[Good Read] Roughly Drafted smashes iPhone price myths

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
Here's the article.

A good read on the various price myths being brought up by lazy journalists and various writers (cough bloggers and "editors" that write mostly about microsoft )

Who knew the iPhone was so inexpensive?
 

RichP

macrumors 68000
Jun 30, 2003
1,573
11
Motor City
Good article, although anyone with half a brain should already be aware of the point the author makes about actual cost of iphone ownership compared to other phones.

That being said, by reading what some people post on here, this article IS necessary.
 

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
Good article, although anyone with half a brain should already be aware of the point the author makes about actual cost of iphone ownership compared to other phones.

That being said, by reading what some people post on here, this article IS necessary.
I know. I love it how people say "The iphone "costs" $250 to make.. OmG APPLE IS GOUGING US"...

Uh. Marketing. Uh Human Resources...

Those commmericals running 24/7 do cost a pretty penny too folks.
 

diamond.g

macrumors 603
Mar 20, 2007
6,361
317
Virginia
Here's the article.

A good read on the various price myths being brought up by lazy journalists and various writers (cough bloggers and "editors" that write mostly about microsoft )

Who knew the iPhone was so inexpensive?
Interesting article. I wonder why doesn't the author take into account subsidy when accepting a two year contract for service? The Treo should actually be about the same price as the iPhone due to the subsidy. Wouldn't the price of the voice plan be the same between all of the phones. With the special thing being the data portion?

Anyhow, interesting.
 

Cabrewolf

macrumors member
Apr 2, 2003
50
0
The article is full of errors and assumptions, all in favor of the iphone. I like it also, but lets not kid ourselves. Why would he compare it to a BB with ES licensing fees when the iphone does not even support ES. Why? Because, if he had removed the ES fees, the Blackberry woudl be cheaper. Also, Most of those smart phones are free. The Blackberry Pearl, curve and all the others are free with two year contract.

The truth is that the iphone is more expensive (unless you use the free phone loophole they will likely close soon). We still buy it, however, because it's better. But, lets not kid ourselves and say it's also cheaper.
 

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
The article is full of errors and assumptions, all in favor of the iphone. I like it also, but lets not kid ourselves. Why would he compare it to a BB with ES licensing fees when the iphone does not even support ES. Why? Because, if he had removed the ES fees, the Blackberry woudl be cheaper. Also, Most of those smart phones are free. The Blackberry Pearl, curve and all the others are free with two year contract.

The truth is that the iphone is more expensive (unless you use the free phone loophole they will likely close soon). We still buy it, however, because it's better. But, lets not kid ourselves and say it's also cheaper.
You should send your thoughts to the author. He often go backs and updates posts.

As for me. Even if the BB is "close" in price, its still too far away in syncing, screen size, video, audio, safari, and photo integration for my tastes and in fact would cost more in frustration and wasted time on my part.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
It's hard to take seriously when he glosses over subsidies, the ability to move other GSM phones around, etc. For instance, if he's going to add $100 for a flash card, then let's add the current $400 for 3G cards to the iPhone. How much more for a better camera and voice dialing and so forth?

At the same time, I think he's allowed to make bogus comparisons if others are doing the same. We should just all be aware of what they really mean.

As for iPhone cost, I think it's clear when Apple charges $250 (8G) or $200 (4G) for "repairs". They're simply charging what it costs them to replace the unit and the shipping, etc.
 

jellis

macrumors member
Nov 17, 2006
77
5
As for me. Even if the BB is "close" in price, its still too far away in syncing, screen size, video, audio, safari, and photo integration for my tastes and in fact would cost more in frustration and wasted time on my part.
It is strange that you could have said "web browser" and instead said "Safari" which is the apple version and is not included on any other phone.
I would say the blackjack (and all other windows based phones) beats the iPhone on "Internet Explorer" and "Windows Media Player" anyday.
 

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
It is strange that you could have said "web browser" and instead said "Safari" which is the apple version and is not included on any other phone.
I would say the blackjack (and all other windows based phones) beats the iPhone on "Internet Explorer" and "Windows Media Player" anyday.
ok. web browser. I prob. said safari since it is almost the same as my desktop browser (unlike most mobile web browsers) sans the 3rd party plugins.
 

Sobe

macrumors 68000
Jul 6, 2007
1,791
0
Wash DC suburbs
It's hard to take seriously when he glosses over subsidies, the ability to move other GSM phones around, etc. For instance, if he's going to add $100 for a flash card, then let's add the current $400 for 3G cards to the iPhone. How much more for a better camera and voice dialing and so forth?

At the same time, I think he's allowed to make bogus comparisons if others are doing the same. We should just all be aware of what they really mean.

As for iPhone cost, I think it's clear when Apple charges $250 (8G) or $200 (4G) for "repairs". They're simply charging what it costs them to replace the unit and the shipping, etc.
I think it's fairly reasonable because the thrust of his article is the bait-and-switch comparison being done in the media.

What he's doing is trying to hold things constant as much as possible.

Sure the 3G capability of a phone has value, but it's not like you can dial up apple.com and order a 3G chip for your iPhone.

And further down he even has a graphic both with and without updated flash to match the iPhone's available memory.

I think it is an excellent critique of some of the breathless stories that were written on the iPhone and I applaud his efforts.
 

diamond.g

macrumors 603
Mar 20, 2007
6,361
317
Virginia
I think it's fairly reasonable because the thrust of his article is the bait-and-switch comparison being done in the media.

What he's doing is trying to hold things constant as much as possible.

Sure the 3G capability of a phone has value, but it's not like you can dial up apple.com and order a 3G chip for your iPhone.

And further down he even has a graphic both with and without updated flash to match the iPhone's available memory.

I think it is an excellent critique of some of the breathless stories that were written on the iPhone and I applaud his efforts.
I think the only reason why this phone is getting any press (let alone the amount of press it is getting) is due to it comming from Apple. Anyone that has any common sense should realize that most "smartphones" are expensive (plan wise). The iPhone really isn't all that different. Especially since most people would just get SMS and not internet on thier phone.

The whole two year contract means crap as well since most people only get new phones when they are subsidized (how many here actually paid full price for the phones they were using before? See what I mean...).

Sorry if I sound a lil irritated, I just had an old co-worker tell me I paid too much money for my phone (1100 + 427...) :mad:
 

Sobe

macrumors 68000
Jul 6, 2007
1,791
0
Wash DC suburbs
I think the only reason why this phone is getting any press (let alone the amount of press it is getting) is due to it comming from Apple. Anyone that has any common sense should realize that most "smartphones" are expensive (plan wise). The iPhone really isn't all that different. Especially since most people would just get SMS and not internet on thier phone.

The whole two year contract means crap as well since most people only get new phones when they are subsidized (how many here actually paid full price for the phones they were using before? See what I mean...).

Sorry if I sound a lil irritated, I just had an old co-worker tell me I paid too much money for my phone (1100 + 427...) :mad:
Indeed and to some extent, the massive marketing campaign Apple rolled out is probably partly to blame. It sure got the iPhone noticed but it also created a bit of a backlash.
 

mkrishnan

Moderator emeritus
Jan 9, 2004
29,777
12
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
I didn't think the iPhone was particularly overpriced before, but I'm not impressed by this article... I find it a bit disingenuous. Some of the prices listed for the phones, for instance, are more than brand new *unlocked* versions sell for in the US, much less subsidized locked ones.

But anyway, I didn't and still don't think the iPhone is particularly overpriced.
 

earnjam

macrumors 6502a
Jun 7, 2007
672
0
North Carolina
Indeed and to some extent, the massive marketing campaign Apple rolled out is probably partly to blame. It sure got the iPhone noticed but it also created a bit of a backlash.
The thing is, they didn't massively market it. Those commercials came out like 2 weeks before the thing went on sale. Steve Jobs introduced it in January, but then they pretty much stayed hush about it for 6 months. All the rumors and hype grew because people were excited about what they saw, but didn't know all the little details. They have run the commercials pretty regularly since they came out though.

But yes, I agree. part of the reason we see stories about it costing so much is because it is the hot topic. Negativity means ratings in journalism, so whatever is popular, find something bad about it and run with it.
 

DylanG

macrumors regular
Jul 8, 2007
114
0
RoughlyDrafted is a mixed bag. He posts good technical information then spoils it by following with conjecture and blatant Apple fan boyism.

His basic point is valid in this case. Take a look at Verizon's and ATT's unlimited data plans for other smartphones. They are $10-$20 a month higher depending on options. That adds up to $240-$480 over two years.

It makes me wonder why they didn't price the plans $10 higher and price the phone $200 lower. I think Apple wanted to establish a market for premium priced phones that aren't subsidized. Apple sells hardware so it's to their benefit for the hardware to be perceived as valuable and not a loss leader used to sell service.
 

Sobe

macrumors 68000
Jul 6, 2007
1,791
0
Wash DC suburbs
RoughlyDrafted is a mixed bag. He posts good technical information then spoils it by following with conjecture and blatant Apple fan boyism.

His basic point is valid in this case. Take a look at Verizon's and ATT's unlimited data plans for other smartphones. They are $10-$20 a month higher depending on options. That adds up to $240-$480 over two years.
Sounds like what you're saying is he gives you the facts then makes his own interpretations.

I don't see a problem with that kind of reporting.
 

diamond.g

macrumors 603
Mar 20, 2007
6,361
317
Virginia
Sounds like what you're saying is he gives you the facts then makes his own interpretations.

I don't see a problem with that kind of reporting.
Part of the issue is the muddying of the facts he gives.

Based on AT&T's website I did some of my own math.

With AT&T the base plan is ~959 dollars (39.99 * 24 months).

If you are signing up for new service then you get a subsidy for your smartphone; the Treo 750 is ~199 (200 dollar online rebate, plus 150 dollar two year contract rebate) normally 549 dollars though.

The PDA Personal Max is the closest match to the iPhone data plan with unlimited data (1500 SMS's included dunno if you can get that removed), and that comes to ~959 dollars as well (39.99 * 24 months).

Total price is ~2118.52 which is only ~66 dollars more expensive than getting an iPhone (and maybe even a bargain if you include the 3G you get with the Treo). So where did 2320 come from?
 

Sobe

macrumors 68000
Jul 6, 2007
1,791
0
Wash DC suburbs
Part of the issue is the muddying of the facts he gives.

Based on AT&T's website I did some of my own math.

With AT&T the base plan is ~959 dollars (39.99 * 24 months).

If you are signing up for new service then you get a subsidy for your smartphone; the Treo 750 is ~199 (200 dollar online rebate, plus 150 dollar two year contract rebate) normally 549 dollars though.

The PDA Personal Max is the closest match to the iPhone data plan with unlimited data (1500 SMS's included dunno if you can get that removed), and that comes to ~959 dollars as well (39.99 * 24 months).

Total price is ~2118.52 which is only ~66 dollars more expensive than getting an iPhone (and maybe even a bargain if you include the 3G you get with the Treo). So where did 2320 come from?
Numbers are important, but let's assume you're spot on and he's deliberately cooking the books to make his point (worst case scenario).

You're talking about a difference of roughly $200 over a span of 2 years, or $8.33 a month.

Considering the over-the-top pronouncements on how expensive the iPhone is/was, I can live with an $8.33 a month or $200 over 2 years discrepancy to make the point which in my opinion is made more valid by your number crunching.

The iPhone, over a 2 year period, is not very pricey at all.
 

diamond.g

macrumors 603
Mar 20, 2007
6,361
317
Virginia
Numbers are important, but let's assume you're spot on and he's deliberately cooking the books to make his point (worst case scenario).

You're talking about a difference of roughly $200 over a span of 2 years, or $8.33 a month.

Considering the over-the-top pronouncements on how expensive the iPhone is/was, I can live with an $8.33 a month or $200 over 2 years discrepancy to make the point which in my opinion is made more valid by your number crunching.

The iPhone, over a 2 year period, is not very pricey at all.
Oh your welcome. It was just bugging me as well. The iPhone is no more expensive in my eyes than having any other smartphone. In fact even if it was more expensive I still would have paid. Why? Three words: Sync with Mac. And the clencher: Flawlessly.

I still remember paying 1300 bucks for two Treo 650's when they first came out. So 1100 bucks for two iPhones is great.
 

sunday888

macrumors member
Jun 30, 2007
81
0
Silicon Valley
The article is full of errors and assumptions, all in favor of the iphone. I like it also, but lets not kid ourselves. Why would he compare it to a BB with ES licensing fees when the iphone does not even support ES. Why? Because, if he had removed the ES fees, the Blackberry woudl be cheaper. Also, Most of those smart phones are free. The Blackberry Pearl, curve and all the others are free with two year contract.
Show me where the Curve (or the Pearl, for that matter) is available free with a 2 year contract? Post a link.

The Curve is $299 with a contract currently, the 8525 is $399. My kid wants a Curve. If it really were free with a contract, I'd get her one today. As it is, I call BS.