More Apple pwnage

[-Jrabbit]

Wal-Mart achives low pricing by beating the crap out of their suppliers. It's a pretty ugly scene.

Re Apple, remember this is a $100 credit -- not a rebate. So the customer has to Buy More Apple Product in order to benefit. As I understand it, there is ZERO out-of-pocket cost for Apple.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Re Apple, remember this is a $100 credit -- not a rebate. So the customer has to Buy More Apple Product in order to benefit. As I understand it, there is ZERO out-of-pocket cost for Apple.

Yea, they could even add $100 on to the price of the next product they release.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Both is better. First you sell the phones for $300 profit then you sell them for $100 profit after everyone has already paid the higher price. If you only sell the phones for $100 profit you make less profit.

I'll assume that you're just kidding around and that you do understand the point of lowering prices to make a bigger overall profit.

[Patroklos]

I think they just misjudge the price level that would generate the optimum profit, which is not surprising given this was their first venture into cellphones and they had a revolutionary product.

But you have to remember the quarters. Companies don't want a single extremely profitable quarter and then three wishy washy quarters, they want steady profits over the year. Even if they might make a little more profit through one super quarter they would still prefer a steady flow, feast or famine type profit gerneration is very harmful for buisness budgeting.

In any case, markets react to quarter reports. It is much prefered to have four postive quarters than one really positive (which really won't gernate much more investor interest anyways) and three even/negative quarters.

[Pekka]

Agathon, This user's mailbox is currently full, and cannot be sent any messages until it is cleaned out. An email has been sent notifying the user of this. Please try your request at a later time.

still, pretty much.. you might have your sent folder full?

[Asher]

Re: More Apple pwnage

Originally posted by Agathon
New iPods.

Shuffle remains the same.

Redesigned iPod Nano with widescreen for video capability, and apparently running a new graphical OS with Coverflow. $150-200 depending on capacity.

Larger capacity iPod "Classic" with new UI as well. Complete metal sheathing.

iPod Touch: like an iPhone without a phone (photos, contacts, etc.). Complete multitouch interface. WiFi with WWW browser and one click access to Youtube. WiFi iTunes store (also now on iPhone).

iPhone price cut by $200. Now costs $399.

Where's your Zune now, biatch?

Figure 1: Apple pwnage (below)

[DinoDoc]

[Lorizael]

Yay! Agathon and Asher together again. Oh, it's just like the good old days.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm interested in more Agathon pwnage

[Asher]

Only inside the reality distortion field can Apple loyalists can try to explain a 33% pricedrop weeks after a product's instruction as a signal of its success. From what I hear, many of Apple's 1 million phones were "sold" to AT&T stores -- where they collected dust. That's why the pricecut occured.

And in my very thread about the iPhone, I said it was ridiculously overpriced. Apple intentionally pricegouged its most loyal customers for an extra buck. It would make a remarkable psychological study why so many Mac loyalists are left-wing, yet they suppose a company like Apple that is more anti-competitive and more prone to price-gouging than any other prominent technology company.

[Pekka]

Asher, Apple _appears_ to be the little guy in the competition. It appears to be different. It "dares to be different". Maybe some of that old 1984 commercial still plays in the head of the few, I don't know.

It's still Apple vs Microsoft in some way, Microsoft is big and evil, Apple is smaller, stylish and cool.

But in reality, unless you need Final Cut, you can throw your iMac away. That's about it, iPod was cool but now it's not the only player so there.

Can you come up with another brand that has more pure price in the brand itself? It's got a lot to do with the design aspect. Where "artistic" people might find the design good, we tend to look at it from different perspective, mostly functionality and usability. That's because we like the technology, not the plastic cover.

[LordShiva]

Re: Re: More Apple pwnage

Originally posted by Asher


Figure 1: Apple pwnage (below)

[Tingkai]

Asher's back, Iginla really does suck.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Asher's back, Iginla really does suck.

He was on pace for a 109 point season last year. If the leafs had his suckyness, maybe they'd make the playoffs.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Pekka
Asher, Apple _appears_ to be the little guy in the competition. It appears to be different. It "dares to be different". Maybe some of that old 1984 commercial still plays in the head of the few, I don't know.

It's still Apple vs Microsoft in some way, Microsoft is big and evil, Apple is smaller, stylish and cool.

But in reality, unless you need Final Cut, you can throw your iMac away. That's about it, iPod was cool but now it's not the only player so there.

Can you come up with another brand that has more pure price in the brand itself? It's got a lot to do with the design aspect. Where "artistic" people might find the design good, we tend to look at it from different perspective, mostly functionality and usability. That's because we like the technology, not the plastic cover.

To be fair, not all of Apple's products are grossly overpriced. The 15" MacBook Pros are a genuinely good deal for a laptop with its dimensions, weight, power, and build quality.