Still a no-go until it supports more than one human - like Google Home does.
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.
Gruber: Apple TV is Sold at Cost, HomePod at Slight Loss
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Still a no-go until it supports more than one human - like Google Home does.
Correct. A number of times when I can't find the USB A adapter for my macbook pro it has nearly been hurled into the wall. Should have fixed it by now.
Wife reminds me weekly how the HomePod is/was the dumbest purchase of my life.
Is Google listening and recording everything you do worth the second voice?
I'm not anonymous. I've been on this site since 2003 and was one of the first editors before the site went to paid staff. I know how Apple works. Selling hardware at cost is not how Apple works.
I would agree with you that Gruber is well respected, but I am quite frankly surprised that he would post that Apple is trying to sell this stuff at cost. This doesn't pass the sniff test. I'd want a hell of a lot of confirmation - more than just 3 sources - before I posted something like that.
It’s $349...tell her to get over it or leave.
[doublepost=1549122394][/doublepost]
If the phones were considerably higher than 38% GM, Apple’s GM would be considerably higher than 38%.
We also now know services are over 60% GM and hardware is lower 30%.
Total hardware yes. So everything from an iPhone XS to a wall adapter and a headphone dongle.
I don't think they are in the game of losing on retail to land service users. They aim to make money on both
Hardware gross margin is actually 33%, services 63% for a combined 38%.
With iPhone being about 2/3 of all hardware revenue, iPhone GM could be somewhat higher or lower than the 34% aggregate for all hardware; it all depends on what GM you assign to the 1/3 of hardware revenue attributable to the Mac/iPad/ Watch/AirPod/HomePod/iPod Touch/accessories portion.
If non-iPhone GM is 25% in aggregate, iPhone GM would be about 39%. If non-iPhone GM is 45%, iPhone GM would be about 29%.
It’s really not mathematically possible for iPhone GM to be “considerably higher” than the 34% GM across all hardware.
Last edited:
Dude, no. The iPhone margin cannot be higher than the average mathematically because the iPhone is 60% of sales and overall GM is 38%. Show me the math you’re doing.
Does this quote help? I mean, the CFO literally tells us:
Apple Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri: “Products gross margin 33.4%, Services 62.8%”
Can you just admit you’re wrong and we will move on? You are dead wrong mathematically.
Aside from just about any other product on the market from virtually every other manufacturer. There are all as capable as the Apple TV at pseudo compressed “UHD 4K” picture when streaming....the others will give you many providers to stream from.
He even said iPhone is significantly higher than the 38% average.
People here literally think whatever they want regardless of the facts. He’s factually wrong and he still argues.
It’s been a long while since I looked at any cost breakdown for any item from any company, so I have no feel as to how accurate or reliable any cost breakdown site is.
What do these sites factor in to the cost? Components, components and assembly, components, assembly and shipping, components, assembly, shipping, staff overhead? I’m putting paperwork/required documentation by the sending or receiving companies that require a response into clerical.
Because you can’t trust any company to tell you much about R&D I don’t think you can easily guess how much it adds to the cost. How much did it cost to design the product, how much to modify/build assembly lines, and how long can you just keep spitting out the same physical parts without needing to modify them are all variables for this cost and a company may not really know how many months or years that they can keep reusing the same item.
If it cost a lot to design, debug, and set up manufacturing and they have to assume in a year or 2 that they they have to do major redesigns then they have to price a unit based on a short profit window. If it’s something that they can build for many years then they can afford to charge less.
Doesn’t mean that they will charge less.
And everyone mentioning memory in Apple products are right. They aren’t making it yet it’s a lot more expensive from them.
....and pointless, given Roku (and virtually every device) achieves exactly the same thing and more.
Like I said, I’m not vouching for their numbers. According to them they’ve done upwards of 3,000 teardowns, and they track 3 million parts prices. No doubt there’s a fair amount of educated guessing going on.
You can claim they’re just bad at their job and their numbers are wrong, but is that any more likely than you being right when you say, “trust me, their numbers are wrong, I know what I’m talking about and they don’t”?
In any case, OP opined that if people did research/googled they would see that Apple couldn’t be losing money on HomePod, based on BOM cost calcs. I disagreed, and showed my work. If you have an issue with the provider of the only data that seems to exist on HomePod BOM, maybe it would be best to take it up with them.
Last edited:
The roku can’t play my iTunes purchases and it would require some work on my part to be able to view my photo library on a roku. I have apps that I’ve purchased from the App Store that I use on my Apple TV. I would have to purchase them again on the roku if they are even available. I can’t airplay from my iOS devices or my Mac to my roku.
DUDE...the iPhone is 62% of the company’s revenue. If the GM on the overwhelming majority of Apple’s business were significantly higher than the 38% average, THE AVERAGE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER!!!!
To make your argument worse, another 13% of the company or $10.9B (services) was disclosed to have 62% GM.
That means you’re effectively saying 75% of the business has higher than the average 38% GM. Objectively, mathematically, wrong and IMPOSSIBLE.
IM DONE.
...none of which needs A10X processor
Possible on these two products. Amazon keeps hardware pricing profit margins very low to drive a wider business model. Apple putting more resources into the services side of the business. Thus, offering a top of the line product at thin profit margins to help drive their music and video services makes sense. I would also believe Apple will expand into a lower cost product but with significant features, to further this trend.
No they don’t. I have the Apple TV 4 with the A8 processor and it works just fine. I don’t have a 4K tv which is why I haven’t bought the Apple TV 4K.
Yeah I thought the same thing. I also think Apple TV probably does okay. HomePod is the only one I don't disagree or have an opinion about. However when he says he thinks AirPods are sold near cost it is hard to take anything else he says seriously.
macrumors, please stop giving apple psycophant John "Kelly Anne" Gruber top billing on your site. Really a waste of space.
BOM cost is different than total product cost. Manufacturing costs, selling costs, R&D, overhead, etc. all have to be added in as well. You can’t just look at the cost of components.
Usually shareholders don't like hearing a company is selling things at below cost or break even. Even record profits aren't always received well. I agree the first statement is hilarious but the rest of the post shows a lack of understanding about how shareholders perceive things. We want to hear sky high margins on products news like this doesn't make shareholders happy.