Acer Aspier = Intel Atom. The iPad 2 runs circles around it. The MBA 11" eats it for breakfast and is still hungry.
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.
CEO complains about iPad being "too cheap"
- Thread starter fertilized-egg
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Acer Aspier = Intel Atom. The iPad 2 runs circles around it. The MBA 11" eats it for breakfast and is still hungry.
If he used the phrase "predatory pricing" he better go talk to his legal counsel. For Apple to be guilty of predatory pricing it would have to be taking a loss in order to gain market share. But Apple buys components openly, many from ahem...Samsung. It does negotiate for lower pricing b/c it can afford to make one big ginormous order due to it's cash reserves... the one the idiot stock analysts keep begging Apple to squander on nickel and dime dividends.
Mr. Pantech CEO, maker of crapware, should also understand that having a market leading product does not equal a "monopoly," in the legal anti-trust meaning of the term. (See: iPod for a little market history). Also, just because Apple might "own" the market doesn't mean customers are going to always and forever want an iPad. Products, die or morph as time goes on. Competition or not Apple has to keep reinventing. (See: iPod model variations 2001-2011.)
Yes, but those costs are amortized (and quite easily estimated, if not as closely as the COM). It's not like Apple had to be created from the ground up last month purely to support the manufacture of the iPad 2.
It's easily arguable that the iPad 2 isn't even all that "aggressively priced." And anything beyond "aggressive" is outside the realm of reality.
You're right and I should clarify that he didn't use the exact term, hence the lack of quotation marks. However he did say that Apple is trying to strengthen their grip of the tablet market by pricing it to the point where the "competitors will die if they try to match the price," while warning consumers about the negative impact of a potential Apple monopoly so he was clearly implying a predatory intention from Apple.
I'd rather be locked in an all white (padded?) room with a fresh stream of Apple gear instead of swimming in a sea of garbage...."choices" as they call them.
CEO needs to get his head out of his rear. It's not Apple's fault that the tab manufacturers game plan to "combat" the iPad was to sell garbage at slightly reduced prices instead of focus on user experience et al.
CEO needs to get his head out of his rear. It's not Apple's fault that the tab manufacturers game plan to "combat" the iPad was to sell garbage at slightly reduced prices instead of focus on user experience et al.
If Google and Htc/Motorola/Samsung really wanted to kill the iPad they'd release a tablet running honeycomb at $350 or less. Apple could never compete. They might have to take a hit on costs, but they'd eventually overtake the iPad through attrition. Google would also have to work on increasing the quality of it's marketplace.
Don't hate the player, hate the game. If apple can price a product at 500-800 dollars and make money, then there's no reason other manufacturer's can't do the same. I'm tired of hearing the whining from these other companies, it just makes them look weak. If you can't compete you shouldn't be playing the game, period. These companies really need to grow some balls, start being more aggressive, and maybe come up with ideas of their own.
If it's one thing I appreciate about apple, it's that in spite of all their restrictions and their closed ecosystem, they're innovators. Even if they don't come up with the original idea for something (there were MP3 players before the ipod), they realize the potential of them. They're trend setters, and because they are so aggressive in bringing compelling, full featured products to market, other companies end up chasing the products apple created, when they SHOULD be thinking up the next best thing. If they keep trying to chase apple, they're going to have to keep playing by their rules, that's it. These corporations need to stop becoming so enamored with the markets and products that apple creates and trying to steal a piece of that pie and start making a better pie of their own.
Don't get me wrong here, I appreciate the other tablets and products out there, and really hope android takes off in the tablet market because Honeycomb has potential and it does put pressure on Apple. But if these companies really want to get out of Apple's shadow they need to identify the needs of consumers and come up with REVOLUTIONARY solutions to meet those needs, they need to introduce new and better ways of doing things, new paradigms, NOT rehashed or different variations of a product that's already out there.
Anyways, sorry for the long, rant-ish, post I'm just kind of appalled by a corporation whining that another company is offering cheap products that make it hard to compete. Welcome to capitalism!
The thing is though, Google really doesn't care about android as an OS, it's just a means to justify an end, that end being to proliferate the Google search engine, the more devices that run android, the more devices that run google search by default, and google doesn't have to pay other OS companies.
If it's one thing I appreciate about apple, it's that in spite of all their restrictions and their closed ecosystem, they're innovators. Even if they don't come up with the original idea for something (there were MP3 players before the ipod), they realize the potential of them. They're trend setters, and because they are so aggressive in bringing compelling, full featured products to market, other companies end up chasing the products apple created, when they SHOULD be thinking up the next best thing. If they keep trying to chase apple, they're going to have to keep playing by their rules, that's it. These corporations need to stop becoming so enamored with the markets and products that apple creates and trying to steal a piece of that pie and start making a better pie of their own.
Don't get me wrong here, I appreciate the other tablets and products out there, and really hope android takes off in the tablet market because Honeycomb has potential and it does put pressure on Apple. But if these companies really want to get out of Apple's shadow they need to identify the needs of consumers and come up with REVOLUTIONARY solutions to meet those needs, they need to introduce new and better ways of doing things, new paradigms, NOT rehashed or different variations of a product that's already out there.
Anyways, sorry for the long, rant-ish, post I'm just kind of appalled by a corporation whining that another company is offering cheap products that make it hard to compete. Welcome to capitalism!
The thing is though, Google really doesn't care about android as an OS, it's just a means to justify an end, that end being to proliferate the Google search engine, the more devices that run android, the more devices that run google search by default, and google doesn't have to pay other OS companies.
I'm surprised no one brought up the console/handheld gaming race. Look at Sony and Microsoft. They always take quite a loss when releasing new consoles. Even nintendo was playing that game prior to their wii strategy. I won't be one bit surprised if the tablet market follows in this footstep. It will probably not be as extreme as say Sony taking up to a $200 loss per playstation console in order to gain market share since the product cycle seems to be about 1-2 years(including continued sales of older devices as budget offerings) vs 6ish years on consoles. All the pieces are in place. Secondary income from software and licensing? Check (AppStore). Battle for spftware exclusivity? Coming soon to an iOS/android/winmo 7 near you.
Companies with huge wallets WILL take a loss to keep you on their platform. Look at googles "better than free" strategy, all in hopes of keeping you from searching anywhere else but google.com. All google apps, including android, is/was designed to protect their core business.
Companies with huge wallets WILL take a loss to keep you on their platform. Look at googles "better than free" strategy, all in hopes of keeping you from searching anywhere else but google.com. All google apps, including android, is/was designed to protect their core business.
Hmm.
A lot of this depends on how you read his comments and intentions. The US government taught me Korean thirty-five years ago, so even though I still can read it fine, I'm rusty at translating. We need a native speaker to read those articles.
For instance, is he actually "complaining" or is he simply commenting on the state of affairs? He seems to say that Pantech will do fine, while pointing out the trouble that smaller companies and even Samsung can have with the price.
The other half of the articles are about the problem of keeping inventory past three months due to the Japan crisis.
A lot of this depends on how you read his comments and intentions. The US government taught me Korean thirty-five years ago, so even though I still can read it fine, I'm rusty at translating. We need a native speaker to read those articles.
For instance, is he actually "complaining" or is he simply commenting on the state of affairs? He seems to say that Pantech will do fine, while pointing out the trouble that smaller companies and even Samsung can have with the price.
The other half of the articles are about the problem of keeping inventory past three months due to the Japan crisis.
The quotes from him in the article:
"It might destroy/ruin the market, that price means (all the competitors) will die"
"Apple introduced the iPad 2 with a price that's too low,"
"It looks like they are trying to monopolize the still in-fancy tablet market."
"That (bill of material) is enough to make even Samsung worry (to match)"
"but Pantech cannot miss the market either, so we'll readjust our strategy and introduce a tablet within this year"
Yes he's complaining. He even said that Apple's predatory-pricing strategy is forcing Pantech to "readjust" their strategy and claims even Samsung, who's known for the ability to pump up competitively priced products, is feeling the heat.
kdarling, I appreciate that you want to be rational and look at the actual evidence, but I find that you try to be too much of a contrarian when there's a mounting evidence that shows Apple's competitors are indeed fuming, which also happened when we discussed about Samsung's attempt at minimize their embarrassment with the Galaxy Tab using the word "smooth." Anyone reading that article can tell that the CEO is complaining and unhappy with Apple forcing their hands to rethink their strategy, not merely commenting on the state of things.
Last edited:
It's hard to know what's in someone's mind, especially with translations getting in between.
For instance, did you notice today's article about Apple scrambling to get parts because of the Japanese crisis?
"Smooth" seems to be a popular word in that part of the world!
It actually got me thinking that "S" words have been used in all sorts of situations.
- Samsung has "Smooth" sales.
- Verizon will only say that iPhone4 sales are "Strong".
- Apple said they were "Stunned" to find out that their signal bars were miscalculated.
I don't need translations. I am a native speaker. The CEO's speech was widely discussed in Korean forums and there was no question on his tone at all.
Except the word "smooth" has a perfectly fitting meaning in that context where there is a natural disaster involved unlike in Samsung's case. You don't need translation, just go to Samsung's English blog and listen to the Samsung executive speak in English for that quote. She was simply trying to cover a blemish in Samsung's sales by using a vague word to describe it and it had nothing to do with translation.
I am just a bit flabbergasted by your over reaching efforts to put these Apple competitors in good light, even going as far as claiming these are all just misunderstanding based on translation when all the evidence point otherwise. Yet whenever I see you talk about Apple or its products you never seem to apply the same lax standard, if anything almost the opposite as you often crticized of MR users of being unreasonably Apple-friendly. Yet here you are trying so hard to be Pantech/Samsung friendly that you are willing to make all kind of conjectures on translations even when I presented evidence.
Last edited:
Apple can price the iPad so competitively because they have economics of scale. That's something that all other tablet competitors can't have until they start making better products or for some miraculous reason more people start buying their products.
Apple was first to market, and it shows big time.
Apple was first to market, and it shows big time.
i never understand why people say this. apple has always had an interest in pushing innovation
Apple can get away with the low price because all of their investment into research and development was finalized with the iPhone and iPod Touch. All they had to do with the iPad was make a bigger screen and tweak a few things. Thus they still make a profit because they are basically paying for parts...
I think Mr.Park might be a closet scalper ... I swear I saw him buying iPads just off of 5th Ave. last week
Why - cuz he's asian?