Over a Blackjack or a Curve? Sure. Over all other subsidized phones? No, not so much. Even when we compare apples to oranges, you can find phones in the iPhone's price ballpark.
....
And when the N95 is offered through ATT, it will likely be more expensive than any of those, and more expensive than the iPhone as well.
The N95 is free according to some folks in Europe. So much for your assertion that the iPhone is aggressively priced vs its competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
O2 have almost no 3G service where I am too but oddly the pub down the road has a Cloud hotspot.
£269 for the phone though is silly. You can get an N95 for free.
I suspect there will be a lot of people getting an N95 on O2 for free, plus an iPhone at £269, switching the SIM to the iPhone and then selling the N95 on eBay.
This is on top of revenue sharing with Apple. The iPhone is effectively subsidized.
Quote:
LOL. Same thing.
Not even close. The $399 price makes it somewhat more approachable but is by no means inexpensive even for high end phone buyers, some of whom expect even the N95 to be free with contract. $399 vs Free is hardly price competitive.
The iPhone competes in features (somewhat), ease of use (lots) and branding (mostly). It is not price competitive.
The N95 is free according to some folks in Europe.
So much for your assertion that the iPhone is aggressively priced vs its competition.
That assumes that
1) the N95 is the only competition for the iPhone in Europe, and
2) Europe is the only market.
Both are very poor assumptions.
Quote:
Not even close. The $399 price makes it somewhat more approachable but is by no means inexpensive even for high end phone buyers, some of whom expect even the N95 to be free with contract. $399 vs Free is hardly price competitive.
Weren't you the guy arguing that 'price doesn't matter' for high-end phones just a few posts back, vinea?
You're so twisted in knots it's hard to know what you believe anymore.
In any case, yep, $399 vs free is hardly competitive, but its not like the N95 is the only competition the iPhone faces, or will be facing, in Europe.
Also, Europe is obviously not the only market... in the US, the N95 won't be even close to free ($499 might be a good guess), in large part 'cuz we don't give bigger phone discounts on high-dollar plans. Europe does.
Why are you so interested in exceptions that only go to prove the rule?
Quote:
The iPhone competes in features (somewhat), ease of use (lots) and branding (mostly). It is not price competitive.
Jobs seems to disagree with you. He dropped the price, in order to "go for it" during the Christmas season. His words, not mine.
If the price drop didn't make the iPhone more price competitive, then the joke sure was on Steve. He left hundreds of millions of dollars on the table for nothing.
1) the N95 is the only competition for the iPhone in Europe, and
2) Europe is the only market.
Both are very poor assumptions.
Neither are assumptions. It is your example phone being offered for free.
Quote:
Weren't you the guy arguing that 'price doesn't matter' for high-end phones just a few posts back, vinea?
No, I was saying that the iPhone doesn't compete on price. Twist words all you like but it doesn't change the fact that the iPhone isn't being priced very aggressively as you state.
Quote:
In any case, yep, $399 vs free is hardly competitive, but its not like the N95 is the only competition the iPhone faces, or will be facing, in Europe.
No, but again it was your example of a high end phone.
Quote:
Also, Europe is obviously not the only market... in the US, the N95 won't be even close to free ($499 might be a good guess), in large part 'cuz we don't give bigger phone discounts on high-dollar plans. Europe does.
Guess all you like but there isn't a single Verizon or Cingular SmartPhone for more than $399 today. Not one. So the Apple iPhone is STILL priced at or above all competitors.
By the time the N95 is offered likely the 16GB iPhone will be out and priced at or above $499.
Quote:
Why are you so interested in exceptions that only go to prove the rule?
Hardly an exception when you have not one single phone priced above the iPhone.
Quote:
Jobs seems to disagree with you. He dropped the price, in order to "go for it" during the Christmas season. His words, not mine.
Apple has also stated in the past that they were pursuing market share for the Mac. But not at the expense of margins. Therefore profit before share is Apple's behavior and remains so in this case OR they would be offering the iPhone for even less.
Quote:
If the price drop didn't make the iPhone more price competitive, then the joke sure was on Steve. He left hundreds of millions of dollars on the table for nothing.
Incorrect argument. The iPhone IS more competitive than before because it now has price parity with the other PDA phones from Verizon and AT&T. But it is neither "agressively priced", "cutting edge of a price war" or any other stupid assertion you've made. It is not competing on price or it would be $199 like the MOTO Q, 8830, 7100i BlackBerry, Treo 755p, 700wx etc. smart phones.
Or free like some other smart phones.
Apple is priced at the top end of the spectrum where pricing is less important than features as long as its not too out of whack with the competition. Now that its priced at the same level as other top end offerings at Verizon and AT&T as opposed to a couple hundred ABOVE those other top end phones then one can expect sales to increase while Apple maintains its traditional 28% margins. Perhaps even a bit more than 28% depending on how much less the new flash will cost Apple and how much revenue sharing Apple is getting from AT&T.
Vinea, I just read your last (long) response, and frankly, laughed.
Look, I'm not going to get into deconstructing each others posts line-for-line forever and ever. Maybe you don't have much going on, but I do, and I'm here way too much as it is. And in the time chunks I spend here, there are better discussions to be had here than listening to go on and on (and on... ) about a point where the best result you're going to get is, "We agree to disagree."
I've also received PMs from other posters saying that I shouldn't bother debating with you further, as you apparently have a pattern of being rather tedious and 'difficult'.
So, to sum up, you feel that the iPhone doesn't compete on price. I think it's obvious from the steep, early price cut, that Apple believes that it does. Even if you refuse to accept it.
If that doesn't satisfy you, oh well. So be a dear and hit the lights on your way out of the thread, 'mkay? Thanks.
Nice false smiley. I guess you don't have a real response to the fact that the N95 is free.
It would be nice if some of the posters who go to all this trouble to research a 'free' phone which you get 'with a 2 year contract' (or 18 months or whatever it is) would take the time to actually post the total cost of ownership and compare those numbers. When I did that in the US the iPhone was one of the cheapest 'smart' phones (or whatever you want to call it) out there. The N95 is definitely not free.
It would be nice if some of the posters who go to all this trouble to research a 'free' phone which you get 'with a 2 year contract' (or 18 months or whatever it is) would take the time to actually post the total cost of ownership and compare those numbers. When I did that in the US the iPhone was one of the cheapest 'smart' phones (or whatever you want to call it) out there. The N95 is definitely not free.
TANSTAAFL
Depends on the amount of messaging you do. The $20 data plan is $9 cheaper than the normal $29 plan but only has 200 SMS messages vs 1500 on the regular plan. Which is the same as the middle data plan for the iPhone.
The total cost isn't all that different at the end of 24 months.
iPhone = $399 + $1416 = $1815 (200 SMS/month)
Blackjack = $99 + $1679 = $1778 (1500 SMS/month)
I guess with SmartPhone Connect Unlimited w/Xpress Mail its also only $20 a month but with no messaging at all. Hmm...add 200 messages for $5.
Blackjack = $99 + $1559 = $1658 (200 SMS/month)
Blackjack = $99 + $1416 = $1515 (0 SMS/month)
Of course, with the iPhone, if you opt for the 2 year contract you can get a backup Blackjack for only $99 or a 3125 for $50. The 3125 is actually a pretty nice little smartphone. No keyboard and tiny but for $50 its kinda nifty for a flip phone.
Is the iPhone the cheapest? No. Is it that much more expensive? Only by $150-$300 over the course of 24 months as might be expected from the price difference.
Yes, I do (the slip, that is). I'm not the only one either. The stories on this had also reported "by the end of next year". There must be a good reason for that.
This simple "next year" stuff means nothing specific by itself. It could mean the beginning of the year, the middle, or the end.
We have to look a bit more critically. The beginning of the year is obviously out. The market simply couldn't support that. European distribution will have begun only a month or so before.
The middle of the year looks more interesting, but as before with Europe, the Asian market will only have been penetrated for a short while.
Neither of these seems to be a good candidate for 10 million sales. Only the end of the year makes any sense.
Now, I'm not saying that Apple won't sell more than 10 million by the end of 2008. But, I am saying the the momentum will be building as the new markets open up. There would be a very tight timeline for 10 million sales by end of june 2008.
I don't think that Jobs wants to cut it that close. just a bit, and Apple misses forecasts. That's not the purpose of forecasts like this. Apple has to beat it, and beat it with margin?for sure.
Remember that you can always raise forecasts but once offered, you can never lower them without suffering a black eye.
In the call yesterday, Steve repeated (again) his prediction of 10 million iPhones sold during calendar year 2008. At this point, is there anyone still in denial about this? Or are we going to insist that he misspoke yet again about it?
In the call yesterday, Steve repeated (again) his prediction of 10 million iPhones sold during calendar year 2008. At this point, is there anyone still in denial about this? Or are we going to insist that he misspoke yet again about it?
I beg to differ, but there is NO question now. The date is the end of Apple's 2008 financial year, which was what was said in the conference call.
As I mentioned in anther forum, we are all right. The interpretations can go where they will. The end of Apple's 2008 financial year is at the end of the 2008 third quarter.
Comments
Over a Blackjack or a Curve? Sure. Over all other subsidized phones? No, not so much. Even when we compare apples to oranges, you can find phones in the iPhone's price ballpark.
....
And when the N95 is offered through ATT, it will likely be more expensive than any of those, and more expensive than the iPhone as well.
The N95 is free according to some folks in Europe. So much for your assertion that the iPhone is aggressively priced vs its competition.
O2 have almost no 3G service where I am too but oddly the pub down the road has a Cloud hotspot.
£269 for the phone though is silly. You can get an N95 for free.
I suspect there will be a lot of people getting an N95 on O2 for free, plus an iPhone at £269, switching the SIM to the iPhone and then selling the N95 on eBay.
This is on top of revenue sharing with Apple. The iPhone is effectively subsidized.
LOL. Same thing.
Not even close. The $399 price makes it somewhat more approachable but is by no means inexpensive even for high end phone buyers, some of whom expect even the N95 to be free with contract. $399 vs Free is hardly price competitive.
The iPhone competes in features (somewhat), ease of use (lots) and branding (mostly). It is not price competitive.
Vinea
Teno, no offense, but given your track record on this issue, I'm gonna go with something, anything, other than what you think.
Given you absurd assertions that's the kettle calling the pot black.
Given you absurd assertions that's the kettle calling the pot black.
Just looked it up in the dictionary:
ab·surd [ab-surd, -zurd] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
1.\tutterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
2.\tthe quality or condition of existing in a meaningless and irrational world.
3. most of what vinea has to say
.
Nice false smiley. I guess you don't have a real response to the fact that the N95 is free.
The N95 is free according to some folks in Europe.
So much for your assertion that the iPhone is aggressively priced vs its competition.
That assumes that
1) the N95 is the only competition for the iPhone in Europe, and
2) Europe is the only market.
Both are very poor assumptions.
Not even close. The $399 price makes it somewhat more approachable but is by no means inexpensive even for high end phone buyers, some of whom expect even the N95 to be free with contract. $399 vs Free is hardly price competitive.
Weren't you the guy arguing that 'price doesn't matter' for high-end phones just a few posts back, vinea?
You're so twisted in knots it's hard to know what you believe anymore.
In any case, yep, $399 vs free is hardly competitive, but its not like the N95 is the only competition the iPhone faces, or will be facing, in Europe.
Also, Europe is obviously not the only market... in the US, the N95 won't be even close to free ($499 might be a good guess), in large part 'cuz we don't give bigger phone discounts on high-dollar plans. Europe does.
Why are you so interested in exceptions that only go to prove the rule?
The iPhone competes in features (somewhat), ease of use (lots) and branding (mostly). It is not price competitive.
Jobs seems to disagree with you. He dropped the price, in order to "go for it" during the Christmas season. His words, not mine.
If the price drop didn't make the iPhone more price competitive, then the joke sure was on Steve. He left hundreds of millions of dollars on the table for nothing.
.
Nice false smiley. I guess you don't have a real response to the fact that the N95 is free.
I was composing it even as you whined.
And what's a 'false smiley'?
.
That assumes that
1) the N95 is the only competition for the iPhone in Europe, and
2) Europe is the only market.
Both are very poor assumptions.
Neither are assumptions. It is your example phone being offered for free.
Weren't you the guy arguing that 'price doesn't matter' for high-end phones just a few posts back, vinea?
No, I was saying that the iPhone doesn't compete on price. Twist words all you like but it doesn't change the fact that the iPhone isn't being priced very aggressively as you state.
In any case, yep, $399 vs free is hardly competitive, but its not like the N95 is the only competition the iPhone faces, or will be facing, in Europe.
No, but again it was your example of a high end phone.
Also, Europe is obviously not the only market... in the US, the N95 won't be even close to free ($499 might be a good guess), in large part 'cuz we don't give bigger phone discounts on high-dollar plans. Europe does.
Guess all you like but there isn't a single Verizon or Cingular SmartPhone for more than $399 today. Not one. So the Apple iPhone is STILL priced at or above all competitors.
By the time the N95 is offered likely the 16GB iPhone will be out and priced at or above $499.
Why are you so interested in exceptions that only go to prove the rule?
Hardly an exception when you have not one single phone priced above the iPhone.
Jobs seems to disagree with you. He dropped the price, in order to "go for it" during the Christmas season. His words, not mine.
Apple has also stated in the past that they were pursuing market share for the Mac. But not at the expense of margins. Therefore profit before share is Apple's behavior and remains so in this case OR they would be offering the iPhone for even less.
If the price drop didn't make the iPhone more price competitive, then the joke sure was on Steve. He left hundreds of millions of dollars on the table for nothing.
Incorrect argument. The iPhone IS more competitive than before because it now has price parity with the other PDA phones from Verizon and AT&T. But it is neither "agressively priced", "cutting edge of a price war" or any other stupid assertion you've made. It is not competing on price or it would be $199 like the MOTO Q, 8830, 7100i BlackBerry, Treo 755p, 700wx etc. smart phones.
Or free like some other smart phones.
Apple is priced at the top end of the spectrum where pricing is less important than features as long as its not too out of whack with the competition. Now that its priced at the same level as other top end offerings at Verizon and AT&T as opposed to a couple hundred ABOVE those other top end phones then one can expect sales to increase while Apple maintains its traditional 28% margins. Perhaps even a bit more than 28% depending on how much less the new flash will cost Apple and how much revenue sharing Apple is getting from AT&T.
Vinea
I was composing it even as you whined.
And what's a 'false smiley'?
.
No, its a wimp attempt to insult someone and then pretend its all a fun jest. Whatever.
Do it or not. Don't try to hide behind a smiley.
No, its a wimp attempt to insult someone and then pretend its all a fun jest. Whatever.
Do it or not. Don't try to hide behind a smiley.
Trust me, if I wanted to insult you, you'd know.
.
Look, I'm not going to get into deconstructing each others posts line-for-line forever and ever. Maybe you don't have much going on, but I do, and I'm here way too much as it is. And in the time chunks I spend here, there are better discussions to be had here than listening to go on and on (and on...
I've also received PMs from other posters saying that I shouldn't bother debating with you further, as you apparently have a pattern of being rather tedious and 'difficult'.
So, to sum up, you feel that the iPhone doesn't compete on price. I think it's obvious from the steep, early price cut, that Apple believes that it does. Even if you refuse to accept it.
If that doesn't satisfy you, oh well. So be a dear and hit the lights on your way out of the thread, 'mkay? Thanks.
.
I've also received PMs from other posters saying that I shouldn't bother debating with you further, as you're something of a known loon here.
Say hi to Mel. Nice personal attack.
V
Nice false smiley. I guess you don't have a real response to the fact that the N95 is free.
It would be nice if some of the posters who go to all this trouble to research a 'free' phone which you get 'with a 2 year contract' (or 18 months or whatever it is) would take the time to actually post the total cost of ownership and compare those numbers. When I did that in the US the iPhone was one of the cheapest 'smart' phones (or whatever you want to call it) out there. The N95 is definitely not free.
TANSTAAFL
It would be nice if some of the posters who go to all this trouble to research a 'free' phone which you get 'with a 2 year contract' (or 18 months or whatever it is) would take the time to actually post the total cost of ownership and compare those numbers. When I did that in the US the iPhone was one of the cheapest 'smart' phones (or whatever you want to call it) out there. The N95 is definitely not free.
TANSTAAFL
Depends on the amount of messaging you do. The $20 data plan is $9 cheaper than the normal $29 plan but only has 200 SMS messages vs 1500 on the regular plan. Which is the same as the middle data plan for the iPhone.
The total cost isn't all that different at the end of 24 months.
iPhone = $399 + $1416 = $1815 (200 SMS/month)
Blackjack = $99 + $1679 = $1778 (1500 SMS/month)
I guess with SmartPhone Connect Unlimited w/Xpress Mail its also only $20 a month but with no messaging at all. Hmm...add 200 messages for $5.
Blackjack = $99 + $1559 = $1658 (200 SMS/month)
Blackjack = $99 + $1416 = $1515 (0 SMS/month)
Of course, with the iPhone, if you opt for the 2 year contract you can get a backup Blackjack for only $99 or a 3125 for $50. The 3125 is actually a pretty nice little smartphone. No keyboard and tiny but for $50 its kinda nifty for a flip phone.
Is the iPhone the cheapest? No. Is it that much more expensive? Only by $150-$300 over the course of 24 months as might be expected from the price difference.
Yes, I do (the slip, that is). I'm not the only one either. The stories on this had also reported "by the end of next year". There must be a good reason for that.
This simple "next year" stuff means nothing specific by itself. It could mean the beginning of the year, the middle, or the end.
We have to look a bit more critically. The beginning of the year is obviously out. The market simply couldn't support that. European distribution will have begun only a month or so before.
The middle of the year looks more interesting, but as before with Europe, the Asian market will only have been penetrated for a short while.
Neither of these seems to be a good candidate for 10 million sales. Only the end of the year makes any sense.
Now, I'm not saying that Apple won't sell more than 10 million by the end of 2008. But, I am saying the the momentum will be building as the new markets open up. There would be a very tight timeline for 10 million sales by end of june 2008.
I don't think that Jobs wants to cut it that close. just a bit, and Apple misses forecasts. That's not the purpose of forecasts like this. Apple has to beat it, and beat it with margin?for sure.
Remember that you can always raise forecasts but once offered, you can never lower them without suffering a black eye.
In the call yesterday, Steve repeated (again) his prediction of 10 million iPhones sold during calendar year 2008. At this point, is there anyone still in denial about this? Or are we going to insist that he misspoke yet again about it?
In the call yesterday, Steve repeated (again) his prediction of 10 million iPhones sold during calendar year 2008. At this point, is there anyone still in denial about this? Or are we going to insist that he misspoke yet again about it?
I beg to differ, but there is NO question now. The date is the end of Apple's 2008 financial year, which was what was said in the conference call.
As I mentioned in anther forum, we are all right. The interpretations can go where they will. The end of Apple's 2008 financial year is at the end of the 2008 third quarter.
There is no "during".
Let's leave it now.
They specifically said shipping 10 million IN 2008, not 10 million by the end of 2008.
Go listen to the conference call, it's at the 27 minute mark.
Sorry, but you obviously haven't listened to the call.
They specifically said shipping 10 million IN 2008, not 10 million by the end of 2008.
Go listen to the conference call, it's at the 27 minute mark.
We have different reference points. The times reports that Apple is saying end of year, as jobs did earlier this year in an interview with CNBC.
Your reference point is a paraphrase from a newspaper (it's not a direct quote from an apple person, is it?). The media isn't always right.
Sorry, but I'm trusting info directly from apple on this.