Relax and get some fresh air!
I don't really see what you're getting at. _Every single_ hardware company needs a gross margin above 30%, otherwise it'll go out of business or be confined to selling commodity products very soon.
I don't know the exact numbers, but Apple's gross margin isn't much better than, say, Intel's, maybe even lower. I'm VERY confident that every single Android phone or Zune out there is sold with a similar margin as the iPhone.
Jeez! Easy now, OK? I read the reply and I still don’t know what your problem is.
I DO NO NOT CARE ABOUT OTHER PHONES. OK? Why do some people have to take any mentioning of Apple’s profit margins so miserably?
You don’t know the numbers, but you are VERY confident?! What do you mean? How can you? I cited an article that was based on experts’ opinions. And YOU come at me like that? Don’t be ridiculous!
Besides, forget that 30 percent argument, the article claimed that Apple had 40 to 55 percent margin. Why do you have to be upset, I’m not the taxman! You don’t have to defend Apple, I didn’t even express any opinion about that figure. But now, talking about it... 30 IS lower than 40 or 55. I hope that you are not trying to refute that.
It is known how much manufacturing flash memory and touchscreen costs, and no one's gonna sell Apple a few million memory chips and GPS chips at a loss, right?
Do you know the exact numbers and figures? Nope, because they are not public. Are you familiar with the exact terms of their contract? Nope. Then what are you rattling about?
(Please do us the favour and don't claim someone will, because it'd be ludicrous)
Well, you know, from time to time, some companies do sell at a loss. In fact, Sony started Playstation 3 with losing 12 cents on every dollar, now its down to about 3 or 4. Still, when you buy a Playstation 3 console, then Sony loses some money on it. BECAUSE IT COST THEM MORE THAN WHAT THEY GET FROM YOUR PURCHASE. Does that sound ludicrous to you? Maybe you should be less arrogant and better informed. Microsoft also started selling the Xbox with a huge loss. Apparently, it cost them 40 percent more than what they charged for it. Depending on national legislations, you can go to certain countries, where supermarkets are still allowed to sell certain items below their costs. Does that mean that their overall operation is making a loss? Not necessarily. It’s just the question of where a company generates its revenues and how it can reduce its operating and other costs.
The iPad is sold with very similar margins as the other Apple products, and is no way more "overpriced" that any iPod Nano or 13" Macbook Pro.
Again, you speculate, but you still argue against people’s opinions that reflect more experience. I haven’t even used the term ‘overpriced’, have I? Nope. Again, why do you defend Apple? Who attacked them? I didn’t, so back off! Again, I HAVEN’T EXPRESSED ANY OPINION ABOUT THE MARGINS.
Have you got ANY idea how much development of a complex piece of software costs? Microsoft stated that the development of Vista cost more than the moon landing.
I don’t care about Vista either. Besides, the iPad doesn’t run Vista, does it?
Of course, that's hyperbole and the numbers aren't comparable...
Yet you still used them.
...but it gives a rough idea that it's definitely not just something you could brush off as overhead. I'm pretty sure, a hell lot of money was invested into iPhone/iPad OS.
Let me be slightly more cautious about referencing and in a rather lazy fashion, quote Wikipedia, which is still more reliable, than the source you ever (or never) used:
"In business, overhead, overhead cost or overhead expense refers to an ongoing expense of operating a business (also known as Operating Expenses - rent, gas/electricity,
wages etc). The term overhead is usually used to group expenses that are necessary to the continued functioning of the business, but do not directly generate profits."
Well, when the iPhone OS cost a lot of money, then it materialised as a development cost of the iPhone. That’s pretty much paid for until a certain stage, when it supposedly was accounted as part of the expenses that Apple's relevant (iPhone) division incurred. After that stage, the iPad uses an asset and it generates some additional costs. There are programmers, software developers and all sorts of Apple employees maintaining and further developing the OS. Do you know, how much of their time they spend with tasks that are directly related to the iPad; or how they share their time between the iPhone and the iPad? Nope, you don’t, because it’s Apple’s business. Do you know, what sort of accounting techniques they use? Nope. You haven’t got facts, just bitterness, anger, arrogance and disturbing lack of patience.
RELAX!
