Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is Google trying to COPY Apple with their tablet?

GarytheiPhonema

GarytheiPhonema

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 19, 2011
58
0
California
GarytheiPhonema said:
oh gee if only Google knew how to operate like Apple. How can it actually BUILD a tablet that it hopes will knock its PARTNERS out of the game? Do you think Google is trying to be the new Apple by doing this? Is this going to be its iPad? :confused::confused:

I am so confused. Going to walk over and talk to the tech guys at lunch and see waht they think. Wife made ham sandwiches today!

http://www.bgr.com/2012/01/05/googles-nexus-tablet-may-push-android-partners-out-of-the-picture/
Click to expand...

It will fall under the Nexus flag, which hopefully means a pure Android experience. No custom manufacturer UI's overlaid on it. Samesung makes their Nexus branded phones now, and you still see other manufacturers selling Android based devices. This will just be more of the same.

Although, this tablet will probably be built with very few features in order to complete with the Fire. Unfortunately for the Fire and this new tablet from Google, by the time that competition heats up, the iPad2 will have gone on sale for $299, killing both of those products off.
 
I don't see how their trying to copy Apple except for the phrase "of the highest quality". If anything, it looks like competition for the Kindle Fire and Blackberry Playbook lines. We all know how Android has been with quality. iPad will reign supreme again over this tablet.
 
Mac.World said:
Unfortunately for the Fire and this new tablet from Google, by the time that competition heats up, the iPad2 will have gone on sale for $299, killing both of those products off.
Click to expand...

As well as killing off Apple's profitability.
 
poloponies said:
So a "good profit" simply means you're not selling below cost?
Click to expand...
Apple's margins are 30%-40%. It has complete control over the design and engineering of its products. It generates and maintains its margins by developing a complete understanding of the manufacturing process from raw materials to transportation of finished products.
 
Google thinking about vertical integration (or moving away from from the universal-licensing mess)? Seems they're learning about User Experience for once. Will they get it right?
 
Last edited:
MisterMe said:
Apple's margins are 30%-40%. It has complete control over the design and engineering of its products. It generates and maintains its margins by developing a complete understanding of the manufacturing process from raw materials to transportation of finished products.
Click to expand...

No kidding. SO if they're earning 30-40% at $499 common sense and math dictate that they'd have to drop ALL costs (not just materials) by a huge margin to sell at $299. Not bloody likely. $399 as a clearance measure, sure. But that's about it.
 
poloponies said:
No kidding. SO if they're earning 30-40% at $499 common sense and math dictate that they'd have to drop ALL costs (not just materials) by a huge margin to sell at $299. Not bloody likely. $399 as a clearance measure, sure. But that's about it.
Click to expand...

Not quite correct. All the tooling and R&D costs, plus computer assembly programming is done for the iPad 2. They have left over inventory that needs to be used up. Only costs incurred on defunct iPad 2 parts are human assembly and distribution. Cost for producing iPad 2's now are significantly less than at start up. Remember, Apple buys in bulk, pays ahead of time and recoups initial costs at the begining of a product cycle. Trust me, Apple still makes a ton on each iPad 2, even at a drop down to $299 or $350 or whatever price they choose.
 
I doubt it will harm their partners pocketbook because none of them actually make all that much profit from selling Android devices anyway. Some are even selling their devices for a loss. Amazon loses money on every Fire that's sold, but they attempt to make it up by tying the device to their own content catalog. Google would gladly do the same with a Nexus tablet if it generated ten times it's cost in mobile ad revenue.
 
Mac.World said:
It will fall under the Nexus flag, which hopefully means a pure Android experience. No custom manufacturer UI's overlaid on it. Samesung makes their Nexus branded phones now, and you still see other manufacturers selling Android based devices. This will just be more of the same.

Although, this tablet will probably be built with very few features in order to complete with the Fire. Unfortunately for the Fire and this new tablet from Google, by the time that competition heats up, the iPad2 will have gone on sale for $299, killing both of those products off.
Click to expand...

Silly Apple fanboy. Amazon's tablet isn't a huge success just because of price. It also has direct access to the best content stores. Kindle store destroys iBooks, and Apple has zero answer for Amazon's video streaming service. The ability to get free books (lending library) is something Apple doesnt match either. So let's drop this idiotic fanboy crap and be realistic. Hopefully Amazon's success makes Apple do more than drop the price.
 
Mac.World said:
... Cost for producing iPad 2's now are significantly less than at start up. Remember, Apple buys in bulk, pays ahead of time and recoups initial costs at the begining of a product cycle. ...
Click to expand...
If Apple sold products at an initially high price to recoup costs and then dropped its prices later, then you would be on solid ground. However, that is not how Apple does business. This is not to say that Apple never drops prices, but it usually does not. We know that Apple buys in bulk but its does much more than buy in bulk. The cost amortization is baked into the cake so that Apple can sell product at a price that returns its expected margin over the life of the product.

Fixating on $299 or some other loss-leader price is emphasis misplaced. Apple has sucked every gram of excess out of its costs. There is no way for its competitors to compete with it on price and stay in business.
 
GarytheiPhonema said:
oh gee if only Google knew how to operate like Apple. How can it actually BUILD a tablet that it hopes will knock its PARTNERS out of the game? Do you think Google is trying to be the new Apple by doing this? Is this going to be its iPad? :confused::confused:

I am so confused. Going to walk over and talk to the tech guys at lunch and see waht they think. Wife made ham sandwiches today!

http://www.bgr.com/2012/01/05/googles-nexus-tablet-may-push-android-partners-out-of-the-picture/
Click to expand...

If Google builds a 7" Android tablet to compete against the Kindle Fire and whatever 7" tablets Windows 8 is shoved onto, then those devices will probably compete against each other, rather than the iPad. I have a kindle fire and I think it's great for e-books and is easy to carry around, these 7" devices cannot begin to capture the feature set of the ipad. I can actually type my resume on my ipad. I would never try that on the kindle fire.
 
CapnJackGig said:
Silly Apple fanboy. Amazon's tablet isn't a huge success
Click to expand...

Ya got that right. It's a moderate success but only because of the price. It's an incomplete device made a little less so by integration with Amazon's content. At $299 sales would have dropped a lot. The $199 price point is what got all the buzz.
 
Mac.World said:
Not quite correct. All the tooling and R&D costs, plus computer assembly programming is done for the iPad 2. They have left over inventory that needs to be used up. Only costs incurred on defunct iPad 2 parts are human assembly and distribution. Cost for producing iPad 2's now are significantly less than at start up. Remember, Apple buys in bulk, pays ahead of time and recoups initial costs at the begining of a product cycle. Trust me, Apple still makes a ton on each iPad 2, even at a drop down to $299 or $350 or whatever price they choose.
Click to expand...

You've done a nice job of explaining why Apple can sell the iPad at $499 instead of a higher starting point, but at a BOM of $325 (admittedly for the 32GB 3G, so let's discount it $75 for the base model) there's no way to make $299 a viable price point. They'd have to get the entire cost of manufacture (not just materials, but assembly, shipping and returns) under $200. Apple negotiates well, but they don't perform miracles.
 
poloponies said:
You've done a nice job of explaining why Apple can sell the iPad at $499 instead of a higher starting point, but at a BOM of $325 (admittedly for the 32GB 3G, so let's discount it $75 for the base model) there's no way to make $299 a viable price point. They'd have to get the entire cost of manufacture (not just materials, but assembly, shipping and returns) under $200. Apple negotiates well, but they don't perform miracles.
Click to expand...

I said $299 or $350. Both numbers are just swags on my part. I have no idea what price Apple will eventually go with, but if they wish to take away from Kindle and Google, they will need to be between those two numbers.
 
Mac.World said:
I said $299 or $350. Both numbers are just swags on my part. I have no idea what price Apple will eventually go with, but if they wish to take away from Kindle and Google, they will need to be between those two numbers.
Click to expand...

Apple's been doing a fine job of maintaining interest in their products and they've always had to deal with low-ball competition. They didn't bite at the $399 desktop market or the $599 laptop market. The tablet market is still in its infancy and Apple can maintain and grow sales well into the future as long as they stay focused and provide good products. There's plenty of room at the low end for companies who want to sell at a loss or at minimal profit to get asses in the seats.
 
poloponies said:
Apple's been doing a fine job of maintaining interest in their products and they've always had to deal with low-ball competition. They didn't bite at the $399 desktop market or the $599 laptop market. The tablet market is still in its infancy and Apple can maintain and grow sales well into the future as long as they stay focused and provide good products. There's plenty of room at the low end for companies who want to sell at a loss or at minimal profit to get asses in the seats.
Click to expand...

I agree, but we are specifically talking about the ipad 2 eating up the low end tablets AFTER the release of the ipad 3. This is one reason why you still see the iphone 3gs and iPhone 4 still being listed as top sellers even though they have reached end of product life status (albeit under slightly different rules, due to subsidies.)
 
Mac.World said:
I agree, but we are specifically talking about the ipad 2 eating up the low end tablets AFTER the release of the ipad 3. This is one reason why you still see the iphone 3gs and iPhone 4 still being listed as top sellers even though they have reached end of product life status (albeit under slightly different rules, due to subsidies.)
Click to expand...

Math is totally different on those. BOM on the 3GS when it was new was about $180. Much, much less now (2-1/2 years later). They get about $350 a pop from the wireless companies so it's a highly profitable item, not a loss-leader. They simply can't do that with the iPad2, so we'll see clearance pricing, and maybe a $399 point, but not lower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back