Surely you are not implying that the majority of iPhones are sold off-contract? Although the iPhone is likely sold off-contract more than other phones, it is common knowledge that the majority of phones are sold in a subscription model.
you have an issue with questions and peoples opinions, jump to conclusion as to what their intent is and get very defensive. i was asking a general question to which i did not have the answer for. clearly you dont have a factually based answer to that as well.
I'm having trouble understanding what point you are trying to make here.
first of i was disagreeing with you that they really had phones covering the $0-$600 range.
secondly you mentioned $199 unsubsidized (dont why you picked that amount) and i responding by saying imo that i think apple could offer a very good device in the $300-$400 range.
the rest of that segment seems to have been messed up in this whole quoting process (am i doing it wrong or is there no quick and easy way to quote multiple segments from the same post?) this is tedious.
the last answer was to the comment on the jobs biography and their pricing ideology and i merely mentioned the imac and mba as products that are favorably priced (when updated) consider what they are.
There are already reports that carriers are willing to price the 5C lower. E.g. the WSJ reports that carriers are pricing the 5C at $79, while the lowest tier 5S is priced at $199. This is not painfully close. The market in Europe is more competitive due to the fact that the carriers are all on the same GSM bands, so we will certainly see the same behaviour here.
im more concerned about the price of the device unloked and without contract. but in the bolded part you are an making unsupported assumption based on behavior and strategy in another continent.
Besides the enclosure, the 5C is essentially the same as the 5. It is therefore fair to compare these in terms of costs. I even indicated that there might be some variations, but it is a fair comparison. I'm not adding or combining anything. I don't see your point.
i misread your post. but however the cost estimates for the 5 were for it a year ago? and also of course the extra $100-$150 is purely conjecture on your part.
If you think markets are the same than I suggest you to read a bit up on strategy and marketing. There are huge differences between markets. Spending behaviour, consumer preferences and wages vary wildly. That's why it is impossible to already make any assumptions on the success of a mobile phone that is not even on the market yet.
i ask a question and you cannot answer it factually. i never made any assumption like that but please tell me what nationalities are more inclined to spend almost the same amount for a year old device as a new device?
is there any market where the iphone is gaining marketshare? if not you dont think its time to think they have to look at their pricing of the "cheaper" devices? i personally think so.
if its impossible to make any assumption at present time why do you get so worked up over a person saying the thought they are pricing it too high and what it "could have been"?
Again, you make assumptions that are not backed up by facts. The fact that the 5C is already sold out in pre-orders shows that Apple is not that crazy in terms of pricing strategy.
wait so all colors in all sizes are sold out?
I'm not acting anything. I'm basing my argumentation on fact. The price of a 5C is now $79. The 5s is priced at $199 on contract. Are you disagreeing with me that these are different prices? The range I refer to is based on the whole product portfolio from the 4s ($0) to the 5s 64 Gb ($399). There is something here for most consumer segments. Although off-contract the prices are indeed closer, the vast majority of global consumers buy a smartphone in a subscription package.
the first thing you did in this post was to acknowledge you had pretty much no idea how the iphone sales were split between contract and non contract sales yet now you are making an unsupported assumption. and its painfully clear that i am pretty focused on the off contract prices.
btw in your previous post you were quoting off contract prices yet now you quote on contract prices.
And here is the big mistake that you make. You cannot make assumptions on the whole market based on your own personal opinion! Tastes and customs are different everywhere! People in Scotland eat haggis, the French eat escargots, Germans prefer german cars, while Japanese favor japanese cars. How can you claim a knowledge on market behaviour based on your "buying hat"?
i thought this was a forum where people expressed their ideas, thoughts and opinions. perhaps you would enjoy a gallup poll more. i dont recall saying anything where i masked my opinion as a fact.
again perhaps you can tell me what nationalities are more inclined to spend almost the same amount for a year old device as a new device?
He is talking in the past-tense. "could have been". My argumentation was that he cannot have concluded on the 5C's success while it isn't even on the market yet. Actually reality has caught up with him / her as the initial supply of the 5C has already sold out in pre-orders. I'm not misreading anything.
You can see here that I'm quite happy to respond in detail, but if you want to continue this discussion than please come up with some fact based support for your assumptions.
so you are backtracking from your previous post that he said it would be
unsuccessful which was of course pure fabrication?
and pricing it cheaper (off contract at least) would make it less desirable?
you have no facts yourself to back up anything you say. you mention the fact it sold out but we have no idea about the supply or other variables so to base anything of that and that alone is ridiculous.
i am more than happy to continue to express my view that i think pricing a year old device so closely to a new one is absurd. whether it sells out is not relevant.