I do see what he's saying - that Apple needs to find a foothold in the emerging markets before Samsung or someone else completley takes over. I'm sure Cook and Co. have been thinking about what they can do in markets that are heavily pre-paid where people can't afford to spend $500 on a phone. I think the rumors of a cheap, plastic phone are ridiculous but I don't doubt Apple has been thinking about what they can do in this space that's not cheaper in quality but price. I don't see this as joining in a race to the bottom but rather trying to hook people into your platform/ecosystem who in the future might be able to afford more expensive products.
If by emerging markets he is referring to Asia, I think people in many parts of Asia are quite image conscious and would rather buy the best iPhone even if it's slightly more than they can really afford. If anything Apple should try and make themselves appear *more* exclusive and elite.
With the mini I think Apple has shown you can make a high quality product that isn't super expensive. I'm sure they could do the same thing in the phone space. I'm curious if this applies to India too as I don't think Apple has huge penetration there.
I don't here a lot or people talking about Europe but it makes me want to vomit when I hear that Galaxy is the phone of choice in a lot of European countries. I guess all that Samsung marketing/brainwashing worked. What can Apple so to turn it around in Europe?
I'm more interested in what Gil Amelio has to say...
You have to give Gil at least a little credit for saving Apple. He did pay NeXT to acquire Apple, and afterward, if he had had any clue what he was doing and been able to hang on to his job, things might have been very different.
If by emerging markets he is referring to Asia, I think people in many parts of Asia are quite image conscious and would rather buy the best iPhone even if it's slightly more than they can really afford. If anything Apple should try and make themselves appear *more* exclusive and elite.
You sound like an american through and through. The culture of spending more that they can really afford is what got the US economy in the shitbox its in at the moment. "Everything on credit" is just fine till you have to pay the bill, and you DO have to pay the bills. I see it on AI consistently. People talk about "free iphones" as if it's something that exists. Remember "there's NO FREE LUNCH". So seducing people to buy hi-tech toys that the can't afford is like selling crack on the street-corner.
Like it or not, Apple is a commodity producer. Their products are toys. Nice toys perhaps. They are no the slightest bit "elite" or exclusive. There is nothing exclusive about having a toy that every kid on the block has. That's the difference between Ferrari and Porsche, or perhaps Rolls-Royce and Cadillac (or whatever). It's the difference between a suite "off the hook" and a tailored suit. So if they want to be "elite" and "exclusive" then they should simply increase the price of the Iphone ... say 100 x, so that only the rich can afford it. In that segment, performance and tech doesn't matter a hoot. Exclusivity and "style" are where its at. A rolex oyster is expensive, but by no means the "best" watch on the market.
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Why is everyone talking about cheaper or larger phones being a necessity for Apple?
Very simply, it is because these folks are pundits. They have limited imagination which led them to write things like "Apple trailed others in innovating in the smaller tablet form factor." They can only write and talk about what they see. If making a smaller tablet is a significant innovation to them, is it any wonder they see a cheaper or larger phone (hey how about a cheaper AND larger phone) being the next Apple blockbuster?
I do see Apple possibly making a larger and/or cheaper phone. But as mentioned before, there will be a reason for Apple to make this, and a reason for consumers to buy it, beyond the fact that it is cheaper and larger. After all, the iPad Mini is NOT just like every other 7-8" tablet.
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Really? Apple lost the race? Can you list one cutting edge feature that other phones/tablets have that Apple doesn't have and cannot add if they so choose?
You sound like an american through and through. The culture of spending more that they can really afford is what got the US economy in the shitbox its in at the moment. "Everything on credit" is just fine till you have to pay the bill, and you DO have to pay the bills. I see it on AI consistently. People talk about "free iphones" as if it's something that exists. Remember "there's NO FREE LUNCH". So seducing people to buy hi-tech toys that the can't afford is like selling crack on the street-corner.
Like it or not, Apple is a commodity producer. Their products are toys. Nice toys perhaps. They are no the slightest bit "elite" or exclusive. There is nothing exclusive about having a toy that every kid on the block has. That's the difference between Ferrari and Porsche, or perhaps Rolls-Royce and Cadillac (or whatever). It's the difference between a suite "off the hook" and a tailored suit. So if they want to be "elite" and "exclusive" then they should simply increase the price of the Iphone ... say 100 x, so that only the rich can afford it. In that segment, performance and tech doesn't matter a hoot. Exclusivity and "style" are where its at. A rolex oyster is expensive, but by no means the "best" watch on the market.
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Many of us use Apple devices to do work for our real jobs -- every day -- to get paid -- this has proved successful for us -- for a long time.
Apple doesn't need to grow or compete in every market any more than Mercedes, BMW or Audi—or any number of other companies you could name—whose products are higher quality and more expensive than average. There is always a market for people who realize that a quality tool saves money over the long term, and tremendous frustration in the short term. Plenty of companies make cheap crap for everyone else.
I'm sure Apple would love to introduce a cheap model because of the importance of locking people into the IOS ecosystem as early as possible, but I believe what's holding them back is fear of cannibalising the rest of their product line.
I think the answer is to have a two tier product line - cheaper plastic products where they aren't afraid to be expressive and innovative (a return to the spirit of the original Imac) then the more serious prosumer products that they currently do. Good design doesn't have to be expensive - and they must have plenty of insanely great young designers there who are currently stifled into designing bland rounded-rectangle minimalist boxes.
"he said that current Apple CEO Tim Cook is %u201Cexactly the right leader%u201D for the company due to his extensive background in supply chain logistics"
Someone batter tell Mr Sculley that Apple isn't a "supply chain logistics" company. Its a computer / Software / Consumer electronics company!
As such, it needs a creative and inventive leader like Jobs, not a number crunching executive with an economics degree, that's totally detached from the popular culture he is supposed to be directing the company into producing goods & services for!
I think everyone is overlooking a market equally important to "emerging markets"... kids...
More and more kids 12-16 are getting phones, and most parents don't want to put $600 devices in their hands. This is also about producing a new gateway drug.
This is a good argument for a cheaper iPhone. I personally would love to see Apple completely replace all iPod touches with a cheaper than 5S iPhone.
If by emerging markets he is referring to Asia, I think people in many parts of Asia are quite image conscious and would rather buy the best iPhone even if it's slightly more than they can really afford. If anything Apple should try and make themselves appear *more* exclusive and elite.
This is the fellow who almost drove Apple into the ground. And here he shows the thinking that did it. Apple has never chased the market. It makes new markets for its ground breaking amazing insanely great stuff. Sculley never got that. Typical bean counter mentality.
Comments
I don't here a lot or people talking about Europe but it makes me want to vomit when I hear that Galaxy is the phone of choice in a lot of European countries. I guess all that Samsung marketing/brainwashing worked. What can Apple so to turn it around in Europe?
Sculley should have stuck to selling sugar water
John Sculley has never known what Apple needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy
I'm more interested in what Gil Amelio has to say...
You have to give Gil at least a little credit for saving Apple. He did pay NeXT to acquire Apple, and afterward, if he had had any clue what he was doing and been able to hang on to his job, things might have been very different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
If by emerging markets he is referring to Asia, I think people in many parts of Asia are quite image conscious and would rather buy the best iPhone even if it's slightly more than they can really afford. If anything Apple should try and make themselves appear *more* exclusive and elite.
You sound like an american through and through. The culture of spending more that they can really afford is what got the US economy in the shitbox its in at the moment. "Everything on credit" is just fine till you have to pay the bill, and you DO have to pay the bills. I see it on AI consistently. People talk about "free iphones" as if it's something that exists. Remember "there's NO FREE LUNCH". So seducing people to buy hi-tech toys that the can't afford is like selling crack on the street-corner.
Like it or not, Apple is a commodity producer. Their products are toys. Nice toys perhaps. They are no the slightest bit "elite" or exclusive. There is nothing exclusive about having a toy that every kid on the block has. That's the difference between Ferrari and Porsche, or perhaps Rolls-Royce and Cadillac (or whatever). It's the difference between a suite "off the hook" and a tailored suit. So if they want to be "elite" and "exclusive" then they should simply increase the price of the Iphone ... say 100 x, so that only the rich can afford it. In that segment, performance and tech doesn't matter a hoot. Exclusivity and "style" are where its at. A rolex oyster is expensive, but by no means the "best" watch on the market.
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Why is everyone talking about cheaper or larger phones being a necessity for Apple?
Very simply, it is because these folks are pundits. They have limited imagination which led them to write things like "Apple trailed others in innovating in the smaller tablet form factor." They can only write and talk about what they see. If making a smaller tablet is a significant innovation to them, is it any wonder they see a cheaper or larger phone (hey how about a cheaper AND larger phone) being the next Apple blockbuster?
I do see Apple possibly making a larger and/or cheaper phone. But as mentioned before, there will be a reason for Apple to make this, and a reason for consumers to buy it, beyond the fact that it is cheaper and larger. After all, the iPad Mini is NOT just like every other 7-8" tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taniwha
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Really? Apple lost the race? Can you list one cutting edge feature that other phones/tablets have that Apple doesn't have and cannot add if they so choose?
As for exclusivity, when did they have it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo
Sculley should have stuck to selling sugar water
That's aspartame water to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taniwha
You sound like an american through and through. The culture of spending more that they can really afford is what got the US economy in the shitbox its in at the moment. "Everything on credit" is just fine till you have to pay the bill, and you DO have to pay the bills. I see it on AI consistently. People talk about "free iphones" as if it's something that exists. Remember "there's NO FREE LUNCH". So seducing people to buy hi-tech toys that the can't afford is like selling crack on the street-corner.
Like it or not, Apple is a commodity producer. Their products are toys. Nice toys perhaps. They are no the slightest bit "elite" or exclusive. There is nothing exclusive about having a toy that every kid on the block has. That's the difference between Ferrari and Porsche, or perhaps Rolls-Royce and Cadillac (or whatever). It's the difference between a suite "off the hook" and a tailored suit. So if they want to be "elite" and "exclusive" then they should simply increase the price of the Iphone ... say 100 x, so that only the rich can afford it. In that segment, performance and tech doesn't matter a hoot. Exclusivity and "style" are where its at. A rolex oyster is expensive, but by no means the "best" watch on the market.
So it's Apple's call. If they want to be a commodity, then that's fine. Its money in the bank. But they have already lost the race in terms of being "cutting edge tech", and sure as hell have lost their "exclusivity".
Many of us use Apple devices to do work for our real jobs -- every day -- to get paid -- this has proved successful for us -- for a long time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy
I'm more interested in what Gil Amelio has to say...
Me too. At least he didn't totally, completely suck as CEO (not quite).
Apple doesn't need to grow or compete in every market any more than Mercedes, BMW or Audi—or any number of other companies you could name—whose products are higher quality and more expensive than average. There is always a market for people who realize that a quality tool saves money over the long term, and tremendous frustration in the short term. Plenty of companies make cheap crap for everyone else.
I'm sure Apple would love to introduce a cheap model because of the importance of locking people into the IOS ecosystem as early as possible, but I believe what's holding them back is fear of cannibalising the rest of their product line.
I think the answer is to have a two tier product line - cheaper plastic products where they aren't afraid to be expressive and innovative (a return to the spirit of the original Imac) then the more serious prosumer products that they currently do. Good design doesn't have to be expensive - and they must have plenty of insanely great young designers there who are currently stifled into designing bland rounded-rectangle minimalist boxes.
Someone batter tell Mr Sculley that Apple isn't a "supply chain logistics" company. Its a computer / Software / Consumer electronics company!
As such, it needs a creative and inventive leader like Jobs, not a number crunching executive with an economics degree, that's totally detached from the popular culture he is supposed to be directing the company into producing goods & services for!
Sculley go home!
This is a good argument for a cheaper iPhone. I personally would love to see Apple completely replace all iPod touches with a cheaper than 5S iPhone.
- There were more Apple models on sale which lead to consumer confusion. I remember a shitty low price model at "The Wiz" electronic store.
- He hampered the Newton development team because the Powerbook team was scared of it's sales being cannibalize.
- Like Microsoft, he allowed the various teams at Apple to turn on each other.
- Doesn't have the balls to make a risky decision!
Spot on.
How is THIS not an already available CHEAP iPhone?
This is the fellow who almost drove Apple into the ground. And here he shows the thinking that did it. Apple has never chased the market. It makes new markets for its ground breaking amazing insanely great stuff. Sculley never got that. Typical bean counter mentality.