CEO complains about iPad being "too cheap"

[fertilized-egg]

Mr. Park, the CEO of Pantech, which some of you might remember as the maker of a few low-end phones released in North America, talked to reporters after a shareholder meeting. Pantech has actually been doing pretty well in its domestic Korean smartphone market with their Android offerings, outperforming likes of HTC and LG, and expected to release tablet sometime in the future.

He claimed that apple is putting on a predatory pricing move by "pricing the iPad 2 too low ... it might mean competitors will all die," and "while this is, in the short term, beneficial for consumers, in the long term it's a bad thing for them since it'll lead to monopolization of the tablet market by Apple which will destroy the variety of species." (um..yeah he actually used the word species in Korean, but you know what he meant) He also added that he believes Samsung announced the new low price for their upcoming tablets even though "(Samsung) are probably taking some losses."

Funny how internet forum users are complaining about Apple's cost cutting moves and that iPad is overpriced while a competing company goes so far to claim Apple is being predatory with their pricing by pricing it too cheap.

 

[Apple OC]

I think Mr.Park might be a closet scalper ... I swear I saw him buying iPads just off of 5th Ave. last week

$500 - $700 for the iPad is not cheap

 

[blow45]

apple is indeed being very aggressive with their pricing, as they 've always been with ipad, anyone not yet aware of this should probably not be in a tech forum. Having said that I find it laughable the above comments (not the op's comments) that people who have constantly been undercutting apple in prices should whine and bitch about prices.

When these guys where selling crap netbooks that rust in garages nowadays, for peanuts, and touting them as the next big thing, apple took a lot of heat for saying we don't make crap.

So, guess what, they created a whole new category themselves. All these guys crying that apple is leveraging it's enormous clout nowadays (and they are, and they will dominate), conveniently omits that this is what happens when you release garbage in the market instead of actively trying to figure out how to best your competitor.

So, where is any semblance of os (Steve said asians can't do software, and he was right) from the asian tech giants? Do they feel comfortable sucking google's sock to have something running on their devices? If not what have they been doing these past ten years? It's not as if linux hasn't been available for them to modify and release with these tablets, but no one but palm (lots of ex apple there) bothered to develop a proper mobile os for their devices... (not even rim imho)

...and now they whine that apple will dominate as they did with ipods, well they sure will, I ve not seen so many ipads and macs in a plane journey as I did today, very few pcs, it's very telling who is using what (and who is hiding their devices)...and it's all down to good business from apple who are lucky to be helmed by a genius, as opposed to rest of the flock who are (mostly) run by morons.

 

[saving107]

He claimed that apple is putting on a predatory pricing move by "pricing the iPad 2 too low ... it might mean competitors will all die," and "while this is, in the short term, beneficial for consumers, in the long term it's a bad thing for them since it'll lead to monopolization of the tablet market by Apple which will destroy the variety of species."

This is unacceptable and I for one will not stand for this, as soon as Apple releases the iPad 3 I am getting rid of my iPad 2 in protest for it being priced so low.

 

[robanga]

Nothing stops another company that has any sort of war chest from competing;

Samsung
Sony
Google (using a special alliance with HTC, Samsung or whomever)
Amazon ( Can you say, Android Kindle Tablet with Color? I thought you could)
Microsoft
HP

Its just tougher because Apple has been so successful in the mobile market, and gaining every percentage point of share is not going to profit rich for a long time.

They have to really want it and like Microsoft with the Xbox, lose money for a time. I doubt their will to do it though. Well except maybe Amazon and HP. Google is all about search, their core business has to really be threatened before they would ever go into hardware.

 

[fertilized-egg]

This is unacceptable and I for one will not stand for this, as soon as Apple releases the iPad 3 I am getting rid of my iPad 2 in protest for it being priced so low.

Count me in. Wait, I think Motorola tried to warn us earlier about the danger of a Apple-ruled world during that Superbowl ad. I shoud've listened!

On the other hand am I being countercultural enough by buying a tablet

- with an OS by a company whose mission is to place their software everywhere and collect as much data as possible to sell ads?(Google)
- made by a company who's best known for making a ton of corporate PCs?(HP)
- made by a company who's best known for making a ton of corporate messenger devices?(RIM)

Crap. I guess I could go with a MeeGo tablet and be more countercultural. Oh wait, it's backed by Intel??? Darn it, I guess I'll just stick with Apple for now until there's some open source tablet project ala OpenPandora.

 

[blow45]

google is making tons of dollars by stealing off java patents in android, and without manufacturing nada, ad dollars, tons of them... but let's see how this plays out...because I am sure apple will dominate, and I agree rim and hp will be contenders, from the rest.

 

[JoeG4]

Do you really want an Apple monopoly?

 

[fertilized-egg]

Do you really want an Apple monopoly?

I definitely don't. We need other companies to keep Apple honest. On the other hand I definitely don't want Android to be the most prevalent non-Apple OS either and that's why I hope HP and RIM can do something good with their products. Also I like WebOS.

 

[iVeBeenDrinkin']

An Apple monopoly? That would be terrible! They already have a monopoly on MP3 players, and the iTunes store, and app stores are pretty much monopolies too.

Maybe other companies should worry more about innovation... every smartphone one the market right now is a copy of the iPhone... and less about what Apple is doing.

 

[blow45]

Do you really want an Apple monopoly?

Yes I do, I prefer it to a monopoly by windows or some other manufacturer with no flair, creativity, and guts, that is. Ideally I wouldn't, but I don't see the ipod (generic term) market segment having suffered because of apple's dominance.

btw, don't confuse monopoly with dominance, they are quite distinct.

but what we prefer is immaterial at the end of the day if the players here, all except apple, didn't have the foresight for this. Ok, palm had some foresight also, but it wasn't apple who sunk palm, it was the dime a dozen android phones.

If someone has some deleterious effect on stifling growth here, that's google. But not many people talk about that, they dont' talk about how having the worlds mobile space dominated by ad revenue off the biggest search provider will stiffle competition, they just talk about apple.

When it's instead google pimping their os for their cash cow (ads) to everyone and anyone. how does that foster competition from say palm (hp) or rim, and doesn't, but do you hear anyone saying this?

 

[fertilized-egg]

but do you hear anyone saying this?

Because Google can't be evil. I know it because I've heard open software is a good thing. Android is open right? (Except when Google decides it's not)

 

[blow45]

Because Google can't be evil. I know it because I've heard open software is a good thing. Android is open right? (Except when Google decides it's not)

exactly, the same old lie, the same rubbish we hear ad infinitum and ad nauseum everyday about google, because of course google have declared to do no evil (other of course than attempting to monopolize all ads on the web (they ve done this pretty much)).

But for people to claim that the one who says here 's a free os (cash cow for us with ad $$), put it anywhere you want is fostering competition, whilst the other (apple) who painstakingly develops both os and hardware, who actually makes a product to sell is sabotaging competition...the irony in this complete reversal of reality is delicious.

 

[TheWheelMan]

btw, don't confuse monopoly with dominance, they are quite distinct.

+1

Park is just upset because Apple continues to be better than everyone else. As they say, if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

 

[FeaRThiS]

Yes it is too cheap for an apple product. What I mean is if you compare it to other apple products and other companies products. Here are a few examples

iPad 2 16GB £399
iPhone 4 16GB £510

I know its a phone but slower cpu/gpu smaller screnn ect probably costs less to make considering how long it has been in production aswell.

Macbook Air 11" £867
Acer Aspire One D255 £299

Both 1.5ghz dual core you could argue about ram and ssd but even then what £150 max big price difference.

Apple have always overpriced their products so samsung/acer and anyone else who felt like it could undercut them. Now it seems with apples current pricing competitors are struggling to undercut apple and still make the huge profit margins they are used to.

 

[iVeBeenDrinkin']

Yes it is too cheap for an apple product. What I mean is if you compare it to other apple products and other companies products. Here are a few examples

iPad 2 16GB £399
iPhone 4 16GB £510

I know its a phone but slower cpu/gpu smaller screnn ect probably costs less to make considering how long it has been in production aswell.

Macbook Air 11" £867
Acer Aspire One D255 £299

Both 1.5ghz dual core you could argue about ram and ssd but even then what £150 max big price difference.

Apple have always overpriced their products so samsung/acer and anyone else who felt like it could undercut them. Now it seems with apples current pricing competitors are struggling to undercut apple and still make the huge profit margins they are used to.

If you're going to compare the cost of an iPhone, to an iPad, you should at least use the iPad with 3G for you comparison.

 

[FeaRThiS]

If you're going to compare the cost of an iPhone, to an iPad, you should at least use the iPad with 3G for you comparison.

ok then
iPad 2 16GB 3G £499
iPhone 4 16GB £510

Still cheaper and more than likely still cost more to make than the current iPhone 4.

 

[mcdj]

I think Mr.Park might be a closet scalper ... I swear I saw him buying iPads just off of 5th Ave. last week

CEOs all look the same to me.

 

[blow45]

Apple have always overpriced their products so samsung/acer and anyone else who felt like it could undercut them. Now it seems with apples current pricing competitors are struggling to undercut apple and still make the huge profit margins they are used to.

yeah, but they are lying, the reason why they undercut them was never because apple didn't have the clout to get great manufacturing prices for their products, it was because they could and chose not to, yet the samsungs/sonys of this world didn't need to develop anything os-wise and just slapped windows on. They had it very easy...but now people are maturing with technology, they demand more, better, easier, more intuitive, more family friendly, easier on the eye, etc. etc.

Now that the tables have turned and they need to do something with their software (their what? yes that software that almost all of them haven't been developing as they should and are now hanging by google's balls), and they need to bring something to the table since these are new devices not some generic pc crap that you stick windows on and ship it, they can't.

My suggestion:
Why don't they just keep selling crap netbooks? Didn't they tout them as the next computing revolution? didnt they revile apple for saying they were crap?

When Steve goes on stage and says look at what they are selling you, these things can't do anything better than what you already can, but the ipad can.

And then what? Ipad is a best seller and somehow everyone with little to none know how, or foresight, wants to jump into the tablet business.

Wait a f. second? Are these the same guys who thought everyone would be using netbooks instead? It doesn't taste as sweet putting their money where their mouth is now does it? But back when they were selling rubbish to people (I know I got a netbook a few years ago sadly...) and it was other people's money they were getting for nothing, it didn't taste bitter. Well a taste of their own medicine in what they need now, they very well deserve it.

So if they can't do it, they better stick with netbooks as acer are doing (and I respect them for doing this and coming out and saying we just can't undercut apple's price or suggest anything to compete here for the time being) instead o whine and bitch, god knows they ve made enough money already. If they cant keep making money it's nobodies fault but theirs.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Yes I do, I prefer it to a monopoly by windows or some other manufacturer with no flair, creativity, and guts, that is. Ideally I wouldn't, but I don't see the ipod (generic term) market segment having suffered because of apple's dominance.

btw, don't confuse monopoly with dominance, they are quite distinct.

but what we prefer is immaterial at the end of the day if the players here, all except apple, didn't have the foresight for this. Ok, palm had some foresight also, but it wasn't apple who sunk palm, it was the dime a dozen android phones.

If someone has some deleterious effect on stifling growth here, that's google. But not many people talk about that, they dont' talk about how having the worlds mobile space dominated by ad revenue off the biggest search provider will stiffle competition, they just talk about apple.

When it's instead google pimping their os for their cash cow (ads) to everyone and anyone. how does that foster competition from say palm (hp) or rim, and doesn't, but do you hear anyone saying this?

So an Apple monopoly/dominance is ok, but a Windows/Microsoft one isn't? I say let the free market decide. The consumer votes with their wallet. If Apple produces the product that the majority of consumers buy, so be it. As long as no laws are being broken and business is on the up and up, why not? The competition needs to bring a desirable product to market. I'm all for consumer choice. If the choice is an excellent product vs crap, my guess is the good product will win.

 

[AppleHater]

google is making tons of dollars by stealing off java patents in android, and without manufacturing nada, ad dollars, tons of them... but let's see how this plays out...because I am sure apple will dominate, and I agree rim and hp will be contenders, from the rest.

Yeah, Google is not contributing much despite of astronomical money they make. No, android doesn't count as they bought the company it's like MS-DOS for Microsoft. Google used to put their word and action together better in the past, but they are no better if not worse than others nowadays. Having said that I'm not hating Google as all companies are here to make money.

 

[kdarling]

Mr. Park, the CEO of Pantech, ...

Got a link for any of these statements, because I can't find a thing. Thanks!

 

[blow45]

So an Apple monopoly/dominance is ok, but a Windows/Microsoft one isn't? I say let the free market decide. The consumer votes with their wallet. If Apple produces the product that the majority of consumers buy, so be it. As long as no laws are being broken and business is on the up and up, why not? The competition needs to bring a desirable product to market. I'm all for consumer choice. If the choice is an excellent product vs crap, my guess is the good product will win.

Yes of course it's important who dominates an area, see what happened with ms and pcs? Could anyone in their right mind suggest that ms's dominance truly propelled the industry to innovate forward? Surely not. Could the case be made that someone else instead of ms could have done a better job. Surely.

Oh, I am all for the market deciding, that's why I am not lamenting apple's foreseeable dominance in the ipad market too. Of course the market isn't sometimes mature enough to choose wisely, but it's what we have, and right now in tech terms the market is far more mature too. Sadly, although as you say is the choice between great and crap, usually great wins, when it comes to great vs. merely capable, the latter wins a lot of the time too. Like I said markets aren't perfect gauges of quality, by far, but there's not point debating their merits since it's the only thing we have ultimately, markets are the arbitrator, the only one in some cases.

 

[Lunchb0x8]

Monopoly? That's just a game, Apple are taking over the ********** world!

 

[neko girl]

Do you really want an Apple monopoly?

No one wants an Apple monopoly.

However, I don't think consumers should reward or support companies designing substandard, knockoff products. I'm not making any of this up, of course. Admissions by Rubin himself:
http://www.nytimes.com/external/ven...comb-due-to-ru-27444.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

.. as well as a Samsung Veep:
http://androidcommunity.com/samsung...d-to-ipad-2-price-cut-may-be-coming-20110304/

If competition comes in the form of tablets loaded with phone software that should not be on tablets (as advised by Android's own software vendor), or tablets that will never receive updates in the field, tablets too fat for a Samsung Veep that will be offloaded to UK and Australian markets (ie: the Samsung 10V), or tablets without any strong argument for existing (usage models, applications) I'm not sure how the consumer is being served well here.

I want to see a strong Android-based answer. What we've seen so far isn't good for the consumer.