mattinoz

About

Username
mattinoz
Joined
Visits
376
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
3,439
Badges
1
Posts
2,688

Reactions

2.6KLike54Dislike161Informative

  • iPhone 17 Pro predicted to cost over $2000 because of Trump tariffs

    mattinozmattinoz
    Do tariffs work differently in the USA to well the rest of the world?

    Apple is well versed in using the hardware import price globally to limit costs of duties, booking all the IP movement into duty-free transfer methods that would be even easier given they have lots of Business costs in the USA for services and IP generation to not even move the money offshore. 

    So how is the iPhone Pro Max going to get from $1199 to over $2k without profiteering?
    Gross margin is 46% last year we can assume the proMax is one of the products above that not below. 
    IP Coust are the next biggest part. 
    so maybe 15% at most will attract a tariff. 

    So basically under $90 so assume they round up $100 across the board? 


    tiredskillsITGUYINSD12Strangers

  • Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs hit every one of Apple's international manufacturing part...

    mattinozmattinoz
    mpantone said:
    Looking at futures right now tomorrow (April 3) looks like a world class sh!t storm. In fact, safety locks might be triggered. You know, the ones when the stock market drops too much during one trading session. Right now, tomorrow might be one of those historic days.

    America wanted change. Well, tomorrow they will get it. Enjoy the ride.

    Apple will survive. But Joe Average American is going to feel it to the core. Too bad.
    Apple can always start supporting Caliexit on the side. Which would free them and a big chunk of Americans from this mess. 
    baconstangronnwatto_cobra

  • Apple doesn't appear to have plans to revive the iPhone mini

    mattinozmattinoz
    charlesn said:
    prof said:
    hmlongco said:
    People say they want one. Apple makes one. People don't buy one. Apple stops making one.

    Rinse. Repeat.

    People did buy it, one dealer I know told me that they sold more iPhone Minis months for months than any other non-Apple or Samsung brand model. Sometimes it's not entirely clear why Apple ditches a product; all bad sales rumours are only unconfirmed speculation. 
    Please. Stop your descent into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. It's really pretty simple: Apple is a publicly owned, for profit company that is in the business of making products that sell well enough to generate sufficient profit to justify keeping them in the product lineup. It keeps making the products that earn their keep and stops making the ones that don't. End of story, The Mini would still be in the lineup if it sold in sufficient numbers, and the story of what one dealer told you for a product that sells globally is absolutely meaningless. Do you think Apple is happy about EOL'ing a new product after just two cycles? Absolutely not. It's questionable if they even made back their costs for research and development of the Mini, costs for tooling and production, design, marketing, etc. after just two years. This isn't to say that the Mini didn't have its fans, and a lot of them, just not enough to make it worthwhile to keep around. Notice also that no major Android manufacturer, even though they seem to run with every new gimmick feature they can dream up, has stepped in to produce a truly premium mini phone--there's no high end Galaxy or Pixel Mini. That's further confirmation that a sufficiently big market for a premium mini phone is simply not there. It's also worth noting that Apple's low-priced and smaller iPhone SE was always the worst selling model in the whole iPhone lineup. 
    Your assumption here is it was a sales problem but evidence says otherwise. So it was either a technical problem with no one making phones that size they could get parts for margin they wanted. Or it wasn’t that sold badly it was that it stole too many customers from higher end phones kind of sales problem which also fits the evidence. 

    Seems so funny that only defense that it sold badly is that any other scenario is “conspiracy”

    could be the reason Apple doesn’t allow pairing the watch to other devices because many high end customers would stop owning a phone. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra

  • House Judiciary Committee subpoenas Apple over AI censorship

    mattinozmattinoz
    hexclock said:
    They censored all sorts of things from Covid info or any dissenting opinion and this has demonstrably been proven. That said, I’m not sure how the government would censor an AI though. 
    If you know the opinions exist then they haven’t been censored just not reboardcast.
    No one is required to expand your reach. 
    shoozzdanoxAppleZuluronnwilliamlondonwatto_cobra

  • Tim Cook says Apple's DEI program may change in the future, but only if required by law

    mattinozmattinoz
    But at the risk of sounding heartless it seems pretty clear DEI measures have had an amazing return on investment. Brought in highly talented people in the business who might not have been exposed by regular hiring practices. Thinking about accessibility has clearly resulted in features that are great for everyone given every time new features are released there are articles about how they are hidden.

    Why not think of the “bloody ROI” and just say these initiatives have opened Apple’s eyes to investments with solid returns. 
    ronnsconosciutotzterrigrandact73OctoMonkeyStrangeDaysargonautwatto_cobra