If Apple makes a $225 profit on each iPad 4G Cellular sold, it only needs to sell 10 000 4G Cellular units in Australia to make up for the marketing SNAFU. Considering that Australia's population is 0.326% of the world, and assuming a similar adoption rate of the iPad in Australia as worldwide in general, Apple probably sells close to 50 000 units in Australia in 3 months. Given that approximately 10% of the iPads sold are 4G (at least as estimated about the US), it would only take half a year for Apple to recover the penalty. If Australian buyers refrain from buying the 4G Cellular model for any reason (lack of compatibility to local 4G networks springs to mind), then it could take Apple as long as one year to recover the costs, or about the time before the release of the next new iPad.
It would appear to me that Apple could have passed on selling the incompatible iPad 4G in Australia altogether.
New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."
We have 4G actually. Just not the frequency Apple chose.
We have 4G actually. Just not the frequency Apple chose.
We have 4G on a frequency no one in the rest of the world chose. Not sure how true it is but Ive read it cause we didn't want to lose the awesomeness of analogue tv
New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."
The new iPad with 4G only for North America. It fails everywhere else
We have 4G on a frequency no one in the rest of the world chose. Not sure how true it is but Ive read it cause we didn't want to lose the awesomeness of analogue tv
This settlement pisses me off. Apple offered anyone who wanted it a full refund, so how can anyone claim "damages." This is just the government extorting money from a wealthy company to fill their pockets while looking like they are "watching out for consumers." Granted, I can't blame apple for settling to avoid the hassle.
There's no damages to prove. It's about misleading advertising. A loss doesn't have to result. The act itself is sufficient.
I wonder if Apple will extend the refund offer to other countries, such as the UK, where the 4G moniker fell foul of the advertising authorities and had to be changed.
At the very least, Apple should make the offer as an act of good faith and customer service.
Ahh so you don't actually have any evidence. Didn't think so...
I'm quite glad you aren't in charge of protecting consumer rights in Australia.
Evidence? I don't think you should be asking for evidence. All you do is make smart arse replies giving no evidence at all.
And its hardly consumer rights, its more like protecting the stupid. It was written on the Apple site the 4G is not compatible with current Australian networks. All you had to do was read the information before entering credit card details.
Comments
False advertising claim gets fined. .
People blame Australia, for upholding their regulations,
Even better, money grab? 2.25million? Australia? whats their GDP? a trillion?
$2.25 million? This is peanuts for Apple.
If Apple makes a $225 profit on each iPad 4G Cellular sold, it only needs to sell 10 000 4G Cellular units in Australia to make up for the marketing SNAFU. Considering that Australia's population is 0.326% of the world, and assuming a similar adoption rate of the iPad in Australia as worldwide in general, Apple probably sells close to 50 000 units in Australia in 3 months. Given that approximately 10% of the iPads sold are 4G (at least as estimated about the US), it would only take half a year for Apple to recover the penalty. If Australian buyers refrain from buying the 4G Cellular model for any reason (lack of compatibility to local 4G networks springs to mind), then it could take Apple as long as one year to recover the costs, or about the time before the release of the next new iPad.
It would appear to me that Apple could have passed on selling the incompatible iPad 4G in Australia altogether.
Australia doesn't use the term "cellular" or "cellphone", using these terms would draw no more than a blank stare, in much the same way as "4G".
One part America can learn from, notice how the loser had to pay costs, that stops a lot of frivolous lawsuits here.
Is this justice?
Only for the rich.
Maybe now Australians should launch a class action against the ACCC for causing a delay in the supply of new (US & Canada) 4G compatible iPads.
Day after day people keep asking for them, day after day we turn them away due to a lack of stock or switch them to iPad 2's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Australia doesn't use the term "cellular" or "cellphone", using these terms would draw no more than a blank stare, in much the same way as "4G".
One part America can learn from, notice how the loser had to pay costs, that stops a lot of frivolous lawsuits here.
Is this justice?
Only for the rich.
Maybe now Australians should launch a class action against the ACCC for causing a delay in the supply of new (US & Canada) 4G compatible iPads.
Day after day people keep asking for them, day after day we turn them away due to a lack of stock or switch them to iPad 2's.
What evidence do you have that this caused a delay in stock of the new iPad?
I think it's fair.
It's only truly "4G" in two countries in the whole world, and shouldn't be marketed as such in other countries.
Sorry Apple. Until it's multiband, it's not "4G" in the rest of the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."
We have 4G actually. Just not the frequency Apple chose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvo84
We have 4G actually. Just not the frequency Apple chose.
We have 4G on a frequency no one in the rest of the world chose. Not sure how true it is but Ive read it cause we didn't want to lose the awesomeness of analogue tv
New Apple ad "The new iPad with 4G. Please note that 4G service may not work where there is no 4G service. For example, Antarctica, Marianas Trench, the Moon, and Australia."
The new iPad with 4G only for North America. It fails everywhere else
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoadm
We have 4G on a frequency no one in the rest of the world chose. Not sure how true it is but Ive read it cause we didn't want to lose the awesomeness of analogue tv
I think you should read some more...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenfingers
This settlement pisses me off. Apple offered anyone who wanted it a full refund, so how can anyone claim "damages." This is just the government extorting money from a wealthy company to fill their pockets while looking like they are "watching out for consumers." Granted, I can't blame apple for settling to avoid the hassle.
There's no damages to prove. It's about misleading advertising. A loss doesn't have to result. The act itself is sufficient.
I wonder if Apple will extend the refund offer to other countries, such as the UK, where the 4G moniker fell foul of the advertising authorities and had to be changed.
At the very least, Apple should make the offer as an act of good faith and customer service.
Seems a bit steep for an advertising breach. Maybe $100k or so would be more reasonable, specially given the term they used was technically correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
What evidence do you have that this caused a delay in stock of the new iPad?
The "4G" on the box, that us Australians are too retarded to understand.
in unrelated news, Apple has slightly increased the price of all products sold in Australia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
The "4G" on the box, that us Australians are too retarded to understand.
Ahh so you don't actually have any evidence. Didn't think so...
I'm quite glad you aren't in charge of protecting consumer rights in Australia.
Don't be too surprised if this doesn't happen. Apple were wrong, will now pay and should move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
Seems a bit steep for an advertising breach. Maybe $100k or so would be more reasonable, specially given the term they used was technically correct.
You make it sound like it was nothing, they openly broke the law and only fixed it when they were forced to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
Ahh so you don't actually have any evidence. Didn't think so...
I'm quite glad you aren't in charge of protecting consumer rights in Australia.
Evidence? I don't think you should be asking for evidence. All you do is make smart arse replies giving no evidence at all.
And its hardly consumer rights, its more like protecting the stupid. It was written on the Apple site the 4G is not compatible with current Australian networks. All you had to do was read the information before entering credit card details.
If Apple was right in this case, they would have won, the end