I think it is seen as expensive but probably by the people who don't fully understand the benefits of the device.
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
It also has great touch navigation, internet everywhere on 3G, which is actually pretty fast when you pick up the signal and some good games.
I actually found the contracts to not be that bad in the UK but they include part of the cost of the phone and the minimum worthwhile one is £35 a month. Over 18 months, that is £630 - £250 iphone subsidy = £380/18 = approx £20 per month for 600 minutes, 500 texts.
I think relative to other carriers, that's actually pretty good value.
Until there is an iPhone that doesn't require a data connection, I will stick with my iPod touch + normal phone.
And what precisely would be the purpose of having an iPhone without data.
None of the devices primary features would work unless on Wi-Fi. Which, if you have not noticed is not universally available. Visual voicemail would not work.
Go get a Touch. If you don't want Edge or 3G data - THE DEVICE IS NOT FOR YOU!!!!!!
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
Except you can buy a BT GPS device for as little as ?30 and connect it to your phone
Unless price evaluations take into account the total cost of ownership this discussion is meaningless. Several countries around the world already offer the handset free of charge.
Retailers could throw "free" $100 notes at customers with every iphone to get them to sign up to a contract. It's all going to be factored into your bill somehow so you better lube up and grit your teeth because telecompanies have pegging down to a fine art.
I have no problem with the price of the iPhone, I just don't want to switch carriers to get one. Simply put, if Apple ditched their "one carrier per country" policy, they would move a lot of them.
Or unlocked with freedom of choice - but then you would get the whiners again - too expensive.
But the real reaso in very simple, as William Jefferson Clinton once put it "IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID"
If your phone is working fine and you're not sure about keeping your job you hardly going to splash out on money - especially if the credit crunch means that you actually dont have any money anymore as all your disposable income is used to repay your debts...
For me at least, the price of the phone is completely immaterial. It's the cost of using the thing that puts me off.
I live in the UK, and O2, the provider here, has just introduced a "Pay And Go" plan. Unfortunately, that is *not* the same as "Pay As You Go".
I had always said that I would buy an iPhone as soon as I could get a PAYG plan for it, but Pay And Go is simply not it: it's just a cheaper version of the existing contracts, in effect. As far as I can see from the limited information I've been able to find so far, you *have* to top up with a minimum of £10 every month (so, £120 per year minimum), and after the first year you have to top of a further £10 each month to get data services too (which are free for the first year). So, that's £240 per year after the first year. That's a complete and utter joke.
They could give me the iPhone and I still wouldn't have it with that kind of financial commitment. I simply don't make enough use of a mobile phone to make that kind of spending worthwhile, no matter how much I might want an iPhone.
On the other hand, if I could just pay for exactly as much service as I use (even at a relatively high rate), with credit that doesn't expire, I'd be willing to spend a lot on the iPhone itself. Sell me one at a bit more than the price of an iPod Touch, with a true PAYG plan, and I'd buy one tomorrow. I'd happily spend up to, say, £400 on the phone itself under those circumstances. But I will *not* sign myself up to the money-pit that's the current range of contracts, much as I'd like an iPhone.
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
The iPhone doesn't do turn-by-turn navigation so your justification is a little out. However, I agree that £350 including a year's data is a pretty good price.
I wonder how one applies to become an analyst? It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to work out that three things influence the sales of electronics (ignoring macro-economic effects): how new the product is, price and Christmas. The danger of Apple's single model strategy is that there will be massive peaks and troughs in the iPhone's sales and market share.
I live in the UK, and O2, the provider here, has just introduced a "Pay And Go" plan. Unfortunately, that is *not* the same as "Pay As You Go".
I had always said that I would buy an iPhone as soon as I could get a PAYG plan for it, but Pay And Go is simply not it: it's just a cheaper version of the existing contracts, in effect. As far as I can see from the limited information I've been able to find so far, you *have* to top up with a minimum of £10 every month (so, £120 per year minimum), and after the first year you have to top of a further £10 each month to get data services too (which are free for the first year). So, that's £240 per year after the first year. That's a complete and utter joke.
Wow, £240 a year, stop being such a tight-ass miser. You'd have been expected to pay £1000+ for that kind of service a year ago, what on earth is your problem.
Also, don't forget you also get the visual voicemail (the only service of its kind in the UK) and "conference calling" (a feature you'd have also had to pay extra at least £10/month).
If you just concentrate on just the numbers you miss the details.
Slow news day?... I agree, analysts should not be given a free pass on their opinions. Their opinion, plus crediting them on AI can equal damage to AAPL stock and reputation.
These analysts have a track record, and they should be called on it, but every bloody time I take AI to task for assuming a journalistic stance but still not quite getting it, I get a note from Kaspar taking umbrage at my comments.
Kaspar, why did you not bother to take an editorial role here and include this analyst's track record as a point of reference to their unfounded comments? I'm honestly interested in what the thinking is here...
Who is the person making the decisions to post stories on AI? That person should be taking a responsible editorial role. I don't think anyone expects "Wall Street Journal" level reporting, but clearly there needs to be an editor assigned... I'd vote for Mel Gross.
I second that, I'm sick of analysts "guesses" (usually bad ones) being presented as "facts", it does nothing but damage the reputations of companies and give them air-time just adds credibility to someone who clearly has no credibility to speak of.
I feel that the iPhone is not overpriced at all. What people are wary about is the phone service, data, text message, add a line, night and weekend minutes extra! Oh, by the way, were gonna stick it to you for 2 years. Even if the damn phone is free people will still not be interested in paying for the services and for that length of time.
I'd be worried about a phone service plan (AT&T) that requires me to pay to RECEIVE calls and SMS messages. I'm sorry but f00k that. It's not within my control, so I'd never pay for that. The US carriers need a real kick up the ass, but whilst they have the major politicians in their pockets, I guess it'll never change.
Guys, I have an iPod touch (for all intents and purposes is an iPhone without the phone). As it turns out, everywhere I go has freely available wi-fi. I have no need to check my email while I drive down the highway (which is what the iPhone data plan might be useful for).
Let's look at it this way. I currently pay ~$60/mo for 12Megabytes/sec internet connection at my home. AT&T is asking for $30/mo for 2Megabits/sec! Not including $5 for text messaging on top. It's a complete ripoff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrandersoniii
And what precisely would be the purpose of having an iPhone without data.
None of the devices primary features would work unless on Wi-Fi. Which, if you have not noticed is not universally available. Visual voicemail would not work.
Go get a Touch. If you don't want Edge or 3G data - THE DEVICE IS NOT FOR YOU!!!!!!
You cannot get an iPhone without the data plan without paying the full price for the phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog
I'm quite sure you can get an iPhone from AT&T without a data plan, but what's the purpose?
Guess what? I am "always connected" with my iPod touch using wi-fi (FOR FREE). I would just like to carry one device instead of two. There is absolutely a value proposition to be made here and it doesn't involve $35/mo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tawilson
Stick with what you have, the whole point of the iPhone is the "always connected" world that it promotes.
If you don't want the data connection and don't really see the benefit of that side of things, you most definitely don't need an iPhone.
If the iphone is still perceived as too expensive, than these people clearly don't live in Canada. Its because of the iphone that prices of Blackberrys and data plans have been coming down here. So for that amazing feat, I say thank you Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
A new report warns that halving the iPhone's price this summer still wasn't enough to truly grow sales -- and that recent metrics may show an actual shrink in sales during the early fall.
Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty points to a study of prospective iPhone buyers that shows about 46 percent of them believing the handset to be too expensive, even at its $199 entry point.
Few actually object to the phone itself; only 11 percent disliked either the design or the feature set, the researcher says. About 31 percent objected to the iPhone's continued exclusivity with AT&T, which prevents subscribers to Verizon or other carriers from switching without added costs.
Huberty also takes care to dismantle notions that the resistance necessarily has its roots in preconceptions of Apple, noting that only 15 percent of the same overall group thinks Macs are overpriced.
The percentage of those showing very strong interest in buying an iPhone has also dropped significantly over time. Where as many as 7 percent of would-be buyers were very interested in the phone in February 2007 -- four months before the original phone and many of its final details were released -- 5 percent now show that same level of interest today.
Regardless of Apple's own beliefs as to the truth of those objections, it may have to use price as leverage to spur sales, the analyst warns. According to Huberty, sales were half as strong during September and October versus the height of the iPhone's launch in July and September. The exact methodology used to collect this information isn't known, but the data is used to lower estimates for Apple's 2009 iPhone shipments from 19 million down to 14 million.
To spike sales, Huberty suggests that Apple should take a cue from recent rumors and halve the price to $100, which she believes could at least double iPhone sales numbers. Apple's prized profit margins likely wouldn't be an issue, she claims, as the company only needs to reduce the cost of manufacturing and selling an iPhone by 17 percent to achieve the intended effect.
While other reports have also been cautious on Apple's iPhone sales performance for the fall, recent analysis has also suggested that the numbers may be deceptive as the company passes through the holiday season. Kaufman Bros.' Shaw Wu has just noted that gift cards may be factors in any seemingly disappointing sales during the fall quarter, as Apple may record the immediate revenue from an iPhone 3G gift card but can't register the buyer as an iPhone customer until the recipient picks up and activates the handset.
As many as one million actual iPhone buyers may go "missing" as a result, Wu says.
I think lowering the price might not have very much impact. In my country, it's priced at 1 euro in combination with a pretty attractive T-Mobile phone + unlimited 3G subscription.
I think that many people are just not interested enough in iPhone's features, to even check their preconception that Apple products are way too expensive.
Apple's perceived priceyness is becoming more and more of a problem, I think.
My own study, based on 1 people interviewed (me), shows that if the Iphone was sold for 1$, Apple would sell hundred millions more.
Quote : "Apple's prized profit margins likely wouldn't be an issue, she claims, as the company only needs to reduce the cost of manufacturing and selling an iPhone by 17 percent to achieve the intended effect."
Don't you think that if it was so easy to reduce the cost of manufacturing & selling by 17%, Apple wouldn't have already done that ? Do you think this company is managed by monkeys ? Obviously this person has no idea of what manufacturing costs are.
Comments
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
It also has great touch navigation, internet everywhere on 3G, which is actually pretty fast when you pick up the signal and some good games.
I actually found the contracts to not be that bad in the UK but they include part of the cost of the phone and the minimum worthwhile one is £35 a month. Over 18 months, that is £630 - £250 iphone subsidy = £380/18 = approx £20 per month for 600 minutes, 500 texts.
I think relative to other carriers, that's actually pretty good value.
Until there is an iPhone that doesn't require a data connection, I will stick with my iPod touch + normal phone.
And what precisely would be the purpose of having an iPhone without data.
None of the devices primary features would work unless on Wi-Fi. Which, if you have not noticed is not universally available. Visual voicemail would not work.
Go get a Touch. If you don't want Edge or 3G data - THE DEVICE IS NOT FOR YOU!!!!!!
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
Except you can buy a BT GPS device for as little as ?30 and connect it to your phone
Retailers could throw "free" $100 notes at customers with every iphone to get them to sign up to a contract. It's all going to be factored into your bill somehow so you better lube up and grit your teeth because telecompanies have pegging down to a fine art.
The problem is that the service from AT&T almost doubles my monthly bill.
Until there is an iPhone that doesn't require a data connection, I will stick with my iPod touch + normal phone.
I'm quite sure you can get an iPhone from AT&T without a data plan, but what's the purpose?
I have no problem with the price of the iPhone, I just don't want to switch carriers to get one. Simply put, if Apple ditched their "one carrier per country" policy, they would move a lot of them.
Or unlocked with freedom of choice - but then you would get the whiners again - too expensive.
But the real reaso in very simple, as William Jefferson Clinton once put it "IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID"
If your phone is working fine and you're not sure about keeping your job you hardly going to splash out on money - especially if the credit crunch means that you actually dont have any money anymore as all your disposable income is used to repay your debts...
I live in the UK, and O2, the provider here, has just introduced a "Pay And Go" plan. Unfortunately, that is *not* the same as "Pay As You Go".
I had always said that I would buy an iPhone as soon as I could get a PAYG plan for it, but Pay And Go is simply not it: it's just a cheaper version of the existing contracts, in effect. As far as I can see from the limited information I've been able to find so far, you *have* to top up with a minimum of £10 every month (so, £120 per year minimum), and after the first year you have to top of a further £10 each month to get data services too (which are free for the first year). So, that's £240 per year after the first year. That's a complete and utter joke.
They could give me the iPhone and I still wouldn't have it with that kind of financial commitment. I simply don't make enough use of a mobile phone to make that kind of spending worthwhile, no matter how much I might want an iPhone.
On the other hand, if I could just pay for exactly as much service as I use (even at a relatively high rate), with credit that doesn't expire, I'd be willing to spend a lot on the iPhone itself. Sell me one at a bit more than the price of an iPod Touch, with a true PAYG plan, and I'd buy one tomorrow. I'd happily spend up to, say, £400 on the phone itself under those circumstances. But I will *not* sign myself up to the money-pit that's the current range of contracts, much as I'd like an iPhone.
If you buy a Prepay phone, a half decent one is £80. If you buy a GPS device, a decent one is £150. An ipod is £100. If you had to buy them all together, that comes to £330. The prepay iphone is just £350.
The iPhone doesn't do turn-by-turn navigation so your justification is a little out. However, I agree that £350 including a year's data is a pretty good price.
I wonder how one applies to become an analyst? It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to work out that three things influence the sales of electronics (ignoring macro-economic effects): how new the product is, price and Christmas. The danger of Apple's single model strategy is that there will be massive peaks and troughs in the iPhone's sales and market share.
Until there is an iPhone that doesn't require a data connection, I will stick with my iPod touch + normal phone.
Stick with what you have, the whole point of the iPhone is the "always connected" world that it promotes.
If you don't want the data connection and don't really see the benefit of that side of things, you most definitely don't need an iPhone.
I live in the UK, and O2, the provider here, has just introduced a "Pay And Go" plan. Unfortunately, that is *not* the same as "Pay As You Go".
I had always said that I would buy an iPhone as soon as I could get a PAYG plan for it, but Pay And Go is simply not it: it's just a cheaper version of the existing contracts, in effect. As far as I can see from the limited information I've been able to find so far, you *have* to top up with a minimum of £10 every month (so, £120 per year minimum), and after the first year you have to top of a further £10 each month to get data services too (which are free for the first year). So, that's £240 per year after the first year. That's a complete and utter joke.
Wow, £240 a year, stop being such a tight-ass miser. You'd have been expected to pay £1000+ for that kind of service a year ago, what on earth is your problem.
Also, don't forget you also get the visual voicemail (the only service of its kind in the UK) and "conference calling" (a feature you'd have also had to pay extra at least £10/month).
If you just concentrate on just the numbers you miss the details.
Except you can buy a BT GPS device for as little as ?30 and connect it to your phone
A BT GPS may not have A-GPS, and certainly not on a ?30 device. And BT will drain your battery even faster than having a built-in GPS.
It's really not the cost of the phone that's the problem, it's the cost of two years of ATT service that is the real killer.
So in summary, the AT&T contract is too expensive, NOT the iPhone.
Slow news day?... I agree, analysts should not be given a free pass on their opinions. Their opinion, plus crediting them on AI can equal damage to AAPL stock and reputation.
These analysts have a track record, and they should be called on it, but every bloody time I take AI to task for assuming a journalistic stance but still not quite getting it, I get a note from Kaspar taking umbrage at my comments.
Kaspar, why did you not bother to take an editorial role here and include this analyst's track record as a point of reference to their unfounded comments? I'm honestly interested in what the thinking is here...
Who is the person making the decisions to post stories on AI? That person should be taking a responsible editorial role. I don't think anyone expects "Wall Street Journal" level reporting, but clearly there needs to be an editor assigned... I'd vote for Mel Gross.
I second that, I'm sick of analysts "guesses" (usually bad ones) being presented as "facts", it does nothing but damage the reputations of companies and give them air-time just adds credibility to someone who clearly has no credibility to speak of.
Irresponsible reporting. Stop it!
I feel that the iPhone is not overpriced at all. What people are wary about is the phone service, data, text message, add a line, night and weekend minutes extra! Oh, by the way, were gonna stick it to you for 2 years. Even if the damn phone is free people will still not be interested in paying for the services and for that length of time.
I'd be worried about a phone service plan (AT&T) that requires me to pay to RECEIVE calls and SMS messages. I'm sorry but f00k that. It's not within my control, so I'd never pay for that. The US carriers need a real kick up the ass, but whilst they have the major politicians in their pockets, I guess it'll never change.
Let's look at it this way. I currently pay ~$60/mo for 12Megabytes/sec internet connection at my home. AT&T is asking for $30/mo for 2Megabits/sec! Not including $5 for text messaging on top. It's a complete ripoff.
And what precisely would be the purpose of having an iPhone without data.
None of the devices primary features would work unless on Wi-Fi. Which, if you have not noticed is not universally available. Visual voicemail would not work.
Go get a Touch. If you don't want Edge or 3G data - THE DEVICE IS NOT FOR YOU!!!!!!
You cannot get an iPhone without the data plan without paying the full price for the phone.
I'm quite sure you can get an iPhone from AT&T without a data plan, but what's the purpose?
Guess what? I am "always connected" with my iPod touch using wi-fi (FOR FREE). I would just like to carry one device instead of two. There is absolutely a value proposition to be made here and it doesn't involve $35/mo.
Stick with what you have, the whole point of the iPhone is the "always connected" world that it promotes.
If you don't want the data connection and don't really see the benefit of that side of things, you most definitely don't need an iPhone.
A new report warns that halving the iPhone's price this summer still wasn't enough to truly grow sales -- and that recent metrics may show an actual shrink in sales during the early fall.
Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty points to a study of prospective iPhone buyers that shows about 46 percent of them believing the handset to be too expensive, even at its $199 entry point.
Few actually object to the phone itself; only 11 percent disliked either the design or the feature set, the researcher says. About 31 percent objected to the iPhone's continued exclusivity with AT&T, which prevents subscribers to Verizon or other carriers from switching without added costs.
Huberty also takes care to dismantle notions that the resistance necessarily has its roots in preconceptions of Apple, noting that only 15 percent of the same overall group thinks Macs are overpriced.
The percentage of those showing very strong interest in buying an iPhone has also dropped significantly over time. Where as many as 7 percent of would-be buyers were very interested in the phone in February 2007 -- four months before the original phone and many of its final details were released -- 5 percent now show that same level of interest today.
Regardless of Apple's own beliefs as to the truth of those objections, it may have to use price as leverage to spur sales, the analyst warns. According to Huberty, sales were half as strong during September and October versus the height of the iPhone's launch in July and September. The exact methodology used to collect this information isn't known, but the data is used to lower estimates for Apple's 2009 iPhone shipments from 19 million down to 14 million.
To spike sales, Huberty suggests that Apple should take a cue from recent rumors and halve the price to $100, which she believes could at least double iPhone sales numbers. Apple's prized profit margins likely wouldn't be an issue, she claims, as the company only needs to reduce the cost of manufacturing and selling an iPhone by 17 percent to achieve the intended effect.
While other reports have also been cautious on Apple's iPhone sales performance for the fall, recent analysis has also suggested that the numbers may be deceptive as the company passes through the holiday season. Kaufman Bros.' Shaw Wu has just noted that gift cards may be factors in any seemingly disappointing sales during the fall quarter, as Apple may record the immediate revenue from an iPhone 3G gift card but can't register the buyer as an iPhone customer until the recipient picks up and activates the handset.
As many as one million actual iPhone buyers may go "missing" as a result, Wu says.
I have plenty of friends that would rather just stick with the black berry and verizon than switch to AT&T
I think that many people are just not interested enough in iPhone's features, to even check their preconception that Apple products are way too expensive.
Apple's perceived priceyness is becoming more and more of a problem, I think.
Quote : "Apple's prized profit margins likely wouldn't be an issue, she claims, as the company only needs to reduce the cost of manufacturing and selling an iPhone by 17 percent to achieve the intended effect."
Don't you think that if it was so easy to reduce the cost of manufacturing & selling by 17%, Apple wouldn't have already done that ? Do you think this company is managed by monkeys ? Obviously this person has no idea of what manufacturing costs are.