There are a number of other costs. They employ Fedex/UPS supply chain services: shipping directly from China to retail/direct to customer is going to be costly even though they are likely to receive a significant discount. Then there are the costs related to R&D, production, marketing, transportation, logistics, support, sales commissions, and just-in-time manufacturing, and finally overhead. My guess is that when all the value-added services are considered, they're looking at $180 when all fixed costs are considered, and so a $70 contribution margin (profit) by this reasoning.
You have a solid understanding of the process. Are you in direct import?
You have a solid understanding of the process. Are you in direct import?
He's saying what several of us have been saying. Over and over again. Every time Apple comes out with a new product, and the "parts pricers" come out, and talk about absurd profits.
According to Marx, it's 100% labor. It's the only thing that I can agree with him about.
Off topic tangent, but that was a major problem with Marx, he undervalued the ecological capital that is necessary to support business and labor (the economic capital and social capital respectively). Labor may be more important than the cost of coal, BUT labor practices are not more important than a sustainable energy supply that doesn't degrade the environment where the workers live. Thus Chernoble and the reasoning that made enviro problems in the USSR so much worse than in the West. We give overwhelming favor to financial capital, he gave overwhelming favor to social capital and both sort of liquidate ecological capital as necessary. All three are important and no industrial economic system has gotten it right yet, though Europe is trying, many developing countries are experimenting, and even the US is slowly appreciating the comcepts behind the "Triple Bottom Line" and "ecoliteracy."
I'm surprised that they allowed this [music "sharing"] at all.
Does anyone know yet what the percentage is of music given this privelage? Anything less than 70% would be annoying.
I wonder if we'll find out much about the entire pricing structure. Does the subscription pricing pay for the "shared" music functionality? Can the subscription model really give the media giants that much money that they can afford to open up other ways of downloading? The fact that so many companies tried subscriptions must mean that there are some advantages.
And how will this translate to a TV or movie format? Will Zunesters be able to beam each other episodes of "Lost" or the trailer to "Spiderman?" Obviously no one is going to be allowed to send someone the Lord of the Rings across the classroom or commuter bus, so does that mean that MS will need to create a different device with different modes of use?
Does anyone know yet what the percentage is of music given this privelage? Anything less than 70% would be annoying.
I would have thought that it'll only work with tracks that have been downloaded with Zune's download service.
It's possible that it may work with any WMA track (source player adds DRM before transmitting to other player), but almost certainly won't work with mp3s.
And how will this translate to a TV or movie format? Will Zunesters be able to beam each other episodes of "Lost" or the trailer to "Spiderman?"
Trailers sound like an obvious thing to allow unlimited beaming, as they're advertisements / enticements.
TV shows or movies however seem like something you wouldn't even allow beaming, as the media they are is very conducive to 'enjoy once', unlike music which is 'enjoy many many times'. If you let the person enjoy a movie or show once, then they're sated, and won't get it (immediately, they may wait for it to hit the bargain bins, which is not desirable).
Music is ideal for the limitations that Zune has - 3 plays or 3 days, that's long enough for it to grow on you, but not enough to bore you.
How about if Apple allowed lower bitrate copies of music - 32kbps mono with no limitations for example. The player could transcode at copy time. This has advantages - smaller files mean less battery life used, and quicker transfers*. All media could be copied, instead of just iTMS purchased media. The enticement to purchase is to get a full stereo high bitrate version, rather than a sub-AM quality version.
* or they could use Bluetooth which is far simpler for these uses. 2mbps Bluetooth 2/EDR could transfer an album (32kbps) in under a minute, or a song in 4 seconds.
Off topic tangent, but that was a major problem with Marx, he undervalued the ecological capital that is necessary to support business and labor (the economic capital and social capital respectively). Labor may be more important than the cost of coal, BUT labor practices are not more important than a sustainable energy supply that doesn't degrade the environment where the workers live. Thus Chernoble and the reasoning that made enviro problems in the USSR so much worse than in the West. We give overwhelming favor to financial capital, he gave overwhelming favor to social capital and both sort of liquidate ecological capital as necessary. All three are important and no industrial economic system has gotten it right yet, though Europe is trying, many developing countries are experimenting, and even the US is slowly appreciating the comcepts behind the "Triple Bottom Line" and "ecoliteracy."
The value of most everything is determined by the difficulty of obtaining it. The more difficult that is, the greater the value.
Basic resources are no different. When it was cheap to mine coal, and drill for oil, the prices were low. Coal's prices are still fairly low.
But, even if 90% of the world's oil is yet to be found, it will be expensive, as the easy to drill oil has already been exploited.
Simply, what this means, is that the machinery that needs to be designed and built requires even more labor to do so. More engineers and scientists to understand and fiqure out how to find, and extract it. More engineers to design the much larger, much more spohisticated equipment. More companies involved in building it, etc.
Again, it all comes down to labor.
The only time this breaks down is when certain luxury goods are involved. Are gold, platinum, and jewels as valuble as their prices suggest? Certainly not as a commodity, despite their rarity. But, to a certain expent, even they depend on more labor than would be involved to extract other natural minerals, because of their rarity. A good deal of the gold mined today is coming from mines that were closed decades ago because the price to extract it had risen above the then low price gold was selling for.
Part of the point is that if these commodities were as easy tio extract as are earthworms, despite their rarity, the prices would be much lower. And, yes, I do know that DeBeers holds diamonds back from the market.
And, in any case, as I pointed out, these are not normal commodities.
An analyst here at Vocabulabs tore down the Craig Berger tear down article and found that the words used to build it could be had for free. Craig Berger himself was torn down and found to consist of several compounds available in any chemists lab, for a nominal cost. We tore down our cute, cuddly kitty cat, and found only guts. But we never found why we loved it so much.
So I guess now we can put an end to blaming the missing search function on hardware differences?
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
In fact, this is why MS had to limit ALL music sharing to a three play, or three day limit, whichever came first.
Not to mention that MS is also saying that not all songs can be shared. They have yet to clarify that, it may mean that media has to be tagged for sharing, or that it it can be shared unless it's tagged for not sharing.
I doubt movies or TV will allow sharing at all, except for trailers.
Buy Maya - and do a "tear-down". All that's in the box is a couple of DVDs and a book for f's sake! A total manufacturing cost of about $10 and yet they sell this for THOUSANDS!!!
What a rip-off! those guys must be raking it in! Etc. Etc.
Comments
One problem is the licensing from the media suppliers. THEY have to allow this.
I'm sure that MS would have wanted to allow unlimited sharing, but couldn't.
I'm surprised that they allowed this at all.
There are a number of other costs. They employ Fedex/UPS supply chain services: shipping directly from China to retail/direct to customer is going to be costly even though they are likely to receive a significant discount. Then there are the costs related to R&D, production, marketing, transportation, logistics, support, sales commissions, and just-in-time manufacturing, and finally overhead. My guess is that when all the value-added services are considered, they're looking at $180 when all fixed costs are considered, and so a $70 contribution margin (profit) by this reasoning.
You have a solid understanding of the process. Are you in direct import?
You have a solid understanding of the process. Are you in direct import?
He's saying what several of us have been saying. Over and over again. Every time Apple comes out with a new product, and the "parts pricers" come out, and talk about absurd profits.
Actually his pricing is low.
According to Marx, it's 100% labor. It's the only thing that I can agree with him about.
Off topic tangent, but that was a major problem with Marx, he undervalued the ecological capital that is necessary to support business and labor (the economic capital and social capital respectively). Labor may be more important than the cost of coal, BUT labor practices are not more important than a sustainable energy supply that doesn't degrade the environment where the workers live. Thus Chernoble and the reasoning that made enviro problems in the USSR so much worse than in the West. We give overwhelming favor to financial capital, he gave overwhelming favor to social capital and both sort of liquidate ecological capital as necessary. All three are important and no industrial economic system has gotten it right yet, though Europe is trying, many developing countries are experimenting, and even the US is slowly appreciating the comcepts behind the "Triple Bottom Line" and "ecoliteracy."
I'm surprised that they allowed this [music "sharing"] at all.
Does anyone know yet what the percentage is of music given this privelage? Anything less than 70% would be annoying.
I wonder if we'll find out much about the entire pricing structure. Does the subscription pricing pay for the "shared" music functionality? Can the subscription model really give the media giants that much money that they can afford to open up other ways of downloading? The fact that so many companies tried subscriptions must mean that there are some advantages.
And how will this translate to a TV or movie format? Will Zunesters be able to beam each other episodes of "Lost" or the trailer to "Spiderman?" Obviously no one is going to be allowed to send someone the Lord of the Rings across the classroom or commuter bus, so does that mean that MS will need to create a different device with different modes of use?
Does anyone know yet what the percentage is of music given this privelage? Anything less than 70% would be annoying.
I would have thought that it'll only work with tracks that have been downloaded with Zune's download service.
It's possible that it may work with any WMA track (source player adds DRM before transmitting to other player), but almost certainly won't work with mp3s.
Will Zunesters be able to beam each other episodes of "Lost" or the trailer to "Spiderman?"
I doubt it - the battery would probably run out before the transfer is complete
And how will this translate to a TV or movie format? Will Zunesters be able to beam each other episodes of "Lost" or the trailer to "Spiderman?"
Trailers sound like an obvious thing to allow unlimited beaming, as they're advertisements / enticements.
TV shows or movies however seem like something you wouldn't even allow beaming, as the media they are is very conducive to 'enjoy once', unlike music which is 'enjoy many many times'. If you let the person enjoy a movie or show once, then they're sated, and won't get it (immediately, they may wait for it to hit the bargain bins, which is not desirable).
Music is ideal for the limitations that Zune has - 3 plays or 3 days, that's long enough for it to grow on you, but not enough to bore you.
How about if Apple allowed lower bitrate copies of music - 32kbps mono with no limitations for example. The player could transcode at copy time. This has advantages - smaller files mean less battery life used, and quicker transfers*. All media could be copied, instead of just iTMS purchased media. The enticement to purchase is to get a full stereo high bitrate version, rather than a sub-AM quality version.
* or they could use Bluetooth which is far simpler for these uses. 2mbps Bluetooth 2/EDR could transfer an album (32kbps) in under a minute, or a song in 4 seconds.
Off topic tangent, but that was a major problem with Marx, he undervalued the ecological capital that is necessary to support business and labor (the economic capital and social capital respectively). Labor may be more important than the cost of coal, BUT labor practices are not more important than a sustainable energy supply that doesn't degrade the environment where the workers live. Thus Chernoble and the reasoning that made enviro problems in the USSR so much worse than in the West. We give overwhelming favor to financial capital, he gave overwhelming favor to social capital and both sort of liquidate ecological capital as necessary. All three are important and no industrial economic system has gotten it right yet, though Europe is trying, many developing countries are experimenting, and even the US is slowly appreciating the comcepts behind the "Triple Bottom Line" and "ecoliteracy."
The value of most everything is determined by the difficulty of obtaining it. The more difficult that is, the greater the value.
Basic resources are no different. When it was cheap to mine coal, and drill for oil, the prices were low. Coal's prices are still fairly low.
But, even if 90% of the world's oil is yet to be found, it will be expensive, as the easy to drill oil has already been exploited.
Simply, what this means, is that the machinery that needs to be designed and built requires even more labor to do so. More engineers and scientists to understand and fiqure out how to find, and extract it. More engineers to design the much larger, much more spohisticated equipment. More companies involved in building it, etc.
Again, it all comes down to labor.
The only time this breaks down is when certain luxury goods are involved. Are gold, platinum, and jewels as valuble as their prices suggest? Certainly not as a commodity, despite their rarity. But, to a certain expent, even they depend on more labor than would be involved to extract other natural minerals, because of their rarity. A good deal of the gold mined today is coming from mines that were closed decades ago because the price to extract it had risen above the then low price gold was selling for.
Part of the point is that if these commodities were as easy tio extract as are earthworms, despite their rarity, the prices would be much lower. And, yes, I do know that DeBeers holds diamonds back from the market.
And, in any case, as I pointed out, these are not normal commodities.
i thought it was 3plays over three days, not 3 plays for 3 days
3 plays, or three days, whichever comes first. If you play it 3 times in the first hour, that's it.
But, if you don't play it at all, and the 3 days are up, that's it as well.
Sometimes the parts do not add up to the whole.
In fact, this is why MS had to limit ALL music sharing to a three play, or three day limit, whichever came first.
Not to mention that MS is also saying that not all songs can be shared. They have yet to clarify that, it may mean that media has to be tagged for sharing, or that it it can be shared unless it's tagged for not sharing.
I doubt movies or TV will allow sharing at all, except for trailers.
Sometimes the parts do not add up to the whole.
These articles are meaningless.
Buy Maya - and do a "tear-down". All that's in the box is a couple of DVDs and a book for f's sake! A total manufacturing cost of about $10 and yet they sell this for THOUSANDS!!!
What a rip-off! those guys must be raking it in! Etc. Etc.
C.