They ALREADY make a cheaper iPhone. The 4s is $99. The 4 is .99 or free. How can you get cheaper than that? Most people are fine with last year's phone, especially if they're new to iOS anyway.
This guy is a fool.
The problem is that this is true ONLY IN SUBSIDIZED MARKETS! Other markets, you pay full price. And those are the markets that are seeing significant growth at the low end. Try to keep up....
You don't believe the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac?
There goes the "post PC" angle...
Nobody ever said the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac. It's a satisfying solution to the needs of the average current consumer, as evidenced by sales.
However, some people will always need trucks, and for those people, an Austin Mini will not do the job.
Granted, a Mini does hardly any job at all, which is why it's driven by hipsters and posh ladies.
Apple could use a less expensive phone - in developing countries, most phones are sold off-contract... In those markets, the iPhone is relatively expensive to crummy Android phones...
and how much much are those android vendors making?
Nobody ever said the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac. It's a satisfying solution to the needs of the average current consumer, as evidenced by sales.
However, some people will always need trucks, and for those people, an Austin Mini will not do the job.
Granted, a Mini does hardly any job at all, which is why it's driven by hipsters and posh ladies.
You'd be amazed at what you can do using a sheet of plywood and some angle iron... then just plunk that baby on the top of the Mini!
The problem is that this is true ONLY IN SUBSIDIZED MARKETS! Other markets, you pay full price. And those are the markets that are seeing significant growth at the low end. Try to keep up....
I agree. 385 euros is far from "dirt cheap", or you probably have some gold nuggets in that dirt.
and how much much are those android vendors making?
I find it funny you use that argument, when people here were using the same argument against the iPad Mini before it came out. Well Apple proved once again they can have a lower price point and decent margins.
Unfortunately Munster has not exactly been the best predicter when it comes to Apple. This is evidenced by his earnings calls, Apple TV call etc. his accuracy rating is somewhere in the mid 40% percentile. He's actually manipulated the stock more than anything else Think about it.
Not sure where you get that 40th percentile number. I follow Apple closely and find him to be one the the most articulate, we'll researched and accurate predictors of all things Apple. Sure, he might have his timing off at times, who doesn't with a stock that is the most manipulated on the market, but in general he is highly accurate.
If you'd like, join the Union. I help with maps in someone's alternate history timeline, and we're working out US state divisions for you guys.
Of course, in this timeline, Australia is won from the UK in a war that takes place around 1812, so in 1847 the continent isn't fully settled or stated yet. Heck, you guys still have some territories right now anyway, right?
Oh, yes yes yes please. Can we also have some steampunk Apple gear?
Even if they did and a third world person bought the damn thing they would get so frustrated wit the thing they would have taken it to a pawn shop and sold it for $25.00 walking out frustrated and therefor splurging at Mc Donald's for the whole family on the dollar menu. Third world people have no concept of technology. Oops did I say that?
And that in fact is what makes Apple so brilliant - even my 2 year old knows how to operate both the iPhone and our iPad. She initiates FaceTime chats on her own, launches apps, takes photos, launches and plays games, all without any instructions from us.
The rest of the world lives on prepaid phones. Contracts and subsidies are not the norm. A $200 off contract phone would be killer. I don't think it will happen if it's not Siri Enabled, or not 4" retina (the new std size). 8GB, nonLTE would be possible, but the interface std is set.
Totally wrong! They are buying cheaply made, underpowered Android throw away phones that are most certainly crippled in power, storage and resolution, as well as in the implementation of android. One other key factor that commenters like yourself fail to realize is that their is actually a huge market in theses countries (China included) for used phones so they obviously don't mind "old" technology. The fact that iPhones are so desirous, and have far better resale value certainly helps here as well.
I was in Sam's Club today and noticed that I could buy an iPhone 4 for 99 cents with a two-year contract. I passed on it because that contract (Verizon data voice) is $90 per month [$2,160]). What needs to happen is for carriers to offer pay-as-you-go plans for iPhone and other smart phones. This is what the huge number of people who live hand-to-mouth need. Unfortunately, the carriers are to anal retentive for that.
Their plans cost the same regardless of the phone that you get. Gonna need to try again.
Looks like other people have beat me to this, but you are not correct. Virgin's plans start at $30/month. T-Mobile is about the same as AT&T and Verizon now, but we'll see what kinds of plans they offer after they abandon the subsidized model next year.
I believe I read that the fastest growing segment is the pre-paid phone. Which is not as profitable for the Telecom businesses as the Contract side. I have entertained chucking my iPhone for a dumb phone and a $50/mo. expense vs. my Sprint's $93/mo. bill.
But I would end up carrying more "gadgets." E.g., a camera, a GPS unit, and an iPad or MBA. For $43, it just doesn't seem worth it to give up the iPhone.
And now Virgin and Walmart offer an "all you can eat" $30 a month data plan for the iPhone which is looking very attractive! You could even pick up a used 4s on eBay to save money if that is your number one concern.
I find it funny you use that argument, when people here were using the same argument against the iPad Mini before it came out. Well Apple proved once again they can have a lower price point and decent margins.
here's the thing, the iPad had room to shrink and still be usuable. The iphone does not. I guess they could "shrink" the screen to 3.5" and use a two y.o. processor but then again that's the iphone 4. If they keep the iphone 4 name, it'll be a "failure" to the "analysts". if they change it to iphone mini, it would be a success to these "analysts".
I'm amazed that with all the smart posters on this board, a number of you don't understand the cell phone business outside your narrow experience with subsidized phones available with post-paid plans (ie ATT, Verizon, etc).
People who cannot afford or do not wish to pay $80 - $120 a month (much more for a family) plus the cost of a handset, choose pre-paid plans (no contract) which are substantially less expensive. .
For example Virgin Mobile offers a plan with unlimited data, unlimited texting and 300 minutes FOR $35 a MONTH (1200 minutes $45, unlimited minutes $55). However, people on limited budgets who are most likely to go for a prepaid plan may not be able to afford Virgin's iPhone 4S at $450 or iPhone 4 at $350, or $550 for a iPhone 5 when available. These are the people who choose an Android device because many are less expensive, which is more important to them than the iPhone's superior user experience.
But even more important to Apple's business are emerging markets such as China, India, the rest of Asia, Africa, and Russia. The majority, the very substantial majority, of mobile users in these locations use pre-paid plans, and pay full price (no subsidies) for a handset. Those people cannot afford a $350 - $550 iPhone. That is why Android, Nokia and Blackberry own nearly 100% of those markets. This is where Apple needs a lower priced iPhone in order to gain a piece of the business.
Apple has followed top line Macs, iPods and iPad with lower priced versions. That's how you gain market share. Later, some of of the people who buy a lower priced Apple product are likely to move up the food chain to a higher priced item. And the same will be true if Apple offers an unsubsidized, unlocked iPhone Nano for $200. In that price range they can compete with Android and others who offer lower priced phones.
BUT, I think Apple may also offer a LARGER iPhone around 4.8 inches. Lets face it, the some large screen Android phones are very popular BECAUSE of the large screens. After all, smart phones are primarily pocket computers. The majority of smart phone users spend much more time texting, surfing and using apps than they do making phone calls. A larger screen offers benefits and an opportunity for Apple to grow sales of the iPhone on the high end.
The one argument against a larger screen iPhone is the compatibility of current apps with a larger screen. However, I believe that is an issue that Apple can resolve.
They ALREADY make a cheaper iPhone. The 4s is $99. The 4 is .99 or free. How can you get cheaper than that? Most people are fine with last year's phone, especially if they're new to iOS anyway.
This guy is a fool.
Once again an American who doesn't get subsidies or the situation in the rest of the world.
This. The existing model of keeping the older models available at a lower price (and on lower pricing plans from carriers) is fine. A "cheap iPhone for the masses" who most likely be spec'd virtually the same as an iPhone 4. Why would Apple go to all that expense of development and re-tooling and manufacturing another phone?
People should be calling for the carriers in the US to have a "data pricing plan for the masses."
This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model. Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model. I think Apple will have NFC, LTE and a possibly bigger form factor in the iPhone 6 and the iPhone "mini" can then look like the iPod touch with a cell radio. That will be light. Will it cannibalise? Yes, Apple isn't afraid to cannibalise itself.
The iPhone 4 is "outdated" only because it has a processor from 2 years ago. In other words... a slow processor.
So... what kind of processor would a cheaper iPhone built today have?
It would be slower, right?
So what's wrong with just using the 2 year old processor that you've already got millions of... and the factories to assemble the iPhone 4 ?
I think Apple's plan to keep selling a certain model for 3 years to wring out every bit of profit is genius.
The other guys are actually spending time and money to make "cheaper" phones.
It's not working. the older model just screams old. A new form factor - however cheap - is always going to be more fashionable.
And let's cut the crap about profit share. Market share matters. If you don't hold up market share profits eventually collapse.
That's another possibility that I think would be great for an iPhone Nano.
Microsoft sold the KIN for free-$100 (depending on the model) with WIFI and Verizon required NO DATA contract for it, only a voice plan.
Yep, and with options (internationally) of Pre-Paid or PAYG as well, it would open Apple up into a market they do not currently participate in.
The only cannibalization would be of the iPod.
The 4" iPhone is safe from cannibalization...almost zero persons would buy an iPhone Nano instead of a 4" iPhone. I take that back, if the economy gets much worse, many of us will be back to 12 key cellphones. :-)
Comments
I believe he's likely a poser.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
See, you don't matter because you're still first world.
Apple MUST create a $100 off-contract phone for the third world (so that they can then go pay $70 a month for forced data), otherwise they will fail.
Australia's in the first world? Wasn't that some faraway colony filled to the brim with evildoers and bizarre animals?
Edit: just joking... I know Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
You don't believe the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac?
There goes the "post PC" angle...
Nobody ever said the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac. It's a satisfying solution to the needs of the average current consumer, as evidenced by sales.
However, some people will always need trucks, and for those people, an Austin Mini will not do the job.
Granted, a Mini does hardly any job at all, which is why it's driven by hipsters and posh ladies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_sanders_aia
Apple could use a less expensive phone - in developing countries, most phones are sold off-contract... In those markets, the iPhone is relatively expensive to crummy Android phones...
and how much much are those android vendors making?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
Nobody ever said the iPad is a satisfying replacement for a Mac. It's a satisfying solution to the needs of the average current consumer, as evidenced by sales.
However, some people will always need trucks, and for those people, an Austin Mini will not do the job.
Granted, a Mini does hardly any job at all, which is why it's driven by hipsters and posh ladies.
You'd be amazed at what you can do using a sheet of plywood and some angle iron... then just plunk that baby on the top of the Mini!
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange
The problem is that this is true ONLY IN SUBSIDIZED MARKETS! Other markets, you pay full price. And those are the markets that are seeing significant growth at the low end. Try to keep up....
I agree. 385 euros is far from "dirt cheap", or you probably have some gold nuggets in that dirt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
and how much much are those android vendors making?
I find it funny you use that argument, when people here were using the same argument against the iPad Mini before it came out. Well Apple proved once again they can have a lower price point and decent margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
If you'd like, join the Union. I help with maps in someone's alternate history timeline, and we're working out US state divisions for you guys.
Of course, in this timeline, Australia is won from the UK in a war that takes place around 1812, so in 1847 the continent isn't fully settled or stated yet. Heck, you guys still have some territories right now anyway, right?
Oh, yes yes yes please. Can we also have some steampunk Apple gear?
What needs to happen is for carriers to offer pay-as-you-go plans for iPhone and other smart phones. This is what the huge number of people who live hand-to-mouth need. Unfortunately, the carriers are to anal retentive for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Their plans cost the same regardless of the phone that you get. Gonna need to try again.
Looks like other people have beat me to this, but you are not correct. Virgin's plans start at $30/month. T-Mobile is about the same as AT&T and Verizon now, but we'll see what kinds of plans they offer after they abandon the subsidized model next year.
You'll see cheap iPhones when you also see arboreal porcine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
I find it funny you use that argument, when people here were using the same argument against the iPad Mini before it came out. Well Apple proved once again they can have a lower price point and decent margins.
here's the thing, the iPad had room to shrink and still be usuable. The iphone does not. I guess they could "shrink" the screen to 3.5" and use a two y.o. processor but then again that's the iphone 4. If they keep the iphone 4 name, it'll be a "failure" to the "analysts". if they change it to iphone mini, it would be a success to these "analysts".
I'm amazed that with all the smart posters on this board, a number of you don't understand the cell phone business outside your narrow experience with subsidized phones available with post-paid plans (ie ATT, Verizon, etc).
People who cannot afford or do not wish to pay $80 - $120 a month (much more for a family) plus the cost of a handset, choose pre-paid plans (no contract) which are substantially less expensive. .
For example Virgin Mobile offers a plan with unlimited data, unlimited texting and 300 minutes FOR $35 a MONTH (1200 minutes $45, unlimited minutes $55). However, people on limited budgets who are most likely to go for a prepaid plan may not be able to afford Virgin's iPhone 4S at $450 or iPhone 4 at $350, or $550 for a iPhone 5 when available. These are the people who choose an Android device because many are less expensive, which is more important to them than the iPhone's superior user experience.
But even more important to Apple's business are emerging markets such as China, India, the rest of Asia, Africa, and Russia. The majority, the very substantial majority, of mobile users in these locations use pre-paid plans, and pay full price (no subsidies) for a handset. Those people cannot afford a $350 - $550 iPhone. That is why Android, Nokia and Blackberry own nearly 100% of those markets. This is where Apple needs a lower priced iPhone in order to gain a piece of the business.
Apple has followed top line Macs, iPods and iPad with lower priced versions. That's how you gain market share. Later, some of of the people who buy a lower priced Apple product are likely to move up the food chain to a higher priced item. And the same will be true if Apple offers an unsubsidized, unlocked iPhone Nano for $200. In that price range they can compete with Android and others who offer lower priced phones.
BUT, I think Apple may also offer a LARGER iPhone around 4.8 inches. Lets face it, the some large screen Android phones are very popular BECAUSE of the large screens. After all, smart phones are primarily pocket computers. The majority of smart phone users spend much more time texting, surfing and using apps than they do making phone calls. A larger screen offers benefits and an opportunity for Apple to grow sales of the iPhone on the high end.
The one argument against a larger screen iPhone is the compatibility of current apps with a larger screen. However, I believe that is an issue that Apple can resolve.
Once again an American who doesn't get subsidies or the situation in the rest of the world.
This is like saying - and it was an argument made here pre-mini - that the iPad mini wasn't needed because we had last years model. Last years model has less of a cachet than this years cheaper model. I think Apple will have NFC, LTE and a possibly bigger form factor in the iPhone 6 and the iPhone "mini" can then look like the iPod touch with a cell radio. That will be light. Will it cannibalise? Yes, Apple isn't afraid to cannibalise itself.
It's not working. the older model just screams old. A new form factor - however cheap - is always going to be more fashionable.
And let's cut the crap about profit share. Market share matters. If you don't hold up market share profits eventually collapse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
That's another possibility that I think would be great for an iPhone Nano.
Microsoft sold the KIN for free-$100 (depending on the model) with WIFI and Verizon required NO DATA contract for it, only a voice plan.
Yep, and with options (internationally) of Pre-Paid or PAYG as well, it would open Apple up into a market they do not currently participate in.
The only cannibalization would be of the iPod.
The 4" iPhone is safe from cannibalization...almost zero persons would buy an iPhone Nano instead of a 4" iPhone. I take that back, if the economy gets much worse, many of us will be back to 12 key cellphones. :-)