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.
Apple Ceases Selling Jawbone UP, Nike Fuelband as Apple Watch Launch Approaches
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In a few posts, you will also tell us that Apple was involved In JFKs assassination.... Let's stick to what you seem to know well: how does your windows gaming station work?
May be it did not occur to you that real estate is not cheap in fancy malls and that Apple may want to showcase their products better or redesign their stores for the new products... How does this sound for a conspiracy theory and for a "tad suspicious" move....? Scary, uh?
Cannot believe the content of your posts....
Apple's decision to remove products is their decision. So what? It's not like those products can't be purchased elsewhere; often cheaper. The saddest part of this thread is the amount of logical fallacies being thrown up and seconded by people, who I will have to assume have no idea what a logical fallacy is. Especially the absolutely stupid car company comparisons. I've got news for those who presented that dumb ass argument. To be clear, I'm saying the argument is dumb, not the people presenting them.
Go to any dealership, be it Ford, Toyota, Lexus, BMW, or whomever. They all sell car brands from other manufacturers. Most dealerships of decent size sell their CPO (used cars) trade ins on the same car lot. So yes, you can buy a Toyota at a Ford dealership or a Lexus at a BMW shop.
I don't agree with spectrumfox's reasoning for Apple removing items, but he is right that the comparisons being made in this thread are not appropriate. Logical fallacies:
Microsoft not selling iPads (never sold iPads), Nike not selling Reebok (never sold Reebok), Gap not selling Banana Republic (never sold BR)... yeah, none of that is even remotely "the same" or even slightly similar to Apple removing product from it's shelves that they previously sold (for years). That's simply internet forum logic with these:all around the word logic. How does one's mind even form the thought that Take Product Off Shelves = Company X doesn't sell Company Y's product?
Personally, I think Apple just wanted the space to highlight their own products with no distractions.
This is the best post in this discussion.
I'm not a Apple fanboy and I only come here when bored. But what right do any of us have to criticize Apple for not selling non-Apple product? It's their store and they can carry/not carry what they please.
But if Apple decides to remove Pebble support from iOS or block Android Wear support that is a different story. That's where I draw the line.
But if Apple decides to remove Pebble support from iOS or block Android Wear support that is a different story. That's where I draw the line.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
Please explain to me why not? They are DIRECTLY competing products. (most) people aren't going to buy both a dedicated fitness tracker and the apple watch which also tracks fitness... There's only so much space on a wrist.
It has always surprised me that Apple sells non Apple products in a store called Apple. I like the idea of the Apple store selling only Apple products. If they sell non Apple products they should create a seperate section of the store specific for those products so it is clear to customers.
I like the way phillips did it for their Hue Lights, by creating a section called "friends of Hue."
I like lots of products that are non-apple available at the apple store, but it does reduce the "cache" of Apple because of the lack of distinction.
Just my opinion, but those that believe that Apple has an obligation to sell anything other than Apple need to stop whatever they are smoking and think more clearly.
Have you ever watched Steve Jobs' video regarding what the Apple Store was created to be?
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
Microsoft not selling iPads (never sold iPads), Nike not selling Reebok (never sold Reebok), Gap not selling Banana Republic (never sold BR)... yeah, none of that is even remotely "the same" or even slightly similar to Apple removing product from it's shelves that they previously sold (for years). That's simply internet forum logic with these:
No sir, you are the one with faulty logic. Microsoft always competed with iPads. Nike always competed with reebok. Gap always competed with BR. The difference is that Apple didn't compete with fitness trackers so they had no problem using their store space to sell them.
The point remains that companies do not sell directly competing products in their stores.
The used cars being sold at a dealership only exists to allow people to trade-in their old car. If they only allowed trade-ins from the same make, then they would greatly, greatly reduce the number of people coming in to buy a new car. Go find me car dealership that sells NEW car models of a competeing company.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
Sorry you lost me at the part where Ford didn't sell Ford cars.... From inception of the company that has been their entire business...
See the difference between Apple and most other companies is that most companies are static. They stay in the same business for decades or even centuries.
Apple has moved from Personal Computer to MP3 Player to Cell Phone to tablet to watch/fitness tracker. Any company that moves into a competing field will obviously discontinue selling those competing products in their store (assuming they ever sold them in the first place).
This doesn't prevent anyone from buying a fitbit, it's just not Apple's responsibility to ensure you can buy one. That's Fitbit's responsibility. Apple's store space is extremely valuable (highest revenue per square foot company in the world). Why would Apple use that space to sell a competing product (which they'd make absolutely miniscule profit from) instead of their own watch line (from which they make significant profit and build up their own ecosystem)?
The fact that anyone in the world thinks this is strange and/or anticompetitive just blows my mind.
Just a couple off the top of my head.
http://www.napletonautosales.com/
http://www.autohausofpeoria.com/index.htm
There are quite a few actually.
Now that being said, I am not suprised or upset by this move. When you have limited retail space, and want a one on one buying experience like Apple is stating they want for the watch, you are going to have to make room for it. If you are going to make room and need to stop carrying stuff it only makes sense to stop carrying items that compete directly, or somewhat with your new item. And it certainly won't hurt to not have the somewhat similar products that are a magnitude lower in cost nearby.
Last edited:
But from the customer's perspective, it just leads them to shop another store first.
For the past year, I've been buying most of my Apple stuff at either Best Buy, Fry's or Micro Center. It's all priced the same. (Sometimes there's even a deal. Good luck finding one of those at Apple!) Most importantly, I can compare against a wide selection of 3rd party alternatives. If the alternative is better, I can buy it on the spot and go home. Done.
If I still want the Apple product and those stores are out of stock, then I'll visit an Apple store. It's becoming my last resort. The stores are crazy, so I like to get in and out fast.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
Not exactly what I was requesting. You found car dealerships that sell multiple different makes, but the dealerships are independent. This is more similar to how best buy sells both iPhones and galaxys.
The problem with your logic is Apple still sells products that compete directly with their own and they have no problem using their store space to sell them. There's no getting around that. Unless you start moving the goalpost by talking about item categories. As I said, taking competing products out of your store to highlight a newly introduced item is not the same as a company never selling competing items. Again, Apple still sells products that compete directly with theirs.
This isn't faulty logic, it's another movement of the goalpost. Nowhere in this thread was there a question of why dealerships sell competing brands. Even with that, it doesn't negate the fact that dealerships do sell competing brands. The assertion was Ford doesn't sell Toyota, BMW doesn't sell Lexus, GM doesn't sell Audi, etc. The only way to make that true is to be a pedant of the highest order. By that I mean Ford Motor Company doesn't sell Toyota's but they don't sell Ford's either. Neither does BMW, nor, Toyota, Honda or any other car company except Tesla. Dealerships sell cars. Not manufacturers. To that end, you're wrong about the new car models as well: "Go find me car dealership that sells NEW car models of a competing company."
Okay:
http://www.jimellis.com/index.htm
http://www.nalleycars.com/index.htm
http://www.edvoyles.com/
Too many to list.
On topic: I personally believe Apple wants to put the
watch in the best light with no distracting products. They want it to sell. When the only option is your product, chances are people are going to choose your product. I'd do it too.----------
All dealerships are independent. Tesla is the only manufacturer that sells it's own car. They are having to fight to do that because dealerships want to get a piece.
And they remain an option, but not on apple's own shelves, where they're trying to sell a competitor product. Particularly not Fitbit, who refused to support HealthKit. Bottom line is that if you feel you need a fitness wearable on your wrist, Apple wants it to be the Apple watch.
Sure mate, works for me. Cheers!
Most car dealers auction off most of the used cars that they do not want on their lot. They keep the ones that they keep based on what they think that they can sell for a better price than they will get at auction.
Exactly, you proved my point that the car analogy was a bad one.
----------
How do you feel about Microsoft getting in trouble over anticompetative behaviour?
Yes!
When I go to Google, there are links to Bing right next to the Google search box! And when I go to Bing, there are links to the Google search box!
And those Microsoft stores sell iPads, iPhones, and Macs!!!
It's amazing how that works, isn't it?
Oh wait...
----------
Apple doesn't officially support Pebble, and while Apple never supported Android Wear. Android doesn't support of the Apple Watch.
Folks you DO realize it's their store and they can do whatever the hell they want?
Right? Right?
Right? Right?
I know! And they don't sell Surface tablets, Android phones, that last Zune on clearance or Roku. THE NERVE!