On the iPod Announcements...

[aimfire]

Ugh, even if you're a big Apple fan (I am), it is OK to be mad at them on this one - please stop making excuses and trying to justify it somehow!

I don't believe for a second that Apple suddenly remembered the holidays were coming up soon and did this 33% price drop 2 months later so they could make more sales. They had this planned all along. But what they didn't anticipate was just how pizzed off people would be and all the negative press they would receive. You think people will line up for hours on launch day for iPhone 2.0? I definitely won't... I'll wait for them to drop the price 2 months later. Apple has just shot themselves in the foot on this one, and have damaged all future iPhone launch days. Smooth move, Jobs.

The $100 Apple Store credit is better than nothing... but would sweeten the deal if they also threw in some free iTunes tracks/ringtones as well.

 

[daschor]

Apple = Genius

First, not all of us are buying brand new cars, so no tears need be shed on the account of that.

Genius is what this rebate amounts to, actually. Revenues from months ago can now be turned into shipping product, thereby increasing sales figures, as well as enhancing the brand's reputation by putting more product on the street.

If you made the decision to pay $599 for your iPhone, I have no tolerance for any complaints about the size of the rebate or the size of the price reduction. Apple is not a charity, they are working for a profit (and doing extremely well with it). In my eyes, this is a reward for early adopters who helped make the iPhone the success it has been so far, and a sign of the importance that Apple places on customer loyalty and satisfaction, as well as managing the brand's image.

Apple got this one perfect.

 

[Sheradon]

Katie i have to dissagree with you.

Apple justified the price of the phone by combining the old Ipod model + actual phone and got to the 599$ as a starter and they did not know exactly where to shoot, how much money customers would be willing to pay, the impact of the phone etc... So they shooted high (it's easy to go down, not go up)

So now at it's current paste the Iphone will be making it's numbers (target of 1M phones by Year end) but barely.Apple does not just want get to the 1 million Iphone by Year end they want to crush this mark. The biggest road block (and complain) to acheive this in the coming chrismass buying spree is the high price !!

Like Job's said, "It is the right move to do (for the company)", but let me tell you that if they would have hit that 1 million phone already and let's assume people would not be complaining as much about the high price, that we would'nt be seing such a huge price drop like we did. If people would have felt the 599$ price was Ok, Apple would have kept the money. Jobs and Apple are in the business of selling hardware and making as much money and profit they can from the technology they create. It is not about changing the fate of the univers or whatever it's all about making investors rich (Apple is public let's not forget this and i hope you have Apple stock).

So if i would have bought a phone at 599$ (I'm Canadian so my turn is in 2 months) and 60 days later it drops by 30% .... this is not price fluctuation this is a marketing repositionning for a product that was priced too high for the masses.

So i can understand the frustration of early buyers and the Apple move had to be done. They don't need bad publicity, not at this time, they need all positivism they can get. I'm sure they were expecting rants from the price drop from existing customers and waited to see how much of an issue it really was, and it was a big one.

I'm even willing to say that if they would have not done what they did, it would have possibly had a negative impact on futur product introduction as the Iphone could have been used as a reason to hold on and wait.

Now with the reembursement of 100$ everyone will use the Iphone as a positive example of the right thing to do and Apple fans will not be afraid in the future to stay in line and pay (potentially) I high sticker price for a new product.

Cheers

 

[NewSc2]

No, there's not. There is no guarantee and no obligation on the part of the seller to sustain your "investment." Once you purchase it, you assume the risk of it being worth $0 the next day. It could be stolen or destroyed, or it could be rendered utterly obsolete. There's a return/adjustment window for some amount of insulation from the market, but it's an artificial force.

Then you wouldn't have owned one, and someone else would have bought it. The resale value has no impact on price or performance at the time of purchase. The computer will last as long and perform as well whether it's worth $10 or $1000. High resale value is a nice perk and nothing more. Lots of people factor it in, but it's entirely speculative. You're taking a gamble, and it's no one's responsibility but your own. If it's not worth the price on the day you're purchasing it, you're making a mistake in buying it.

Welcome to market speculation. You might be annoyed about the future playing out differently than you anticipated, but it's no one's responsibility but your own.

Products are sold for a price at a specific point in time. The reality is that you don't know what is going to happen tomorrow. You don't have any control over the future. Learn to live with it. That risk calculation might not pay off, and that's something that must be factored in.

If your iPhone breaks, take it in. That's what a warranty is for.

You have a degree in economics and you're comfortable with that statement? Give me a break. You bore the risk and you lost.

This has nothing to do with economic losses or business decisions. You're upset, you're to blame for putting yourself in the situation, and you've decided to complain about it to exorcise your frustration with yourself and put it on a third party. This is why we don't live in a democracy.

My point was completely opposite your point. I don't see how you can conclude that I'm wrong by repeating "you're wrong." Maybe it's the law degree?

I purchased the iPhone because I felt it would hold its value. Maybe you didn't.

Part of the reason why I buy vintage music gear or electronics off eBay is because I know the value will stay true. If I don't like a certain vintage instrument (like my Roland TR-909), I can re-sell it on eBay for pretty much the exact same price I paid for it. If I bought a Powerbook off eBay for $800 today, I will be able to re-sell it for $800 next week. Even if a newer MBP came out, the older Powerbooks wouldn't depreciate in price by much.

That feeling holds true over to new Apple products, and it's what I've come to expect. Again, maybe you haven't, but I have. It's like visiting a trusted mom n' pop store, that I've gone to for years, know the owners, and have spent lots of money, and expecting a bit more service than I would from a faceless internet store. Sure, the mom n pop store could burn me, but they'd lose my business. They'd bend the rules here and there to keep a loyal customer satisfied. I'd pay more to have that service, and it's what we pay when we purchase luxury goods (I'm a distributor for a luxury goods brand).

My bigger point was that Katie's article was touching on sensitive issues and went with the "tough poop" mentality. I'm sure she feels that way, and you do too, but I didn't feel it representative of a good MacRumors post. I couldn't care less if it were posted on her own blog somewhere else.

80% of people could feel the same way you do -- just deal with the price drop. To the other 20% that felt burned, though, that's 200,000 people dissatisfied by Apple's pricing policy, and it's not something to be ignored. Even if it were 50,000 or 50, there are people out there that were left with a sour taste in their mouth, and it's not something good. As an Apple news site, I'd have thought MR would instead report on the divide, and not take sides.

 

[illumin8]

Wow, you people that were lined up to purchase the newest, shiniest Apple toy a couple months ago are really unbelievable.

We live in a capitalist society. That means that when two people want to exchange goods or services, there is a money transfer agreed upon. The amount of money paid for a good or service is determined at the TIME OF SALE.

You walked into an Apple or AT&T store, saw the iPhone, and AGREED to pay $599 for it. This was your CHOICE. Nobody held a gun to your head and said "you better pay $599 or else..."

Let me give you an analogy that might be more relevant than gasoline or new cars: Apple Computers.

When Apple released the new iMac recently, you had a couple choices if you wanted to buy it. You could buy it from the Apple physical or online store the day it came out, pay FULL RETAIL PRICE, + sales tax, and get it right away (instant gratification), or you could wait a week or two until it hits the discount mac retailers and buy it for about $100 less, - sales tax (mail order from out of state), and save a few hundred dollars overall.

I'm willing to bet a lot of people here might take the instant gratification. You know, or should know by now that electronics depreciate rapidly. You paid $599 for instant gratification.

Hey, I did too. I bought an iPhone on launch day for $599. I love my iPhone, and the fact that it's cheaper now in no way dimishes the usefulness or functionality of my iPhone. I agreed to pay $599, and getting a $100 gift card is just gravy as far as I'm concerned.

You people need to grow up a little bit and learn how the consumer electronics industry works. Any electronics device you buy, will be available for a few hundred dollars less and with more features and power a few months later. It's just the way it works. Ever heard of Moore's Law? Computing power doubles roughly every 18 months. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this translates into more powerful devices that cost less.

 

[samwich]

When will these stop? Steve posted his decision, it's over and done with. And after reading some of these posts, it sounds as if for every one person that complained about the price drop, there are at least five people yelling at them, and giving them lessons about the economy. (Between this thread, and the countless others.) Stop beating this point to death!

 

[Daremo]

You people need to grow up a little bit and learn how the consumer electronics industry works. Any electronics device you buy, will be available for a few hundred dollars less and with more features and power a few months later.

What you typed is why people are so angry over this! If a NEW 16GB phone, with new features came out, it would JUSTIFY the price drop on the 8GB phone! This is the exact item, dropping 33%, 68 days after launch, with the excuse of Apple wanting to dominate the market over the holiday season! Regardless if Apple gave in because of the outrage, Steve Jobs recognized the error, and remedied it with a $100 pay back.

And I'm SO SICK of those of you who feel the need to use the "grow up" defense when someone's opinion differs from yours. That's the beauty of a free society, and our right to disagree and debate. Age, or maturity level has nothing to do with it, and it's simply a cheap shot to make yourself look superior.

 

[tbobmccoy]

boy people are sure a bunch of whiners. every time i buy a new computer a newer, cheaper faster one comes out the next month. i've never asked for a refund. the fact that a product can be offered at a cheaper price means it's doing well and more people will be able to get it. i loved the car analogy. just lost about 2000 bucks driving off the lot last month. the point is people are being thanked by apple by receiving a 200 buck coupon. that never happens in any other industry. so come on stop bitching because you jumped on the band wagon early. early adopters always pay the premium. remember when a 10 gig ipod was 400 bucks with a b&w screen and 6 hours of batterylife.
oh by the way i'm over 50 and found nothing juvenile about the young ladies opinion. if anything she has a very clear sense of the real world.....

To insert my two cents here..

This computer analogy is exactly why I purchase from Apple now. Their products go through relatively stable cycles and you can expect to get, often, a year of use before the price is cut dramatically or totally new features are added in. This expectation is built up by Apple, and they need to support it. People whining about the whiners need to understand that after 68 days, a price drop this dramatic (33%) is unreasonable according to their prior interactions with Apple. A perfect example can be seen in my MacBook. I've had it for about a year, when C2D first came out for the MacBooks, and there's only a small upgrade available for this computer to date (the processor speed). I'm glad Apple understood this mentality and has given us early adopters basically a $100 refund (I call it a refund because early adopters will be using it in the future more than any casual user).

Edit: Oh, as a side note, I'm glad future iPhones will NOT be ranking up in the 600s to purchase. Apple won't be able to sell them for that price unless they can also toast bread thanks to the decision to drop the price within 2 months!

 

[matticus008]

I purchased the iPhone because I felt it would hold its value. Maybe you didn't.

You made an arbitrary decision to make an unfounded and unqualified (and more importantly, unadvertised and demonstrably ill-conceived given cell phone prices) assumption about the future. You simply cannot do that with purchases--it's called speculation, and any failure to meet your prediction is solely your own fault.

Part of the reason why I buy vintage music gear or electronics off eBay is because I know the value will stay true.

Then you should stick to vintage gear, not cutting-edge products that are a first entry into a new and unusually aggressive market. Your theory of value has no place in the iPhone's market.

That feeling holds true over to new Apple products, and it's what I've come to expect.

No it doesn't--do you know what happened to the price for the old iPods this week? They crashed to half what people paid for them just the day before. It's because the new iPods are not only better, but bigger and comparatively cheaper.

Comparing an iPhone to a Mac is ludicrous. Comparing it to an iPod would make more sense, but still be a stretch.

My bigger point was that Katie's article was touching on sensitive issues and went with the "tough poop" mentality. I'm sure she feels that way, and you do too, but I didn't feel it representative of a good MacRumors post.

I felt it representative of reality. You bought a product. You paid a price that you assented to as being appropriate consideration. That is the end of it.

Any assumptions you made about the product's future are things that are solely your problem. You're upset and looking to blame someone else because you "had to have it" and paid more than you could have if you'd waited. It's your fault; deal with it. Buyer's remorse isn't anyone's responsibility but the buyer's.

Apple did this solely for PR reasons because they have an extraordinarily whiny and vocal set of malcontents as part of their customer base and it wanted them to shut up. Giving them store credit was cheaper than giving up the news cycle to irrational people who have neither the willpower to resist early adoption nor the responsibility to own their decisions.

To the other 20% that felt burned, though, that's 200,000 people dissatisfied by Apple's pricing policy, and it's not something to be ignored.

It wasn't ignored. In fact, it's the exact reason for this post. This is Katie's blog. It's her response to the issues and the news about the iPhone, which she is fully qualified to post here. Her blog posts aren't supposed to be journalistic puff pieces. Like other online columnists, she writes what she thinks. If you want product news, stick to the News page. This is the blog.

 

[fredfnord]

This reduction was: Extreme, Unprecedented, Uncommon, and so early they may as well have done it on June 30th.

Well, actually — not that you want to hear this — this sort of thing has happened a number of times in Apple's history. I can think of two (non-computer) items offhand that were dropped in price around 25 to 30 percent after less than three months in production, and one computer (the Mac IIvi) which was discontinued in favor of a cheaper and faster model less than three months after the first ones shipped (and less than four months after it was announced) without any warning of any kind that it was a computer with its balls cut off that couldn't even keep up with the Mac IIcx, which had been discontinued for a while when the IIvi was introduced. And in those days Apple had no retail stores and did not permit their resellers to have pricing protection, nor take back opened product, even with a restocking fee.

Tell me, would you still feel the same way if they had done this on June 30th? No, you'd be up in arms little crazy internet author writing about the biggest scam in history.........what if it happened 15 days after iDay, just outside of the 14 day price protection, how you feel then?!?! (!1!1!!elevendy-one!1!)

Tell me, would you still feel the same way about this if they had waited a year?

So, given that it really is just a matter of how much time they waited, what possible use could that argument be? 'If they did something that everyone would agree was awful, then they would have done something awful!' Yes. But, see, the point is, they didn't do that. They did something that only some people believe was awful, and trying to make it the logical equivalent of lowering the price after 15 days is just as silly as making it the logical equivalent of doing it after a year, or two, or five.

-fred

 

[aly]

Take your head out of Apples holly butt and join the rest of us on terra firma.

Unless you are implyng that Apple's butt is prickly and festive I believe you mean holy.

 

[glennyboiwpg]

Katie, I think you dead on!

 

[Maui]

AANNNDD Miss Thang, you didn't even pay for the phone. You're no old hag either. Don't EVEN try to tell to tell me you wouldn't be pissed if you were in our shoes!

Seems to me she did pay for her phone, by trading her time for it. You traded your time for money, then used that money to trade for the phone. Katie skipped the money step -- but I fail to see how that deprives her of the right to comment on what Apple did.

Since you fail to understand the most basic concepts of economics, as I see it, the score on who is the professor here:

Katie 1
TwoSyllables 0

Everything else I would say about your juvenile personal attacks would get me banned, so I'll skip it. If you don't like the blog, how odd that you not only take the time to read it, but to then comment on it.

 

[techage14]

thank you

that was very well said Katie.

 

[eenu]

What staggers me is why people have to be so unnecessarily rude to Katie.

Sure, you might not like her blog or what she says, or you might be annoyed about the whole iPhone price issue... but some of you are just being personally nasty for no reason at all, except for the reason that you feel you can, typing from your mother's basement or wherever.

It's just really saddening to see so much bitterness out there directed at a 19 year old girl who speaks her mind. Take a good hard look at yourselves before you feel inclined to post, because for some of you, it doesn't make you look good at all. And if you don't like her blog, spare yourself the drama and just don't read it; it's that simple.

Just my personal thoughts... and not an official MR mod stance or whatever.

Sorry Blue but i find that rather hypocritical given one or two rude posts you have written to me on the boards that i found unacceptable especially from a mod. Katie is an adult who has chosen to write a public blog and accept comments in return. There has been nothing here that has been unacceptably rude or out of order. She has put herself in this position and can therefore deal with the replies.

not so much in defense of personal attacks, I will say that the blog did seem a bit offensive to me. At least in my reading, the tone of the article indicated (to me) that anyone who was complaining didn't understand basic principles of life. That and the poor analogies were enough to make me respond.

Yes that is how i read it too. For me the issue isn't the $200 issue, i have no emotion on that as i am not in the position but telling everyone who feels hard done by they have no clue on life is dumb by any standards. Again its her opinion so i think she is fair to state it but i hope no one here expects people to necessarily agree with it. And to JSW, i do find it hypocritical that she thinks $599 is fair but is going to take the $100 credit. But that is just my opinion.

 

[psycoswimmer]

Katie, are you coming out with a new blog entry soon? I enjoy reading them but it's been 11 days since the last one came out!

Edit: I PM'ed arn about this today, hopefully he'll reply soon.

About a week later and still no reply... This is a little odd.

 

[sillycybin]

....'Katie Says' has been killed???

I heard through some very good sources that the 'katie says' blog has been put down. I am saddened by this horrible news. I felt the need to reminisce on all the wonderful info I have gained from reading....

what have we learned from the blog?

Vegans are cool
Peep toe shoes are all the rage
iPhones make essential survival flashlights


R.I.P Katie Says

feel free to add your favorite Katie Says memory

 

[Markleshark]

Was wondering the same myself.

Any news Arn?

 

[nbs2]

Any news Arn?

A week has gone by since your post - I'm no doctor, but I'm calling it dead.

I'm a bit torn as I thought this would be a Barry Bonds scenario. Some attack the guy, some defend, but he just ignores everything and comes to the ballpark everyday. Ignore the Bonds juiced-ness - that breaks the analogy.

 

[Markleshark]

A week has gone by since your post - I'm no doctor, but I'm calling it dead.

I'm a bit torn as I thought this would be a Bonds scenario. Some attack the guy, some defend, but he just ignores everything and comes to the ballpark everyday. Ignore the Bonds juiced-ness - that breaks the analogy.

Looks that way, and yes, after I got over the fact I thought you we're talking about James Bond I now see your point.

 

[breath of apple]

Where is Katie???

Arn, can you please give us an update on what happened to Katie?
Many of us were enjoying her blogs.
Katie, if you are reading this, thanks!!!

 

[mustang_dvs]

It's dead, Jim.

18 blog posts over 2 months = free iPhone. Not to be a cynic, but boy, did Katie ever hit the jackpot.

 

[psycoswimmer]

I almost feel like something's being covered up.

I PMed arn, but I'm not sure of how he deals with those or if he even looks at them. Also, no moderators have posted on this thread.

 

[nbs2]

18 blog posts over 2 months = free iPhone. Not to be a cynic, but boy, did Katie ever hit the jackpot.

IIRC, the terms of the deal indicated that the phone would be returned or paid for if the deal fell apart - I don't remember which. From my reading of KT, she's not the kind of person to break an agreement (contract?).

 

[breath of apple]

Definitely a cover up!

Hmmmm.....this is definitely a cover-up! Even if a contract had been completed, Katie surely would have said a gracious "good-bye." Even if something happened to break the contract behind the scenes, Arn should have posted a message announcing that the posts would end and at least thanking everyone for reading Katie's posts giving first-hand accounts, experiences and impressions of the iphone. Something definitely smells.... Arn is very responsive to his other threads....Arn, can you please post an update for us? Thanks!