You shouldn't, if the business model is inherently unsustainable.
Curmudgeon was talking as a consumer. As a consumer he probably likes the selection and pricing. Unless I am buying something expensive, I don't care if they go out of business tomorrow. I will rely on the manufacturer warranty.
The LTE yearly plan is amazing. I have absolutely no idea how Amazon is going to foot that bill, or how they got AT
The higher $499 price of the 32gb Fire HD basically subsidizes the LTE service. Considering what we know about about the cost of tablet manufacturing, that model probably costs around $350 to make. Lets say Amazon is paying AT&T $100 for the LTE service, the customer paying Amazon $50 /year on top of that. Amazon may have $50 profit on this high end model.
The higher $499 price of the 32gb Fire HD basically subsidizes the LTE service. Considering what we know about about the cost of tablet manufacturing, that model probably costs around $350 to make. Lets say Amazon is paying AT&T $100 for the LTE service, the customer paying Amazon $50 /year on top of that. Amazon may have $50 profit on this high end model.
Why would Amazon being paying AT&T an additional $100 per device? When you run the numbers AT&T is already getting more per GB than they charge for the iPad save for the lowest option of 250MB that is intended to push you toward a higher tier. It's over $16 per GB which is over 60% more than what AT&T charges for an additional 1GB.
You might say that if AT&T is charging iPad users $15/month for 250MB then they would require Amazon's customers to do so, but that rationale is erroneous. One, for the reason stated in the previous paragraph, and two, AT&T is getting $50 up front. It's a one year contract that they get regardless if customers use that data or that device. With the iPad it's month-to-month which inherently is a less secure way for companies to secure payments, which is why companies like AT&T love to subsidize your phones and will let you out of your current contract early providing you sign another two year agreement.
The higher $499 price of the 32gb Fire HD basically subsidizes the LTE service. Considering what we know about about the cost of tablet manufacturing, that model probably costs around $350 to make. Lets say Amazon is paying AT&T $100 for the LTE service, the customer paying Amazon $50 /year on top of that. Amazon may have $50 profit on this high end model.
Agree. There is no way $50 covers the annual cost of the 4G plan. My guess that Amazon is subsidizing about $100 for the $50/year 250MB 4G plan, and the other $100 covers the increase in memory and the addition of the 4G/LTE radio. There is still no information how much the 2nd year or 13th month will cost.
Agree. There is no way $50 covers the annual cost of the 4G plan. My guess that Amazon is subsidizing about $100 for the $50/year 250MB 4G plan, and the other $100 covers the increase in memory and the addition of the 4G/LTE radio. There is still no information how much the 2nd year or 13th month will cost.
What's your rationale that 3GB of prepaid data would cost $150 when it's only around $30 from other vendors?
Why would Amazon being paying AT&T an additional $100 per device? When you run the numbers AT&T is already getting more per GB than they charge for the iPad save for the lowest option of 250MB that is intended to push you toward a higher tier. It's over $16 per GB which is over 60% more than what AT&T charges for an additional 1GB.
You might say that if AT&T is charging iPad users $15/month for 250MB then they would require Amazon's customers to do so, but that rationale is erroneous. One, for the reason stated in the previous paragraph, and two, AT&T is getting $50 up front. It's a one year contract that they get regardless if customers use that data or that device. With the iPad it's month-to-month which inherently is a less secure way for companies to secure payments, which is why companies like AT&T love to subsidize your phones and will let you out of your current contract early providing you sign another two year agreement.
I don't buy it. AT&T might take $150/year for a prepaid 250MB/month plan, but I've seen nothing in the past three years as an AT&T customer that makes me believe they would take $50/year when the going rate is $15/month.
No, there has to be a subsidy in there somewhere...
IMHO Amazon is grossly committing false advertising. The new Fire models won't be distributed for nearly 2 months, until November 20th, yet on the company's home page, the present tense is used throughout: "Kindle Fire HD 8.9" 4G isn't just the best tablet for the price, it's the best tablet. $499 now gets you a large-screen HD tablet with a stunning 8.9" display, exclusive Dolby audio, dual stereo speakers, the fastest Wi-Fi, ultra-fast 4G LTE wireless, plus our new unprecedented $49.99 one-year 4G data package. Customers save hundreds of dollars in the first year compared to other 4G tablets. Kindle Fire HD 8.9" is also available in a Wi-Fi only model for $299."
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
You shouldn't, if the business model is inherently unsustainable.
Curmudgeon was talking as a consumer. As a consumer he probably likes the selection and pricing. Unless I am buying something expensive, I don't care if they go out of business tomorrow. I will rely on the manufacturer warranty.
You seem to be talking like an investor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00fus
The LTE yearly plan is amazing. I have absolutely no idea how Amazon is going to foot that bill, or how they got AT
The higher $499 price of the 32gb Fire HD basically subsidizes the LTE service. Considering what we know about about the cost of tablet manufacturing, that model probably costs around $350 to make. Lets say Amazon is paying AT&T $100 for the LTE service, the customer paying Amazon $50 /year on top of that. Amazon may have $50 profit on this high end model.
Why would Amazon being paying AT&T an additional $100 per device? When you run the numbers AT&T is already getting more per GB than they charge for the iPad save for the lowest option of 250MB that is intended to push you toward a higher tier. It's over $16 per GB which is over 60% more than what AT&T charges for an additional 1GB.
You might say that if AT&T is charging iPad users $15/month for 250MB then they would require Amazon's customers to do so, but that rationale is erroneous. One, for the reason stated in the previous paragraph, and two, AT&T is getting $50 up front. It's a one year contract that they get regardless if customers use that data or that device. With the iPad it's month-to-month which inherently is a less secure way for companies to secure payments, which is why companies like AT&T love to subsidize your phones and will let you out of your current contract early providing you sign another two year agreement.
As of Saturday night, Ars is saying that Amazon changed their tune (again) and will let people pay $15 to remove the ads: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/09/amazon-backtracks-will-remove-ads-from-kindle-fire-for-15-fee/
Quote:
Originally Posted by BanExtremists
The higher $499 price of the 32gb Fire HD basically subsidizes the LTE service. Considering what we know about about the cost of tablet manufacturing, that model probably costs around $350 to make. Lets say Amazon is paying AT&T $100 for the LTE service, the customer paying Amazon $50 /year on top of that. Amazon may have $50 profit on this high end model.
Agree. There is no way $50 covers the annual cost of the 4G plan. My guess that Amazon is subsidizing about $100 for the $50/year 250MB 4G plan, and the other $100 covers the increase in memory and the addition of the 4G/LTE radio. There is still no information how much the 2nd year or 13th month will cost.
What's your rationale that 3GB of prepaid data would cost $150 when it's only around $30 from other vendors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Why would Amazon being paying AT&T an additional $100 per device? When you run the numbers AT&T is already getting more per GB than they charge for the iPad save for the lowest option of 250MB that is intended to push you toward a higher tier. It's over $16 per GB which is over 60% more than what AT&T charges for an additional 1GB.
You might say that if AT&T is charging iPad users $15/month for 250MB then they would require Amazon's customers to do so, but that rationale is erroneous. One, for the reason stated in the previous paragraph, and two, AT&T is getting $50 up front. It's a one year contract that they get regardless if customers use that data or that device. With the iPad it's month-to-month which inherently is a less secure way for companies to secure payments, which is why companies like AT&T love to subsidize your phones and will let you out of your current contract early providing you sign another two year agreement.
I don't buy it. AT&T might take $150/year for a prepaid 250MB/month plan, but I've seen nothing in the past three years as an AT&T customer that makes me believe they would take $50/year when the going rate is $15/month.
No, there has to be a subsidy in there somewhere...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
What's your rationale that 3GB of prepaid data would cost $150 when it's only around $30 from other vendors?
My rationale was that 250MB would cost $150/year. The going rate on a monthly basis works out to $180/year.
IMHO Amazon is grossly committing false advertising. The new Fire models won't be distributed for nearly 2 months, until November 20th, yet on the company's home page, the present tense is used throughout: "Kindle Fire HD 8.9" 4G isn't just the best tablet for the price, it's the best tablet. $499 now gets you a large-screen HD tablet with a stunning 8.9" display, exclusive Dolby audio, dual stereo speakers, the fastest Wi-Fi, ultra-fast 4G LTE wireless, plus our new unprecedented $49.99 one-year 4G data package. Customers save hundreds of dollars in the first year compared to other 4G tablets. Kindle Fire HD 8.9" is also available in a Wi-Fi only model for $299."