13 ms·
>reason was so that people would think it's high end, and not dismiss it as a low/mid range phone. Wow, that is whole another level of disconnect with reality!
by blinkingled 11y ago
>reason was so that people would think it's high end, and not dismiss it as a low/mid range phone.
Wow, that is whole another level of disconnect with reality!
- knappe 11y agoHardly. The adage 'You get what you pay for' has been proven to have real consequences. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2006/january18/shiv-011806.html http://news.stanford.edu/news/2006/january18/shiv-011806.htm...
- Crito 11y agoIt is a great deal of disconnect. You can't just make a veblen good by slapping an outrageous pricetag on shit. It has to at least pretend to be a quality product. If the world worked like that, then you could open a hotdog shop, sell hotdogs for 100USD each, then expect a Michelin star rating.
- rhino369 11y agoMaking a low/mid range would have been just as bad of an idea. That range is way lower margin and the established players are way better at it. They had to go big or go home. They really should have gone home though.
- Apocryphon 11y agoTruly going big would have been to build two phones- keep the Fire as high end, then build a cheaper version for the low/mid range. That way there is no ambiguity.
- rifung 11y agoThe thing is, I think Amazon is fine with selling at low margins. Look at their Kindle devices. If anything they don't need to make money from device sales if the phones come preinstalled with the Amazon market as they can make money off app sales and get more developer mindshare.