Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Where are you getting your 20% from. I don't think it's accurate: https://finbox.com/NASDAQGS:AAPL/explorer/gp_margin

You need to look at net profit not gross profit.

 
  • Like
Reactions: PickUrPoison
You need to look at net profit not gross profit.

Ok, but you're comparing the entire profit margins of Apple and Microsoft, and claiming that MacBooks are low margin, when both of their businesses have only a tiny part of their income as laptops. So comparing these overarching figures is useless. Provide data of the profit margins of both company's laptop divisions, and only then can you make a claim that Apple laptops are generously priced.
 
And I think people maybe expect Apple to operate on the same razer thin margins as other hardware makers. In some people’s heads maybe decent profit margins are reserved only for software companies?
People also forget that other hardware makers simply focus on the hardware, and use an OS supplied by another company.

Apple, in addition to designing their hardware, also spends money and resources working on the OS, software (stock apps) and services. Stuff like maps and iMessage don't earn them any money, but require money to continuously maintain, and form an integral part of the Apple experience.

Apple has higher costs than other OEMs, so I don't see the logic behind them having to adhere to their cost structure, much less a business model that clearly has not been working well for anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: R3k
Ok, but you're comparing the entire profit margins of Apple and Microsoft, and claiming that MacBooks are low margin, when both of their businesses have only a tiny part of their income as laptops. So comparing these overarching figures is useless. Provide data of the profit margins of both company's laptop divisions, and only then can you make a claim that Apple laptops are generously priced.

AFAIK there’s no published information like that.
 
I wonder what this means for the rumored Refresh of the Machine. I am waiting to buy so i don't end up with a year old machine and in two weeks they push out a new one.
 
To think many already found the prices insane but I guess custom will be a little more forgiving. I wonder how far they can push the envelope before people go "Nope".
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
AFAIK there’s no published information like that.
Exactly. But there are online stores that publish their retail prices for Apple-compatible SSDs and RAM, and they are typically 1/2 the price for SSDs, and 1/4 for RAM, as Apple charges for it's upgrades. So there is your real data about Apple price gouging. Yes, Apple gouges for the upgrades. QED.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Exactly. But there are online stores that publish their retail prices for Apple-compatible SSDs and RAM, and they are typically 1/2 the price for SSDs, and 1/4 for RAM, as Apple charges for it's upgrades. So there is your real data about Apple price gouging. Yes, Apple gouges for the upgrades. QED.
And do those online stores spend $3 billion a month on operating expenses, including $1.5 billion a month in R&D? Those expenses have to be covered somehow, whether in the base price or the price of upgrades.

There’s a reason Apple products are expensive, and it’s not because their profit margin is too high. It’s because their costs are high. Component costs are only the beginning of the costs the price has to cover.

If Newegg had 500+ retail stores and 130,000+ employees, can you imagine how much higher their prices would be?
 
Exactly. But there are online stores that publish their retail prices for Apple-compatible SSDs and RAM, and they are typically 1/2 the price for SSDs, and 1/4 for RAM, as Apple charges for it's upgrades. So there is your real data about Apple price gouging. Yes, Apple gouges for the upgrades. QED.
I would argue that position Mac memory and storage upgrades as accessories is what allows Apple to keep entry-level product pricing low for the mass market.

Likewise, Apple's gross margins have actually been falling in previous years. My take is that Apple is lowering product pricing (mainly to offset the effects of foreign exchange), and that even in cases where the product price does increase, this rise in price is not enough to offset the cost of including this new technology.

Third, Apple's product portfolio has never been more competitive from a pricing perspective. The Apple Watch and AirPods remain very competitively-priced relative to the alternatives, and even today, you will be hard pressed to find any competitor that is equivalent in price and / or quality. Then you have products like the entry level 10.2" iPad, the newly-released MacBook Air, and the much-praised iPhone 11. All of which allow consumers to enter the apple ecosystem at a very affordable price. Sure, anyone can max out the storage in a 15" MBP or opt for all the extras in a Mac Pro and post the maximum price for the sake of a few easy clicks, but you know that most people will never need that much specs, and the "real" option will be so much more affordable in comparison.

At the same time, it's thanks to cheaper, entry-level offerings like this which frees Apple up to create products like the iPad Pro for people willing to pay for a premium user experience (such as myself who uses the iPad Pro for work on a daily basis and don't mind paying for the best), because there's still something in every price range for everyone.

Even the much maligned 30% App Store cut is a necessity to offset the massive costs involved in running and maintaining a curated App Store, especially when you consider that free apps don't earn Apple any money, yet cost them money to vet and host.

The mythical "Apple Tax", an easy way to take cheap potshots at Apple users for their apparent cluelessness in paying more for a product despite cheaper alternatives being available, is just that - a myth. Apple’s ability to grab monopoly-like share of industry profits isn’t a result of there being an Apple Tax but rather a byproduct of Apple following a design-led product strategy that is able to marginalise entire industries.
 
I would argue that position Mac memory and storage upgrades as accessories is what allows Apple to keep entry-level product pricing low for the mass market.

Likewise, Apple's gross margins have actually been falling in previous years. My take is that Apple is lowering product pricing (mainly to offset the effects of foreign exchange), and that even in cases where the product price does increase, this rise in price is not enough to offset the cost of including this new technology.

Third, Apple's product portfolio has never been more competitive from a pricing perspective. The Apple Watch and AirPods remain very competitively-priced relative to the alternatives, and even today, you will be hard pressed to find any competitor that is equivalent in price and / or quality. Then you have products like the entry level 10.2" iPad, the newly-released MacBook Air, and the much-praised iPhone 11. All of which allow consumers to enter the apple ecosystem at a very affordable price. Sure, anyone can max out the storage in a 15" MBP or opt for all the extras in a Mac Pro and post the maximum price for the sake of a few easy clicks, but you know that most people will never need that much specs, and the "real" option will be so much more affordable in comparison.

At the same time, it's thanks to cheaper, entry-level offerings like this which frees Apple up to create products like the iPad Pro for people willing to pay for a premium user experience (such as myself who uses the iPad Pro for work on a daily basis and don't mind paying for the best), because there's still something in every price range for everyone.

Even the much maligned 30% App Store cut is a necessity to offset the massive costs involved in running and maintaining a curated App Store, especially when you consider that free apps don't earn Apple any money, yet cost them money to vet and host.

The mythical "Apple Tax", an easy way to take cheap potshots at Apple users for their apparent cluelessness in paying more for a product despite cheaper alternatives being available, is just that - a myth. Apple’s ability to grab monopoly-like share of industry profits isn’t a result of there being an Apple Tax but rather a byproduct of Apple following a design-led product strategy that is able to marginalise entire industries.

The long and short of it is that some people want Apple to make barely any or no margin. They see companies like Xiaomi with 5% margin and expect Apple to also make a 5% margin.
 
The long and short of it is that some people want Apple to make barely any or no margin. They see companies like Xiaomi with 5% margin and expect Apple to also make a 5% margin.
I have never understood this logic that an Apple product is overpriced just because it's selling for more than the combined cost of its components.

Even when you eat outside at a restaurant, the final price of a dish is definitely going to cost way more than the price of its ingredients. There are other costs to factor in - from the rental, to labour, and of course the shop has to be able to earn a decent profit at the end of it all to make their efforts justified. You are basically paying for the convenience, ambience and experience.

When I see a doctor, the money I pay for is many times more than the cost of the medicine dispensed. I am essentially paying for the doctor's expertise in knowing which medicine to prescribe.

Same logic here, IMO. Yes, an Apple product may sport many off-the-shelf parts, but who amongst us is able to just buy them off the shelf just like that and assemble them into the desired end product? That to me is what I am paying for when I buy an Apple product - Apple's expertise in being able to put all these parts into a product that affords me that unique user experience (made possible by Apple's control over their hardware and software) that no other company that provide.

That, amongst other things, include the underlying OS and the services accorded by the ecosystem (iMessage, Siri, Apple Pay, maps, amongst others). These are provided free, but cost money to maintain, and their costs have clearly been worked into the final price of the product).

I see it as a virtuous feedback loop. Apple's profitability is proof that they are still making great products (flaws and all) that people are willing to pay a premium for, because the critics ultimately forget that Apple sells a user experience, not raw paper specs. It is this profitability which in turn enables Apple to keep improving their products to the point where the competition simply can't keep up (for instance, there is no tablet market, just an iPad market).

I always find it hilarious when the critics call for consumers to vote with their wallets, and then act all shocked and aghast when the people proceed to do precisely that. Just not in the way they wanted.
 
I have never understood this logic that an Apple product is overpriced just because it's selling for more than the combined cost of its components.

Even when you eat outside at a restaurant, the final price of a dish is definitely going to cost way more than the price of its ingredients. There are other costs to factor in - from the rental, to labour, and of course the shop has to be able to earn a decent profit at the end of it all to make their efforts justified. You are basically paying for the convenience, ambience and experience.

When I see a doctor, the money I pay for is many times more than the cost of the medicine dispensed. I am essentially paying for the doctor's expertise in knowing which medicine to prescribe.

Same logic here, IMO. Yes, an Apple product may sport many off-the-shelf parts, but who amongst us is able to just buy them off the shelf just like that and assemble them into the desired end product? That to me is what I am paying for when I buy an Apple product - Apple's expertise in being able to put all these parts into a product that affords me that unique user experience (made possible by Apple's control over their hardware and software) that no other company that provide.

That, amongst other things, include the underlying OS and the services accorded by the ecosystem (iMessage, Siri, Apple Pay, maps, amongst others). These are provided free, but cost money to maintain, and their costs have clearly been worked into the final price of the product).

I see it as a virtuous feedback loop. Apple's profitability is proof that they are still making great products (flaws and all) that people are willing to pay a premium for, because the critics ultimately forget that Apple sells a user experience, not raw paper specs. It is this profitability which in turn enables Apple to keep improving their products to the point where the competition simply can't keep up (for instance, there is no tablet market, just an iPad market).

I always find it hilarious when the critics call for consumers to vote with their wallets, and then act all shocked and aghast when the people proceed to do precisely that. Just not in the way they wanted.

I buy Apple products mostly due to philosophical and moral reasons. They have a business model I agree with (selling products for money rather than harvesting data to sell advertising). They have a level of transparency in their supply chain that’s almost unparalleled, and they have a level of integration amongst different product classes that is also unrivalled.

There’s no other manufacturer that you can safely buy your desktop, laptop, tablet, smartphone, smart watch and headphones from that offers the same experience as Apple. That market has so far failed miserably to remain competitive with Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abazigal
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.