4 ms·

I'd assume to avoid the competition -- they absolutely know the numbers on revenue per device and can guess at services revenue from low cost devices. It's way

by x0x0 6y ago

I'd assume to avoid the competition -- they absolutely know the numbers on revenue per device and can guess at services revenue from low cost devices. It's way lower than selling new phones. If one were charitable, perhaps they couldn't be refurbed to Apple's standard. I don't believe they deserve the benefit of doubt there.

konschubert 6y ago
But that’s just cargo cutting statistics, mistaking correlation for causation. If a person doesn’t have money and therefore buys a used phone and doesn’t spend on services, forcing them to buy a new phone won’t make them magically have money for services.
- x0x0 6y ago
  But it will make them spend more money at Apple -- the device purchase price.
  - konschubert 6y ago
    Or maybe they just get an android then and are out of the ecosystem
dahart 6y ago
Why do you assume a consumer buying a low-cost used Apple device would prefer a new device over a low-cost competitor's device? Obviously they already chose based on price. Do you think it's possible Apple believes that reselling devices will result in lower recycling rates? Is it possible that reselling devices that can't be refurbished to their standards could be a safety or liability issue? Why are you making judgements about what benefit of the doubt a company deserves based on an assumption on top of an assumption?
- x0x0 6y ago
  > Why do you assume a consumer buying a low-cost used Apple device would prefer a new device over a low-cost competitor's device? Obviously they already chose based on price. Apple has relatively high repurchase rates, crossing market segments. > Why are you making judgements Their focus on preventing third-party repairs to their devices, preferring to sell expensive repairs or force customers to purchase new devices. Secondarily, their focus on dollar extraction. Upselling chargers or cables; using their app-store to collect a 30% tax on all transactions, even to the point of attempting to blackmail wordpress for a revenue share. (The fact they walked it back after negative publicity doesn't change that they tried.)

by x0x0 6y ago

konschubert 6y ago

But that’s just cargo cutting statistics, mistaking correlation for causation. If a person doesn’t have money and therefore buys a used phone and doesn’t spend on services, forcing them to buy a new phone won’t make them magically have money for services.

x0x0 6y ago
But it will make them spend more money at Apple -- the device purchase price.
- konschubert 6y ago
  Or maybe they just get an android then and are out of the ecosystem

dahart 6y ago

Why do you assume a consumer buying a low-cost used Apple device would prefer a new device over a low-cost competitor's device? Obviously they already chose based on price. Do you think it's possible Apple believes that reselling devices will result in lower recycling rates? Is it possible that reselling devices that can't be refurbished to their standards could be a safety or liability issue? Why are you making judgements about what benefit of the doubt a company deserves based on an assumption on top of an assumption?

x0x0 6y ago
> Why do you assume a consumer buying a low-cost used Apple device would prefer a new device over a low-cost competitor's device? Obviously they already chose based on price. Apple has relatively high repurchase rates, crossing market segments. > Why are you making judgements Their focus on preventing third-party repairs to their devices, preferring to sell expensive repairs or force customers to purchase new devices. Secondarily, their focus on dollar extraction. Upselling chargers or cables; using their app-store to collect a 30% tax on all transactions, even to the point of attempting to blackmail wordpress for a revenue share. (The fact they walked it back after negative publicity doesn't change that they tried.)