Apple is not interested in the low-end of the market. Never has been. Never will be (hopefully).
Audi, BMW, and Mercedes are not interested in the low-end of the car market. And it would hurt their brands if they went after that market.
Apple releases well-built, high-quality products that people pay for. And are happy to do so because of the perceived and real extra value Apple provides.
If Apple can make a 32GB iPod touch for $299 and presumably make their profit margin, there is no reason why they couldn't make a cheaper iphone with maybe even less memory of around 8 or 16 GB and not make similar margins. Whether they choose to do that or not is up to them and I really don't have a dog in that race as it wouldn't effect me. But I don't think it would be a bad decision at all if they chose to offer a product in the largest market segment where they currently aren't really competing.
The thing about these super cheap Android phones is they get people into the ecosystem. They get people familiar with Google apps and how to feel comfortable using an Android phone. When these people upgrade their phones and have more money to afford more expensive models they will probably stick with Android because that is what they are familiar using. Apple would be smart to offer a cheaper alternative to get them into the iOS ecosystem.
By not including LTE and using older specs they could make a very nice phone at a reasonable price and still make their typical margins. But the real reason to do this would be to give that customer a good reason to buy the regular iPhone model later down the road.
I agree. It makes it look like we actually want this.
Originally Posted by gwmac
If Apple can make a 32GB iPod touch for $299 and presumably make their profit margin, there is no reason why they couldn't make a cheaper iphone with maybe even less memory of around 8 or 16 GB and not make similar margins.
Yeah, they're not the same device by a long shot. If you want a comparison of what they "can and cannot do", compare equal generations of iPod touch and iPhone. That's the price difference.
Yeah, they're not the same device by a long shot. If you want a comparison of what they "can and cannot do", compare equal generations of iPod touch and iPhone. That's the price difference.
Actually they are not so different at all. LTE is very expensive but just leave that out. I also think by using 8 or 16 GB that alone saves quite a bit of money over the 32GB in the iPod. Use a 3.5" screen instead of 4" on the iPod as well. Those two savings alone would easily pay for adding the 2G/3G telephony and data components to make it into a phone. It can easily be done if they chose to do it. They wouldn't need to sacrifice quality or their brand. People would understand as a cheaper model it would not be as fast, as nice a screen, as good a camera, and lack some other premium features. These customers often wouldn't mind or care.
Ah yes, the same crew that said Apple will never launch an ipad mini or a larger screen iphone are at it again.
They may or may not do this, but the wisdom in it would be to be to capture the low cost market from Android further expanding the iOS reach. The more iOS vs Android you have the less attractive it is for developers to develop for the fractured Android marketplace. You also develop an expanded loyal following.
If Apple introduces a low cost line of food products (perhaps rice and corn), they could address 99% of the eating market - which is larger than the phone market.
But that wouldn't make any more sense than getting into the cheap crapware phone market.
Apple should offer a trade in program, with a credit toward a new phone; then sell the used phones off contract to these developing countries. Make $$ twice on each phone, the used phone at a lower margin.
Apple should protect the brand as "elite" and not offer lower cost models. What they should do is make a model with a larger screen size! 5" would be perfect.
Most of the world by a very wide margin have to buy their phone outright. They don'y have the choice to get a free or $99 older iPhone modell. They currently would have to shell out around $450 to get even an older model iPhone.
Even here in the U.S. if you added up the total subscribers for all the pre-paid carriers like Pageplus, straight talk, Boost, Virgin mobile, Ting, etc. not to mention the pre-paid customers from the big carriers themselves, that would be a pretty large number of people. Probably 50 million or more in fact. Why not offer 65% of the world an affordable iPhone?
Apple already owns the majority profit share with their current market share. Focusing on the low-cost market won't help as much as some people think. They should focus on growing their high-cost market.
Comments
ROFL I do remember that!
No. Just stop. Please.
Apple is not interested in the low-end of the market. Never has been. Never will be (hopefully).
Audi, BMW, and Mercedes are not interested in the low-end of the car market. And it would hurt their brands if they went after that market.
Apple releases well-built, high-quality products that people pay for. And are happy to do so because of the perceived and real extra value Apple provides.
- Jasen.
This get's more and more embarrassing. What makes me angry, is that people like GM get paid for this BS talking.
A line of cheap phones will be released under the Performa line... iPhone P4 and iPhone P5.
To further accommodate marketing these phones Apple will be whoring out iOS to several vendors.
Apple CEO Tim Spindler also announced that there will be other changes to make Apple more competitive.
The thing about these super cheap Android phones is they get people into the ecosystem. They get people familiar with Google apps and how to feel comfortable using an Android phone. When these people upgrade their phones and have more money to afford more expensive models they will probably stick with Android because that is what they are familiar using. Apple would be smart to offer a cheaper alternative to get them into the iOS ecosystem.
By not including LTE and using older specs they could make a very nice phone at a reasonable price and still make their typical margins. But the real reason to do this would be to give that customer a good reason to buy the regular iPhone model later down the road.
Originally Posted by lightknight
Ai, please stop megaphoning that rumor.
I agree. It makes it look like we actually want this.
Originally Posted by gwmac
If Apple can make a 32GB iPod touch for $299 and presumably make their profit margin, there is no reason why they couldn't make a cheaper iphone with maybe even less memory of around 8 or 16 GB and not make similar margins.
Yeah, they're not the same device by a long shot. If you want a comparison of what they "can and cannot do", compare equal generations of iPod touch and iPhone. That's the price difference.
1) Apple continues selling the iPhone 4, after the 5S comes out, later this year for $349
2) Apple resurrects the 3GS as is for $249
3) Apple designs and creates an iPhone Mini from scratch and prices it anywhere from $300-500
A cheap, plasticky, lower-quality iPhone?
That isn't something that is in Apple's DNA. At least I hope not.
A lower-priced, slimmed-down version of a flagship product, like an "iPhone Mini" (taking after the iPad Mini) makes far more sense.
But Apple slumming it with the bottom-feeders? Nah.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yeah, they're not the same device by a long shot. If you want a comparison of what they "can and cannot do", compare equal generations of iPod touch and iPhone. That's the price difference.
Actually they are not so different at all. LTE is very expensive but just leave that out. I also think by using 8 or 16 GB that alone saves quite a bit of money over the 32GB in the iPod. Use a 3.5" screen instead of 4" on the iPod as well. Those two savings alone would easily pay for adding the 2G/3G telephony and data components to make it into a phone. It can easily be done if they chose to do it. They wouldn't need to sacrifice quality or their brand. People would understand as a cheaper model it would not be as fast, as nice a screen, as good a camera, and lack some other premium features. These customers often wouldn't mind or care.
They may or may not do this, but the wisdom in it would be to be to capture the low cost market from Android further expanding the iOS reach. The more iOS vs Android you have the less attractive it is for developers to develop for the fractured Android marketplace. You also develop an expanded loyal following.
But that wouldn't make any more sense than getting into the cheap crapware phone market.
Originally Posted by gwmac
It can easily be done if they chose to do it.
[citation needed]
Never mind that after declaring them "not so different" (they are), you decided to make them more so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy
OMG, this again? The iPhone 4, which runs rings around "free" phones, is $1 or less with a contract.
I think the tech media wags the dog with some of these stories.
True, but the prepaid and no contract markets are big. There you have to pay for the phone outright.
Apple should protect the brand as "elite" and not offer lower cost models. What they should do is make a model with a larger screen size! 5" would be perfect.
Most of the world by a very wide margin have to buy their phone outright. They don'y have the choice to get a free or $99 older iPhone modell. They currently would have to shell out around $450 to get even an older model iPhone.
Even here in the U.S. if you added up the total subscribers for all the pre-paid carriers like Pageplus, straight talk, Boost, Virgin mobile, Ting, etc. not to mention the pre-paid customers from the big carriers themselves, that would be a pretty large number of people. Probably 50 million or more in fact. Why not offer 65% of the world an affordable iPhone?