a court to agree? At the very least Apple appears to be misleading the judge.



    http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/d...awsuit-filing/
  • Reply 6 of 70
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    The most frequent question will be which TV do I have to buy to get an iPad. Second will be, can I just get a discount instead of a Tab I don't want. Third, can you throw this away for me.
  • Reply 7 of 70
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    And again faking images to make the Galaxy S phones appear as identical to the iPhone as possible. If Apple is so convinced that Samsung smartphones are "copies" of their iPhone, why manipulate images to convince a court to agree? At the very least Apple appears to be misleading the judge.



    http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/d...awsuit-filing/



    That's pretty much a non issue, and I doubt that anybody was trying to fool any judge, because the Judge has the actual devices in front of him to examine.
  • Reply 8 of 70
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post


    "Disgruntled over the matter, Best Buy reportedly refused to pay for the remaining tablets"



    Whenever I hear about someone who's disgruntled, I wonder why I never hear about anyone who's been gruntled. I'm not entirely kidding - 'gruntled' is a real word. But you never hear of anyone getting their gruntle on - only losing it.



    Something must be done about this. I'm doing my part.



    Best post here in a while.



    I'm going to start using the word 'gruntled' when I am pleased with something.
  • Reply 9 of 70
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,171member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    That's pretty much a non issue, and I doubt that anybody was trying to fool any judge, because the Judge has the actual devices in front of him to examine.



    The German judge didn't. I know it seems like common sense that the judge would have physical samples to examine, but he did not. There's no indication that the Dutch court has actual sample devices to physically examine either.
  • Reply 10 of 70
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    And again faking images to make the Galaxy S phones appear as identical to the iPhone as possible. If Apple is so convinced that Samsung smartphones are "copies" of their iPhone, why manipulate images to convince a court to agree? At the very least Apple appears to be misleading the judge.



    http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/d...awsuit-filing/



    And you think the judge couldn't request to see the actual product because?
  • Reply 11 of 70
    xsuxsu Posts: 401member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Sort of like when Apple was giving away a free iPod Touch (and now an iTV) with the purchase of a Mac "possibly hinting... need of a stimulus to combat poor sales" \



    As for the rest of this 'article', my position has always been that the chances of someone walking into an electronics store and purchasing a Samsung Galaxy device somehow thinking it was an Apple product are nearly infinitesimal, if for no other reason than the fact that the device is clearly labeled SAMSUNG on its surface, start-up screen, and packaging, in addition to running a completely different operating system.



    Actions such as these should be seen for exactly what they are, anti-competitive attempts to stifle the competition by any means...legal, ethical or otherwise.





    Using this standard, all KIRF manufacturers from China should be able to freely market their products as long as they don't use names such as iiPhone, Nookia, Arpple. After all, they would then be clearly labeled as another brand, look different when you start it up, packaged differently, and most certainly running a different OS.
  • Reply 12 of 70
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rothgarr View Post


    Best post here in a while.



    I'm going to start using the word 'gruntled' when I am pleased with something.



    I've never thought of it that way. LOLOLOLOL I hope you don't mind if I use that one for the sake of humor. I love it.
  • Reply 13 of 70
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    The German judge didn't. I know it seems like common sense that the judge would have physical samples to examine, but he did not. There's no indication that the Dutch court has actual sample devices to physically examine either.



    The reason I wrote what I wrote is because I was just reading something yesterday where it stated that the judge had access to the actual devices. If it wasn't the German judge like you say then it must have been the Dutch judge I assume. I don't remember where I read that info, but I'll post the link if I find it.
  • Reply 14 of 70
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,670member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    ... my position has always been that the chances of someone walking into an electronics store and purchasing a Samsung Galaxy device somehow thinking it was an Apple product are nearly infinitesimal, if for no other reason than the fact that the device is clearly labeled SAMSUNG on its surface, start-up screen, and packaging, in addition to running a completely different operating system.



    Actions such as these should be seen for exactly what they are, anti-competitive attempts to stifle the competition by any means...legal, ethical or otherwise.



    The point is not that someone will 'accidentally' buy a Samsung but that IP and first mover innovation has value and as such the owner needs to protect it. Samsung, and Google should be able to compete freely and fairly but the point at which they cross the line and copy rather than innovate something has to be done. I am not sure where that line goes but consider for a moment what the landscape was like before IOS.



    At which point do you think that protecting your IP becomes anti-competitive? Is there a point at which Apple, in your opinion, rightfully can say 'wait a minute - you're just copying us', and try to prevent that?
  • Reply 15 of 70
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    And again faking images to make the Galaxy S phones appear as identical to the iPhone as possible. If Apple is so convinced that Samsung smartphones are "copies" of their iPhone, why manipulate images to convince a court to agree? At the very least Apple appears to be misleading the judge.



    http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/d...awsuit-filing/



    It was one image where the aspect was changed and the device looked like the Apple product. There were 15 other images AND actual product in the hands of the judge. You really need to get over this. There is only incompetence here with one image not some vast conspiracy to deceive and defraud a judge.



    I suppose you subscribe to the idea that if you repeat something enough it eventually becomes true...



    But if it helps you sleep at night keep doin' this thing that you do....
  • Reply 15 of 70
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rothgarr View Post


    Best post here in a while.



    I'm going to start using the word 'gruntled' when I am pleased with something.



    Thank you. I want you to know, I'm feeling quite gruntled right now.
  • Reply 17 of 70
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Are you allowed to return merchandise that you're given for free?

    Face it Best Buy, you're stuck with that crap.
  • Reply 18 of 70
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,382member
    I joked BestBuy would give them away only yesterday!
  • Reply 19 of 70
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    The German judge didn't. I know it seems like common sense that the judge would have physical samples to examine, but he did not. There's no indication that the Dutch court has actual sample devices to physically examine either.



    I found it......



    Furthermore, there has been an accusation that Apple's German lawyers doctored evidence submitted to the court to purposefully make the Galaxy Tab 10.1 appear more like the iPad than it really does. However, BBC News noted that the judge examined examples of both devices instead of relying strictly on Apple's legal briefs or Samsung's preemptive filing. A hearing is scheduled for August 25.



    So, according to that, the BBC notes that the judge examined both devices and didn't just look at a few pictures.



    http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-smackdown.ars
  • Reply 20 of 70
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,382member
    Partial quote



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Sort of like when Apple was giving away a free iPod Touch (and now an iTV) with the purchase of a Mac "possibly hinting... need of a stimulus to combat poor sales" \




    A free Apple TV or iPod is at least a current and supported product. Hopefully BestBuy will keep enough back to swap out for the next few years as they fail.
Sign In or Register to comment.