Schiller implies that Apple has no interest in developing a "cheaper iPhone". Can't say it's definitive since the original article on his comments was translated into English.
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.
I like that idea and I am sure it is already being done to a certain degree. But not large scale like Apple could run the program. It costs Apple very little to refurb a phone and make it look like new. The only problem with this theory is that the used iPhone market like Ebay or craigslist pay you a lot more than Apple would be willing to pay and our used phone market would not be sufficient to even come close to filling demand in large countries like India, China, or Brazil. The demand for a cheaper iPhone would probably be quadruple what the current sales are for the iPhone now.
They would need either a brand new cheaper iPhone or to start selling the 3GS or iPhone 4 at a much lower cost to meet that demand.
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.
I agree that Apple could make another phone. That phone would need to be substantially different such as in your example.
A cheap phone won't happen because if there is a cheap phone why would anyone buy the expensive one? If you get the same services just in a cheap package I suspect most people would go for the cheaper model because:
Apple's cheaper model would still be very nice (No way could Apple afford to make a really cheap and crappy phone that is so poor its not worth owning)
Apple's cheaper phone would have all the same services (Producing a limited iPhone would damage the Apple brand - clue: user experience)
There are high end product makers that make cheaper models but they tend to be really expensive, such as high end car manufacturers. But a phone is hardly in the same bracket. How many people would pay and extra $200.- just to have a nicer looking phone? I know, some people buy $200.- (and up) cases but I have personally never seen one.
People keep talking about the "developing" world. Screw the developing world. People in those kind of countries are probably lucky to make $1000 a year. How is selling a phone to somebody there going to help Apple?
If Apple is offering a low cost, almost no margin phone, then where will the profit come from?
Remember when the talking heads said that Apple offering a dividend would be a good thing? That turned out to be a huge pile of crap too.
If Apple had listened to all of the talking heads and analysts, and did everything that was recommended, Apple would have been bankrupt and out of business a long time ago.
Apple can't even keep up with current demand on many of it's product lines. They should worry about that instead of introducing new, cheap product lines.
Apple and low-cost products are not exactly synonymous. I am not saying they are overpriced, merely that Apple is not the place to look for bargain values. It seems like every six months the low-cost iPhone rumors creep out of the shadows.
I will admit though I was a tad surprised to see the iPad Mini. Anything is possible with the new Apple, I suppose.
This is a bogus analysis about the iPhone market. Carriers got no desire for a cheaper iPhone, the current iPhone sales it self without any help of carrier's clerks who gladly propose 0$ subsidize phone to non-savvy customers that doesnt care about what phone he want as long its free.
I am curious how much does it cost to make a 3GS or iPhone 4 now. That is the most obvious solution since no R&D or new designs would be needed. If they are able to keep making these older models and get the price down from $450 to below $300 that would by far be the easiest solution. They don't have to be as cheap as Android, but certainly cheaper than $450 would make a huge difference in those markets.
The only problem with that model is iOS fragmentation. It is possible if not likely that iOS 7 will not run on the 3GS and possibly the 4.
Apple and low-cost products are not exactly synonymous. I am not saying they are overpriced, merely that Apple is not the place to look for bargain values. It seems like every six months the low-cost iPhone rumors creep out of the shadows.
I will admit though I was a tad surprised to see the iPad Mini. Anything is possible with the new Apple, I suppose.
Schiller implies that Apple has no interest in developing a "cheaper iPhone". Can't say it's definitive since the original article on his comments was translated into English.
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.
Still, as Tim Cook has spoken about for years, Apple needs to think about it.
E.g. it's better to be prepared with a plan in case subsidies disappear, than to be caught with no response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Schiller implies that Apple has no interest in developing a "cheaper iPhone". Can't say it's definitive since the original article on his comments was translated into English.
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.
That seems like a great idea. It would score them more points with the Green community, hedge against the adverse effects of carriers eliminating some subsidies, and stimulate more frequent device upgrades. I personally would be far more likely to trade in my one-year-old iPhone and use the credit to upgrade every year if Apple handled it in their trademark easy, customer-friendly way.
I read that Apple had ben speaking with an outside aftermarket CE distributor about offloading older models in peripheral markets. Using such a distributors's existing channels on the back end while Apple operates on the front end with customers (online or at an Apple store) would be great.
The average iPhone buyer isn't yet comfortable or familiar enough with companies like Gazelle. If Apple offered it, just about everyone would do it.
While Cinnabon owns first-to-market position for small to mid-size cinnamon rolls, a sizable untapped market remains for high-quality, premium priced sticky buns in the United States and abroad. THEREFORE, BEYOND ANY DOUBT, tech giant Apple will add iBuns to its expanding ecosystem.
"Existing Apple customers will be able to easily find iBuns from their favorite Apple Store locations or by using GPS on their iOS device, and request them online for in-store pick up" said no one. Additionally, use of iBuns will expand Cupertino's audience further into the diabetes market - known to be heavy tech users.
"It's a no-brainer. Apple will do this. I have bet my children's future on this fact. It's guaranteed."
People are assuming that Apple has to stay high end in terms of price to maintain their profits & build quality.
But there's a chance, between investing in heavy automation at Foxconn and their insane purchasing power, that they could build a high end phone for a low-end price and still maintain enough margin that the whole thing would be a net positive for the company and obliterate every other manufacturer.
Or not, I'm just speculating. But I guarantee TC has at least looked into this strategy.
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.
When I worked for IBM in Palo Alto (1973-1980), we would often bring in IT representatives from major accounts -- for long term planning/training/selling of our maimframe computers, communication systems, peripherals, database & data communication software (DB/DC). Among the likes of Kraft Foods, The Bell Telephone Companies... the various divisions of General Motors were included. I was once asked to give a DB/DC preso to a group of IT reps from GM, Chevrolet Motor Division.
I kidded my fellow IBM rep: "Why are you wasting your time with Chevy -- everyone knows that Cadillac is the primo GM brand?"
His answer was: "Think about it -- all the [GM] cars are the same -- but Chevy outperforms all the other divisions put together... in revenue and profit!"
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.
People are assuming that Apple has to stay high end in terms of price to maintain their profits & build quality.
But there's a chance, between investing in heavy automation at Foxconn and their insane purchasing power, that they could build a high end phone for a low-end price and still maintain enough margin that the whole thing would be a net positive for the company and obliterate every other manufacturer.
Or not, I'm just speculating. But I guarantee TC has at least looked into this strategy.
No way : Apple is a low volume player ! /s
“We like our model, as we are evolving it. In every category Apple competes, it is the low-volume player, except in tablets. In the PC market, obviously the advantage of diversity has mattered since 90-something percent of PCs that get sold are Windows PCs. We will see what winds up mattering in tablets,” said Steve Ballmer, chief executive of Microsoft, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
Comments
Schiller implies that Apple has no interest in developing a "cheaper iPhone". Can't say it's definitive since the original article on his comments was translated into English.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/01/10/phil-schiller-denies-budget-iphone/
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
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.
I like that idea and I am sure it is already being done to a certain degree. But not large scale like Apple could run the program. It costs Apple very little to refurb a phone and make it look like new. The only problem with this theory is that the used iPhone market like Ebay or craigslist pay you a lot more than Apple would be willing to pay and our used phone market would not be sufficient to even come close to filling demand in large countries like India, China, or Brazil. The demand for a cheaper iPhone would probably be quadruple what the current sales are for the iPhone now.
They would need either a brand new cheaper iPhone or to start selling the 3GS or iPhone 4 at a much lower cost to meet that demand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex iPhone Owner
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.
I agree that Apple could make another phone. That phone would need to be substantially different such as in your example.
A cheap phone won't happen because if there is a cheap phone why would anyone buy the expensive one? If you get the same services just in a cheap package I suspect most people would go for the cheaper model because:
Apple's cheaper model would still be very nice (No way could Apple afford to make a really cheap and crappy phone that is so poor its not worth owning)
Apple's cheaper phone would have all the same services (Producing a limited iPhone would damage the Apple brand - clue: user experience)
There are high end product makers that make cheaper models but they tend to be really expensive, such as high end car manufacturers. But a phone is hardly in the same bracket. How many people would pay and extra $200.- just to have a nicer looking phone? I know, some people buy $200.- (and up) cases but I have personally never seen one.
Makes no sense
People keep talking about the "developing" world. Screw the developing world. People in those kind of countries are probably lucky to make $1000 a year. How is selling a phone to somebody there going to help Apple?
If Apple is offering a low cost, almost no margin phone, then where will the profit come from?
Remember when the talking heads said that Apple offering a dividend would be a good thing? That turned out to be a huge pile of crap too.
If Apple had listened to all of the talking heads and analysts, and did everything that was recommended, Apple would have been bankrupt and out of business a long time ago.
Apple can't even keep up with current demand on many of it's product lines. They should worry about that instead of introducing new, cheap product lines.
Apple and low-cost products are not exactly synonymous. I am not saying they are overpriced, merely that Apple is not the place to look for bargain values. It seems like every six months the low-cost iPhone rumors creep out of the shadows.
I will admit though I was a tad surprised to see the iPad Mini. Anything is possible with the new Apple, I suppose.
This is a bogus analysis about the iPhone market. Carriers got no desire for a cheaper iPhone, the current iPhone sales it self without any help of carrier's clerks who gladly propose 0$ subsidize phone to non-savvy customers that doesnt care about what phone he want as long its free.
I am curious how much does it cost to make a 3GS or iPhone 4 now. That is the most obvious solution since no R&D or new designs would be needed. If they are able to keep making these older models and get the price down from $450 to below $300 that would by far be the easiest solution. They don't have to be as cheap as Android, but certainly cheaper than $450 would make a huge difference in those markets.
The only problem with that model is iOS fragmentation. It is possible if not likely that iOS 7 will not run on the 3GS and possibly the 4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
Apple and low-cost products are not exactly synonymous. I am not saying they are overpriced, merely that Apple is not the place to look for bargain values. It seems like every six months the low-cost iPhone rumors creep out of the shadows.
I will admit though I was a tad surprised to see the iPad Mini. Anything is possible with the new Apple, I suppose.
The iPad Mini is a bargain value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero910
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.
Still, as Tim Cook has spoken about for years, Apple needs to think about it.
E.g. it's better to be prepared with a plan in case subsidies disappear, than to be caught with no response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Schiller implies that Apple has no interest in developing a "cheaper iPhone". Can't say it's definitive since the original article on his comments was translated into English.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/01/10/phil-schiller-denies-budget-iphone/
Maybe. To me, it reads more like he was saying that Apple didn't want to do a phone without the corresponding ecosystem and experience. (?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
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.
That seems like a great idea. It would score them more points with the Green community, hedge against the adverse effects of carriers eliminating some subsidies, and stimulate more frequent device upgrades. I personally would be far more likely to trade in my one-year-old iPhone and use the credit to upgrade every year if Apple handled it in their trademark easy, customer-friendly way.
I read that Apple had ben speaking with an outside aftermarket CE distributor about offloading older models in peripheral markets. Using such a distributors's existing channels on the back end while Apple operates on the front end with customers (online or at an Apple store) would be great.
The average iPhone buyer isn't yet comfortable or familiar enough with companies like Gazelle. If Apple offered it, just about everyone would do it.
Apple to Release Mini Sticky "iBuns"
by Gene Munster
While Cinnabon owns first-to-market position for small to mid-size cinnamon rolls, a sizable untapped market remains for high-quality, premium priced sticky buns in the United States and abroad. THEREFORE, BEYOND ANY DOUBT, tech giant Apple will add iBuns to its expanding ecosystem.
"Existing Apple customers will be able to easily find iBuns from their favorite Apple Store locations or by using GPS on their iOS device, and request them online for in-store pick up" said no one. Additionally, use of iBuns will expand Cupertino's audience further into the diabetes market - known to be heavy tech users.
"It's a no-brainer. Apple will do this. I have bet my children's future on this fact. It's guaranteed."
People are assuming that Apple has to stay high end in terms of price to maintain their profits & build quality.
But there's a chance, between investing in heavy automation at Foxconn and their insane purchasing power, that they could build a high end phone for a low-end price and still maintain enough margin that the whole thing would be a net positive for the company and obliterate every other manufacturer.
Or not, I'm just speculating. But I guarantee TC has at least looked into this strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasenj1
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.
When I worked for IBM in Palo Alto (1973-1980), we would often bring in IT representatives from major accounts -- for long term planning/training/selling of our maimframe computers, communication systems, peripherals, database & data communication software (DB/DC). Among the likes of Kraft Foods, The Bell Telephone Companies... the various divisions of General Motors were included. I was once asked to give a DB/DC preso to a group of IT reps from GM, Chevrolet Motor Division.
I kidded my fellow IBM rep: "Why are you wasting your time with Chevy -- everyone knows that Cadillac is the primo GM brand?"
His answer was: "Think about it -- all the [GM] cars are the same -- but Chevy outperforms all the other divisions put together... in revenue and profit!"
Do that and you get an iPhone 4/4S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb
People are assuming that Apple has to stay high end in terms of price to maintain their profits & build quality.
But there's a chance, between investing in heavy automation at Foxconn and their insane purchasing power, that they could build a high end phone for a low-end price and still maintain enough margin that the whole thing would be a net positive for the company and obliterate every other manufacturer.
Or not, I'm just speculating. But I guarantee TC has at least looked into this strategy.
No way : Apple is a low volume player ! /s
“We like our model, as we are evolving it. In every category Apple competes, it is the low-volume player, except in tablets. In the PC market, obviously the advantage of diversity has mattered since 90-something percent of PCs that get sold are Windows PCs. We will see what winds up mattering in tablets,” said Steve Ballmer, chief executive of Microsoft, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
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.
Ahh... Der Diesel... Was ist das? Das ist scheiße!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain J
Ah yes, the same crew that said Apple will never launch an ipad mini or a larger screen iphone are at it again.
If apple indeed releases such a cheap phone (which I doubt they will), we'll see a different opinion here