Apple employees can buy HomePod at half price for limited time

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 76
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,712member
    k2kw said:
    felix01 said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. <snip>
    Most quality MBA programs have a case study or two on just this question and you are 100% bassackwards. The time-proven strategy is to skim off the premium market first while recovering R&D costs and then gradually step down the price as production ramps up and assembly experience lowers production costs. Sequentially skim off every segment of the market, high to low.

    One of the earliest practitioners of this strategy in the electronics business was Polaroid Corporation (consumer-friendly instant cameras). 

    I expect the HomePod to stay $350 for atleast 3 years.   Then they will raise the price to $399 with the second model (like they raised the price of the watch and iPadPro).

    I wish they had included an auxiliary in port like Google Max.  I decided to buy a SONOS Play 5 because I need the aux-in.    I wonder how many of Google Speaker partners felt screwed when Apple came out with the Google Max speaker (which seems to only be loud based on the review i've read).   Talk about really screwing your partners.   At least Amazon hasn't screwed over their Speaker Partners like SONOS.
      
    I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. You've mixed up a couple of different speaker/OEM combos.

    Over the past few weeks several companies including Altec Lansing, Anker Innovations, Bang & Olufsen, Bose, Braven, iHome, JBL, Jensen, LG, Klipsch, Knit Audio, Memorex, RIVA Audio, SōLIS, Sony and more announced Home-like Google Assistant speakers either already available (JBL/Bose/Sony) or coming in the next few months, and long after the Home Max was announced. Even Sonos who you brought up as an example has Google Assistant coming to their product line too very soon.

    Apparently they don't feel at all "screwed" by Google if that's what you were meaning to get at. They all seem anxious to work with Google.despite there being a relatively high-priced Home Max. 

    BTW the water-resistant and portable 360° sound Bose Soundlink that's already available supports both Google Assistant and Siri.  Sonos will too.
    https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/speakers/portable_speakers/soundlink-revolve-plus-bundle.html#v=soundlink_revolve_plus_triple_black

    edited February 2018
  • Reply 22 of 76
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,946member
    k2kw said:
    felix01 said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. <snip>
    Most quality MBA programs have a case study or two on just this question and you are 100% bassackwards. The time-proven strategy is to skim off the premium market first while recovering R&D costs and then gradually step down the price as production ramps up and assembly experience lowers production costs. Sequentially skim off every segment of the market, high to low.

    One of the earliest practitioners of this strategy in the electronics business was Polaroid Corporation (consumer-friendly instant cameras). 
    I expect the HomePod to stay $350 for atleast 3 years.   Then they will raise the price to $399 with the second model (like they raised the price of the watch and iPadPro).

    I wish they had included an auxiliary in port like Google Max.  I decided to buy a SONOS Play 5 because I need the aux-in.    I wonder how many of Google Speaker partners felt screwed when Apple came out with the Google Max speaker (which seems to only be loud based on the review i've read).   Talk about really screwing your partners.   At least Amazon hasn't screwed over their Speaker Partners like SONOS.
    1) Huh?! Is that a typo or are you suggesting the HomePod is the same as Google's Max wireless speaker?

    2) Sonos seems quite happy that they'll be able to offer multiple personal digital assistants in their devices.

    lolliver
  • Reply 23 of 76
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price 😬
  • Reply 24 of 76
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,293member
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price 😬
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    lolliver
  • Reply 25 of 76
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 758member
    larrya said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    You’ve never heard it. You have no idea how it compares. The amount of faith you demonstrate is remarkable. I truly hope you are as happy with it as you anticipate. 
    There are plenty of reviews directly comparing the speakers the OP mentioned. They do not compare to HomePod in sound quality per these reviews. Some reviewers even felt it sounded better than the Google Home Max which is priced $ 50.00 higher than HomePod. 

    One thing people seem to miss here is that IF HomePod does not deliver it can easily be returned and something else can replace it. What I find amusing is people having such issue with Price when Google has had a lesser speaker ( technology wise ) in the Home Max out for months at a higher price point than HomePod, yet I don’t here anyone making any negative comments about it. Does google have some track record of making high priced, high quality audio equipment that Apple doesn’t ?


      I only bring Google into this because I have read many a comment saying that Apple has out priced itself and the speaker can’t sound that good for whatever multitude of reasons, yet google  has a more expensive offering and not a peep is said ?  What exactly am I missing ? 
    StrangeDaysmike54randominternetpersonpscooter63lolliver
  • Reply 26 of 76
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,895member
    MacPro said:
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price ߘ즬t;br>
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    How is Apple going to know that you bought a HomePod and gave it to someone else? After you purchase it, Apple is in no position to tell you what you can and cannot do with something. 
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 27 of 76
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,946member
    macxpress said:
    MacPro said:
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price ߘ즬t;br>
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    How is Apple going to know that you bought a HomePod and gave it to someone else? After you purchase it, Apple is in no position to tell you what you can and cannot do with something. 
    I can't imagine how Apple wouldn't be able to see analytics for an internet connected device whose primary source of streaming music is from an Apple Music account.
  • Reply 28 of 76
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,453member
    Mmm...

    IDK the current state of audio amplifiers, speakers, etc.

    In 1950 our family (I was 10 years old) moved from Minneapolis to Pasadena -- my dad and uncle created a company that made HiFi radios. They sounded pretty good!

    I especially remember  a (circa 1951 or 1952) maple, wall-mounted model that looked like  a knick-knack shelf (about 3' wide, 3' high and 1' deep).  It had some feature they called bass-crossover, and it filled the room with sound.

    Sadly, the company failed and my dad had to get a regular job.  

    But, audio was in his blood -- and he kept making hifi, then stereo systems as a hobby.  He would cobble together inexpensive instruments and parts from the war surplus store... He even built a table saw from an old motor so he could build speaker/amplifier/turntable cabinets.

    Long story -- even longer...

    I can remember him testing his radios using a Cathode Ray Ocilloscope -- I couldn't hear it, my dad couldn't hear it -- but my mom, in another room complained (and neighbor's dogs barked).

    He would experiment, build a system -- then sell it for a profit... rinse and repeat.

    Later, when I was out on my own, I'd stop by the Pasadena homestead and he would proudly show off his latest creation... new amplifier, crate-size folded-horn speakers, whatever.

    The crowing glory, tho, was a system he built that made the made the bay window on the opposite side of the living room vibrate...  he could make a wooden Japanese candy dish  jump off their marble coffee table. 

    I guess you could say that sound is meant to be felt as well as heard!

    I think audio today is a mixed bag.  On the one hand, when I listen to old tracks, transferred from CD to my iPhone uncompressed with decent quality Grado ear buds, the sound is pretty damned good and how I remember it.   I have a high-end consumer A/V receiver (high-end, but not at the esoteric level) and it sounds great for Blu-ray movies, but it's absolutely terrible for analog audio and for listening to CD's.   I had to reinstall a 1970's preamp and power amp and install an amp switch to the speakers so I could switch between the A/V receiver and the old hi-fi.   I think the problem is a combination of digital processing (even when it's supposedly toggled off) and inferior solid state electronics, even at the high end.

    I've gone to esoteric hi-fi shows expecting to hear miraculous sound from the extraordinarily expensive systems ($5-$10,000 turntables, $20,000 speaker systems, $10,000 amps, even the cables cost $1000+) and I'm almost always disappointed and feel like if I spent even $2K on such a system, I'd be ripped off.  They mostly sound incredibly dull and lack anything resembling definition.     

    What's hard to know is whether old systems of the 1960's-1970's really sounded good or whether we just remember them that way.   In the 60's, I had a Fisher receiver and AR speakers and I remember it sounding spectacular.   There were speakers from AR, Advent and other companies in which Henry Kloss had a role in the design and they all had a very refined sound that you don't hear today.   (Kloss also designed the Tivoli radios, which sound pretty good for a small box.)   I sold audio at the Korvettes chain in the early 70's and even the house brand speakers, which were actually manufactured by Electro Voice, sounded pretty good.   

    I'm open to hearing what Apple has accomplished, but I have my doubts.   For background listening, I'm sure it's fine.   My brother has the Sonos and that sounds fine for background listening.   But for foreground serious listening, maybe not.    As others have posted, I question getting decent stereo out of one small box (how is it that so many people don't care about stereo anymore - although maybe it's because everyone is background listening) and you can't get past the physics that in order to reproduce decent sound, you have to push air and especially for low frequencies with long wavelengths, you have to push a lot of air, which a small speaker simply can't do.   
    pscooter63dick applebaum
  • Reply 29 of 76
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,712member
    jcs2305 said:
    larrya said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    You’ve never heard it. You have no idea how it compares. The amount of faith you demonstrate is remarkable. I truly hope you are as happy with it as you anticipate. 

     What I find amusing is people having such issue with Price when Google has had a lesser speaker ( technology wise ) in the Home Max out for months at a higher price point than HomePod, yet I don’t here anyone making any negative comments about it. 
    That could only be because you haven't looked. There's been dozens of blogs and review sites that say the Home Max as a speaker alone isn't worth the price they're asking no matter how "good" it might sound. It's still a single smallish speaker. 
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 30 of 76
    MacPro said:
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price ߘ즬t;br>
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    I’d be surprised if the do. He has bought me many items in the past with his employee discount. Most recently a 512GB Rose Gold MacBook, which was a gift for my wife. Never been an issue. I know there is a limit on how many items he can get at discount so maybe it’s only 1-2 units at 50%. I’ll have to ask him.
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 31 of 76
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,895member
    Soli said:
    macxpress said:
    MacPro said:
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price ߘ즬t;br>
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    How is Apple going to know that you bought a HomePod and gave it to someone else? After you purchase it, Apple is in no position to tell you what you can and cannot do with something. 
    I can't imagine how Apple wouldn't be able to see analytics for an internet connected device whose primary source of streaming music is from an Apple Music account.
    Then how is Apple going to know it was this very HomePod that was sold and now being used by someone else? Why would Apple really care anyways? Its getting the device in the hands of more people. Hell, maybe this person would decide to buy another at full price. 
    StrangeDaysSendMcjakrandominternetperson
  • Reply 32 of 76
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,946member
    macxpress said:
    Soli said:
    macxpress said:
    MacPro said:
    supadav03 said:
    Guess i’ll be hitting up my friend who works at the Apple Store at the Galleria Mall to score one of these for me at half price ߘ즬t;br>
    I wonder if the employees have to sign some sort of agreement to prevent exactly what you suggest from happening.
    How is Apple going to know that you bought a HomePod and gave it to someone else? After you purchase it, Apple is in no position to tell you what you can and cannot do with something. 
    I can't imagine how Apple wouldn't be able to see analytics for an internet connected device whose primary source of streaming music is from an Apple Music account.
    Then how is Apple going to know it was this very HomePod that was sold and now being used by someone else? Why would Apple really care anyways? Its getting the device in the hands of more people. Hell, maybe this person would decide to buy another at full price. 
    1) You're asking how would a company have an idea how a device with a digital serial number and MAC addresses for the various network connection types, various network account services, and IP address data can be used to track a device and its usage? I don't even know where to begin with something that I thought was common knowledge. Even with this forum it's very easy for AI's staff to figure out where you're posting from and if you're using aliases if you're using the same network to post.

    2) Apple cares about analytics because they want to see patterns in how their devices are used, but that data is purposely anonymized because it's the aggregate that is important, not the outliers. Why they would care about a particular employee is selling a HomePod to make a profit doesn't blip my radar, and I doubt it would Apple's, unless there's been a problem with this in the past. My guess is that most employees enjoy using Apple products and getting these in the hands of employees helps sales.
    lolliver
  • Reply 33 of 76
    entropys said:
    If it was that price all the time the audio performance would devastate competitor smart speakers and be an instant hit. as it is I reckon it is priced out of most of the market.
    nope, this price is cheap for a high quality wireless speaker. 
    mmatzlolliver
  • Reply 34 of 76
    larrya said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    You’ve never heard it. You have no idea how it compares. The amount of faith you demonstrate is remarkable. I truly hope you are as happy with it as you anticipate. 
    Yeah but this guy has:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/7t51a2/nda_is_up_what_can_i_tell_you_guys_about_the/
    lolliver
  • Reply 35 of 76
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,946member
    larrya said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    You’ve never heard it. You have no idea how it compares. The amount of faith you demonstrate is remarkable. I truly hope you are as happy with it as you anticipate. 
    Yeah but this guy has:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/7t51a2/nda_is_up_what_can_i_tell_you_guys_about_the/
    1) The base HW sounds promising. Like all Apple products, we'll get more reviews than we could possibly imagine, and will likely be the default product by which all others in the general category is compared and contrasted, even when not the most direct competitor.

    2) Interesting that "up" can mean both "in place" and "at an end," depending on the context. My first read of the "NDA is up" title is that it was still in place.
  • Reply 36 of 76
    A little off the subject but I have not been able to find anyone getting a HomePod to review. Looks like they are all going to see them when we do. Wonder why Apple is not sending evaluation units to the usual pundits?
  • Reply 37 of 76
    davendaven Posts: 528member
    So much speculation from people who haven't heard the speaker in the wild. Why not just wait until it hits the street and then make informed comments? I'm waiting for real first-hand reviews before I make my decision. It really isn't that difficult to do.
    edited February 2018
  • Reply 38 of 76
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    All they had to do was not lock this thing inside 50 layers of anti-consumer fencing.
    This product is more about solidifying AM subscriptions to try and fend off the bleeding to Spotify, Tidal etc... than it is about the actual product. 

    Remember when they locked up the iPod with all their DRM and iTunes limitations - a year later they had their tails between their legs and had to gradually open the platform up.
    The only reason the first 2 Apple TV's sold was because of XBMC. You couldn't go to a BestBuy or any dealer without them describing the benefits of the product running XBMC - as the product couldn't sell on it's own. 

    Long list of Apple severely limiting their products to maintain their ecosystem. Equally long list of cracks and work-arounds. 
    The Homepod will be no different. Except the user base might be so small that nobody will write a crack - and that only hurts Homepod sales. 

    Even if it sounds fantastic - who wants to be tied to an AM subscription to fully utilize this product. 

    It's not $349 - it's $349 + $10/month. 

  • Reply 39 of 76
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,946member
    bitmod said:
    leighr said:
    Cost is a relative thing. Perhaps Apple would have been better to introduce HomePod at $175 in order to firstly gain market share, and then move up to premium HomePodPro models. They couldn’t drop the quality though, people expect poor quality from Google and Samsung, even Amazon, but poor quality from Apple would not be tolerated, so it would have to be the same model, but at a price that doesn’t really make them money - which a lot of companies do to gain traction. That said, $349 is not a lot for an excellent speaker system, which HomePod is. Well advanced technically from the competing tinny speakers, and cheaper that Google’s premium speaker, it’s main issue is that people compare it to the little tinnies because of its similar look and size. Looking forward to receiving mine next week!
    All they had to do was not lock this thing inside 50 layers of anti-consumer fencing.
    This product is more about solidifying AM subscriptions to try and fend off the bleeding to Spotify, Tidal etc... than it is about the actual product.
    Do you remember when people freaked out because the iPhone didn't ship with a 3rd-party App Store?

    Remember when they locked up the iPod with all their DRM and iTunes limitations - a year later they had their tails between their legs and had to gradually open the platform up.
    1) No. The iPod came out 2 years before the iTunes Music store launched and you could also install AAC, MP3, and ALAC (and possibly other codecs) without any DRM, since it would be impossible to have any DRM on a product where the music will come from ripping CDs.

    2) Jobs was a big advocate for getting rid of DRM because it didn't work. It was the content owners that wanted and Apple was the key reason it went away when it did.

    The only reason the first 2 Apple TV's sold was because of XBMC. You couldn't go to a BestBuy or any dealer without them describing the benefits of the product running XBMC - as the product couldn't sell on it's own. 
    No it's not. Jailbreaking was the key reason older Apple TVs held their value even after newer models were released, but the XMBC numbers don't equate to Apple TV sales.

    Long list of Apple severely limiting their products to maintain their ecosystem. Equally long list of cracks and work-arounds. 
    The Homepod will be no different. Except the user base might be so small that nobody will write a crack - and that only hurts Homepod sales. 
    Then the product should fail just like all their other "ecosystem maintaining" products, like the iPhone with its Lightning port and App Store. :eyeroll:
    randominternetpersondws-2lolliver
  • Reply 40 of 76
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    MacPro said:
    Yep, girlfriend just told me about this and now we’ll be getting one at the half off price. Have absolutely no use for it as I have a way better HT system setup, but might as well try it for a bit. 
    I may be wrong but I suspect over time Apple's use of advanced computer technology and beam forming will make all audio HiFi enthusiasts rethink what they consider the bees knees.  I am not saying HomePods are going to compete with the audio on a high end system but I am saying more and more high end systems will start to incorporate the same technology and one day we will look back to when Apple changed the face of HiFi. 
    Dude... seriously. 
    There are hundreds of other companies already using this technology - and have been for over a decade. 
    Apple is just combining that tech with a voice assistant. They aren't changing the face of anything. They aren't pioneering anything. 
    They are simply packaging several technologies together - with their own design. 

    It's like you are saying Apple invented the camera because they put it on an iPhone. 
    They adapted camera technology that was already there - into the iPhone. 
    This is no different - Apple didn't invent beam-forming, and the HomePod is not HiFi.
    Show me where Apple uses the term HiFi?
    They don't. 

Sign In or Register to comment.