Apple comes off as "listening to the whiners, I mean, spoiled customers." Good PR move. Defuses the rhetoric.
And they give those folks $100 credit for use at the store. Which means you get about $50 worth of stuff they bought for $10. Good financial move.
Then they hit you up with the shipping and handling charges on your $100 purchase you didn't buy at Target or BestBuy. Even better financial move. Pure profit.
And now you'll all go buy a SECOND iPhone for $400, because that lowers your overall price for two phones even more. You give the "older" one to your old lady, who has never forgiven you for quitting your job to go stand in line for 3 days to pay $600 for a stupid cell phone in the first place. (After all, she has a $29 one that she uses 24/7 to call and tell all her friends what a loser you are.) She loads up her "new" iPhone with pictures and video of you passed out drunk on the apartment floor with fake eyebrows drawn on your face in permanent marker by your loser friends.
BS. There is no risk of losing a lawsuit after you lower your prices. Ever. Stop kidding yourself. It was a good move though, not out of the goodness of their heart. I'm amazed how quickly everyone seems to have forgiven - remember Apple is the company that makes 50% margins on everything - that $100 credit just means another sale for them. Duh!
Agreed. In fact, this may be the case where Steve Jobs has actually made chicken salad out of chicken shit. Indeed, he probably had this planned out. Needed to cut the price to drive sales to meet expectations. He knew it would seriously piss of his "loyal" customers. Let the press eat up the screaming of these customers for a day. Then, comes out with his "open letter" offering an olive branch which apparently is enough to placate most. All the while, this olive branch will, as you point out, actually end up making Apple MORE money from these people, or at least not losing any.
I was one of the early adopters who bought on June 29th. I don't care if I get the credit or whatever. I just became more impressed with Jobs, not because of the goodness of his heart, but rather because of what appears to be shear cunning and marketing savvy. Interesting.
BS. There is no risk of losing a lawsuit after you lower your prices. Ever. Stop kidding yourself. It was a good move though, not out of the goodness of their heart. I'm amazed how quickly everyone seems to have forgiven - remember Apple is the company that makes 50% margins on everything - that $100 credit just means another sale for them. Duh!
True. Store credit is never as expensive to give away as it appears. It's like a casino comping you with a free hotel room.
I'm sure I'll be happy to spend that $100 credit, but I do think it's a mistake to capitulate to crybabies. It only encourages them to do it again and again. And it also makes them all gloat about how "effective" all their whining was.
This kind of thing is exactly what makes our legal system so screwed up in this country. I think Apple would have been better off taking the bad press for a week or two, and then laughing all the way to the bank this holiday season as they outsell every previous iPod holiday season by a wide margin. It wasn't going to hurt iPhone sales in the long run.
But they obviously know something I don't, so I'll take my $100 and move on.
Could you please explain how dropping the price on a consumer electronics item opens Apple up to a lawsuit?
Ridiculous.
This is a gesture to stop erosion of goodwill. Nothing more.
...and to keep the credit card companies that offer price protection happy. AE, and others sure did not like eating a 200/phone cost that customers were rightfully requesting.
A company is under no obligation to sell the same product, at the same price, for any given period of time.
Actually, consumer protection laws do have provisions regarding what companies can charge for similar products. Regardless, i'm not talking about a product - i'm talking about breaching contractual commitments (written and otherwise) and the remedies the breached party can seek upon breach....
I'm loving this. Way to step up to the plate Apple!
I was fine that I paid $200 more than the current price. I chose to buy it and a future lower price wouldn't have stopped me from buying it at launch time.
It's a smart way to do it because it drives more sales. Also, given the margin on products, $100 in retail credit doesn't actually cost Apple $100. A win/win.
Since I can't justify buying a new iMac (the G5 iMac is plugging along fine), maybe I'll try out one of the new keyboards.
I can't see the need for a nano once you have an iPhone, unless you need it for jogging, or something. That little screen is so disappointing after seeing the iPhone's screen. And there's no capacity advantage.
Now a $250 classic 160 GB is more like it. Keep all my music on one iPod, and have the iPhone for the occasional mobile video.
Agreed. In fact, this may be the case where Steve Jobs has actually made chicken salad out of chicken shit. Indeed, he probably had this planned out. Needed to cut the price to drive sales to meet expectations. He knew it would seriously piss of his "loyal" customers. Let the press eat up the screaming of these customers for a day. Then, comes out with his "open letter" offering an olive branch which apparently is enough to placate most. All the while, this olive branch will, as you point out, actually end up making Apple MORE money from these people, or at least not losing any.
I was one of the early adopters who bought on June 29th. I don't care if I get the credit or whatever. I just became more impressed with Jobs, not because of the goodness of his heart, but rather because of what appears to be shear cunning and marketing savvy. Interesting.
i agree with you - i think this was likely planned out - apple's success isn't only about serendipity - it's about Jobs' vision of the future of technology and media being right..
...and to keep the credit card companies that offer price protection happy. AE, and others sure did not like eating a 200/phone cost that customers were rightfully requesting.
Aaargh.
Apple have no obligation to the credit card companies to keep the price the same. Apple have no control over the 'price protection' policies that the credit card companies offer.
Of course, it's easy to offer price protection when you charge a decent interest rate and also take 1 to 2.5% of the purchase price from the merchant as the 'service charge' on every purchase made on the card.
i agree with you - i think this was likely planned out - apple's success isn't only about serendipity - it's about Jobs' vision of the future of technology and media being right..
But, I'm not saying he was wrong in doing so, if he did plan it out. I think he was bloody brilliant, is all I'm saying. From our past discussions with one another in another related thread, I'm sure you will disagree with me.
But, I'm not saying he was wrong in doing so, if he did plan it out. I think he was bloody brilliant, is all I'm saying. From our past discussions with one another in another related thread, I'm sure you will disagree with me.
I don't think he was wrong - I think he is smart and was well advised. So, I don't disagree except to the extent that you believe I will disagree with you (on the point about whether Jobs is right).
Comments
And they give those folks $100 credit for use at the store. Which means you get about $50 worth of stuff they bought for $10. Good financial move.
Then they hit you up with the shipping and handling charges on your $100 purchase you didn't buy at Target or BestBuy. Even better financial move. Pure profit.
And now you'll all go buy a SECOND iPhone for $400, because that lowers your overall price for two phones even more. You give the "older" one to your old lady, who has never forgiven you for quitting your job to go stand in line for 3 days to pay $600 for a stupid cell phone in the first place. (After all, she has a $29 one that she uses 24/7 to call and tell all her friends what a loser you are.) She loads up her "new" iPhone with pictures and video of you passed out drunk on the apartment floor with fake eyebrows drawn on your face in permanent marker by your loser friends.
Everybody wins.
and for many iPhone buyers, hello $49 iPod nano.
BS. There is no risk of losing a lawsuit after you lower your prices. Ever. Stop kidding yourself. It was a good move though, not out of the goodness of their heart. I'm amazed how quickly everyone seems to have forgiven - remember Apple is the company that makes 50% margins on everything - that $100 credit just means another sale for them. Duh!
Agreed. In fact, this may be the case where Steve Jobs has actually made chicken salad out of chicken shit. Indeed, he probably had this planned out. Needed to cut the price to drive sales to meet expectations. He knew it would seriously piss of his "loyal" customers. Let the press eat up the screaming of these customers for a day. Then, comes out with his "open letter" offering an olive branch which apparently is enough to placate most. All the while, this olive branch will, as you point out, actually end up making Apple MORE money from these people, or at least not losing any.
I was one of the early adopters who bought on June 29th. I don't care if I get the credit or whatever. I just became more impressed with Jobs, not because of the goodness of his heart, but rather because of what appears to be shear cunning and marketing savvy. Interesting.
BS. There is no risk of losing a lawsuit after you lower your prices. Ever. Stop kidding yourself. It was a good move though, not out of the goodness of their heart. I'm amazed how quickly everyone seems to have forgiven - remember Apple is the company that makes 50% margins on everything - that $100 credit just means another sale for them. Duh!
True. Store credit is never as expensive to give away as it appears. It's like a casino comping you with a free hotel room.
I'm sure I'll be happy to spend that $100 credit, but I do think it's a mistake to capitulate to crybabies. It only encourages them to do it again and again. And it also makes them all gloat about how "effective" all their whining was.
This kind of thing is exactly what makes our legal system so screwed up in this country. I think Apple would have been better off taking the bad press for a week or two, and then laughing all the way to the bank this holiday season as they outsell every previous iPod holiday season by a wide margin. It wasn't going to hurt iPhone sales in the long run.
But they obviously know something I don't, so I'll take my $100 and move on.
Could you please explain how dropping the price on a consumer electronics item opens Apple up to a lawsuit?
Ridiculous.
This is a gesture to stop erosion of goodwill. Nothing more.
...and to keep the credit card companies that offer price protection happy. AE, and others sure did not like eating a 200/phone cost that customers were rightfully requesting.
this isn't from the goodness of apple's heart - they obviously got advice from their counsel that they were at risk for a claim - - -
Dude, it must suck to go through life being such a cynic.
A company is under no obligation to sell the same product, at the same price, for any given period of time.
Actually, consumer protection laws do have provisions regarding what companies can charge for similar products. Regardless, i'm not talking about a product - i'm talking about breaching contractual commitments (written and otherwise) and the remedies the breached party can seek upon breach....
I was fine that I paid $200 more than the current price. I chose to buy it and a future lower price wouldn't have stopped me from buying it at launch time.
It's a smart way to do it because it drives more sales. Also, given the margin on products, $100 in retail credit doesn't actually cost Apple $100. A win/win.
Since I can't justify buying a new iMac (the G5 iMac is plugging along fine), maybe I'll try out one of the new keyboards.
wow...BOOM!
and for many iPhone buyers, hello $49 iPod nano.
I can't see the need for a nano once you have an iPhone, unless you need it for jogging, or something. That little screen is so disappointing after seeing the iPhone's screen. And there's no capacity advantage.
Now a $250 classic 160 GB is more like it. Keep all my music on one iPod, and have the iPhone for the occasional mobile video.
Agreed. In fact, this may be the case where Steve Jobs has actually made chicken salad out of chicken shit. Indeed, he probably had this planned out. Needed to cut the price to drive sales to meet expectations. He knew it would seriously piss of his "loyal" customers. Let the press eat up the screaming of these customers for a day. Then, comes out with his "open letter" offering an olive branch which apparently is enough to placate most. All the while, this olive branch will, as you point out, actually end up making Apple MORE money from these people, or at least not losing any.
I was one of the early adopters who bought on June 29th. I don't care if I get the credit or whatever. I just became more impressed with Jobs, not because of the goodness of his heart, but rather because of what appears to be shear cunning and marketing savvy. Interesting.
i agree with you - i think this was likely planned out - apple's success isn't only about serendipity - it's about Jobs' vision of the future of technology and media being right..
what if....this was planned out from day one of the release? Can Apple be that smart?
How many people on the planet now know the iPhone is $399 ?
no such thing as bad press.
makes you go hmmmm.
... just maybe all of the 'whiners' were not so far off-base (or as unimportant as you made them all out to be) after all...
Oh for christ's sake... now we have to listen to the whiners gloat as well.
...and to keep the credit card companies that offer price protection happy. AE, and others sure did not like eating a 200/phone cost that customers were rightfully requesting.
Aaargh.
Apple have no obligation to the credit card companies to keep the price the same. Apple have no control over the 'price protection' policies that the credit card companies offer.
Of course, it's easy to offer price protection when you charge a decent interest rate and also take 1 to 2.5% of the purchase price from the merchant as the 'service charge' on every purchase made on the card.
i agree with you - i think this was likely planned out - apple's success isn't only about serendipity - it's about Jobs' vision of the future of technology and media being right..
But, I'm not saying he was wrong in doing so, if he did plan it out. I think he was bloody brilliant, is all I'm saying. From our past discussions with one another in another related thread, I'm sure you will disagree with me.
But, I'm not saying he was wrong in doing so, if he did plan it out. I think he was bloody brilliant, is all I'm saying. From our past discussions with one another in another related thread, I'm sure you will disagree with me.
I don't think he was wrong - I think he is smart and was well advised. So, I don't disagree except to the extent that you believe I will disagree with you (on the point about whether Jobs is right).
claims can be the basis for lawsuits - but are often resolved prior to litigation. I posted the basis for my view in other threads...
yeah... we noticed your cross-forum spam/whining that continues even after the rebate announcement.