The Apple retail stores also offer education pricing on hardware - something no other retailer does. That's a pretty significant discount right there and I'd imagine that the retail stores don't pay retail reseller prices for those sales. I wonder how much of the pricing difference is due to that.
I meant to say that no other "general" retailer does. Anyone who buys from the campus computer stores will be affiliated with the university. This isn't the case at the Apple Store or other retailers.
I meant to say that no other "general" retailer does. Anyone who buys from the campus computer stores will be affiliated with the university. This isn't the case at the Apple Store or other retailers.
Yup, any student can walk in with a student ID and pay $2699 for the 17" PowerBook that was listed as purchased with an invoice price of price of yadda-yadda. Since they are listed by the same SKU, it makes no difference. The values on Apple invoices to Apple Stores likewise doesn't matter much at all.
For accounting purposes, it is seems perfectly acceptable to spread profits by tipping scales. As long as the net profits increase as they have, investors probably couldn't care any less.
Interesting speculation - have any proof of that, one way or the other?
Apple mostly drop ships products to each store, instead of utilizing the big box retailers distribution center. Then Apple doesnt allow a lot of the product to remain in the DCs. (well except for things were the margins are pretty high like Applecare, ipods and software.)
A large chain like Compusa or BBY they have a lot of DCs, if each one is considered and individual Company or location it will not work out for the large volume orders. So some resellers are pretty much treated like an individual shopper is when purchasing Apple stuff.
So I think the volume discount arguement could be used to justify the preferential treatment, but it is still completely unfair. The unfortunate consequences of this treatment will lead to less retailers carrying Apple products and will have a huge effect on future sales possibilities.
A large big box retailer doesn't need Apple to survive and could cut them out of the product mix. The loss of the small retailers would diminish the Apple technician network as well as general visibility of the Apple brand.
The Apple stores are great from a marketing perspective, but doesn't win apple any friends in the existing partnerships and could lose out on the niche markets where apple has huge market penetration: the music and movies people.
What I wonder from reading the Thinksecret article is whether Apple wants to put their resellers out of business. Seems to me, as I have been following this issue for a while, that is EXACTLY what they plan on doing--it is only a matter of time.
Is it any wonder that long standing Apple Specialists, not just your run of the mill "Mom and Pop" stores, are being "shabbily run, poorly lit, and understaffed"? That they have been able to stay in business at all is nothing short of miraculous.
I contend that competition is good because it maintains a cap on greed and underhandedness in dealing with the public. If Apple dodges this bullet and is successful in eliminating the middlemen distributors, what might we anticipate?
As Mac Voyer put it..."MS screws their enemies. Apple screws their friends.."
What I wonder from reading the Thinksecret article is whether Apple wants to put their resellers out of business. Seems to me, as I have been following this issue for a while, that is EXACTLY what they plan on doing--it is only a matter of time.
There's no question that they've been far less lackadaisical about their channel than they were. Whether their restructurings have been beneficial is a rough question to answer. But Apple can't really afford to have their channel be a mess. That's one of the main things that was killing them in the mid to late '90s.
There's no question that they're preferring VARs to ordinary shops, but then to look at it from their end, why not? No-one sheds a tear when they drop Sears or Best Buy for summary incompetence. Retail is a tremendous effort that has cost them a lot of time and money and energy. They spent years trying to get their existing channels to work. They opened the Apple Stores when they realized that if they wanted it done right, they'd have to do it themselves. Apple is not afraid to do that (see FCP), and they can't really afford not to. It's been a truism for a long time now that Apple and retail are oil and water, and that's not good for a consumer-oriented brand.
Quote:
I contend that competition is good because it maintains a cap on greed and underhandedness in dealing with the public. If Apple dodges this bullet and is successful in eliminating the middlemen distributors, what might we anticipate?
First of all, competition is not the panacea some people think it is. More than a few underhanded and greedy things have been done in the name of competition. Second, if Apple intended the stores to kill the rest of the channel, they wouldn't charge MSRP for everything.
Quote:
As Mac Voyer put it..."MS screws their enemies. Apple screws their friends.."
What he should have added is that MS considers everyone to be their enemy. The tech graveyards are full of companies who thought they were cooperating with MS until they were gutted and discarded. Given that, I don't see any question that MS is worse. Apple can be arrogant and infuriating (ask any developer, pre-OS X), but MS is a blight.
There's no question that they've been far less lackadaisical about their channel than they were. Whether their restructurings have been beneficial is a rough question to answer. But Apple can't really afford to have their channel be a mess. That's one of the main things that was killing them in the mid to late '90s.
It is my understanding that without their channels, there never really would have been an Apple computer corporation. Were these various channels poorly managed due to a lack of central direction from Apple? Probably. However, it is also my understanding that many of these independent operations learned HOW to do it well, while others floundered and/or folded along the way.
Apple stores are a marvelous marketing tool for Apple wares. They are not, however, the money making venture Apple would have us believe. Anderson's repeated comments regarding almost guaranteed first year profitability of each Apple store has now been revealed to be the result of "spin", bordering on the illegal.
Might it be the result of Steve Jobs almost maniacal need to control every aspect of his Apple company that has influenced the direction of Apple's retail segment and their approach to their resellers, particularly those with years of expertise under their belt?
I agree that places like Best Buy, Fry's, etc. leave the hawking of Apple products sorely lacking. But the Specialists have not. And these are the guys who are currently being gutted. All Apple has to do is stop interfering with them and allow them to continue to do what they have become expert at over the past two decades.
It is curious to me why Apple would want to pit themselves against this loyal and effective means of promoting their products, rather than work with them and have a productive exchange with them. You know--learn from the successes and either help or eliminate the failures.
No, instead, Apple has usurped the client base of the successfully run operations, lured away their employees, while making it fiscally impossible for these operations to stay in business. In the meantime, Apple doesn't realize the DOWNSIDE to its own image this may be costing them. To me, this approach seems like a lose/lose proposition.
I remember how the original iMacs were merchandised at Sears and it was truly pathetic. Then again, all of Sears' efforts to sell electronics and especially computers is truly pathetic. It wasn't just Apple products. Demonizing retailers for Apple's inability to gain market share is even more pathetic IMO.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
I enjoy my mac and I am a salesman by trade. But I would not like to sell Macs in a general computing store for a living. Macs do not do so well when selling along side PCs in that environment. Take the notebooks as an example. By itself, a PB is very attractive. However, the moment you set it up next to a good PC notebook, even if the shopper doesn't look at the specs, the first thing they will wonder is why the screen on the Apple notebook does not look as good as the one on the PC. No amount of fan-boy gushing over OS X will change that perception.
The Apple retail store concept doesn't really help IMO. Here's why.
1. It makes it appear as if Macs don't compare well to PC's so to keep them from looking bad, they are moved to a separate store. If they can't be sold in the same way as PCs, then they must be inferior.
2. It makes the platform seem like even more of an island. Since different rules apply to selling them, then they must be a whole different sort of an animal. People don't want to feel isolated from the rest of the computing world. Of course they thing the Mac will isolate them since it has to be isolated from the rest of the computing world in order to be sold. As a result, I don't see the Apple stores as a solution to Apple's retail woes. If these accusations are in fact true, then I will never believe anything Apple has to say about the profitability of these stores. It seems their just trying to save face at any cost. Sorry for the rant. I feel much better now.
I remember how the original iMacs were merchandised at Sears and it was truly pathetic. Then again, all of Sears' efforts to sell electronics and especially computers is truly pathetic. It wasn't just Apple products. Demonizing retailers for Apple's inability to gain market share is even more pathetic IMO.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
RE the Mom and Pop PC retailers: depends on where you live. In northern California there are quite a few, and if you pick up one of the Computer Currents magazines you will see ads for any number of white box pc makers in office parks and strip malls.
Even if the big box retailers do a horrible job selling Apple stuff, Apple needs to be where 50% of peoplr buy their computers. At Best Buy and CompUSA and office max and staples etc.
Selling Apple is hardwork along side the PCs, and this is where Apple needs to step in and refine their products.
When the original imacs and ibooks came out they were very price competitve with PCs and they looked cool. They were also very competitive with the powermacs. Now the differences between the powermacs and the imacs is huge. The performance comparisoon between PCs and Apple's has the PCs sprinting ahead except for on the high end where the g5 is very competitive. But most people are not looking for a dual processor machine, nor do the have the cash to spend $2500 and up.
Even though the original imacs were poorly merchandised at Sears and the other retailers they still sold: the advertising offered a clear message on the benfits of getting one, everyone who wanted one coulg go to just about any store they wanted to get one.
Now well the benefits of an Apple aren't so clear, and you pretty much have to shop online to get one. It doesn't really make sense for most people. And since Apple's computers aren't really flying off the shelves, it doesn't really make sense to alienate your most ardent supporters.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
Macs are only harder to sell than PCs because you need a modicum of knowledge about Macs to easily explain how they operate. Tho they have less processor speed, because of their architecture, Macs utilize their "lower" processing speed to accomplish tasks at a much greater rate of overall speed. It is simply the difference between multitasking and single tasking. If I am moving at, say 5mph, but accomplishing five different tasks at that speed, compared to moving at 25mph and accomplishing one task, which is more efficient?
As us Mac users know, we put up with the exclusivity of the software and poor compatabilty with the PC world because of the elegance of the design and function of Mac machines. Apple stores are an excellent place to come in and play with Macs. PC users can experience, first hand, this elegance.
That is why I believe the Apple stores are a wonderful MARKETING tool. As for a retail operation, however, it is the long standing Apple Specialists who have figured out, through years of trial and error, how to make it fly. Apple stores NEED this expertise. This isn't like running another Gap store.
While I believe Apple stores have a valuable place in bringing the Mac platform to the rest of the planet, I share Mac Voyer's sentiments about being lied to by Apple corporate.
Unfortunately volume discounts are not at play here. From May 2001 when Apple opened their stores, they appear to always have gotten lower prices. If there is an excuse of Volume discounts at play, then this should absolutely dispel this notion. So it is also clear, the pricing paid by both Bestbuy and CompUSA are the same as that of the local dealers and significantly higher than what the Apple Retail Stores pay for the same product.
How are they lying about profitability exactly? Disgruntled former resellers are going to have are hard time proving Apple is engaging in "unfair competition" when they're all selling at MSRP. It's also tough to call Apple Stores a tool for anti-competitive practice when there are only 70 or so out there.
Variable invoice pricing doesn't say anything about anything other than the obvious.
Eugene,
Unfortunately, Apple Retail stores don't sell exclusively at MSRP. Based on the significantly higher margins they are getting, they are capable of giving better pricing for no better reason than they are able to. For example on a 6 unit order, Apple sold this to the end user for $510 under dealer price and about $920 under MSRP. This is not good for the dealers, it is also not good for the stockholders. This sale was going to happen regardless of the pricing offered. But to sell it at under MSRP, this one sale cost Stockholders $3,060.
Wow, another LAME story from Thinksecret! It seems all of their Apple "inside" sources have dried up ... they haven't gotten a scoop on a new product or service in years. And when they get an "exclusive" break, their the 3rd or 4th to actually publish the story.
Got to give credit where credit is due though ... breaking open the story on Filemaker pro 7 was pretty heavy.
Unfortunately, I don't think so. Since the Enron like problems that have occured, Publicly traded companies have been compelled to report separate market segments as individual entities to avoid the problem with hiding the true financial status of these segments.
Apples' Ron claimed on 11/5/2003,"The way we account for retail, is we capture all the costs associated with retail both direct and through headquarters and we transfer product to the retail stores at the price approximately our retailers would take the product at.
This is measuring us as an independent reseller. All of the manufacturing margin through products generated and sold in the stores would be captured at the corporate level and we are very happy we are at this place in the world."
Apple knows what they are doing and it is neither ethical or fair. This behavior will initially hurt the local resellers and then it will hurt all consumers. But this is just the tip of the iceburg. There are more things coming that will take even the most dyed in the wool mac lover and make them understand how low Apple has stooped. There can be no question regarding Apple's goals
Unfortunately volume discounts are not at play here. From May 2001 when Apple opened their stores, they appear to always have gotten lower prices. If there is an excuse of Volume discounts at play, then this should absolutely dispel this notion. So it is also clear, the pricing paid by both Bestbuy and CompUSA are the same as that of the local dealers and significantly higher than what the Apple Retail Stores pay for the same product.
Why are you trying to prove your case in a rumor board discussion forum. Why not wait for the trial and prove your case there?
The reason that I say this is simple. You know that Apple will not respond to what you write in this forum, therefore, you can say or allege anything that you wish without fear of reprisal or contradiction. Therefore, how can any substantive discussion take place when we only have one side of the story.
Unfortunately, I don't think so. Since the Enron like problems that have occured, Publicly traded companies have been compelled to report separate market segments as individual entities to avoid the problem with hiding the true financial status of these segments.
Apples' Ron claimed on 11/5/2003,"The way we account for retail, is we capture all the costs associated with retail both direct and through headquarters and we transfer product to the retail stores at the price approximately our retailers would take the product at.
This is measuring us as an independent reseller. All of the manufacturing margin through products generated and sold in the stores would be captured at the corporate level and we are very happy we are at this place in the world."
Apple knows what they are doing and it is neither ethical or fair. This behavior will initially hurt the local resellers and then it will hurt all consumers. But this is just the tip of the iceburg. There are more things coming that will take even the most dyed in the wool mac lover and make them understand how low Apple has stooped. There can be no question regarding Apple's goals
You claim that this is just the tip of the iceberg. You claim that there is more coming down the pike that will show us how low Apple has stooped. HOW ABOUT JUST TELLING US NOW? If you know this information, why not just divulge it and let us know how bad Apple is.
The reason that I say this is simple. You know that Apple will not respond to what you write in this forum, therefore, you can say or allege anything that you wish without fear of reprisal or contradiction. Therefore, how can any substantive discussion take place when we only have one side of the story.
I totally agree. Problem with a substantive discourse is that Apple's policy to not discuss any pending legal matters leave us, their adoring public, no other sources of information. What's a concerned citizen to do?
Perhaps we can investigate ways to check out the allegations ourselves....
Comments
Originally posted by torifile
The Apple retail stores also offer education pricing on hardware - something no other retailer does.
The retailer on campus does.
Originally posted by Kickaha
The retailer on campus does.
I meant to say that no other "general" retailer does. Anyone who buys from the campus computer stores will be affiliated with the university. This isn't the case at the Apple Store or other retailers.
Originally posted by torifile
I meant to say that no other "general" retailer does. Anyone who buys from the campus computer stores will be affiliated with the university. This isn't the case at the Apple Store or other retailers.
Yup, any student can walk in with a student ID and pay $2699 for the 17" PowerBook that was listed as purchased with an invoice price of price of yadda-yadda. Since they are listed by the same SKU, it makes no difference. The values on Apple invoices to Apple Stores likewise doesn't matter much at all.
For accounting purposes, it is seems perfectly acceptable to spread profits by tipping scales. As long as the net profits increase as they have, investors probably couldn't care any less.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Interesting speculation - have any proof of that, one way or the other?
Apple mostly drop ships products to each store, instead of utilizing the big box retailers distribution center. Then Apple doesnt allow a lot of the product to remain in the DCs. (well except for things were the margins are pretty high like Applecare, ipods and software.)
A large chain like Compusa or BBY they have a lot of DCs, if each one is considered and individual Company or location it will not work out for the large volume orders. So some resellers are pretty much treated like an individual shopper is when purchasing Apple stuff.
So I think the volume discount arguement could be used to justify the preferential treatment, but it is still completely unfair. The unfortunate consequences of this treatment will lead to less retailers carrying Apple products and will have a huge effect on future sales possibilities.
A large big box retailer doesn't need Apple to survive and could cut them out of the product mix. The loss of the small retailers would diminish the Apple technician network as well as general visibility of the Apple brand.
The Apple stores are great from a marketing perspective, but doesn't win apple any friends in the existing partnerships and could lose out on the niche markets where apple has huge market penetration: the music and movies people.
Is it any wonder that long standing Apple Specialists, not just your run of the mill "Mom and Pop" stores, are being "shabbily run, poorly lit, and understaffed"? That they have been able to stay in business at all is nothing short of miraculous.
I contend that competition is good because it maintains a cap on greed and underhandedness in dealing with the public. If Apple dodges this bullet and is successful in eliminating the middlemen distributors, what might we anticipate?
As Mac Voyer put it..."MS screws their enemies. Apple screws their friends.."
Originally posted by meilleure ami
What I wonder from reading the Thinksecret article is whether Apple wants to put their resellers out of business. Seems to me, as I have been following this issue for a while, that is EXACTLY what they plan on doing--it is only a matter of time.
There's no question that they've been far less lackadaisical about their channel than they were. Whether their restructurings have been beneficial is a rough question to answer. But Apple can't really afford to have their channel be a mess. That's one of the main things that was killing them in the mid to late '90s.
There's no question that they're preferring VARs to ordinary shops, but then to look at it from their end, why not? No-one sheds a tear when they drop Sears or Best Buy for summary incompetence. Retail is a tremendous effort that has cost them a lot of time and money and energy. They spent years trying to get their existing channels to work. They opened the Apple Stores when they realized that if they wanted it done right, they'd have to do it themselves. Apple is not afraid to do that (see FCP), and they can't really afford not to. It's been a truism for a long time now that Apple and retail are oil and water, and that's not good for a consumer-oriented brand.
I contend that competition is good because it maintains a cap on greed and underhandedness in dealing with the public. If Apple dodges this bullet and is successful in eliminating the middlemen distributors, what might we anticipate?
First of all, competition is not the panacea some people think it is. More than a few underhanded and greedy things have been done in the name of competition. Second, if Apple intended the stores to kill the rest of the channel, they wouldn't charge MSRP for everything.
As Mac Voyer put it..."MS screws their enemies. Apple screws their friends.."
What he should have added is that MS considers everyone to be their enemy. The tech graveyards are full of companies who thought they were cooperating with MS until they were gutted and discarded. Given that, I don't see any question that MS is worse. Apple can be arrogant and infuriating (ask any developer, pre-OS X), but MS is a blight.
There's no question that they've been far less lackadaisical about their channel than they were. Whether their restructurings have been beneficial is a rough question to answer. But Apple can't really afford to have their channel be a mess. That's one of the main things that was killing them in the mid to late '90s.
It is my understanding that without their channels, there never really would have been an Apple computer corporation. Were these various channels poorly managed due to a lack of central direction from Apple? Probably. However, it is also my understanding that many of these independent operations learned HOW to do it well, while others floundered and/or folded along the way.
Apple stores are a marvelous marketing tool for Apple wares. They are not, however, the money making venture Apple would have us believe. Anderson's repeated comments regarding almost guaranteed first year profitability of each Apple store has now been revealed to be the result of "spin", bordering on the illegal.
Might it be the result of Steve Jobs almost maniacal need to control every aspect of his Apple company that has influenced the direction of Apple's retail segment and their approach to their resellers, particularly those with years of expertise under their belt?
I agree that places like Best Buy, Fry's, etc. leave the hawking of Apple products sorely lacking. But the Specialists have not. And these are the guys who are currently being gutted. All Apple has to do is stop interfering with them and allow them to continue to do what they have become expert at over the past two decades.
It is curious to me why Apple would want to pit themselves against this loyal and effective means of promoting their products, rather than work with them and have a productive exchange with them. You know--learn from the successes and either help or eliminate the failures.
No, instead, Apple has usurped the client base of the successfully run operations, lured away their employees, while making it fiscally impossible for these operations to stay in business. In the meantime, Apple doesn't realize the DOWNSIDE to its own image this may be costing them. To me, this approach seems like a lose/lose proposition.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
I enjoy my mac and I am a salesman by trade. But I would not like to sell Macs in a general computing store for a living. Macs do not do so well when selling along side PCs in that environment. Take the notebooks as an example. By itself, a PB is very attractive. However, the moment you set it up next to a good PC notebook, even if the shopper doesn't look at the specs, the first thing they will wonder is why the screen on the Apple notebook does not look as good as the one on the PC. No amount of fan-boy gushing over OS X will change that perception.
The Apple retail store concept doesn't really help IMO. Here's why.
1. It makes it appear as if Macs don't compare well to PC's so to keep them from looking bad, they are moved to a separate store. If they can't be sold in the same way as PCs, then they must be inferior.
2. It makes the platform seem like even more of an island. Since different rules apply to selling them, then they must be a whole different sort of an animal. People don't want to feel isolated from the rest of the computing world. Of course they thing the Mac will isolate them since it has to be isolated from the rest of the computing world in order to be sold. As a result, I don't see the Apple stores as a solution to Apple's retail woes. If these accusations are in fact true, then I will never believe anything Apple has to say about the profitability of these stores. It seems their just trying to save face at any cost. Sorry for the rant. I feel much better now.
Originally posted by Mac Voyer
I remember how the original iMacs were merchandised at Sears and it was truly pathetic. Then again, all of Sears' efforts to sell electronics and especially computers is truly pathetic. It wasn't just Apple products. Demonizing retailers for Apple's inability to gain market share is even more pathetic IMO.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
RE the Mom and Pop PC retailers: depends on where you live. In northern California there are quite a few, and if you pick up one of the Computer Currents magazines you will see ads for any number of white box pc makers in office parks and strip malls.
Even if the big box retailers do a horrible job selling Apple stuff, Apple needs to be where 50% of peoplr buy their computers. At Best Buy and CompUSA and office max and staples etc.
Selling Apple is hardwork along side the PCs, and this is where Apple needs to step in and refine their products.
When the original imacs and ibooks came out they were very price competitve with PCs and they looked cool. They were also very competitive with the powermacs. Now the differences between the powermacs and the imacs is huge. The performance comparisoon between PCs and Apple's has the PCs sprinting ahead except for on the high end where the g5 is very competitive. But most people are not looking for a dual processor machine, nor do the have the cash to spend $2500 and up.
Even though the original imacs were poorly merchandised at Sears and the other retailers they still sold: the advertising offered a clear message on the benfits of getting one, everyone who wanted one coulg go to just about any store they wanted to get one.
Now well the benefits of an Apple aren't so clear, and you pretty much have to shop online to get one. It doesn't really make sense for most people. And since Apple's computers aren't really flying off the shelves, it doesn't really make sense to alienate your most ardent supporters.
Consider this. Macs are clearly harder to sell than PCs. If a salesman can't figure out how to convince a consumer that a system with less than half the processor speed, half the graphics memory, half the ram running at half the speed, with a third less hard drive running at a third the speed, costing twice as much, and never mind all that, it is really twice as fast, and infinitely better, though it has a fraction of the software, peripherals, and in some cases, expandability -- If a salesman has a hard time overcoming all that, maybe the problem isn't the salesman; maybe it's the product.
Macs are only harder to sell than PCs because you need a modicum of knowledge about Macs to easily explain how they operate. Tho they have less processor speed, because of their architecture, Macs utilize their "lower" processing speed to accomplish tasks at a much greater rate of overall speed. It is simply the difference between multitasking and single tasking. If I am moving at, say 5mph, but accomplishing five different tasks at that speed, compared to moving at 25mph and accomplishing one task, which is more efficient?
As us Mac users know, we put up with the exclusivity of the software and poor compatabilty with the PC world because of the elegance of the design and function of Mac machines. Apple stores are an excellent place to come in and play with Macs. PC users can experience, first hand, this elegance.
That is why I believe the Apple stores are a wonderful MARKETING tool. As for a retail operation, however, it is the long standing Apple Specialists who have figured out, through years of trial and error, how to make it fly. Apple stores NEED this expertise. This isn't like running another Gap store.
While I believe Apple stores have a valuable place in bringing the Mac platform to the rest of the planet, I share Mac Voyer's sentiments about being lied to by Apple corporate.
Originally posted by Gabid
Could there be any volume discounts at play here?
Unfortunately volume discounts are not at play here. From May 2001 when Apple opened their stores, they appear to always have gotten lower prices. If there is an excuse of Volume discounts at play, then this should absolutely dispel this notion. So it is also clear, the pricing paid by both Bestbuy and CompUSA are the same as that of the local dealers and significantly higher than what the Apple Retail Stores pay for the same product.
Originally posted by Eugene
How are they lying about profitability exactly? Disgruntled former resellers are going to have are hard time proving Apple is engaging in "unfair competition" when they're all selling at MSRP. It's also tough to call Apple Stores a tool for anti-competitive practice when there are only 70 or so out there.
Variable invoice pricing doesn't say anything about anything other than the obvious.
Eugene,
Unfortunately, Apple Retail stores don't sell exclusively at MSRP. Based on the significantly higher margins they are getting, they are capable of giving better pricing for no better reason than they are able to. For example on a 6 unit order, Apple sold this to the end user for $510 under dealer price and about $920 under MSRP. This is not good for the dealers, it is also not good for the stockholders. This sale was going to happen regardless of the pricing offered. But to sell it at under MSRP, this one sale cost Stockholders $3,060.
Got to give credit where credit is due though ... breaking open the story on Filemaker pro 7 was pretty heavy.
Apples' Ron claimed on 11/5/2003,"The way we account for retail, is we capture all the costs associated with retail both direct and through headquarters and we transfer product to the retail stores at the price approximately our retailers would take the product at.
This is measuring us as an independent reseller. All of the manufacturing margin through products generated and sold in the stores would be captured at the corporate level and we are very happy we are at this place in the world."
Apple knows what they are doing and it is neither ethical or fair. This behavior will initially hurt the local resellers and then it will hurt all consumers. But this is just the tip of the iceburg. There are more things coming that will take even the most dyed in the wool mac lover and make them understand how low Apple has stooped. There can be no question regarding Apple's goals
Also, everyone should take a look at www.petitiononline.com/applewar/
Originally posted by Tom Santos
Unfortunately volume discounts are not at play here. From May 2001 when Apple opened their stores, they appear to always have gotten lower prices. If there is an excuse of Volume discounts at play, then this should absolutely dispel this notion. So it is also clear, the pricing paid by both Bestbuy and CompUSA are the same as that of the local dealers and significantly higher than what the Apple Retail Stores pay for the same product.
Why are you trying to prove your case in a rumor board discussion forum. Why not wait for the trial and prove your case there?
The reason that I say this is simple. You know that Apple will not respond to what you write in this forum, therefore, you can say or allege anything that you wish without fear of reprisal or contradiction. Therefore, how can any substantive discussion take place when we only have one side of the story.
Originally posted by Tom Santos
Unfortunately, I don't think so. Since the Enron like problems that have occured, Publicly traded companies have been compelled to report separate market segments as individual entities to avoid the problem with hiding the true financial status of these segments.
Apples' Ron claimed on 11/5/2003,"The way we account for retail, is we capture all the costs associated with retail both direct and through headquarters and we transfer product to the retail stores at the price approximately our retailers would take the product at.
This is measuring us as an independent reseller. All of the manufacturing margin through products generated and sold in the stores would be captured at the corporate level and we are very happy we are at this place in the world."
Apple knows what they are doing and it is neither ethical or fair. This behavior will initially hurt the local resellers and then it will hurt all consumers. But this is just the tip of the iceburg. There are more things coming that will take even the most dyed in the wool mac lover and make them understand how low Apple has stooped. There can be no question regarding Apple's goals
Also, everyone should take a look at www.petitiononline.com/applewar/
See you are already starting it:
You claim that this is just the tip of the iceberg. You claim that there is more coming down the pike that will show us how low Apple has stooped. HOW ABOUT JUST TELLING US NOW? If you know this information, why not just divulge it and let us know how bad Apple is.
If not, why can't you?
The reason that I say this is simple. You know that Apple will not respond to what you write in this forum, therefore, you can say or allege anything that you wish without fear of reprisal or contradiction. Therefore, how can any substantive discussion take place when we only have one side of the story.
I totally agree. Problem with a substantive discourse is that Apple's policy to not discuss any pending legal matters leave us, their adoring public, no other sources of information. What's a concerned citizen to do?
Perhaps we can investigate ways to check out the allegations ourselves....