Apple again predicted to build low-cost iPhone for emerging markets

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

    And that's somehow a "recycled" component?


     



    Your words, not mine.

  • Reply 22 of 55
    Although I'm sure this story's BS, the whole upgrade route is something to think about.

    Apple's been down this road before as they lost the PC market to lower-cost competitors. Even when someone was ready to move up to a high-end PC, it was too late. The consumer was already used to Windows, had invested in applications, and perhaps even more importantly, the Mac's low market share led to a dearth of applications.

    It could happen again in the phone market if Apple doesn't strategize correctly.
  • Reply 23 of 55
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I hate to be crass here but what's the upside for Apple making a cheap phone for places like India and Africa. That might increase iOS marketshare but how does it increase Apple's bottom line? I presume that's all Wall Street cares about...
  • Reply 24 of 55
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    tokyojimu wrote: »
    Although I'm sure this story's BS, the whole upgrade route is something to think about.
    Apple's been down this road before as they lost the PC market to lower-cost competitors. Even when someone was ready to move up to a high-end PC, it was too late. The consumer was already used to Windows, had invested in applications, and perhaps even more importantly, the Mac's low market share led to a dearth of applications.
    It could happen again in the phone market if Apple doesn't strategize correctly.
    When did Apple ever own the PC market? Also Apple and Samsung are dividing up the lions share of profits. How long can competitors like HTC and Nokia survive? I have yet to see either of them make a dent in Samsung's market share, even though they're discounting their phones. But how long can they afford to sell their top line phones for cheap?
  • Reply 25 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    So? This means what, in "requiring" a cheaper iPhone?



    ...




    Except only in the US and Canada are data plans forced. Except apps ? cell data. You're saying "cell data is too expensive, so don't let them have apps". I don't get it.


     





    This means most people in India and China (not upper middle-class) realistically, would never be able to afford an iPhone service plan which requires both voice and data. Apple could develop a data-only version, but it would not be able to fetch the same industry-leading subsidies which engorge its margins.



    Let's face it, once Apple kills voice, by commoditizing data (where voice becomes another service over IP), the ASP of iPhone would instantly plummet. This is the only way the current iPhone can become more accessible to the last 50% of the market yet to embrace the smartphone. Everything that strays from Apple's current iPhone business model is a compromise.

  • Reply 26 of 55


    Apple is in the business to make money.  They will NOT go after a low price point market until, and maybe not ever, they hit a certain saturation point with their current selling products.  The world is a big market and Apple has lots of upside yet to capture.


     


    This is the kind of argument you hear about lots of premium brands and companies.  If only Rolex would offer a cheaper version, they could sell lots more watches. If only Mercedes would make a cheaper car, they'd sell lots more (this has been proven to be NOT true given their Smart brand is floundering at best).  When analysts make comments like this, it just makes me mad that they can make boatloads of money and be complete idiots.


     


    Any time you find yourself in a race to the bottom, you're in the wrong race.  Just look at what happened to the PC market.  Sure, prices come down at retail, which is good for consumers, to a point.  Once you reach that point, then everything and everyone suffers - the manufacturers suffer in not making the margins they once did, the retailers suffer not making the real dollar profit they once did, the consumer suffers getting cheap product (getting what they paid for) with a poor user experience.


     


    Also, Apple, due in part to their phenomenal marketing and of course their high quality and well designed products (including iPhones) becomes a product that consumers aspire to.  They, Apple, are taking a page from Levis back in the late 70's and early 80's, where in emerging markets, Levis were something people saved up for and went out of their way to get them.  They aspired to own a pair of Levis.  This exact thing is happening now in other parts of the world, but people are now aspiring to own an iPhone.  Sure they may get a cheap Android phone and use it until they've saved enough money to buy an iPhone, but the iPhone is what they want and the Android phone simply becomes a step along their way to getting an iPhone.


     


    So tell me again why Apple should be trying to make an emerging markets iPhone lite?  

  • Reply 27 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    When did Apple ever own the PC market? Also Apple and Samsung are dividing up the lions share of profits. How long can competitors like HTC and Nokia survive? I have yet to see either of them make a dent in Samsung's market share, even though they're discounting their phones. But how long can they afford to sell their top line phones for cheap?


    Apple had the lead in the PC market when there wasn't really a PC market.  They were first to the gate before the racetrack was even built.  Do you remember when only a few select independent retailers sold computers?  And when mass retailers first started?  Apple was part of it for sure - but their decision not to license their software in the same way MS did ended up killing their hopes of being part of the PC revolution.

  • Reply 28 of 55
    smalmsmalm Posts: 677member
    In emerging markets only small parts of the people have the money for iPhones. If this part is big enough Apple will go into that market at full prices and ignore the rest.
  • Reply 29 of 55
    rogifan wrote: »
    When did Apple ever own the PC market?

    Well, they owned the GUI PC market, roughly analogous to the smartphone market.
  • Reply 30 of 55
    chuckd wrote: »

    This means most people in India and China (not upper middle-class) realistically, would never be able to afford an iPhone service plan which requires both voice and data.

    Not true. Just because iPhone service plans cost $80 a month in the U.S., don't assume the same is true everywhere. In China I pay about US$5 a month for my voice/data plan.
  • Reply 31 of 55


    No way!!


    I don't think this will happen in a long time, or maybe not at all!


    My argument for this is that they don't need to, Apple sells the most expensive phone in the market like hot cakes, a significantly cheaper offering should be also significantly cheaper to manufacture, like a nano version... and a nano version won't run apps on a nano screen.. so they will canibalize themselves and also risk loosing application sales.


     


    What I really think Apple would be aiming for is expanding it's portfolio with new products, opening new markets, and everything related to selling more apps and new services.


     


    Stepping into the living room sounds more plausible if they can secure a good deal with content distributors, also if we where to dream like this, an iPad Pro running full OSX and big apps sounds logical if they're interested in bumping up Mac sales.


    Such a product could be positioned right between the iPad and macbook air where there is a little price gap that could be exploited with such a product.


     


    What do you people think?


     

  • Reply 32 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TokyoJimu View Post





    Not true. Just because iPhone service plans cost $80 a month in the U.S., don't assume the same is true everywhere. In China I pay about US$5 a month for my voice/data plan.




    What iPhone model do you have and how much did it cost?

  • Reply 33 of 55


    Originally Posted by ChuckD View Post

    This means most people in India and China (not upper middle-class) realistically, would never be able to afford an iPhone service plan which requires both voice and data. 


     


    So what. They can just buy a plan without data. Why does the phone have to omit a $0.60 chip?





    Apple could develop a data-only version…


     


    Why?






    Let's face it, once Apple kills voice, by commoditizing data (where voice becomes another service over IP)…




     


    How can they possibly do this when they have absolutely no control whatsoever over either aspect of the network?


     



    This is the only way the current iPhone can become more accessible to the last 50% of the market yet to embrace the smartphone.



     


    …What. Apple has zero control over plan prices. I fail to see how this is a concern.

  • Reply 34 of 55
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,228member


    In emerging markets Apple should pull an Amazon.  Dump at cost a 99$ cell phone and make money on the ecosystem. All they need to make is a 3 gs type phone with a long batterie life. Cheap, heavy duty and long battery life are the key metrics.


     


    Speaking of international markets, in Canada, Apple is now selling multilingual movies.  There is a bunch of movies with english, french and spanish soundtracks.

  • Reply 35 of 55
    So lets see 3.5 inch non retina screen A5(probably single core) 3G/2G only 8 gb 5 megapixel camera with FaceTime VGA 30 pin connecter running the lowest end IOS 6 thick as original model, 1 mic. 1 speak.
    This is always a possibility yet it fails, we'll it would be like Samsung with S3 and S3 mini cheaper smaller, hay, well were talking released with IPhone 6(not 5S). This would contain features from IPhone 3GS-4-4S which none would be selling at the Time(if standards stay) IPhone mini could easily be $100 with no
    contract well it would require apple to lose its quality title(IPad mini is compared to IPad 2, New IPad, IPad with retina all selling this year Plus the IPad mini has better specs than this IPhone mini, I more likely see the IPhone 4 selling longer than this a IPhone with smaller screen worse specs but brand new.
  • Reply 36 of 55
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,254member
    At some point the iPod touch and iPhone will have to merge. As low cost handsets begin to approach iPod touch functionality the appeal of a music player without cellular connectivity will diminish.

    Android handsets are already positiioning to become a relatively profitless exercise in the same way that the netbooks category did. Apple deosn't need to race to the bottom of the price barrel. But they do need to be aware people are attracted by android prices and y.

    The challenge for Apple is how to differentiate their low end and premium phone products so the low end can still represent something of value without canabalising too many high-end sales.
  • Reply 37 of 55
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,228member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    When did Apple ever own the PC market? Also Apple and Samsung are dividing up the lions share of profits. How long can competitors like HTC and Nokia survive? I have yet to see either of them make a dent in Samsung's market share, even though they're discounting their phones. But how long can they afford to sell their top line phones for cheap?


     


     


    BTW Apple almost died because it place itself in a pc market niche.  With the ecosystem wars you must keep a significant market share to avoid a massive exodus from you're ecosystem by both customers and developers.  Maintaining a critical mass is key.


     


    And Apple could have a better offering on the cheap side in any market,  the iPhone 4 at 8g is still too expensive compare to the Android competition.  You can have better phones at 250$ unlock.

  • Reply 38 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Why?





    I wonder why.

     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    How can they possibly do this when they have absolutely no control whatsoever over either aspect of the network?





    Have you heard of iMessage?

     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    …What. Apple has zero control over plan prices. I fail to see how this is a concern.





    They do, indirectly, as a result of the subsidies they demand. Ask T-Mobile.

  • Reply 39 of 55


    Originally Posted by ChuckD View Post

    I wonder why.


     


    That would be why I asked, yes.





    Have you heard of iMessage?




     


    Having… what to do with either the voice or data aspect of the telecoms' networks? 



    So, in your mind, because Apple has iMessage, you can… stop… having cell data? Or telephony? And not only will iMessage magically keep working, Apple can break free of the telecoms and offer a "cheaper experience"? I don't get what you're saying.


     




    They do, indirectly, as a result of the subsidies they demand. Ask T-Mobile.




     


    The subsidies… which are the same as all other phone subsidies… and the plans… which are the same price if you get a different phone.


     


    WHAT are you talking about?!

  • Reply 40 of 55

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TokyoJimu View Post



    Although I'm sure this story's BS, the whole upgrade route is something to think about.

    Apple's been down this road before as they lost the PC market to lower-cost competitors. Even when someone was ready to move up to a high-end PC, it was too late. The consumer was already used to Windows, had invested in applications, and perhaps even more importantly, the Mac's low market share led to a dearth of applications.

    It could happen again in the phone market if Apple doesn't strategize correctly.


    You're revising history. Early PCs were not less expensive than Apple's offering of the day. What got PCs ready acceptance was the IBM name on the box. It wasn't until an inexpensive chip set became available that a lot of OEMs got into the game and began to build reasonable quality PCs that enterprise was willing to buy that prices came down.  The price drop was caused because no one had a way of differentiating one box from another except by price, and the IT of the day were highly confident of anything connected to the IBM name. 


     


    I will give IBM this: They got out of the PC business LONG before anyone else saw where the race to the bottom would lead to today.


     


    I see the emerging markets of today as a different landscape then the early computer days. Today the iPhone is as easily fit to any phone services as is the Andriod phones. The OS of the phone does not cut out one brand or another like the PC-DOS vs Apple II split did in the 1970s. Apple just needs to stick to their knitting and market to the governments and large businesses of the countries in question. The users who bicycle to and from their tiny market stalls have no reason to care what OS the phone uses as long as its cheap enough to buy and lasts them long enough. 


     


    My personal opinion is that targeting the average citizen of these emerging markets will turn out to be a boondoggle and those chasing this consumer market will lose their shirts in the process. No matter what country one does business in, it will be a cat fight for the business. Going to where even less will be sold at a thin profit margin is a pipe dream. Look at Nokia. They were and may still be the king of the low-cost phone markets for decades. How much loyalty did that earn them? 

Sign In or Register to comment.