RED iPod Nano Tomorrow?

[JGowan]

...I'm kind of disappointed. When I bought my Nano, it would have made me feel better to know that at least some of my money was going to a good cause. I also would have much preferred red over blue.

Go buy a Red one and give your blue one to someone else. Certainly someone in your family merits one of these sweet Apple players. I've bought one for a friend, father, sister and wife.

If you're like most people, you keep the box and packing materials and you keep your iPod very protected. You could just wipe the player, fill it with the relative's favorite tunes and tell them you had to open the box to load all the music on it. Of course, give this to someone who hasn't seen you with it.

The holiday's are a-coming. Treat others. Treat yourself.

 

[PerfectlyFlawed]

Why does Bono have to be the one to introduce it or even have his own U2 edition of ipod?

they should have a Black Sabbath edition or a band people actually know of!
I can't name a single song from U2 they really aren't that popular!!
I remember some music video about 4 or 5 years ago where the guy had a black and red ipod,
it looked awesome but you couldn't get one like it, then 2 years later U2 comes out with a version like that.
now I'll never get one just U2 has their name on it.

the cause is good, but f*** I hate Bono!!!!!

 

[Chundles]

Why does Bono have to be the one to introduce it or even have his own U2 edition of ipod?

they should have a Black Sabbath edition or a band people actually know of!

the cause is good, but f*** I hate Bono!!!!!

Pretty sure people know of U2...

As for "why Bono"? Because it's his charity. He started it, it's his idea so why shouldn't it be Bono.

This also has nothing to do with U2, nothing at all, it's purely Bono's baby.

 

[peas]

Charity's great, but the fact is, metallic red is the color I've wanted ever since the first colored iPod appeared

But add video (which I'd output to TV at friend's houses) and sell it with 8GB.

see, this is what is needed. skip the feel-good bs, tell it like it is.
we're all grown-ups here. thank you for that moment of truth, nagromme

 

[JGowan]

i'm all for simplifying a process, but to say "i'd help if i could just click on it in itunes" is just down right lazy.

A Certain adage comes to mind: "There's strength in numbers". One person can't make a difference. 10 million just might. At least some people are trying. A lot of people know that tragedy is all over the world. It's overwhelming. But it's hard to know exactly what to do because the world is in such need. Knowing that I can go to joinred.com and decide how to spend my holiday money, helps me feel good -- somehow I can contribute. What if thousands decide that this Christmas, every gift they give will come from the companies that are making (PRODUCT)RED™ products? You seem to think it will do no good, but I think you're wrong.

While I didn't quote your entire rant (as you, yourself, called it), I can definitely say that it was one of the more pessimistic posts I've seen on here.

Ask yourself: "What am I doing?"

 

[MacUser4_20]

GREAT post!!

A Certain adage comes to mind: "There's strength in numbers". One person can't make a difference. 10 million just might. At least some people are trying. A lot of people know that tragedy is all over the world. It's overwhelming. But it's hard to know exactly what to do because the world is such need. Knowing that I can go to joinred.com and decide how to spend my holiday money, helps me feel good -- somehow I can contribute. What if thousands decide that this Christmas, every gift they give will come from the companies that are making (PRODUCT)RED™ products? You seem to think it will do no good, but I think you're wrong.

While I didn't quote your entire rant (as you, yourself, called it), I can definitely say that it was one of the more pessimistic posts I've seen on here.

Ask yourself: "What am I doing?"

 

[clintob]

profits are just that, profits. how it's accomplished is regulated by the likes of the irs and ftc, just to name 2

Pleae tell me you didn't just attempt with a striaght face to assert that the IRS and FTC actually regulate the business of Pharmaceutical profits (or any big business for that matter)? I'm not even going to validate that with a response.

As for what is and isn't asinine, I think you're going to have a hard time finding anyone who'll agree that these profit margins aren't just that. If you exclude the four most highly developed countries on that continent South Africa, Egypt, Algeria, and Morocco (none of which are not inclusive in the discussion of the AIDS epidemic), the 4 major US oil company's profits in 2005 totaled more than the GNP of all the remaining African countries combined! Look it up. And if that's not bad enough, these same companies, with these same profits, RAISED oil prices more than 30% over the course of 6 months, nearly doubling their profit margin.

If you took 2% of that money, it would be enough to fund a global AIDS foundation that could provide education and treatment to millions of infected African people. 2%. So what you're saying is that Pfizer's CEO's third yacht is just as important as that initiative.

You still want to say none of this profit is extravagant? Do you REALLY want to make that argument?

 

[JasonElise1983]

so this is turning into some sort of economic argument? Well, i've wasted enough time reading these posts, i might as well comment.

Pharmaceudical companies make lots of money. There is no one saying they don't, but to some degree they EARN it. We live in a democracy, where it is your right to EARN money. On the same token, you COULD go donate all your earnings (accept of course what you need to live so $5.15 an hour in the US) and just live modestly. Oh, wait...let me guess, your time is worth more than that...cause i sure as hell think mine is. I work hard everyday and feel i deserve the money i make.

Also, does anyone have a clue what it takes to test, re-test, start over, test, re-test a new drug. It's a lot of work. My wife is a pharmacist and I am friends with two pharmaceudical sales reps, and a few chemists. It isn't easy to get it done. So these people should go un rewarded for all their hard work? They should do all this out of the goodness of their hearts? If medicine was free, do you really think new medicines would come out that often? Same with technology, if computers were free, what would be the drive to innovate?

-JR

 

[morespce54]

...Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!...

You're kidding, right?

 

[clintob]

so this is turning into some sort of economic argument? Well, i've wasted enough time reading these posts, i might as well comment.

Pharmaceudical companies make lots of money. There is no one saying they don't, but to some degree they EARN it. We live in a democracy, where it is your right to EARN money. On the same token, you COULD go donate all your earnings (accept of course what you need to live so $5.15 an hour in the US) and just live modestly. Oh, wait...let me guess, your time is worth more than that...cause i sure as hell think mine is. I work hard everyday and feel i deserve the money i make.

Also, does anyone have a clue what it takes to test, re-test, start over, test, re-test a new drug. It's a lot of work. My wife is a pharmacist and I am friends with two pharmaceudical sales reps, and a few chemists. It isn't easy to get it done. So these people should go un rewarded for all their hard work? They should do all this out of the goodness of their hearts? If medicine was free, do you really think new medicines would come out that often? Same with technology, if computers were free, what would be the drive to innovate?

-JR

Nobody is suggesting that Pharmaceutical companies don't have a right to earn a profit. This is a capitalist society, that is absolutely their right. But there is a moral issue involved when your profit margins are surpassing that of entire countries' GNPs! Of course they should be rewarded fairly for their efforts - it's a wonderful field in many respects. But please, let's not be so naive as to think that the higher-ups in this large business do not make exorbitant salaries and bonuses that are far beyond what would be considered even "extremely wealthy". It's very hard to sit by and watch foundations struggle to raise capital while corporations raise prices for drugs that already have profit margins well in excess of 50-70%. It's greed, pure and simple.

Yes, we are all entitled to life's comforts if we work for them. That's what America is all about. But there comes a time when you have to have a conscience and a certain level of human decencty to realize that if you're company is profiting in excess of $10 billion per year, it would also function just fine on profits of $8 billion as well, and that 20% would go a LONG way towards curtailing a lot of the poverty and disease in the world.

That's tough to argue.

 

[morespce54]

Alright, what is a "bux", "cos", "haveing", and "recipet".
Perhaps you need to enroll in the ""The Derek Zoolander Center For Children Who Can't Read Good And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too"

LOL

- "mer-mad"

 

[gugy]

the cause is good, but f*** I hate Bono!!!!!

Why do you hate him?
You even said you are not familiar with U2 music.
What's your problem dude?

 

[epicwelshman]

Only $10 to AIDS???

I'm sorry if this was pointed out before, I looked through the thread but didn't see it.
Apple's only giving $10 from a $200 iPod to AIDS research. Is that enough? I know that Gap is giving 50% of their profit to "RED", roughly 25% of the retail cost. I find it hard to believe that Apple is only making $20 profit on every Nano. What's the story with this?

 

[drdan]

Why retrovirals?

Obviously the individual with AIDS would prefer the retroviral medicine. However, those of us over here giving to charity might be interested in preventing the most suffering possible with our dollars. I care equally about the suffering of the person currently infected with AIDS or HIV AND the suffering of some future person who will be infected with HIV. Since education and economic development will prevent a LOT more suffering overall, that's where I will choose to put my money.

It's as I said before, giving retroviral medicine to those who are suffering is a great cause, but it's sad if there isn't already enough money being spent on reducing future infections. And there ISN'T enough money being spent on education and economic development.

Ok, not to be the smartass, but there's a very good reason to focus on retrovirals.

Bono is pushing retrovirals because it gives people hope for life after AIDS. Most Africans never get tested because its entirely pointless - even counterproductive for them because of the stigma.

The moment that they have ways to live with AIDS (and oh by the way provide for their families who get the worst of the deal), is the moment that testing becomes helpful. Hopefully education and responsibility follow.

I'm going to my Apple Store after work today.

 

[pyramid6]

You're kidding, right?

I guess no one told him you can get AIDS from something other than sex. Not to mention, I babies and kids who have AIDS.

$10 still seems like small change, but I don't think the $10 is really what they are after. It's more likely the publicity.

Anthony

 

[zac4mac]

I gotta say something to PerfectlyFlawed - #1 Hate is bad, #2 How in the "F" do you hate someone you don't even know? Or do you know Bono closely, and he's personally screwed you really really bad.... I don't get it.

Back on topic -
Just got back from Boulder's latest Apple Store Grand Opening (29th Street) and got a RedPod. I'm impressed with the 2nd generation nano, very sweet, gorgeous color. I liked FINALLY not having to type in a serial number that the computer can see when I registered... gotta say tho, the new pakaging is almost as hard to get open as an iPod.

Go out and buy a RedPod or two.

Z

 

[danvdr]

Go out and buy a RedPod or two.

Z

Or, buy another color and then give $10 to a worthy cause.

 

[gloss]

they should have a Black Sabbath edition or a band people actually know of!
I can't name a single song from U2 they really aren't that popular!!

Am I the only one who finds this obscenely funny? U2 has sold 170 million albums worldwide. People know of them.

(comparison - Black Sabbath has sold 15 million albums in the US. U2: 50 million.)

Cannibal Corpse Special Edition iPod!

 

[lmalave]

This is one of the more misguided comments I've seen in a long time. Yes, of course America is a capitalist society, and any company is entitled to earn all the profits they can. That's the American way.

But to say that the Pharmaceutical companies deserve all their profits, or that they are honest companies merely trying to recouperate their losses is bordering on asinine. Here are some empirical facts for you - you can look them up, it's public information:

1) The top 10 pharma companies had 2006 FIRST HALF (6 month) profits that totaled over $39 Billion dollars.

2) Pfizer alone had first half profits in '06 that totaled over $6.5 billion.

Those are PROFIT numbers... profit only, as in money in their pocket after all expenses, patent costs, drug production and distribution costs, payroll, etc are paid. Period.

That's a disgusting amount of profit for corporations that are supposed to be in business of research, development, and the public good. If you genuinely believe these companies don't lie, cover up, and manpulate medical facts for their own benifit, or hike up the prices of drugs unnecessarily for their own gains (at the expense of the health of people around the world) then you are sorely naive and misguided.

I think the statement "That's a disgusting amount of profit for corporations that are supposed to be in business of research, development, and the public good" is exactly where you're misguided. Who on earth decreed that Pfizer, etc. are *supposed* to be for "research, development, and the public good."? Again, they're a for-profit corporation! A public research university like UCLA is supposed to be for "research, development, and the public good." Their stakeholders are the tax-paying public. A private, for-profit corporation can do whatever they want, as long as it's lawful.

So yes, if pharmas are perpretrating fraud through fraudulent research data, then by all means they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. That I have no problem with. Pharmas are, properly, held to a very high standard when it comes to consumer safety protection, since the safety of medicines is by its very nature a life-or-death issue.

But you are not just stopping there. You are somehow saying that Pharmas should charge a lower price than customers are willing to pay. Why? They're a private company. The price they are charging is usually whatever price they estimate maximizes their profits. The price *would* eventually get to a point where their sales would drop off because people are unwilling to pay that high a price. However, the prices for medicines tend to be high because: 1) pharmas usually have a monopoly on the drug they're selling, because of patents as I've mentioned, and 2) customers are willing to pay a high price for medicines, because health is a top priority for most people.

And if you're referring to the fact that Pharmas *market* themselves as being for the public good, then that's a totally different issue, but that's their right as well (provided they don't cross the line and say something fraudulent like implying that they're a non-profit). If customers fall for that kind of marketing than they're stupid. It's really no different than insurance companies or financial companies marketing themselves like they're a "friend" and "always there for you" when in reality they're just trying to get your money like anyone else. Anyone who falls for that kind of marketing is a schmuck.

 

[macfevorite]

Where's the Love and Compassion?

Look at the intent to ease suffering. Just search your soul...we are all connected. Search within....then give according....bjut most of all do something that helps ease another's pain.

 

[lmalave]

I'm sorry if this was pointed out before, I looked through the thread but didn't see it.
Apple's only giving $10 from a $200 iPod to AIDS research. Is that enough? I know that Gap is giving 50% of their profit to "RED", roughly 25% of the retail cost. I find it hard to believe that Apple is only making $20 profit on every Nano. What's the story with this?

I think your numbers are way off. Last time I checked Gap didn't have 50% profit margins, so I don't see how 50% of profits could be 25% of retail cost. Even though Gap is vertically integrated so they have higher profits than, say, Wal-Mart, I think their profits are *much* lower than 50%. I'll lookup their financial reports to verify...

EDIT: just looked at their income statement. Last year their operating income was $1.1 billion on $16 billion in reenue. So their operating margins are well under 10%. So if they're donating 25% of the retail price, then that's awesome!!! They would definitely be losing a lot of money on each sale. For any company that does this, though (for example if Apple decided to donate $50 per iPod), it would definitely have to be a *limited* release product, since there must be some cap on how much the company is willing to lose.

 

[whatever]

Get a life!

Why does Bono have to be the one to introduce it or even have his own U2 edition of ipod?

they should have a Black Sabbath edition or a band people actually know of!
I can't name a single song from U2 they really aren't that popular!!
I remember some music video about 4 or 5 years ago where the guy had a black and red ipod,
it looked awesome but you couldn't get one like it, then 2 years later U2 comes out with a version like that.
now I'll never get one just U2 has their name on it.

the cause is good, but f*** I hate Bono!!!!!

Unless you've lived under a rock since 1976, you've heard of U2 and should know at least one song.

Now I like Sabbath and all, but come one, you can't compare the two. There have been so many members in Sabbath, that comparing them to U2 is like comparing Menudo to the Beatles. Come on can you even name all of the lead singers that Sabbath has have. Here's a quick list.

Ozzy Osbourne - vocals
Ronnie James Dio - vocals
Ian Gillan - vocals
David Donato - vocals
Glenn Hughes - vocals
Ray Gillen - vocals
Tony Martin - vocals

But anyways. Bono is only the spokes person for this charitiy. This is not a U2 or Bono iPod. I wonder if people who don't like Bob Dylan complain about the iTunes Music Store because he appears in an Apple commercial for the store.

 

[KingYaba]

Why not save yourself the 200 bucks and just donate 20 dollars (twice as much) to the AIDS thing.

 

[powerbuddy]

I'm sorry if this was pointed out before, I looked through the thread but didn't see it.
Apple's only giving $10 from a $200 iPod to AIDS research. Is that enough? I know that Gap is giving 50% of their profit to "RED", roughly 25% of the retail cost. I find it hard to believe that Apple is only making $20 profit on every Nano. What's the story with this?

The whole point is Apple is not asking you to buy its product , just because of charity,and if it did ; it would forward all of its proceeds to charity in that case. Apple is obviously selling it as a profit , like any other of its products. The choice is upto the consumer if they like the color red , or buying it as gifts for others , as a goodwill. By buying the Nano just for charity sake , is foolish , and dont complaint about the bang for the buck that only 5% is going to charity , because one could very well donate much more to the Red Cross or other NGO's helping people around the world. 10$ may be a small amount for people living in developed countries, but it could mean a whole one months meal for a starving child living in poor parts of Africa.

 

[mizzoucat]

Why don't they focus on a real disease that is taking the lives of our own nation every day........like cancer? AIDS is not a serious epidemic in the United States. I don't know a single person who has died of AIDS nor anyone who has even been HIV positive. Yet, I know several people who have died of cancer.