Are people mis-interpreting "aggressive price point"?

[christiemp]

The thing that doesn't sit well with me about the "agressive price point" is that it is most likely just going to take affect for the base model. I dont' want the entry level mac to be 899 or 999, but then the one I want to still be 1500....:-/ even with the education discount.

 

[aleksandra.]

The only reason Apple would consider changing to the lower priced strategy is if they really believe that sales are at a tipping point, where they can gain 10 or 30% marketshare by having a slightly lower priced product to get people in.

Right now *everyone* has heard about Apple and has at least glanced at the Macs. Many dismiss them as too expensive given the specs, and saying "it's like your computer *but better!*" is a hard sales strategy.

This is their chance to swoop in and really convert users before Microsoft has a chance to sweep the Vista debacle under the rug with Windows 7 (which I'll bet is just Vista with a new skin, ala Mojave, so they can get it out the door quickly)

So, Apple could strike, other then the overall economic conditions, there has never been a better time for Apple to take marketshare away from Windows.

That got me thinking... I never cared about Windows 7 and how could it influence Apple's strategy, however now I see Windows 7's date of release will likely coincide with Snow Leopard's. For many people one of Vista's drawbacks was that they offered 64-bit Vista Buisness for higher price than even Vista Buisness. And since most laptops still ship with Vista, and individual users don't want to pay for Buisness version, it effectively limits their RAM to 4GB at best. Of course, most people annoyed with Vista aren't that much interested in computers to know it (although of course many do, as mentioned above). Now, I previously assumed Apple will wait until they can sell Snow Leopard with it - and until flash memory's even cheaper - to offer 8GB RAM upgrade. However, if they advertised their notebooks as "the only ones without 4GB limit" or something like that (regardless of whether it's actually true), and imply the blame for this limit on most PC laptops lies with Vista, already-Vista-annoyed people might reconsider. Especially those who care about specs and like to recite them . That would mean lower margins (as RAM isn't that cheap yet), but also might be a part of the "technologies and features that others can't match". Feature part, that is. Although I think 4GB is really enough now for most people.

Alright, so I still don't think it is really probable, but it's possible... somehow.

 

[iMacmatician]

The thing that doesn't sit well with me about the "agressive price point" is that it is most likely just going to take affect for the base model. I dont' want the entry level mac to be 899 or 999, but then the one I want to still be 1500....:-/ even with the education discount.

Or Apple could increase the prices for BTO options.

 

[hogfaninga]

Or Apple could increase the prices for BTO options.

I don't see them doing that. IMO they will lower Macbooks by a little across the board and still offer the same $100 discount for students. They have a good thing going with that and I don't see them abandoning that in the future. I don't think that was what you were suggesting though.

 

[bplein]

Actually, if you read my post here, you'll see that PC's with equivalent weight and thickness still cost significantly less than a Macbook, and yet come out with better specs.

Weight and thickness aren't reasons to get a Macbook. You an get PC's just as light and thin, for less, with better hardware.

Reducing prices is a fool's game.

Dell, oft cited as having "more for less", is hurting.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Dell.html?src=linkedin

yeah, that's a good business model. Trim your margins to nearly zero, depending on volume, and when the volume dries up, you are out of luck.

Or, charge higher margins for a better product (but not necessarily as much as you are upcharging), sell less units, and have a better profit.

Uh, I'll take the second model, thank you.

 

[Abstract]

Actually, if you read my post here, you'll see that PC's with equivalent weight and thickness still cost significantly less than a Macbook, and yet come out with better specs.

Weight and thickness aren't reasons to get a Macbook. You an get PC's just as light and thin, for less, with better hardware.

You never considered software that Apple includes with every Mac.

I'm configuring an HP dv4t right now to be around the same as a current MacBook (where the current model is old and just about to be replaced, mind you....). I have left pretty much all hardware at default, except:

- I upgraded the wireless card to one that gets 802.11 a/g/n and Bluetooth (since Macs get 802.11n and Bluetooth)
- upgrade to the 6-cell battery in order to get 3 hours 15 minutes of battery life (and in reality, it'll be less than that. MBs still win there by a large margin)

- I've added the most basic (i.e. "cheap") software for photos
- some sofware to burn CD/DVDs with
- software for backing up.

I'm at $1047 now.


And if you think about the fact that the version of OS X is actually good enough for large business, the $1047 I've been quoted doesn't include an upgrade to Vista Business, or Vista Ultimate (for both entertainment and business use). That's OS X.

- I upgrade to Vista Ultimate, and the price is $1207.99.


Should I add Norton Antivirus so that my new HP is protected against viruses? My MacBook doesn't need it, but if you're going to make them equivalent........

$1286.99 with Norton Anti-Virus for 3 years (which is probably the useful life of your system).


The damn system is still 0.24" thicker than my MacBook. That's 6 mm for non-Americans, and is quite a bit if you grab a ruler and look.

Here's something funny: Would you like to pay $39.99 in order to get $10 OFF Computrace Lojack for 1 year? Sounds like a steal.



Conclusion: Why would I pay more for a lesser system? The horrid battery life alone makes me turn away. Please provide another example. That was clearly not the point you were trying to make. Also, for $1299, I can get the mid-level MacBook, which has a 2.4 GHz processor, 2 GB of RAM. I'd have to upgrade the HP again from 2 GHz to 2.4 GHz to compensate, but then it would be an endless cycle.

 

[TommyLee]

The only reason Apple would consider changing to the lower priced strategy is if they really believe that sales are at a tipping point, where they can gain 10 or 30% marketshare by having a slightly lower priced product to get people in.

Right now *everyone* has heard about Apple and has at least glanced at the Macs. Many dismiss them as too expensive given the specs, and saying "it's like your computer *but better!*" is a hard sales strategy.

This is their chance to swoop in and really convert users before Microsoft has a chance to sweep the Vista debacle under the rug with Windows 7 (which I'll bet is just Vista with a new skin, ala Mojave, so they can get it out the door quickly)

So, Apple could strike, other then the overall economic conditions, there has never been a better time for Apple to take marketshare away from Windows.

agreed. the goal should be just to get people hooked on OS X.

 

[TommyLee]

Should I add Norton Antivirus so that my

wtf's a Nortan?

 

[TheCreator]

$899 or lower would be great... but I'd say $999 would be the lowest possible price they would offer.

 

[hogfaninga]

$899 or lower would be great... but I'd say $999 would be the lowest possible price they would offer.

Free would be nice also, but that isn't going to happen either.

 

[Chris Rogers]

Do these have optical outputs for sound and hdmi outputs as well?

My HP DV9220US has an HDMI output. I'm not really satisfied with this thing though. I think it is overpriced at about $1,500 in April 2007.

"Aggressive pricing" means that the product will be priced to compete with other products like it. That would mean a price drop.

BUT:

If the 4% margin decrease is accurate, that's less than $50 on the base macbook. $50 off $1100 isn't going to make them fly off the shelves, so I would be inclined to agree that faster components will be used to justify their price tag.

This is by far the most logical way of interpreting what apple meant. But it also depends on where the 4% is coming from; materials, overhead, Steve's salary, sale price, etc.

I'm also trusting that this 4% is common knowledge, I have no idea where this # came from

 

[MVApple]

BTW do Apple computers come with crapware the way pc's do? I know pc manufactuers load up on crapware to reduce the price of their computers. It's annoying having to reinstall windows when you buy a brand new computer though.

 

[wordmunger]

BTW do Apple computers come with crapware the way pc's do? I know pc manufactuers load up on crapware to reduce the price of their computers. It's annoying having to reinstall windows when you buy a brand new computer though.

Well, they do come with a preview version of MS Office

Seriously, though, there's pretty much no crapware on a Mac. Nothing like PCs, that's for sure.

 

[chrisiw]

I think that Apple will take into account, the poor state of the US economy, when they pitch the price of the new MacBooks, as good as they will be, there is a limit to what the market will stand.

 

[Pacer69]

I think that Apple will take into account, the poor state of the US economy, when they pitch the price of the new MacBooks, as good as they will be, there is a limit to what the market will stand.

Exactly what I was thinking reading through this thread. Look for an $899-999 USD entry MB stripper and the better models will be at current pricing or POSSIBLY 100 less than current pricing. There is a market / volume opportunity now that Apple has made huge inroads for itself. Jobs and Co are not stupid and also remember they are game-changers.

 

[mbleopard]

This is their chance to swoop in and really convert users before Microsoft has a chance to sweep the Vista debacle under the rug with Windows 7 (which I'll bet is just Vista with a new skin, ala Mojave, so they can get it out the door quickly)

From what I hear Windows 7 is more or less an update of Vista with multi-touch functionality and probably a few more goodies thrown in there to try to please people. There is no way they would have rewritten an operating system from scratch since Vista. THere are rumors though that they are in fact writing a brand new OS

I agree with the other people who are saying that the prices will stay the same but we will just get more for our money, I would rather have Al Macbooks with LCD screens and multitouch trackpads then a $700 laptop that is cheaply built.

Anyways Apple's strategy seems to be working for them, all of the PC manufactures want to distance themselves from Vista with HP rumored to be preparing its own OS based off of Linux

 

[Drumjim85]

I would rather have Al Macbooks with LCD screens and multitouch trackpads then a $700 laptop that is cheaply built.

as apposed to those MBs with CRT displays?

 

[Mindflux]

As I posted in the front page thread, $899 is still $200-$300 more than the HP and Dell competition.

As you also failed to point out, Notebooks and PC's have a subsidized savings passed on to you, which is why they are that cheap. All that demo crud that comes on your PC, the Norton, the Works Demo, the this the that is all paid for by the Software houses. Because this is loaded on there, Dell, HP, Sony, et al can sell the hardware cheaper.

Sony AFAIK is the *ONLY* company that will allow you to order your system without all that stuff, to the tune of $200 dollars more.

Granted, if you want to take the savings and remove it all.. you can. But some folks aren't that technologically inclined.

 

[aleksandra.]

From what I hear Windows 7 is more or less an update of Vista with multi-touch functionality and probably a few more goodies thrown in there to try to please people. There is no way they would have rewritten an operating system from scratch since Vista. THere are rumors though that they are in fact writing a brand new OS

There're rumors they're still using code from the earliest DOS... You aren't suggesting they're going to forsake this tradition?

 

[m1stake]

There're rumors they're still using code from the earliest DOS... You aren't suggesting they're going to forsake this tradition?

Not a rumor, 100% truth.

Windows has plenty of legacy code.

And despite my post earlier, I do think that the next MacBook will start at $999. If the MBP fell to $1799 again, that would be fantastic too. I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Brien]

I don't know if they'll pricedrop the MBP. If they want to keep margins I could see them doing something like dropping FW from the MacBook. It'd be horrible, I know! But it's possible.

 

[MusicallySilent]

Ill go with the vote of 999 for macbook and 1799 for base mbp, 100 off macbooks and 200 off macbook pros and leave the student discounts the same, they may also drop air to 1699 but that is sort of unlikely. I can't see apple going much below 900 at the lowest for the macbook.

My 1799 point for macbook pro is people constantly compare to xps 1530 which is quite competitive especially at about 500 less, and similar features (OSX isnt completely worth 500 in the minds of many), by dropping to 1799 they break the gap a little and get much closer to dell and other manufactures in the non sale times.