What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
That said, there are several questionable statements about the component breakdown. For example, they refer to "an additional $60 includes various smaller parts like the lighting system used to display the Siri animation on the top of the device," which is just the 38mm Apple Watch display, but I don't think it contains the capacitance touch or force touch elements of the display, and can probably be the Series 0 Watch display with the lower brightness. These could also be discarded displays that weren't good enough for the Apple Watch but would be perfectly fine for use under a translucence, plastic top cover for the HomePod's basic animation.
It doesn't have a "display" or "screen". From the https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/HomePod++Teardown/103133, you can see it's just a circular patter of 19 multi-color LEDs under a diffuser. The touch is just capacitance touch - no force or anything special. The "+" & "-" for volume control - they are just back lit cutouts in the board, illuminated via light pipes.
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
How do you know that? Apple has sold something at a loss before (Original AirPort Base Station). If they are in fact selling it at a slight loss, or making no profit on it, then kudos to Apple for putting their employees ahead of profits.
Enough with this margin bullshit! As a former cost accountant/cost analyst, I know I could legitimately make a margin anything I wanted: high, low or indifferent -- all by changing what I included as part of the cost. (What I did do when determining margins was to insure that I was consistent across products so that they could be compared).
And, the part of the cost that these margins exclude is the cost of the Apple ecosystem that accompanies each and every product Apple sells.
So, just like the comparison of margins on a Samsung phone cannot be compared to margins on an iPhone (because the Samsung does not include an ecosystem to support and enhance its functionality), neither can the margin of a HomePod be compared to that of an iPhone -- because the restricted functionality of a HomePod limits the amount of Apple ecosystem needed to support it.
No, Apple knows its cost and knows what its doing. Armchair quarterbacks are just bluster.
That said, there are several questionable statements about the component breakdown. For example, they refer to "an additional $60 includes various smaller parts like the lighting system used to display the Siri animation on the top of the device," which is just the 38mm Apple Watch display, but I don't think it contains the capacitance touch or force touch elements of the display, and can probably be the Series 0 Watch display with the lower brightness. These could also be discarded displays that weren't good enough for the Apple Watch but would be perfectly fine for use under a translucence, plastic top cover for the HomePod's basic animation.
It doesn't have a "display" or "screen". From the https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/HomePod++Teardown/103133, you can see it's just a circular patter of 19 multi-color LEDs under a diffuser. The touch is just capacitance touch - no force or anything special. The "+" & "-" for volume control - they are just back lit cutouts in the board, illuminated via light pipes.
[image]
Thanks! The last I had read was that it would use the 38mm Watch display below a plastic diffuser plate. This array of LEDs are even less expensive, unless it's some special tech that they're testing for this relatively low-volume product (which I think is highly doubtful).
Sorry, but this is absolutely BS. Most of this hardware is dirt cheap to manufacture, and apple gets all there parts massively below any prices you would ever see published because apple is one of the largest customers on the market and orders in major bulk. 216 is about the same it costs them to build an iphone, and theres no way youre concing me a crappy home pod gimmick product cost in the same ballpark and a full fledged handheld Computer(iphone).
I'll wait until you have 50+ posts and take you seriously.
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
This is just the estimated retail price of the components. Apple may've gotten them for deep discount like 30%-40% off. So, I agree with you, the real cost of the product (BOM + assembly, test and such...) won't be more than $175. I worked for many corporations and I know that their EPP is usually at cost or more, never less.
Apple’s strategy is to make money on Apple Music services, not the HomePod.
You can’t review the HomePod, which is tied to Airplay and Apple Music, on its own.
They could have zero margin and still it would be a great investment, because it serves their subscription directly.
Heck, I even considered moving to Apple Music with HomePod, if it weren’t for the lack of any reliable solutions to move my playlists and a better UI/UX.
Yep. This product is all about that $10/mo subscription. All.
I've sort of been expecting Amazon to give away their hardware, particularly the kindle things. Push this button, buy a book. A chance for people to walk around and buy your stuff on a whim? Retailers generally would kill for that.
Apple’s strategy is to make money on Apple Music services, not the HomePod.
You can’t review the HomePod, which is tied to Airplay and Apple Music, on its own.
You’re either ignorant or just spreading FUD nonsense. the HP is not tied to AM. As a normal airplay wifi speaker it’s an endpoint to any device content you wish to beam to it, from spotify to pandora to your local ripped itunes library. for voice powered interface (yawn) you can use itunes match or your itunes purchase history.
AirPlay speakers are a product category. I paid 300 bucks for my current one; it has zero smart features and is solely a wifi endpoint for audio. Sounds like crap, too. the HP is 50 more, sounds much better, and does more. a bargain. AM plays no part in that comparison whatsoever.
Sorry, but this is absolutely BS. Most of this hardware is dirt cheap to manufacture, and apple gets all there parts massively below any prices you would ever see published because apple is one of the largest customers on the market and orders in major bulk. 216 is about the same it costs them to build an iphone, and theres no way youre concing me a crappy home pod gimmick product cost in the same ballpark and a full fledged handheld Computer(iphone).
I don't think anyone is going to argue with you about the stated component prices, but to suggest that Apple uses "hardware [that] is dirt cheap to manufacture" is absolutely false. Apple has repeatedly shown that they go out of their way to use better components than the competition, even if many believe that they're the exact same based on some superficial spec sheet listing. Years ago AnandTech even speculated that Apple had a deal to source the most power efficient chips for their Macs despite the model numbers being identical. This is because not all chips are exactly the same, and I have to assume Apple was paying a premium for that benefit or had some other arrangement that would benefit Intel.
You can find a cheap 4" woofer online, but that one component is made up of many components that Apple probably sourced or even designed for a vendor to build so that it would offer the right kind of sound. This means it's likely not an off the shelf component which means they likely paid more for it than some run-of the-milll 4" speaker, despite economies of scale potential being in effect for even this new product category.
Then you have many other materials as well as material that make up components Apple sources from vendors where they will demand that the workers are paid fairly for the region, not overworked, and aren't made with harmful chemicals that are bad fo the environment. You may find these to be pointless considerations, but Apple has webpages detailing just how important these aspects are to the company. You could even argue that it's all for publicity, but that's a moot point, as it is part of their ethos and then efforts do end up costing them money.
Finally, Apple has massive mindshare. This means they can easily sell a lot more products with little advertising compared to an unknown startup, but it also means that they're scrutinized a lot more, which means R&D costs may have to be increased so that they can test for unknowns which will raise costs, as well factor in potential legal issues for the truly unknowns which also get added to the product costs before any profit margin can be attributed.
Well said. This guys obviously unhappy with himself in life or trolling.
Apple’s strategy is to make money on Apple Music services, not the HomePod.
You can’t review the HomePod, which is tied to Airplay and Apple Music, on its own.
They could have zero margin and still it would be a great investment, because it serves their subscription directly.
Heck, I even considered moving to Apple Music with HomePod, if it weren’t for the lack of any reliable solutions to move my playlists and a better UI/UX.
Yep. This product is all about that $10/mo subscription. All.
I've sort of been expecting Amazon to give away their hardware, particularly the kindle things. Push this button, buy a book. A chance for people to walk around and buy your stuff on a whim? Retailers generally would kill for that.
The Homepod is all about selling Apple Music? That's ridiculous. If you want Apple Music all you have to do is hook up an old iPhone, iPod or iPad (which most people interested in a Homepod would already have laying around) to a blue tooth speaker ($100) or to a home stereo via a headphone jack.
Like most posts accusing Apple of only being interested in bottom line profits (like Samsung does), this one goes down in flames upon close inspection.
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
CNET put the HP head to head with the Google Max and said the Max was better. I owner how much it cost (bill of materials)?
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
CNET put the HP head to head with the Google Max and said the Max was better. I owner how much it cost (bill of materials)?
They test in the god damn sweet spot so they did no such thing, and well it’s cnet, you know cnet, which has not been relevant since the 1990s. They and the verge are pretty much in the same space now.
funny my own experience, and I have 30 year experience with all kind of expensiv audio equipment and i’m Pretty familiar with the studio side of things, though not in the last 5 years, do not match these people at all.
they’re essentially the epitome of desingenuisness, straw man and false equivalence in review form.
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
CNET put the HP head to head with the Google Max and said the Max was better. I owner how much it cost (bill of materials)?
They test in the god damn sweet spot so they did no such thing, and well it’s cnet, you know cnet, which has not been relevant since the 1990s. They and the verge are pretty much in the same space now.
funny my own experience, and I have 30 year experience with all kind of expensiv audio equipment and i’m Pretty familiar with the studio side of things, though not in the last 5 years, do not match these people at all.
they’re essentially the epitome of desingenuisness, straw man and false equivalence in review form.
Spell correction error. I meant to ask "I wonder how much it cost (bill of materials)?" GoogleMax is Loud and Big. How much did they spend on it. Is the quality good or are they Cheap parts. Google was smart to add in the external port as some people will either want or need one. If you are in the apple eco-system it may not matter that now auxiliary line in port is on the HomePod. But if you aren't in the Apple eco-system the HP is a no-go.
What a load of crap. Apple sell these at $175 to employees, so there's no chance in hell they're taking a hit even for employees. True figure is likely a lot less as some have said due to bulk parts ordering.
They are losing money on selling it to employees but who cares: that’s just a limited number plus that’s an investment in employee satisfaction. That’s a small price to pay for them.
I’m not worried about Apple’s margins: I’m more worried about Siri on HomePod. Siri is so weak compared to Google Assistant, this might just handicap the HomePod.
Comments
Nobody but Apple knows what their individual product gross margins are. All we have are ASPs and the overall margins and a lot of guesswork.
As a former cost accountant/cost analyst, I know I could legitimately make a margin anything I wanted: high, low or indifferent -- all by changing what I included as part of the cost. (What I did do when determining margins was to insure that I was consistent across products so that they could be compared).
And, the part of the cost that these margins exclude is the cost of the Apple ecosystem that accompanies each and every product Apple sells.
So, just like the comparison of margins on a Samsung phone cannot be compared to margins on an iPhone (because the Samsung does not include an ecosystem to support and enhance its functionality), neither can the margin of a HomePod be compared to that of an iPhone -- because the restricted functionality of a HomePod limits the amount of Apple ecosystem needed to support it.
No, Apple knows its cost and knows what its doing. Armchair quarterbacks are just bluster.
I've sort of been expecting Amazon to give away their hardware, particularly the kindle things. Push this button, buy a book. A chance for people to walk around and buy your stuff on a whim? Retailers generally would kill for that.
AirPlay speakers are a product category. I paid 300 bucks for my current one; it has zero smart features and is solely a wifi endpoint for audio. Sounds like crap, too. the HP is 50 more, sounds much better, and does more. a bargain. AM plays no part in that comparison whatsoever.
That's ridiculous. If you want Apple Music all you have to do is hook up an old iPhone, iPod or iPad (which most people interested in a Homepod would already have laying around) to a blue tooth speaker ($100) or to a home stereo via a headphone jack.
Like most posts accusing Apple of only being interested in bottom line profits (like Samsung does), this one goes down in flames upon close inspection.
CNET put the HP head to head with the Google Max and said the Max was better. I owner how much it cost (bill of materials)?
funny my own experience, and I have 30 year experience with all kind of expensiv audio equipment and i’m Pretty familiar with the studio side of things, though not in the last 5 years, do not match these people at all.
they’re essentially the epitome of desingenuisness, straw man and false equivalence in review form.