Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by Pablo, Dec 31, 2003.
I don't think they would cannibalize at all, if you look at the top 5 MP3 players 2 are flashed based and the others are iPods. So there is a market for a low cost iPod, and if the hype lives up to our expectations Apple will dominate the low cost market too.
I take issue with the article's assertion that Apple hasn't been a value leader. There's a difference between value and low prices. It was demonstrated pretty clearly in the thread on the top 5 rankings that the iPods have excellent price per megabyte value compared to the two flash-based players on the list (as in up to an order of 100).
agreed. maybe at first, it would a bit, because people would buy a smaller one. but eventually they'll upgrade. and there will be a bunch of people who now look at $300 and 10GB as way more than they need/can afford, and will buy. overall, it's a good thing.
CNet writing a negative article about Apple? No way!
CNet has a negative bias towards Apple. They'd write something like this whether or not there was a shred of evidence to support their claims.
IMO, new iPods won't cannibalize iPods. In fact, the idea really doesn't make sense. They're all the same product. How can they really cannibalize each other? It's like saying the 12" Powerbook is going to cannibalize 15" Powerbook sales. Sure, Apple probably sells more 12" PBs than 15" ones, but they're very different machines. New iPods aren't going to cause a problem for existing ones.
These new minipod's won't cannabalize anything. Take me for example. I can't justify $300+ on a glorified discman, but I can see spending $100-$150 on a flash model.
While I won't buy a big ipod, I can think of three people for whom I would buy a small one.
So, rather than spend $400 once, I'll end up spending ~$150 three times, totalling $450, which is more than I would have spent on one ipod. Conclusion, Apple makes an extra fifty bucks off me in the long run. Brilliant move steve, just brilliant.
first of all how would apple produce a cheap mini iPod of toshiba has only recently come out with their micro 1 1/2" harddrive? wouldnt the prices be higher?
second i think a smaller iPod would canabalize the iPod market, however its a step they need to make especially with so much other harddrive based MP3 players coming out. Market price has to go down sometime. the smaller iPod will make that step and allow the larger iPod to retain their higher price.
as for my point of view, if i save up enough money i definately would purchase a 10gb iPod for $300. for my utility however, its way overpriced. but then if apple makes a mini iPod, i definately would rather purchase that, somewhat canabalizing their market to people like me.
p.s. my first comment i am completely unsure what people mean by a mini iPod so pardon my ignorance. does it mean a physically smaller iPod or just a smaller drive but same size?
There has been a lot of rumors floating around about cheap mini HDs like a 2 gig for $65 when bought in bulk, so its very possible that this could end up in a new miniPod.
There's no way in hell I'd spend $300 on a glorified Walkman. At $100, with interoperability with iTunes, I might be swayed.
No cannibalization here...
Now this doesn't make any sense. The iPod, by it's own success, proves that people are willing to shell out $500 to carry their entire libraries with them... They could just as easily go buy a flash model already on the market, but they didn't. Apple would not be attacking it's own user segment, it would be attacking the user segment that it doesn't have yet. So, perhaps normal iPod sales will dip slightly, but will be more than made up for by the sales of the mini iPod.
From a consumer point of view, if I only had a small amount of music, I would not spend the money on the iPod-- I'd be tempted to go look at the smaller players, where you'd trade off price for the need to load/remove music. But if Apple had an offering that, for the same price, could hold 1-1.5 gig, I'd go with them in an instant. The mini-iPod is a solution to a compromise that no one wanted to make.
I have 37 Gigs of music and I have no interest at all in taking all of it with me. Give me a $100 price point for this minimalist glorified Walkman and I'll consider jumping in the game.
I don't think there would be a cannibalization problem with a smaller iPod. It seems to me that anybody with enough money and an interest to buy an iPod has already made up their mind on the matter. A small iPod would be bought by a previously untapped market.
Not to mention that who cares if it "cannibalizes" the larger iPod sales? Apple's never sold anything for a loss (to my knowledge), so they're still getting money. And in the end, that's all that matters.