5 ms·
I doubt everyone would want to pay the extra 20-30% more that Apple would charge to cover this.
by vondur 5y ago
I doubt everyone would want to pay the extra 20-30% more that Apple would charge to cover this.
- wmf 5y agoApple charges more like 15% for extended warranty.
- mola 5y agoOP seem to pay this premium indirectly anyway. So I guess people would pay that premium. Like they pay premium for mac's anyway. The regulation for warranty just means sellers need to actually provide the quality the brand induces
- tehjoker 5y agoThats why apple would eat most or all of the cost without passing it on to consumers or would make more reliable laptops. The laptops are already priced at what the market would bear and apple makes huge profits.
- Spivak 5y agoNah. You're forgetting that that this is Apple. There would be an announcement that for new Macs you will be required to purchase 3 years of AppleCare+ to have the best possible experience. People will bitch for a few months but eventually it'll die down and Apple will get to market the current price as the base price while charing 30% more.
- tehjoker 5y agoHard to say. Apple is often able to release new products at insane price points, but to reprice existing products is more dicey, especially when laptops are one of their most expensive products on offer. I think you have something of a point: Apple products are mostly aimed at people with lots of disposable income, but raising the price still reduces the total addressable market size. The only way to know is to run the experiment.
- minhazm 5y agoWhat Apple does is they make a new model or add a big feature to the latest model and drastically increase the price. You can see that with the iPhone X, the iPad Pro, and with the introduction of the retina macbook pro's, or even with the touchbars. Apple knows how to increase prices and keep the vast majority of their customer base.
- tehjoker 5y agoYou're right, but the iPhone X is well below the price point of their Macbook Pros (closer to Macbook Airs though). Their flexibility is reduced the higher the absolute price point goes. At a certain point, people really can't spend that money.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ElFitz 5y agoOver here we have a 2 years mandatory warranty, and most if not all of the price difference can be explained by the displayed prices including VAT and dollar -> euro conversion. Now, it only covers defects, but that’s what most warranties do.
- wwtrv 5y agoThey do offer 2 years in the EU (iirc 3 in the UK) and the prices for most of their products are pretty close to the ones in US (if you subtract VAT)
- lostlogin 5y agoThis is done for all items sold to consumers in New Zealand. A base MacBook is US $999 in the US and NZ $1749 in New Zealand, which is approximately US $1200. Your maths checks out. The tiny market, currency fluctuations and long shipping route probably factor in the price too, but our legislation is surely the prime reason for the cost. I absolutely love the consumer guarantees act we have here, and the protection it gives. Edit: NZ has 15% sales tax and this is missing from the above equation. It accounts for most the difference.
- GordonS 5y agoI think you're forgetting VAT, which in NZ, I think, is 13%. Not sure if there are import tariffs/duties to account for too. Considering all these other costs, I reckon a 20% markup is great value for a 3-year warranty. Like others though, I really all Apple products globally should come with a 3-year warranty - you pay over the odds for Apple hardware, and should get high-quality, reliable kit in return.
- lostlogin 5y agoI have missed tax differences. In New Zealand you are getting a 3 year warranty and getting something guaranteed in return - and the extra price appears minimal once tax differences are included.
- 0xy 5y agoYou're forgetting about the high sales tax of 15% in NZ. That explains the vast majority of the price difference.
- lostlogin 5y agoThere is zero sales tax on US Apple store sales? Where is tax paid? I certainly have missed that.
- bialpio 5y agoSales tax can vary depending on state (among other things), see for example Oregon where it's 0%, vs Washington, where it's 6.5% (and my jurisdiction adds additional couple percent for a total of ~10%).
- sp332 5y agoI don't think the odds of a replacement or repair are that high. 20% means one-in-five chance of total replacement.
- coldtea 5y agoThat can easily be fixed if they're also kept on a watch by legislators and consumer rights groups for pulling such shit up (as opposed to sucking up the cost)... In the EU, where a longer guarantee is mandaded, state tax aside, the prices aren't that different. MacBook Air $999 US (849 €) vs 1129 € France. Of that 188 € is the state tax (VAT), which means the price difference as far as Apple pockets is 1129-188 - 849 = $92 or $108 dollars. So that $999 would be say $1109, a 11% increase, hardly 20-30%. (And that's not even counting the higher cost of business in Europe aside the VAT, which also factors in that 1129-188 price).
- ksec 5y agoApple are already making higher margin on M1 Mac than on Intel Mac. Did you notice the higher discount rate running on all M1 product compared to old Intel Mac? Those extra margin could have been repurposed to Service Revenue, getting Apple Care+ by default. ( May be having one accidental damage instead of two ). Just like how the Mac is putting money into services revenue for MacOS, iCloud, Map and Siris. The consequence of that is instead of a possible lower cost Mac lineup with M1, you now have the same cost but longer warranty. Apple now also has an incentive to make the Mac last longer to minimise any AppleCare cost they get within three years.
- colinmhayes 5y agoCompanies exist to maximize profit. The only thing that matters in pricing is supply, demand, and perhaps goodwill/brand power. Apple's already positioned itself as a luxury brand, so they would have no problem raising prices in the face of a supply shock.