3 ms·

The "Apple makes more profit" angle is nice, I guess 51% of profit share, $238 of profit per phone sold. If market share was all they cared about, they could d

by lukasb 16y ago

The "Apple makes more profit" angle is nice, I guess 51% of profit share, $238 of profit per phone sold. If market share was all they cared about, they could drop the price of the iphone by $200. http://www.asymco.com/2010/10/31/making-it-up-in-volume-how-to-view-unit-profitability-vs-volume-in-handsets/ http://www.asymco.com/2010/10/31/making-it-up-in-volume-how-... edit: formatting

ergo98 16y ago
If market share was all they cared about, they could drop the price of the iphone by $200. If they dropped the price by $200, it would have a negligible impact on sales. If there was an advantage to hitting a lower price point in the subsidized device market, they would already have an iPhone4 LE or something out. In the unsubsidized market they do have such a thing out -- it's called the iPod Touch. Which factors heavily into iOS propaganda. Though they learned with the iPhone 3GS -- when they kept the 3G around for the people who apparently couldn't pull together $150 -- that ever burger flippers ponied up for the big boy. Consumers, especially in North America (but to a degree worldwide) are addicted to subsidized phones. From my wireless company I can pick up an iPhone 4 for $159, or a Samsung Galaxy S -- the hottest selling Android device -- for $179, the contracts for both cost the same. The iPad, as others have pointed out, is one of the cheapest decent tablets you can buy. For the media player market Apple has the entire market covered, hitting as discount of a market as exists. Of course you're playing to the "iPhone is a luxury brand" misnomer that is utterly ridiculous. The hottest selling Android devices all have a post-subsidization price virtually equivalent to the iPhone product, and most of them require the user to then go out and pick up their own high capacity SD card. That asymco piece, by the way, is horrendous on so many levels. It's a pandering piece of the worst kind.
- masklinn 16y ago
  > If they dropped the price by $200, it would have a negligible impact on sales. > [...] > From my wireless company I can pick up an iPhone 4 for $159 Now realize that if they dropped the unsubsidized price of the iPhone 4 by $200, you could get it for free subsidized. > In the unsubsidized market they do have such a thing out -- it's called the iPod Touch. Actually, in the unsub market they also have an iPhone. It just isn't available in the US. The touch doesn't help them get phone market share (though it does help them get more devices out there).
  - ergo98 16y ago
    Now realize that if they dropped the unsubsidized price of the iPhone 4 by $200, you could get it for free subsidized. That's great, and obvious, and even specifically mentioned in my post. Are you autistic? Actually, in the unsub market they also have an iPhone. Actually, I was talking about the iPhone 4 value option (which was pretty obvious), which is the iPod Touch 4th gen. Effectively giving you an iPhone 4 minus 3G/voice for just a couple hundred dollars.

by lukasb 16y ago

ergo98 16y ago

If market share was all they cared about, they could drop the price of the iphone by $200. If they dropped the price by $200, it would have a negligible impact on sales. If there was an advantage to hitting a lower price point in the subsidized device market, they would already have an iPhone4 LE or something out. In the unsubsidized market they do have such a thing out -- it's called the iPod Touch. Which factors heavily into iOS propaganda. Though they learned with the iPhone 3GS -- when they kept the 3G around for the people who apparently couldn't pull together $150 -- that ever burger flippers ponied up for the big boy. Consumers, especially in North America (but to a degree worldwide) are addicted to subsidized phones. From my wireless company I can pick up an iPhone 4 for $159, or a Samsung Galaxy S -- the hottest selling Android device -- for $179, the contracts for both cost the same. The iPad, as others have pointed out, is one of the cheapest decent tablets you can buy. For the media player market Apple has the entire market covered, hitting as discount of a market as exists. Of course you're playing to the "iPhone is a luxury brand" misnomer that is utterly ridiculous. The hottest selling Android devices all have a post-subsidization price virtually equivalent to the iPhone product, and most of them require the user to then go out and pick up their own high capacity SD card. That asymco piece, by the way, is horrendous on so many levels. It's a pandering piece of the worst kind.

masklinn 16y ago
> If they dropped the price by $200, it would have a negligible impact on sales. > [...] > From my wireless company I can pick up an iPhone 4 for $159 Now realize that if they dropped the unsubsidized price of the iPhone 4 by $200, you could get it for free subsidized. > In the unsubsidized market they do have such a thing out -- it's called the iPod Touch. Actually, in the unsub market they also have an iPhone. It just isn't available in the US. The touch doesn't help them get phone market share (though it does help them get more devices out there).
- ergo98 16y ago
  Now realize that if they dropped the unsubsidized price of the iPhone 4 by $200, you could get it for free subsidized. That's great, and obvious, and even specifically mentioned in my post. Are you autistic? Actually, in the unsub market they also have an iPhone. Actually, I was talking about the iPhone 4 value option (which was pretty obvious), which is the iPod Touch 4th gen. Effectively giving you an iPhone 4 minus 3G/voice for just a couple hundred dollars.