Citigroup: Amazon plotting smartphone to challenge Apple's iPhone in 2012

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80
    An Amazon phone would make Apple go ballistic.
  • Reply 42 of 80
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    Here's what Apple should do...
    • Buy every Amazone tablet / phone (they'll be getting them at less than cost)

    • Re-jig IOS (IOS lite?) to run on the newly purchased hardware.

    • Manufacture a different shell

    • Sell the new device at a modest profit





    What a bright idea! To pay for the modification costs, shipping back and forth, and still break even, Apple would have to sell them at close to $300. At this price, out of nearly 5 million that they buy, they will hardly be able to sell more than 500,000 of this underpowered device. The rest 4.5 million will be a clear loss. Even if my assumptions are slightly off, it would still be more cost efficient for Apple to simply buy the Kindles and dump them in landfills. Surely they can afford it ($200 times 5 million = 1 billion USD).



    All that waste just to screw over Amazon and Amazon's consumers.



    Why?
  • Reply 43 of 80
    ivladivlad Posts: 742member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by capoeira4u View Post


    Amazon is a good company, but selling a phone? To me, it would be comparable to a Walmart-branded phone. Who would want that?



    People who love Walmart.
  • Reply 44 of 80
    ivladivlad Posts: 742member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    An Amazon phone would make Apple go ballistic.



    Yep, just like Android phones made Apple go ballistic.

    I don't think Apple cares.
  • Reply 45 of 80
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    What a bright idea! To pay for the modification costs, shipping back and forth, and still break even, Apple would have to sell them at close to $300. At this price, out of nearly 5 million that they buy, they will hardly be able to sell more than 500,000 of this underpowered device. The rest 4.5 million will be a clear loss. Even if my assumptions are slightly off, it would still be more cost efficient for Apple to simply buy the Kindles and dump them in landfills. Surely they can afford it ($200 times 5 million = 1 billion USD).



    All that waste just to screw over Amazon and Amazon's consumers.



    Why?



    All in the name of (un) sporting competition. You know, a little like selling a product at less than cost to screw over every other manufacturer out there.
  • Reply 46 of 80
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    All in the name of (un) sporting competition. You know, a little like selling a product at less than cost to screw over every other manufacturer out there.



    Manufacturers are free to screw each other as much as they want, as long as the consumers benefit (as in the case of Amazon's Kindle or Google's Android). I am not going to cry over companies missing their profit margins because of competition.
  • Reply 47 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iVlad View Post


    Yep, just like Android phones made Apple go ballistic.



    Is this supposed to be humor or sarcasm? You present it as though it isn't true. It is.



    Quote:

    I don't think Apple cares.



    Explains their lawsuits against Android manufacturers and Amazon proper, then.
  • Reply 48 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by res08hao View Post


    There is no need at all for a Amazon phone. This is just a reflection of the greedy ego of Jeff Bozo.



    it might not be even that. Remember this is some stock analyst saying they are planning to do a phone. Perhaps they were talking about it and the plan was tablet in 2011 and phone in 2012. But they haven't sealed the deal on making a phone because they are waiting to see how the recently released tablets go. They could decide in the end not to move forward at this time if ever.



    Or this analyst could be talking out of the hole that isn't on his face and has zero information to back up what he's saying and it's just an attempt to raise Amazon's stock value a little to make a few more bucks
  • Reply 49 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post


    The aPhone won't even come close to build quality of an iPhone, but will still be called an iPhone challenger, nontheless. Wall Street doesn't seem to care or notice that Amazon's standards don't come close to Apple's standards.



    Well if it's taking a reasonable slice of Apple's market share, then it *is* a challenger to Apple's market success. It may not be a challenger in terms of technological superiority, but that's obviously not what analysts care about, so I don't follow your complaint.



    As for needing a "big concept" (mentioned in earlier post). If they simply slap their own version of Android on top of any decent/cheep ODM android phone, they'll sell a bundle. It's not something I'd buy, but in a Wal*Mart world, there's certainly going to be a market.
  • Reply 50 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    I

    Explains their lawsuits against Android manufacturers and Amazon proper, then.



    Apple doesn't care if someone makes a product, only how they make it. If they abuse Apple IP in their process they get sued. Otherwise, whatever. But Apple won't change plans because some analyst calls this or that 'the iPad/iPhone killer'
  • Reply 51 of 80
    Ladies and gentlemen, introducing the the first of many dumb smartphones.





    Edit: Amazon is following the inkjet printer model. Sell a device at a loss so they can then sell high priced consumables.
  • Reply 52 of 80
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    Manufacturers are free to screw each other as much as they want, as long as the consumers benefit (as in the case of Amazon's Kindle or Google's Android). I am not going to cry over companies missing their profit margins because of competition.



    That's short term-ism. If we end up with content AND technology by only a small handful of corporations who can provide both you could argue that the ones that are getting screwed in the long term are the consumers. You support the idea that someone like Amazon can flood the market with products sold at less than cost and in so doing potentially kill companies that produce hardware only and depriving the consumers of choice, yet you decry Apple for buying up all the less-than-cost product and ditching them (this will never happen, of course) in the name of competition? I don't see why. You have just arbitrarily decided for yourself where the consumer looses. By the same measure Apple could, hypthetically, undercut Amazon in terms of hardware and content prices at every turn, and do so for many years. Would that be fair competition?
  • Reply 53 of 80
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Amazon needs to do this for their company. With the launch of Google Music, Google now has books, movies, apps and music on Android. Amazon won't be the default store on Android anymore. When that happens, they're share in the mobile world could drop precipitously, followed by marketshare drops outside mobile. And Google isn't the only one hurting Amazon's business model. I'm sure the launch of iBooks was quite damaging to them. So a response was inevitable.



    Amazon has the potential to be very disruptive here. I could imagine a device with Galaxy Nexus capabilities, being sold for $300 unlocked and unsubsidized. Imagine how that would change the marketplace.
  • Reply 54 of 80
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    Amazon reportedly broke from its usual partnership with Foxconn for the Kindle Fire tablet in a rush to get it out the door. The company is said to have contracted Original Design Manufacturer Quanta because the ODM could save time by piggybacking off of work on RIM's BlackBerry PlayBook.



    Piggybacking is a cute euphemism. Samsung should use that to explain why its products look so much like Apple's. Also, I can't imagine RIM will be too pleased about this.
  • Reply 55 of 80
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    ...By the same measure Apple could, hypthetically, undercut Amazon in terms of hardware and content prices at every turn, and do so for many years. Would that be fair competition?



    That wouldn't be competition but stupidity, but boy will that give them 100% market share! Amazon is undercutting competitors with the Kindle Fire for the benefit of Amazon's customers, in the hope that they will spend more at Amazon. There's nothing unfair with that, but simply a risk that Amazon is taking that the return may not be as high as expected. In your example, Apple simply wastes 1 billion in order to spite everyone, without any gains for anyone.
  • Reply 56 of 80
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Be dismissive all you want. But if Amazon does the same thing with the phone, as the Kindle Fire and sell it at cost, the device will become quite popular.



    Maybe not around the world (Amazon's brand is not as strong elsewhere as in the US). But in the USA? I don't see why a cheap, but solid capability device would not sell.



    If you're an Amazon customer, and you get most of your content from Amazon and you subscribe to Amazon Prime, why would you bother getting a $200 iPhone/Android with a 2 year contract when you could probably get a pretty high spec'd Amazon device for free on contract or for $300?



    Unless you're an ardent fanboy, anybody should be able to see the value proposition in this for Amazon's customers. Now this question is, how many of Amazon's customers are willing to give them exclusivity on content acquisition and are willing to forego iTunes, Android Market, iBooks, etc.



    I'm not sure, how many ardent Amazon fans there are out there, but I'm willing to bet at $300 for fully spec'd device (large HD screen, fast processor, large onboard memory), they'd win quite a few converts.
  • Reply 57 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    That's short term-ism. If we end up with content AND technology by only a small handful of corporations who can provide both you could argue that the ones that are getting screwed in the long term are the consumers. You support the idea that someone like Amazon can flood the market with products sold at less than cost and in so doing potentially kill companies that produce hardware only and depriving the consumers of choice, yet you decry Apple for buying up all the less-than-cost product and ditching them (this will never happen, of course) in the name of competition? I don't see why. You have just arbitrarily decided for yourself where the consumer looses. By the same measure Apple could, hypthetically, undercut Amazon in terms of hardware and content prices at every turn, and do so for many years. Would that be fair competition?



    +++ Well said!
  • Reply 58 of 80
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    That wouldn't be competition but stupidity, but boy will that give them 100% market share! Amazon is undercutting competitors with the Kindle Fire for the benefit of Amazon's customers, in the hope that they will spend more at Amazon. There's nothing unfair with that, but simply a risk that Amazon is taking that the return may not be as high as expected. In your example, Apple simply wastes 1 billion in order to spite everyone, without any gains for anyone.



    In my example Apple would get rid of Amazon's tablet and phone and therefore severely limit their content ambitions. Apple's customers would increase dramatically and would win because of the reduced prices. There's little difference here. Amazon is doing this to compete, not to be nice to their customers, as would Apple. Why do you assume Amazon does what Amazon for the benefit of its customers but Apple would do it to spite everyone?
  • Reply 59 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Nah. We've been through many iterations of this before.



    More like harakiri. (And I don't mean Apple).



    Ha ha ha! Amazon will report 'earnings', the more Fires they sell the less money they make! They are gonna make it up on BOOK sales? Or housewares or what?

    Even apple only makes 1% on their ecosystem sales. Right now the P/E for Amazon stock is 105, at a share price of $200. looks like another Netflix. I'm sure it will be shorted, anybody can see this one coming. The Fire doesn't even have a volume control! They may sell a lot of them but the followthrough for amazon content will be, well, you said it best, harakiri.
  • Reply 60 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by palomine View Post


    Right now the P/E for Amazon stock is 105, at a share price of $200. looks like another Netflix.



    You got it.
Sign In or Register to comment.