If they made silver bezels the display would be compromised...black is the best way to go...while white may look good (iPad 2) it isn't very practical for human vision)
And yes, I am not a fan of Samsung...so sue them to high heaven for their obvious infringements...but on having a rectangular tablet? I can't get behind that...just can't.
I absolutely do not see how anyone can justify seriously suggesting in one way or another that Apple should have a complete and utter monopoly on a simple rectangular tablet.
If someone had a patent on the basic shape of flat screen TVs/monitors/etc forcing all companies not company A to make oval, trapezoidal. round, TVs or monitors it'd be an issue...and you'd agree, because TVs are so common...tablets being a 1 horse race with a few retarded legless horses rolling around behind it makes it a lot easier to suggest that one company should own such a basic and oft used in tech shape as a rounded rectangle.
I'm not sure how brushed silver, grey, red or green would compromise the display any more than white or black. I have two Samsung sets and I like them, but they are clearly copying. And I'm not quite sure I would agree. PCs have many different shapes. Of course, with TVs the name is right on the front. Samsung could do this, I suppose. Probably would if Apple put the name 'Apple' on the front.
Again, there were tablets before the iPad just as there were phones before the iPhone, so why do all phones and tablets now bear such a striking resemblance to the iPhone and iPad?
[update]
Again, I think the problem is that Apple found what may be the perfect form factor and you seem to think that the should not be able to horde it. Maybe. But they thought of it. Again, take a look at the CliniScape Tablet PC. There's your non-iPad looking tablet. Search for Cisco tablet. Heck, look at any episode of Star trek:TNG, Voyager or DS9.
How do you know this? Can you provide a cite to actual data (not second- or third-hand news reports)?
Yes I source products from Asia quite frequently for clients and for 5K of eink eBook reader with WiFi and keyboard the price is in the range US$68 to US$71 FOB China. If Amazon can't get a better price than that, ship across to the US (around US$2 freight), warehouse it and ship it out and after all of this not make a profit selling at US$139 then I should apply for a job there
I know from speaking to a vendor who provides 1 year data with their device that for a low volume data deal they have been quoted sub US$5. Their system filters the web through a proxy to reduce data. I know Amazon do roaming too so that would add to deal but not a terrific amount based on some of the cross-carrier agreements that exist. It's mainly used for (paid for) books and once you've got over the novelty of browsing on an Eink screen the data use is very low.
If they made silver bezels the display would be compromised...black is the best way to go...while white may look good (iPad 2) it isn't very practical for human vision)
And yes, I am not a fan of Samsung...so sue them to high heaven for their obvious infringements...but on having a rectangular tablet? I can't get behind that...just can't.
I absolutely do not see how anyone can justify seriously suggesting in one way or another that Apple should have a complete and utter monopoly on a simple rectangular tablet.
If someone had a patent on the basic shape of flat screen TVs/monitors/etc forcing all companies not company A to make oval, trapezoidal. round, TVs or monitors it'd be an issue...and you'd agree, because TVs are so common...tablets being a 1 horse race with a few retarded legless horses rolling around behind it makes it a lot easier to suggest that one company should own such a basic and oft used in tech shape as a rounded rectangle.
I'm curious. Had the iPad tanked, do you think we'll see other tablets? If so, what do you think they would look like?
oh, and google this: Philips Launched the CliniScape Tablet PC. Doesn't look like an iPad, does it? It can be done. Search for Cisco tablet. Heck, look at any episode of Star trek:TNG, Voyager or DS9.
Because XBox is still in the hole. They only made a profit last quarter and are still at least a billion(most likely more) in the hole.
Most companies cannot use Windows and Office to subsidize billions in losses.
It's also third in the Market share race since the PS3 has been overtaking the 360 in Europe and Australia since Xmas 2009/2010 (I forget which), making the US the only Market to outdo the PS3. I found the figures for returns/trade ins as well (which made a mockery of the Wii) which actually put the PS3 so close to the number1 spot it was rediculous, but I can't for the life of me find them again. They were for the UK so it probables wouldnt have bothered many people on this site.
But the point still stands - being first doesn't make you the best. Quality and marketing does; Apple with the "i" line and Sony with the Playstation and Playstation3 are prime examples of this.
again...are you people suggesting that no one should be able to release a rectangular device with rounded corners ever again if they aren't Apple?
What Gives Absolute Disaster?
Who said anything about shape? It's the details. It's all in the detail.
It's all Samsung entries into any field of computing. Have you seen their MacBook Pro line? Did you see their RIM copies before Apple came out with their smart phone? This company lacks imagination. Which, leads me to suspect that nothing they build has any originality at all. (Maybe look up the word suspect first, before blowing your top.
Sheesh. I really thought you were speaking tongue-in-cheek. Guess I gave you too much credit.
Common man, Think.
And I have to add: Apple is where it is because it creates new approaches to old songs. It's why the iPad, iPhone, iPod, MBA work so well, sell so well, are loved so much and why Apple doesn't just make the news, it is the news.
We welcome great gizmos from every company but please make them good, add some polish, add something new. Don't just copy pixel by pixel. It just makes you look cheap and foolish madly jumping on someone else's bandwagon. Samsung may survive this way but they won't change the world. And that job shouldn't just be left to Apple.
Yes I source products from Asia quite frequently for clients and for 5K of eink eBook reader with WiFi and keyboard the price is in the range US$68 to US$71 FOB China. If Amazon can't get a better price than that, ship across to the US (around US$2 freight), warehouse it and ship it out and after all of this not make a profit selling at US$139 then I should apply for a job there
I know from speaking to a vendor who provides 1 year data with their device that for a low volume data deal they have been quoted sub US$5. Their system filters the web through a proxy to reduce data. I know Amazon do roaming too so that would add to deal but not a terrific amount based on some of the cross-carrier agreements that exist. It's mainly used for (paid for) books and once you've got over the novelty of browsing on an Eink screen the data use is very low.
Sufficient for you?
Unfortunately, not sufficient. Not even close.
Where is the SG&A in your calculation? Or do you think that is for free?
Where is the SG&A in your calculation? Or do you think that is for free?
No of course not but let's say US$73 landed plus 5% handling in a warehouse, add US$10 shipping to customer. Net delivered to customer round it up to US$90 because I'm feeling generous. That gives 35% margin or US$49 based on a US$139 selling price. Amazon S&GA runs at 18% of revenue according to their financials. Net profit US$14 per device and that's assuming Amazon can't buy better than me which I severely doubt.
Then factor in profit from buying an Amazon Kindle case of circa US$25 per case (adds nothing to outbound freight cost) and you have a very profitable business model. May not have started out like that but eBook pricing has dropped rapidly in the last 9 months.
lol, like I said...Android tablets have a LONG way to go quality/price/experience wise before they can even imagine picking up. As it stands right now it's as if no one is even trying.
the only one worth having is the ASUS Transformer. precisely because it isn't trying to be a 'clone' of the ipad. ASUS should concentrate on perfecting this one and it will continue to do well.
the only one worth having is the ASUS Transformer. precisely because it isn't trying to be a 'clone' of the ipad. ASUS should concentrate on perfecting this one and it will continue to do well.
Exactly, SF. And I hope the company follows your advice. We need this world of enterprise to change and this would be a great start. There has to be companies out there who are willing to put the effort Apple does, into their products. We expect more now. Well, some of us do.
Samsung should learn from Sony, you innovate by creating your own designs, not by blatantly stealing the work of others.
I agree with what you a saying. Sony does its own designs and while not everything they produce is a hit, they at least aren't slavish about emulating others. I applaud Sony for doing something tasteful and unique instead of trying to make a iPad clone.
That said, the Sony of today is not the electronics powerhouse they once were. Remember that John Sculley said that in the 1980s Steve Jobs wanted Apple to be more like Sony, and well, if he means leading in design, creating new markets, and dominating public mindshare in desirable electronics that you would be willing to pay for, then yes, Apple made it.
IMO, Amazon is the only company with even a chance of effectively competing against Apple in Tablets, but their first offering has to be rock solid. No cheap buttons that get mushy after a month or two of light use, etc. If they can do that, then I think they've got a chance. They've spent years cultivating an online presence that virtually everyone already has a login for, they've more or less figured out mobile video, music, and ebook delivery, recently added cloud storage and even a curated App Store. They're the only ones (other than Apple) that can offer a full service package.
IIRC Amazon last quarter made a profit of some $ 200mio. Apple made over 7 BILLION. If this continues, Apple will make more profit in 10 days than Amazon in a YEAR.
So Amazon can only succeed (a little) as long as Apple does not feel threatened.
Because Amazon can subsidize an Amazon-tablet. But they cannot subsidize dozens millions of tablets to fight a tablet war against apple. The money simply is not there.
You're completely missing the main point in the comments.
What people are saying is actually they want competition, but bemoaning the fact that, the (thus far) incompetents in this arena have been unable to deliver.
"incompetents" ... "unable to deliver". that's typical overly-defensive rhetoric. the only thing that's qualified to make these kinds of assessments is the consumer market in which these tablets will compete.
i agree that Apple has done very well in the past several years in delivering quality products and a consumer experience that's really good. i also agree that hive-mind thinking and outright inane strikes against Sony, Google, Samsung, HP (as examples) reduces some folks in the Apple fan base into a mass of irrational beings.
IIRC Amazon last quarter made a profit of some $ 200mio. Apple made over 7 BILLION. If this continues, Apple will make more profit in 10 days than Amazon in a YEAR.
So Amazon can only succeed (a little) as long as Apple does not feel threatened.
Because Amazon can subsidize an Amazon-tablet. But they cannot subsidize dozens millions of tablets to fight a tablet war against apple. The money simply is not there.
It's an interesting situation. Amazon is clearly attempting to move itself from a box-shifter to a box-shifter that has value added services which generate regular income. It is possible to buy a 10 inch Android tablet and sell it at US$299* without losing money so they have a chance given they have a 'reliable' App store and a strong consumer pull. I'd rate their chances higher than most.
* Apologies to anantksundaram that I have not provided a full breakdown here but rest assured it is possible to do this and make money.
"incompetents" ... "unable to deliver". that's typical overly-defensive rhetoric. the only thing that's qualified to make these kinds of assessments is the consumer market in which these tablets will compete.
i agree that Apple has done very well in the past several years in delivering quality products and a consumer experience that's really good. i also agree that hive-mind thinking and outright inane strikes against Sony, Google, Samsung, HP (as examples) reduces some folks in the Apple fan base into a mass of irrational beings.
While 'incompetent' is strong stuff, 'unable to deliver' seems reasonable and accurate. What's wrong with that?
No of course not but let's say US$73 landed plus 5% handling in a warehouse, add US$10 shipping to customer. Net delivered to customer round it up to US$90 because I'm feeling generous. That gives 35% margin or US$49 based on a US$139 selling price. Amazon S&GA runs at 18% of revenue according to their financials. Net profit US$14 per device and that's assuming Amazon can't buy better than me which I severely doubt.
Then factor in profit from buying an Amazon Kindle case of circa US$25 per case (adds nothing to outbound freight cost) and you have a very profitable business model. May not have started out like that but eBook pricing has dropped rapidly in the last 9 months.
Don't confound issues by bringing up the case. We're discussing the basic product, i.e., the Kindle.
So you say $14 in 'net profit' for a product that retails at $139. Let's assume that is correct, for the sake of argument.
$139 is the retail price, not Amazon's revenue generated per kindle sold (for those that are not sold directly, the channel has to take its cut). Thus, in all likelihood, Amazon's margin is much lower than even 10%. (Incidentally, the retail price could be less than $139 for a product who's MSRP is $139, squeezing the margin even more).
A 10% profit (net income) margin - which it probably is not, given the above - does not remotely compare to what the best in the industry can achieve. Apple's net income margins, for example, are more like 20% - 22%. If Amazon can't compete along similar lines, it will take a severe toll on its P/E ratio and hence its valuation. It won't be too long before Bezos is asking the same questions as HP was about its low-margin PC business.
At the moment, one has to assume that the Kindle segment is a relatively immaterial product for Amazon's bottom line (and perhaps a break-even or even loss-leading product, since the company hopes to make the money from the books and such that it sells to go with the hardware -- after all, selling 'media' is Amazon's core business, not selling hardware; look it up). Kindle's numbers merit no mention in the company's financials. You can rest assured that if it were a hugely profitable product and they were selling them in the gazillions, they'd be shouting about it from rooftops.
Here's the clincher: It's all hypothetical anyway. If/when Amazon introduces a successful tablet, let's see what it does and how it does.
Don't confound issues by bringing up the case. We're discussing the basic product, i.e., the Kindle.
Except that if you knew anything about retail you'd know that accessories are used as a way to bump up overall margin per sale. Apart from that the Kindle clearly makes a profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
A 10% profit (net income) margin - which it probably is not, given the above - does not remotely compare to what the best in the industry can achieve.
Depends what industry, this is exceptional for a retailer and above average for consumer electronics if you want to make a comparison. It is also several times greater than Amazon's normal margin of circa 2%-4% net. Despite what you might think Apple are not that unusual or indeed far from delivering the best net income for any company in any industry, just unusual in the consumer electronics business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Kindle's numbers merit no mention in the company's financials. You can rest assured that if it were a hugely profitable product and they were selling them in the gazillions, they'd be shouting about it from rooftops.
Well it is the best selling product on Amazon. In their history they have rarely spoken about individual product sales. Don't compare every company to Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Here's the clincher: It's all hypothetical anyway. If/when Amazon introduces a successful tablet, let's see what it does and how it does.
I'd agree in part with that statement but my initial post related to the statement that the Kindle made a loss, However if Amazon introduces a successful tablet it will by a given definition be successful
Comments
If they made silver bezels the display would be compromised...black is the best way to go...while white may look good (iPad 2) it isn't very practical for human vision)
And yes, I am not a fan of Samsung...so sue them to high heaven for their obvious infringements...but on having a rectangular tablet? I can't get behind that...just can't.
I absolutely do not see how anyone can justify seriously suggesting in one way or another that Apple should have a complete and utter monopoly on a simple rectangular tablet.
If someone had a patent on the basic shape of flat screen TVs/monitors/etc forcing all companies not company A to make oval, trapezoidal. round, TVs or monitors it'd be an issue...and you'd agree, because TVs are so common...tablets being a 1 horse race with a few retarded legless horses rolling around behind it makes it a lot easier to suggest that one company should own such a basic and oft used in tech shape as a rounded rectangle.
I'm not sure how brushed silver, grey, red or green would compromise the display any more than white or black. I have two Samsung sets and I like them, but they are clearly copying. And I'm not quite sure I would agree. PCs have many different shapes. Of course, with TVs the name is right on the front. Samsung could do this, I suppose. Probably would if Apple put the name 'Apple' on the front.
Again, there were tablets before the iPad just as there were phones before the iPhone, so why do all phones and tablets now bear such a striking resemblance to the iPhone and iPad?
[update]
Again, I think the problem is that Apple found what may be the perfect form factor and you seem to think that the should not be able to horde it. Maybe. But they thought of it. Again, take a look at the CliniScape Tablet PC. There's your non-iPad looking tablet. Search for Cisco tablet. Heck, look at any episode of Star trek:TNG, Voyager or DS9.
How do you know this? Can you provide a cite to actual data (not second- or third-hand news reports)?
Yes I source products from Asia quite frequently for clients and for 5K of eink eBook reader with WiFi and keyboard the price is in the range US$68 to US$71 FOB China. If Amazon can't get a better price than that, ship across to the US (around US$2 freight), warehouse it and ship it out and after all of this not make a profit selling at US$139 then I should apply for a job there
I know from speaking to a vendor who provides 1 year data with their device that for a low volume data deal they have been quoted sub US$5. Their system filters the web through a proxy to reduce data. I know Amazon do roaming too so that would add to deal but not a terrific amount based on some of the cross-carrier agreements that exist. It's mainly used for (paid for) books and once you've got over the novelty of browsing on an Eink screen the data use is very low.
Sufficient for you?
If they made silver bezels the display would be compromised...black is the best way to go...while white may look good (iPad 2) it isn't very practical for human vision)
And yes, I am not a fan of Samsung...so sue them to high heaven for their obvious infringements...but on having a rectangular tablet? I can't get behind that...just can't.
I absolutely do not see how anyone can justify seriously suggesting in one way or another that Apple should have a complete and utter monopoly on a simple rectangular tablet.
If someone had a patent on the basic shape of flat screen TVs/monitors/etc forcing all companies not company A to make oval, trapezoidal. round, TVs or monitors it'd be an issue...and you'd agree, because TVs are so common...tablets being a 1 horse race with a few retarded legless horses rolling around behind it makes it a lot easier to suggest that one company should own such a basic and oft used in tech shape as a rounded rectangle.
I'm curious. Had the iPad tanked, do you think we'll see other tablets? If so, what do you think they would look like?
oh, and google this: Philips Launched the CliniScape Tablet PC. Doesn't look like an iPad, does it? It can be done. Search for Cisco tablet. Heck, look at any episode of Star trek:TNG, Voyager or DS9.
Because XBox is still in the hole. They only made a profit last quarter and are still at least a billion(most likely more) in the hole.
Most companies cannot use Windows and Office to subsidize billions in losses.
It's also third in the Market share race since the PS3 has been overtaking the 360 in Europe and Australia since Xmas 2009/2010 (I forget which), making the US the only Market to outdo the PS3. I found the figures for returns/trade ins as well (which made a mockery of the Wii) which actually put the PS3 so close to the number1 spot it was rediculous, but I can't for the life of me find them again.
But the point still stands - being first doesn't make you the best. Quality and marketing does; Apple with the "i" line and Sony with the Playstation and Playstation3 are prime examples of this.
what is wrong with all these people? it's market suicide to do that. you only get one chance to make that first impression.
poor Sony, they used to know what they were doing. Stringer's clearly out of his depth.
again...are you people suggesting that no one should be able to release a rectangular device with rounded corners ever again if they aren't Apple?
What Gives Absolute Disaster?
Who said anything about shape? It's the details. It's all in the detail.
It's all Samsung entries into any field of computing. Have you seen their MacBook Pro line? Did you see their RIM copies before Apple came out with their smart phone? This company lacks imagination. Which, leads me to suspect that nothing they build has any originality at all. (Maybe look up the word suspect first, before blowing your top.
Sheesh. I really thought you were speaking tongue-in-cheek. Guess I gave you too much credit.
Common man, Think.
And I have to add: Apple is where it is because it creates new approaches to old songs. It's why the iPad, iPhone, iPod, MBA work so well, sell so well, are loved so much and why Apple doesn't just make the news, it is the news.
We welcome great gizmos from every company but please make them good, add some polish, add something new. Don't just copy pixel by pixel. It just makes you look cheap and foolish madly jumping on someone else's bandwagon. Samsung may survive this way but they won't change the world. And that job shouldn't just be left to Apple.
Yes I source products from Asia quite frequently for clients and for 5K of eink eBook reader with WiFi and keyboard the price is in the range US$68 to US$71 FOB China. If Amazon can't get a better price than that, ship across to the US (around US$2 freight), warehouse it and ship it out and after all of this not make a profit selling at US$139 then I should apply for a job there
I know from speaking to a vendor who provides 1 year data with their device that for a low volume data deal they have been quoted sub US$5. Their system filters the web through a proxy to reduce data. I know Amazon do roaming too so that would add to deal but not a terrific amount based on some of the cross-carrier agreements that exist. It's mainly used for (paid for) books and once you've got over the novelty of browsing on an Eink screen the data use is very low.
Sufficient for you?
Unfortunately, not sufficient. Not even close.
Where is the SG&A in your calculation? Or do you think that is for free?
Unfortunately, not sufficient. Not even close.
Where is the SG&A in your calculation? Or do you think that is for free?
No of course not but let's say US$73 landed plus 5% handling in a warehouse, add US$10 shipping to customer. Net delivered to customer round it up to US$90 because I'm feeling generous. That gives 35% margin or US$49 based on a US$139 selling price. Amazon S&GA runs at 18% of revenue according to their financials. Net profit US$14 per device and that's assuming Amazon can't buy better than me which I severely doubt.
Then factor in profit from buying an Amazon Kindle case of circa US$25 per case (adds nothing to outbound freight cost) and you have a very profitable business model. May not have started out like that but eBook pricing has dropped rapidly in the last 9 months.
lol, like I said...Android tablets have a LONG way to go quality/price/experience wise before they can even imagine picking up. As it stands right now it's as if no one is even trying.
the only one worth having is the ASUS Transformer. precisely because it isn't trying to be a 'clone' of the ipad. ASUS should concentrate on perfecting this one and it will continue to do well.
a rounded rectangular tablet...
or should everyone avoid violating Apples design patent and make circular or triangular tablets...to be safe...?
I can't let this bone go.
You quoted hill60 Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Samsung should learn from Sony, you innovate by creating your own designs, not by blatantly stealing the work of others.
Honestly
No one, certainly not hill60, no one but you is squawking about rounded rectangular.
No one before or after, other than you mentions any of those two words. This is a non issue. This is silly talk. You trolls really lack imagination.
And now I am taking the silly tin foil hat off.
the only one worth having is the ASUS Transformer. precisely because it isn't trying to be a 'clone' of the ipad. ASUS should concentrate on perfecting this one and it will continue to do well.
Exactly, SF. And I hope the company follows your advice. We need this world of enterprise to change and this would be a great start. There has to be companies out there who are willing to put the effort Apple does, into their products. We expect more now. Well, some of us do.
True Apple fans want the rest to do their best.
Eddie Murphy did a stand-up routine about his mom making him a hamburger instead of getting him a Mcdonalds burger. It was hilarious.
Same situation here. Who wants to be outside with their 'big ole welfare' tablet when others have an ipad?
lol.
Samsung should learn from Sony, you innovate by creating your own designs, not by blatantly stealing the work of others.
I agree with what you a saying. Sony does its own designs and while not everything they produce is a hit, they at least aren't slavish about emulating others. I applaud Sony for doing something tasteful and unique instead of trying to make a iPad clone.
That said, the Sony of today is not the electronics powerhouse they once were. Remember that John Sculley said that in the 1980s Steve Jobs wanted Apple to be more like Sony, and well, if he means leading in design, creating new markets, and dominating public mindshare in desirable electronics that you would be willing to pay for, then yes, Apple made it.
IMO, Amazon is the only company with even a chance of effectively competing against Apple in Tablets, but their first offering has to be rock solid. No cheap buttons that get mushy after a month or two of light use, etc. If they can do that, then I think they've got a chance. They've spent years cultivating an online presence that virtually everyone already has a login for, they've more or less figured out mobile video, music, and ebook delivery, recently added cloud storage and even a curated App Store. They're the only ones (other than Apple) that can offer a full service package.
IIRC Amazon last quarter made a profit of some $ 200mio. Apple made over 7 BILLION. If this continues, Apple will make more profit in 10 days than Amazon in a YEAR.
So Amazon can only succeed (a little) as long as Apple does not feel threatened.
Because Amazon can subsidize an Amazon-tablet. But they cannot subsidize dozens millions of tablets to fight a tablet war against apple. The money simply is not there.
You're completely missing the main point in the comments.
What people are saying is actually they want competition, but bemoaning the fact that, the (thus far) incompetents in this arena have been unable to deliver.
"incompetents" ... "unable to deliver". that's typical overly-defensive rhetoric. the only thing that's qualified to make these kinds of assessments is the consumer market in which these tablets will compete.
i agree that Apple has done very well in the past several years in delivering quality products and a consumer experience that's really good. i also agree that hive-mind thinking and outright inane strikes against Sony, Google, Samsung, HP (as examples) reduces some folks in the Apple fan base into a mass of irrational beings.
IIRC Amazon last quarter made a profit of some $ 200mio. Apple made over 7 BILLION. If this continues, Apple will make more profit in 10 days than Amazon in a YEAR.
So Amazon can only succeed (a little) as long as Apple does not feel threatened.
Because Amazon can subsidize an Amazon-tablet. But they cannot subsidize dozens millions of tablets to fight a tablet war against apple. The money simply is not there.
It's an interesting situation. Amazon is clearly attempting to move itself from a box-shifter to a box-shifter that has value added services which generate regular income. It is possible to buy a 10 inch Android tablet and sell it at US$299* without losing money so they have a chance given they have a 'reliable' App store and a strong consumer pull. I'd rate their chances higher than most.
* Apologies to anantksundaram that I have not provided a full breakdown here but rest assured it is possible to do this and make money.
"incompetents" ... "unable to deliver". that's typical overly-defensive rhetoric. the only thing that's qualified to make these kinds of assessments is the consumer market in which these tablets will compete.
i agree that Apple has done very well in the past several years in delivering quality products and a consumer experience that's really good. i also agree that hive-mind thinking and outright inane strikes against Sony, Google, Samsung, HP (as examples) reduces some folks in the Apple fan base into a mass of irrational beings.
While 'incompetent' is strong stuff, 'unable to deliver' seems reasonable and accurate. What's wrong with that?
No of course not but let's say US$73 landed plus 5% handling in a warehouse, add US$10 shipping to customer. Net delivered to customer round it up to US$90 because I'm feeling generous. That gives 35% margin or US$49 based on a US$139 selling price. Amazon S&GA runs at 18% of revenue according to their financials. Net profit US$14 per device and that's assuming Amazon can't buy better than me which I severely doubt.
Then factor in profit from buying an Amazon Kindle case of circa US$25 per case (adds nothing to outbound freight cost) and you have a very profitable business model. May not have started out like that but eBook pricing has dropped rapidly in the last 9 months.
Don't confound issues by bringing up the case. We're discussing the basic product, i.e., the Kindle.
So you say $14 in 'net profit' for a product that retails at $139. Let's assume that is correct, for the sake of argument.
$139 is the retail price, not Amazon's revenue generated per kindle sold (for those that are not sold directly, the channel has to take its cut). Thus, in all likelihood, Amazon's margin is much lower than even 10%. (Incidentally, the retail price could be less than $139 for a product who's MSRP is $139, squeezing the margin even more).
A 10% profit (net income) margin - which it probably is not, given the above - does not remotely compare to what the best in the industry can achieve. Apple's net income margins, for example, are more like 20% - 22%. If Amazon can't compete along similar lines, it will take a severe toll on its P/E ratio and hence its valuation. It won't be too long before Bezos is asking the same questions as HP was about its low-margin PC business.
At the moment, one has to assume that the Kindle segment is a relatively immaterial product for Amazon's bottom line (and perhaps a break-even or even loss-leading product, since the company hopes to make the money from the books and such that it sells to go with the hardware -- after all, selling 'media' is Amazon's core business, not selling hardware; look it up). Kindle's numbers merit no mention in the company's financials. You can rest assured that if it were a hugely profitable product and they were selling them in the gazillions, they'd be shouting about it from rooftops.
Here's the clincher: It's all hypothetical anyway. If/when Amazon introduces a successful tablet, let's see what it does and how it does.
Don't confound issues by bringing up the case. We're discussing the basic product, i.e., the Kindle.
Except that if you knew anything about retail you'd know that accessories are used as a way to bump up overall margin per sale. Apart from that the Kindle clearly makes a profit.
A 10% profit (net income) margin - which it probably is not, given the above - does not remotely compare to what the best in the industry can achieve.
Depends what industry, this is exceptional for a retailer and above average for consumer electronics if you want to make a comparison. It is also several times greater than Amazon's normal margin of circa 2%-4% net. Despite what you might think Apple are not that unusual or indeed far from delivering the best net income for any company in any industry, just unusual in the consumer electronics business.
Kindle's numbers merit no mention in the company's financials. You can rest assured that if it were a hugely profitable product and they were selling them in the gazillions, they'd be shouting about it from rooftops.
Well it is the best selling product on Amazon. In their history they have rarely spoken about individual product sales. Don't compare every company to Apple.
Here's the clincher: It's all hypothetical anyway. If/when Amazon introduces a successful tablet, let's see what it does and how it does.
I'd agree in part with that statement but my initial post related to the statement that the Kindle made a loss, However if Amazon introduces a successful tablet it will by a given definition be successful