Ive's design shop knows what it's doing. Sure their not perfect but they get it right more often than not. In fact I would argue their thin and light design of the ipad mini (along with the chamfered edge detail) saved that device from being just OK to being great. In fact the NY Times tech writer just blogged that if he was stuck on and island and could only have one device with him it would be the iPad mini.
I think Hermit is referring to the fact that the contract calls for pricing to be set at the beginning of each calendar year. Therefore, rumors of price increase in the fall were categorically false. But could Samsung feel smug enough to play hard ball in January?
Of course, it may also be a false rumor that prices are set at the beginning of the each year.
In fact, it might just be a rumor that Samsung is a supplier at all.
I think it's just a rumor that Apple is building phones...
Not necessarily. We don't know the terms of the current contract. It might not run out for five more years. And it might be written in such a way that Samsung can't change the pricing just cause.
The 'truth' in the story could be that yes the contract is running out and yes perhaps Samsung did attempt to get 20% more for the chips they are producing, to offset that they aren't getting all the orders. But it doesn't mean that they tried to force it or that Apple agreed to the pricing. It was just where Samsung started negotiating.
5 years? Really? Both parties would be equally stupid to agree to a 5 year contract.
... and, according to the story, prices are set at the beginning of each year. Who could blame Samsung for asking for more money. 20% more?... I highly doubt it. I can see no reason, though, why 10% more would be out of the question.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
I think Hermit is referring to the fact that the contract calls for pricing to be set at the beginning of each calendar year. Therefore, rumors of price increase in the fall were categorically false. But could Samsung feel smug enough to play hard ball in January?
Of course, it may also be a false rumor that prices are set at the beginning of the each year.
In fact, it might just be a rumor that Samsung is a supplier at all.
I think it's just a rumor that Apple is building phones...
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Not necessarily. We don't know the terms of the current contract. It might not run out for five more years. And it might be written in such a way that Samsung can't change the pricing just cause.
The 'truth' in the story could be that yes the contract is running out and yes perhaps Samsung did attempt to get 20% more for the chips they are producing, to offset that they aren't getting all the orders. But it doesn't mean that they tried to force it or that Apple agreed to the pricing. It was just where Samsung started negotiating.
5 years? Really? Both parties would be equally stupid to agree to a 5 year contract.
... and, according to the story, prices are set at the beginning of each year. Who could blame Samsung for asking for more money. 20% more?... I highly doubt it. I can see no reason, though, why 10% more would be out of the question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
Yeah, I thought that was odd too. What next, having unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy?
As Clinton said that depends on your definition of sex, and also what the meaning of the word 'is' is.
When I hold public office I will love the time they ask me about my "experiments" with "party pills"... My statement, will be...
"I never swallowed!"
(That's what she said...)