| |
ThaidUp
|
CS fails to see the genius and pure capitalism at work. There no better way to make money than a monopoly. Apple has done two great things.
One, they are the first to tie there hardware to monthly revenue sharing. So say if they earn $10.00 per phone per month they are raking in free money at practically no expense. They can sell phones because their phone operation and design blows aways the competition who has been at it for years which segways to point 2.
Two, they lite a fire under the ass of the rest of the phone companies with their lame ass Phone OS's. In the next two years the other will innovate or lose market share. That is good for the consumer.
Besides choice of a carrier is not that big of a deal as you only have a choice who is going to screw you in the ass with their fees. In the end you still get it in the end.
I think CS has been residing in Europe too long to start adopting their socialist policies. I think Apple could give a shit about selling more phones just to sell mores phones. It is all about revenues.
CS here is a company that follows your model, Motorola.
Dateline Sept. 2005
Apple Computer's newest MP3 player, the iPod nano, is receiving rave reviews and analysts believe the device will solidify Apple's dominance in the competitive MP3 player market for at least another year. However, not everyone praises the device -- Motorola CEO Ed Zander had some harsh words for the nano in a recent interview.
"Screw the nano," said Zander. "What the hell does the nano do? Who listens to 1,000 songs? People are going to want devices that do more than just play music, something that can be seen in many other countries with more advanced mobile phone networks and savvy users," he said.
Zander's comments come just three weeks after the introduction of the iPod nano in an event that also saw the unveiling of the Motorola Rokr, the first iTunes compatible phone.
Traditionally Apple likes to have complete control over products it introduces, which led some consumers and analysts to speculate that Apple would release their own iTunes phone. The company instead opted to partner with Motorola to develop the hardware. Zander declined to comment specifically on the idea of an Apple smart phone, but said "all computer companies are thinking about voice."
Who listensto 1,000 songs? Idiot. Maybe Steve Jobs should send him a Nano for his retirement. Zander will have a lot of free time to listen to 1,000 songs.
Dateline 2007
But Motorola (MOT) "hasn't impressed me lately," says Menaker, 39. Some newer phones, including the Razr2, seem buggy and filled with unnecessary features, he says. Menaker, a tech buff, is buying other cellphone brands, including an HTC TyTN and Apple iPhone.
That's the problem that prompted Motorola CEO Ed Zander to announce his resignation Friday, says tech analyst Bill Hughes at researcher In-Stat. Motorola's cellphones aren't resonating with consumers, with sales falling 36% in the most recent quarter, he says. In charge of changing that is Greg Brown, who replaces Zander as CEO on Jan. 1. Zander will remain chairman until Motorola's board meeting in May.
|
Thai Girls : Meet Sexy Thai Girls
Posted on: 5:38 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
DaffyDuck
|
Quote: from ThaidUp on 8:53 am on Dec. 12, 2007
One, they are the first to tie there hardware to monthly revenue sharing. So say if they earn $10.00 per phone per month they are raking in free money at practically no expense. They can sell phones because their phone operation and design blows aways the competition who has been at it for years which segways to point 2.
Lovely post, TU - but there's an additional facet of the iPhone business model that many (including CS) fail to grasp... Unlike most other products on the market, which are just boxes to be pushed upon the consumer, the iPhone is a (software) work in progress -- i.e. the hardware is designed in such a manner that the software can make it do pretty much anything, and that is why Apple is committed to refining and further evolving iPhone over the next two years, while at the same time generating the revenue to reflect the actual cost of iPhone.
Yes, $399 is a snappy price for iPhone, but those $399 do not even come close to amortizing R&D cost that Apple has poured into it -- in other words, while everyone is quick to point out that iPhone is not subsidized (technically, it isn't), but realistically, it is being 'financially supported' over the next two years, and effectively subsidized by the subscriber fees from the deals Apple made with the carrier.
Recently, in Europe, a more realistically value/price for iPhone surfaced, when it is being sold in unlocked configurations in France (and earlier, Germany), for roughly €750, which comes out to $1,100 - a more realistic cost for iPhone, reflecting Apple's investment -- or you pay $399, and pay the difference as part of your monthly subscriber fees with your carrier.
In the end, as TU pointed out, it really doesn't matter, as you always will end up paying some provider for your phone service - and so far, at least in the US, the charges via AT&T actually ended up being less than I paid previously with T-Mobile -- so, effectively, everyone wins from this deal : The consumer (getting an iPhone, and less cost), AT&T (grabbing market share from other carriers), Apple (for obvious reasons).
Why do carriers agree to this upside down structure, and give Apple their money? Because Apple provided them with more than just a simple phone, like others (Nokia, Moto) have been doing.
Yes, I certainly would prefer a plain unlocked iPhone (and, for €750 I can have one), but for the vast majority of users, the phones locked to plans will work just fine - an alternative that I would like to see is to have a user agree to an 18 months or 2 year plan, *after* which they may opt to have their iPhone unlocked for a small fee. Still, by the time iPhone hits Asia, we may end up with some similar compromises (or, cross-competitive roaming fees between iPhone providers would be another solution -- i.e. if you roam in a region covered by an iPhone provider, your roaming fees are reasonable on that carrier's network, for example).
I'm sure CS enjoys his phone, whatever it is.
|
Bangkok Women : Meet Sensual Bangkok Women
Posted on: 7:19 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
snpark
|
well before u get so excited check out the new nokia aeon and the new benq siemens blackbox phones
both of which out 2008 make the iphone look iprehistoric
all apple did was make the others raise their game
|
Thai Girls : Meet Sexy Thai Girls
Posted on: 9:18 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
ThaidUp
|
Quote: from snpark on 12:33 pm on Dec. 12, 2007
all apple did was make the others raise their game
My point #2, the old farts in the stodgy phone suppliers needed a good ass boot.
|
Bangkok Girls : Meet Sexy Bangkok Girls
Posted on: 9:45 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
ColoradoGuy
|
Quote: from DaffyDuck on 10:34 am on Dec. 12, 2007
an alternative that I would like to see is to have a user agree to an 18 months or 2 year plan, *after* which they may opt to have their iPhone unlocked for a small fee.
In two years, that iPhone they have will not be the phone they want to use anyway, they will want a different one.
But you could always give to a TBG in two years.. she'll see "thank you, this old phone, but it is OK, I give to my brother" 
|
Thai Women : Meet Matured Thai Women
Posted on: 9:57 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
DaffyDuck
|
Quote: from snpark on 12:33 pm on Dec. 12, 2007
well before u get so excited check out the new nokia aeon and the new benq siemens blackbox phones
Yeah, those sure look really nice FOR CONCEPT PHONES. Do you know what a concept phone is?
It's a photo mock-up.
Something that doesn't exist.
So, yeah, in Fantasy Land, those two concepts look really nice -- but it's functionality, and the user interface, that end up mattering a lot more.
Considering:
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2006/10/08/nokias-aeon-full-surface-screen-cellphone-concept/
"...Currently mobile technology isn't quite up to realizing this fantasy..."
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2006/10/01/the-benq-siemens-black-box-concept-phone-that-never-was/
The BenQ / Siemens is even better - not only is it a concept, but the company went under before it even had a chance of realizing it. Yeah, certainly looks like a real contender.
So, you got anything *real* to offer up...?
So, as for TU's point #2 - the industry may feel like they need to kick it up a notch, but pandering 'concepts around is pretty much the same as just talking about what they will do... but never really doing anything.
|
Bangkok Women : Meet Beautiful Thai Girls
Posted on: 11:24 pm on Dec. 11, 2007
|
|
China Sailor
|
Quote: from DaffyDuck on 11:34 am on Dec. 12, 2007
I'm sure CS enjoys his phone, whatever it is.
Nokia N95 (Standard Version).
I like the GPS/Mapping and the WLAN functions as they are useful to me with the amount of traveling I do.
I did look at the iPhone when I was in LOS last month, it is cool but at SGD 900 I took a pass on it.
As it is my service provider is SingTel and neither them nor the other two providers (StarHub and M3) sell the iPhone yet.
My understanding from the folks at SingTel is that as long as the phone is required to be locked to a single provider the Singapore Infocomm Development Agency (IDA) will not approve them for sale. It seems that there is a law in Singapore that all mobile phones and Singapore assigned mobile phone numbers be interchangeable between service providers. Whilst this does not prevent you from bringing a 'hacked' iPhone to Singapore and using a local SIM card, it will limit your support options.
Now two years from now when the iPhone is 'refined', has WLAN and GPS, and is available from SingTel I may upgrade to it. But currently, given that I rarely watch video or listen to tunes on my phone, the N95 is the best option for me. Also with the SGD 485 Xmas deal from SingTel it was a real bargain.
BTW: Do stay away from the N95 8Gb model. A technician at Nokia (Singapore) told me that if you should drop the phone by accident it may damage the phone's flash drive and you will lose the system firmware...
|
Bangkok Girls : Meet Attractive Thai Girls
Posted on: 1:51 am on Dec. 12, 2007
|
|
China Sailor
|
Quote: from ThaidUp on 9:53 am on Dec. 12, 2007
CS fails to see the genius and pure capitalism at work. There no better way to make money than a monopoly...
...I think CS has been residing in Europe too long to start adopting their socialist policies...
Actually it has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative, it is more about being ethical and not being selfish.
If you read the work of Milton Freedman, Adam Smith, and the other great theorists of 'Conservative Economics' you would see that any monopoly is harmful to a capitalistic economy. What a monopoly does is limit competition, stifle creativity, and in the long-run choke off the economic growth for the whole system.
In fact at a lecture given by Dr. Freedman that I attended he compared a monopoly (in that case AT&T) to a cancer that would eventually choke itself off. He predicted that the new 'Baby Bells' would eventually revolutionize the Telecommunications Industry and eventually 'eat' their parent (AT&T). This was proved true when a 'Baby Bell', Southwestern Bell (SBC) absorbed AT&T, and re-branded itself as AT&T.
Any good economist, Liberal or Conservative, will object to monopolistic behavior as a threat to the economy.
Quote: from DaffyDuck on 11:34 am on Dec. 12, 2007
Lovely post, TU - but there's an additional facet of the iPhone business model that many (including CS) fail to grasp...
Wrong again Duck, some of us are as intelligent as you are and we understand what Apple is doing. We just object to their policy on ethical grounds.
When mobile phones first became viable in the early 1990's many of these phones were sold below cost by the various providers. The cost of the phones (and the network infrastructure) was recovered in the contracts that appeared to be a bargain but at the end of the year ended up costing the consumer a fortune. This original pricing scheme strangled the growth of the mobile phone industry. It was not until the creation of fixed price contracts in the late 1990's that mobile phones became a consumer item.
It seems that the same is happening with the iPhone. Whilst the cost of normal phone use is competitive with other plans, the optional features (many set on by default) are leaving consumers with huge phone bills at the end of the month.
Unlike you Duck the average consumer is not smart enough to realize that these services and options are costing them an 'arm and leg' until that first bill is received.
Therein lies the ethical quandary. Whilst I understand the Apple needs to recover the cost of the R&D that went into the phone, I believe that these costs should be reflected in the upfront cost of the phone and not in the cost of the service.
Whilst this model may not maximize profits over the short term, it has proved itself in the long-term with most of the consumer electronics we currently own.
Free enterprise and the capitalistic system depends on free markets. This means that the consumer should be allowed choose the service provider of his choice and not be forced into a decision by another party. If this is not the cornerstone of your economic model then you are just practicing 'State Socialism' with the facade of private ownership.
And if you want to know how well 'State Socialism' works, just ask the Cubans...
|
Thai Girls : Meet Active Thai Girls
Posted on: 2:42 am on Dec. 12, 2007
|
|
DaffyDuck
|
Quote: from China Sailor on 5:57 pm on Dec. 12, 2007
It seems that the same is happening with the iPhone. Whilst the cost of normal phone use is competitive with other plans, the optional features (many set on by default) are leaving consumers with huge phone bills at the end of the month.
Please detail these 'optional features' which you seem to be so familiar with, and which clearly must leaving me with a huge bill.
Quote: from China Sailor on 5:57 pm on Dec. 12, 2007
Unlike you Duck the average consumer is not smart enough to realize that these services and options are costing them an 'arm and leg' until that first bill is received.
What are they?
Quote: from China Sailor on 5:57 pm on Dec. 12, 2007
If this is not the cornerstone of your economic model then you are just practicing 'State Socialism' with the facade of private ownership.
And if you want to know how well 'State Socialism' works, just ask the Cubans...
Nice strawman you're trying to build - considering that, so far, you're making crap up, I take it that you actually (no surprise there) don't really know what you are talking about?
But please, let's take it one thing at a time - what are these optional features set by default on my phone bill?
|
Thai Women : Meet Matured Thai Women
Posted on: 3:31 am on Dec. 12, 2007
|
|
China Sailor
|
EDGE for one. In early versions of the iPhone this could not be turned off. In version 1.1.1 you can turn it off but the default in on.
This is the real killer because of GPRS costs. For me in roaming in the UK costs SGD 13.80 per MB. This can run up a phone bill real fast (that is why I like WLAN).
Here one of many forums that discuss this:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=661158
Now it is true that the consumer will have these costs whether his phone is locked or not but on the other hand if Apple was not getting a share of the service cost maybe they would have the default for EDGE set to 'Off' like Nokia does with their GPS-A...
|
Bangkok Girls : Meet Attractive Thai Girls
Posted on: 4:53 am on Dec. 12, 2007
|
|
| |
|
