Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
All iPads Anyone think Apple would eventually only sell cellular iPads?
- Thread starter bniu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ahhhhh.... Not all of us have smart phones.
in our use case the cellular iPad is a nice thing to have. As for whether they'd go cellular only? No way, it'd cut out a big part of their customer base, me thinks and as others have stated. Now, if they kept pricing the same and just included it? Sure, be great for us.
Actually I listed the cost difference above, though its less then the $36 now that it was in Oct, and will continue to decrease. Its easier for Apple to make fewer SKUs, it helps in production, sales, inventory, etc. Much like we once had a different Iphone and Cellular iPad for each major cellular supplier (AT&T, Sprint & Verizon) and now have one Cellular that works with all, in the next two generations LTE will be in all the current models. Its likely Apple will get rid of the 16 GB units for the post IPad Air ipads as well.
Now, if they kept pricing the same and just included it? Sure, be great for us.
If they did that then you'd have people complaining that they don't have a cheaper version that doesn't have cellular.
Just wrong. This is the same argument that has some believing Apple will continue to make 16 GB iPads no matter how many pixels they put on the screen. LTE support at the same price as the current wifi isnt going to hurt sales it would help sales. I never use the video camera on my iPad, and I sure dont sit around going Apple is being greedy by putting a camera on my iPad. Tim gets up there and says every iPad we are shipping has LTE in it at the old wifi prices, everyone will be happy, especially the stockholders.
I think the iPad mini proved this theory wrong. It came out, all the couch critics were on here, its not going to sell, its going to be a failure, its too expensive why didnt they do an 8 gb one (personal favorite of the whinings). Yet it sold how many million the first weekend? Apple is not interested in a race to the bottom on price, the cheapest current generation full size iPad will be $499 for a long time. They are just going to keep putting more stuff in it, soon I think that will be LTE. Second Generation Ipad Mini came out and they raised the price $70, thats not a company that is going make a cheaper iPad they are going to consolidate models 40 in production is too many, and this year or next year wifi-cellular will be part of the consolidation.
It would certainly sell well, probably better than any individual model now, but you would lose some of the market to people buying cheaper android tablets since they don't need cellular connectivity and don't want to pay the extra for it.
Because if I really need my iPad abroad I can just tether it to my iPhone anyway. Or any other smartphone i'll have. Not gonna get 2 subscribtions for something that can be covered by 1.
If it was a good and/or profitable idea Apple would do it. They aren't because it's not.
If nothing else Apple is very good at making money.
Well, the question was if they might eventually do it. It might not be profitable now to include cellular as a default option, but could it become so at some point in the future?
Really? my needs? Who doesn't have a smartphone these days? Hell who has an iPad but not a smartphone... this just seems very unlikely.
Edit:
We're at the point where facebook is spreading wifi through drones, there's wifi at home, at work, in the city literally any place you can sit still there's wifi. So the chances of the LTE iPad being removed is far more likely i'd say. As there is less need for it.
I know a few people that use iPads at their primary device and keep cheap flip phones for the occasional phone call.
Furthermore, not all plans include tethering. I am grandfathered in to AT&Ts unlimited data plan, so I do not have tethering.
I am not saying that this is the case for everyone, even though that's what you seem to be doing.
I know a few people that use iPads at their primary device and keep cheap flip phones for the occasional phone call.
Furthermore, not all plans include tethering. I am grandfathered in to AT&Ts unlimited data plan, so I do not have tethering.
I am not saying that this is the case for everyone, even though that's what you seem to be doing.
You are misunderstanding, OP asked if they would ever drop the Wifi model. I am saying it's more likely that they wil drop the Wifi+LTE models, because there's literally no need for them, plenty of people on the go with Laptops all of them on Wifi at the trainstation, in the train and when they arrive they go to starbucks. Lmfao it's miracle the LTE model has survived this long.
This is where you are wrong. There may not be a need for them for YOU. That doesn't mean that there is no need for them.
lit·er·al·ly [lit-er-uh-lee] : actually; without exaggeration or inaccuracy
It is a good and profitable idea, other things drive when things occur however. Eventually they will make one model, whether thats this year when the delta is $30 or so, or next year when its $20 or so is the only real question. Cutting down the SKUs helps hugely across the board the number of SKUs is a big problem with backorders, stock and repairs and also costs them sales. Go to a walmart or a target or an Apple store noone has all 40 SKUs for the iPad. It wasnt cheaper on a phone by phone basis to make the iPhone be one phone for all networks. HOWEVER once you factor in not having to make 3x as many kinds of phones, being able to ship a single phone to all the vendors is a huge savings. Thats why Apple did it for the iPhone and why they will eventually do it for the iPad.
While I understand what you are saying I feel comparing the iPhone and iPad on this subject doesn't work.
All iPhones require cellular. Because of that there is no/little cost difference between manufacturing an iPhone that works in the US vs one in India. So combining them using a more all-in-one radio could only benefit Apple. They replaced a bunch of cellular radios with one. The iPad isn't like that, manufacturing cost are less on the wifi only iPad unlike the iPhone used to be.
I think the delta would need to be MUCH smaller then that also. A % is profit margin, the higher the price of a device the more Apple makes.
Reducing the variations of a device can/will reduce overhead however it's tough when you fall back on a single model and it's production line. Currently there is no way Apple could keep up with the demand if it were to fall back on its lesser sold products production line. There is significant expense in retooling retraining etc etc what is currently there.
While I do think it will happen I think it'll be years and years. The mini line is relatively new so setting up manufacturing to produce one model would have been no more difficult then two (wifi & wifi+cellular) yet Apple still didn't do it.
We'll just have to wait and see.
It certainly is an interesting question to pose. I would consider it unlikely unless there is a dramatic fall off in sales.
The reason I say this is because as another poster stated, less than half the cellular iPads sold have ever been activated. This leads me to the conclusion that there is not a significant enough demand to justify either raising the cost accross the iPad line or reducing the profit on the cellular models.
In my opinion, based on what I've seen, people who need or just want to use a cellular iPad are not as price conscious as compared to other electronics consumers. They are willing to pay a premium to get a cellular model.
I have also noticed that current generation cellular iPad models very rarely go on sale.
With all this said, I do plan on getting a cellular model for my next iPad. I am finding myself in situations where I wish I had a tablet with cellular capability.
The reason I say this is because as another poster stated, less than half the cellular iPads sold have ever been activated. This leads me to the conclusion that there is not a significant enough demand to justify either raising the cost accross the iPad line or reducing the profit on the cellular models.
In my opinion, based on what I've seen, people who need or just want to use a cellular iPad are not as price conscious as compared to other electronics consumers. They are willing to pay a premium to get a cellular model.
I have also noticed that current generation cellular iPad models very rarely go on sale.
With all this said, I do plan on getting a cellular model for my next iPad. I am finding myself in situations where I wish I had a tablet with cellular capability.
Wifi ipad + tethering on my android + grandfathered verizon unlimited 4g = great
So how much does it cost for The FCC to test the device. And then ATT for their network, and then Verizon for their network, etc... WiFi might be cheaper because it is on a public frequency band. But for cellular stuff, I can imagine testing and verification costs are much much larger.
So how much does it cost for The FCC to test the device. And then ATT for their network, and then Verizon for their network, etc... WiFi might be cheaper because it is on a public frequency band. But for cellular stuff, I can imagine testing and verification costs are much much larger.
Agreed, it definitely is the same argument.
Your viewpoint for both is definitely motivated by the same desire - more of the features you want, for a lower price. If Apple increases the feature set of the entry-level model (without changing its price), the world will flock to its door.
Under this scenario, Apple would cut the price of their $629 premium product by 20% ($130), but would not cut the price of their entry-level model. People who budgeted $499 for a new iPad Air will still be paying $499. Some would certainly be happy - more for less. Some of them will feel similarly to the way you feel about the video camera - they won't be upset about paying for something they don't use, but they won't appreciate having it, either.
Others will wonder why they can no longer get a cheaper model without cellular. If the "rich" got a price cut, why didn't they? There's a growing corporate and education market that has no use for cellular iPads - they're not taking them into the field, they're using them in the warehouse, classroom, and showroom floor. "Everyone knows" that extra features cost extra - they see it every time they go into an appliance store. If you pay extra for a CPU with more cores, it's logical that a communications chip with wifi, cellular, and Bluetooth is going to cost more than a wifi-and-Bluetooth chip. How can the cost of one feature drop so steeply while the cost of everything else in the device remains the same?
Some will think it's a conspiracy on the part of Apple, AT&T, and Verizon - a subsidy on the cost of the LTE model in order to get more subscribers. Retailers will try to up-sell a cellular data plan to every iPad purchaser, and that's going to generate some push-back. "Screw Apple, show me a Samsung, HP, Microsoft... anything that doesn't use cellular data!"
I strongly doubt the shareholders and stock analysts would cheer. There would be skepticism that Apple would gain enough new customers to offset the reduced profit margin. There would be declarations that it's a sign of Apple's weakness, that the entire premium-price/no discounts strategy is failing. "There's clearly support for iPad at the $499 price point, but they're failing at $629." Consider all the pain they inflicted on the share price because the iPhone 5c wasn't cheap enough. There was hardly mention that it was a better value than the 5. Better specs? Ho hum. The entry-level price was still too high.
This is where you are wrong. There may not be a need for them for YOU. That doesn't mean that there is no need for them.
lit·er·al·ly [lit-er-uh-lee] : actually; without exaggeration or inaccuracy
So you bold some words, and took them out of context. So what?
You haven't made your point at all. I stand by what I say. Wifi equals no need for data. Not just for me, for anyone.
Literally.