The price of Fairy dust and unobtanium has gone through the roof
Also lawyers with expertise of rounded corners and off-shore tax experts don't work for pennies you know
Apple is reportedly talking with wireless carriers about pricing for its upcoming iPhone, but not about reinvigorating a stalling smartphone market by lowering prices, instead about raising the cost of its top-of-the-line handsets. "Our checks indicate Apple has started negotiating with carriers on a $100 iPhone 6 price …
Apple really screwed the pooch by suing Samsung. They now have to pay full price for their screens (Galaxy rejects, incidentally), full price for their memory and wildly inflated prices for their processors. Samsung really loved the terms of the Californian "settlement" - it gave them all the excuse they needed for a more aggressive pricing policy.....
"Apple really screwed the pooch by suing Samsung. They now have to pay full price for their screens (Galaxy rejects, incidentally), full price for their memory and wildly inflated prices for their processors. Samsung really loved the terms of the Californian "settlement" - it gave them all the excuse they needed for a more aggressive pricing policy....."
Nice fairy tale you've told yourself there.
If you're interested in reality, Apple doesn't use Samsung displays. They triple source from Sharp, LG, and Japan Display. The memory isn't from Samsung--it's from Hynix. The processors are currently from Samsung but reliable rumor is that they are in the process of second sourcing from TSMC. The idea that Samsung manufactures iPhones and Apple just slaps a shiny logo on them is a myth that poorly informed fandroids enjoy telling each other.
"If you're interested in reality, Apple doesn't use Samsung displays."
Which only happened after the $1BN jury award, moron. Because immediately after it was awarded, Samsung notified Apple of their price increase. Apple had to go source all their parts from other companies. Apple now uses inferior parts because of their poor corporate strategy.
"Apple really screwed the pooch by suing Samsung."
I did wonder why that never seemed to directly come up at the trial. I would have had my opening statement be: your honor, if Apple didn't want their phones to look like Samsung phones, perhaps they shouldn't buy and use our screens, processors, RAM, etc. *drops mic*
While Apple "won" $1BN, their annual per year costs went up $1BN as a result. Not really a smart move.
I can then wave my new iPhone 6 in the pub with even more self-satisfied smugness. Why not make it another £1000, then it would be even more 'exclusive'. In a recent visit to the small market town of Enniskillen, Co Femanagh, I found a shop in the high street where the cheapest watch was £4500. Now THAT is style!
Either people won't pay that much in which case Apple suffers, or they will, in which case Samsung has some headroom to expand into - it does like a phone at every price point and if there's a new price point there's a new opportunity; even if it is still the case that people won't pay as much for Samsung as they do for Apple, a new phone that is fifty dollars cheaper but still more profitable than the old top-of-the-range model is going to have them rubbing their hands in glee.
Oh no. Don't forget that phones are apparently free!
For example, in the UK market I think you get a 'free' latest iPhone or Galaxy S5 on about £40 per month. Over a 2 year contract I guess that would mean only an extra £5 per month. I'm sure we can just call that inflation, and no-one will notice...
So as you say it's probably not a big enough difference that it'll drive everyone to say "sod that! The top-of-the-range Androids are just as good, I'm going to save myself £120" I suspect many people will think that a fiver is worth it to keep their beloved iPhone. And in fact there won't be a difference, as Sammy can put up it's prices to match - or equally likely (as they've already set their prices) the phone companies can just put their prices up and pocket some extra profit.
I do find top-end smartphone prices amazing. You can get an iPad for £400, why should a phone with a quarter the expensive battery and screen cost more? The difference in Samsung's prices is even higher.
A few years back it made sense to pay top-dollar. The top-end phones were far superior to what you could get for even £250. But nowadays you can have a Nokia Lumia 620 for £130! It's not good enough if you need apps (which I don't), but it's an extremely good phone with calendar/diary/email and sat-nav. Or just over £200 for a Nexus or Moto G. Now the top-end phones are stupidly over-priced.
I'm not sure how the pricing in the UK works, but in the USA it has been pretty stable for a while.
The "willingness to pay" for smartphones was found to be around $200, so they were subsidized with increases in service to be around $200. You were eligible for a new phone every 1 year, then 1.5 years, then 2 years... as the carriers supposedly had trouble breaking even on iPhone users. Android users where not upgrading as often as they are usually sensible and utilitarian, whereas Apple users were image oriented and not concerned about function. Or maybe Android phones just didn't break so much or wear out so fast. Either way, carriers were losing money on Apple kit from a hardware perspective.
Additionally, the price differentiation factor kicked in. If the iPhone 4S cost $200 when you got in and the iPhone 5 costs $200, is it really an upgrade? Oh no good sir it costs $250 so you can tell it must be an upgrade! There was no resistance to this from carriers because they could use the relaxing of their subsidy, which they may never earn back. Carriers then implemented the same pricing plan for Android phones too.
Apple sees this and is not amused. They want to consume all of the profits in their value chain. The phone carrier (in Apple's opinion) does not deserve to turn a profit on Apple kit. After all, the carrier only warehouses the product, ships it, pays people to sell it and is on the hook for unsold inventory. They clearly add no value compared to Apple, who buys some parts from various companies and pays someone else to assemble them. Apple is raising prices to consume that extra $50 or $100 the carriers have tried to get out of the customer to remain profitable.
As Apple's share continues to fall, eventually this will reach a breaking point, and Apple phones will only be available at the Apple store, as carriers will back out. No one likes working with a bully if they don't have to.
"no one likes working with a bully if they don't have to."
ROTFLMAO ... said by someone truly, truly naive. The TELCOs invented the concept of corporate bullying and they are the masters of it. That they have to dance a bit with Apple does not change that fact. The TELCOs had no problems telling MS's reseller NOKIA to fuck off after Elop took over and that basically ended NOKIA's reign - the TELCOs hate WinPhone, Skype in particular and Elop specifically.
The TELCOs don't make handsets, they work with whomsoever they think will add the most value to their network business. Apple users are profitable, or the TELCOs would be shot of Apple in a heartbeat.
"with wearables/fitness tracking fad."
When you pass the half century, and start seeing friends and associates collapsing, or worse drop dead, you may understand why wearable health monitoring is going to be an absolutely monstrously profitable market.
The western world is getting older, and with age we wear out. Monitoring health is a natural (and dare I say welcome) enhancement to the smart device lineup.
And like it or not, for the most part we successful "senior citizens" have lots of disposable income to use on truly useful tech, and helping me live longer and in a healthier state is really high on my priority list!
Whether the iPhone 6 or some set of BT enabled set of sensors reporting to it are the game changers, I have no idea. But it will come, as surely as a wet summer in Kent (random county - in retrospect I should have written Aberdeen, but too late now)
I may be naive, but I wonder whether there is any point to monitoring blood sugar without taking blood, except in connection with a built-in insulin dispenser for diabetics; but it would seem the insulin dispenser might have to be in contact with the bloodstream. What am I missing?
Many diabetics control their condition with tablets, certainly in the initial stages of the disease. I know my father did. Effective control in the early stages can help to lessen the rate of progress and will also reduce bodily damage, or at least slow down the effects. Continuous non-invasive monitoring would be a fantastic tool for any diabetic because they could respond to any medication need more often than at present and without having to prick their finger and smear blood on a test-strip.
You don't have to be diabetic to suffer the effect of blood sugar levels dipping or spiking, it's a great indicator for athletes and sports people as well as affecting mood and performance in everyone.
I'd be interested in a blood free monitor to see how my levels change during exercise but I'd prefer it not to be on a 'phone.
"blood sugar levels dipping or spiking"?
Really? I don't think so. Your pancreas and liver work pretty damn well, assuming you don't poison them with excess calories. If you're getting significant swings in blood sugar, I'd suggest you see a doctor.
Icon full of calories :-)
It's perfectly possible to have blood sugar levels dip during sustained and intense exercise, it's a diet issue for athletes and bodybuilders, if the sugar isn't available then it can't be regulated.
Recovery from exercise can also involve the ingestion of large amounts of monosacharides and complex carbohydrates which can lead to a sugar/insulin spike if not done correctly but I digress, it's about making sure the nutrition is right so that I can exercise more effectively and recover more rapidly.
Your liver contains enough glycogen to provide glucose for ~18 hours at rest. You need to do plenty of exercise to use all this up... it is possible, just implausible. Then you have plenty of fat, and muscle... (unless you're a marathon runner or elite cyclist :-)
I don't know how much exercise you do, but for most people diet after/during exercise is an irrelevance compared to their habit of sitting on the sofa. I do (did, if I'm honest) a fair bit of running and cycling and what made me faster was more running and cycling, not changing my diet.
And whenever someone says bodybuilders, I worry that the problem is 'roids and/or testosterone, not carbs fats or protein.
Has anyone anywhere talked about the actual impact of having millions of relatively well off, middle aged people tracking their health constantly?
Wouldn't even a 0.01% rate of 'false positive' for something like 'imminent heart attack' be a huge impact on the healthcare system?
Because that is the age at which even healthy people develop the tell tale signs of age.
Plus, as you get older, you don't discount the future as much as when you are young, thus there is a higher interest in health amongst the older citizens than the younger. You may be you g enough to stillm believe in your own indestructibility, I know better.
make up for lost revenues with 5C.
Apple knows may of their fanbois and fangirls are more than willing to pay $100 more for the "privilege" of being the first one on their block with the newest generation of a one model phone. I'm surprised they aren't looking at a higher price. I guess they don't want to appear too greedy.
Apple FULLY understands the old adage:
"A fool and his money are quickly parted"
LOL!! I just got a new phone. I had the usual choices. I went with the MOTO-X... I could have gone with the iPhone5S for $10 more a month... so its not really hurting to pay a bit more for an iPhone.
iPhones are very nice looking, but I don't need one and they are more likely to be stolen. I have a custom Moto X (Yes, I'm in the USA - hopefully Europe will get it) that is easily MY phone.
I didn't go with LG (which are great phones) because I don't like the power & volume buttons on the back nor the glossy cheap plastic. I didn't go with the Samsung S4 because of its gloss and the HUGE bodies of both the S4 and S5. The MOTO-X has the cleanest Android OS... setting up the Alarms is AWESOME compared to anyone else - where you spend so much energy flipping numbers.
"make up for lost revenues with 5C."
That is the least logical statement I have read today.
Explain exactly how there are "lost revenues" when a gazillion of the item have been sold. I haven't read anywhere that there are large stockpiles of unsold devices, so I conclude the supply chain is functioning as it should.
Try growing a brain.
I'll bet this is for the larger of the two. If it is supposed to be released this fall, they have to get carrier agreements in place before that.
The slightly larger one (which will probably just have more screen less bezel but be the same size) will be the same price, the larger one will cost more.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019