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

So about that sub $1000 Apple laptop. Guess analysts and rumors proved to be wrong this time aroud.

A

Appurushido

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 28, 2012
276
265
Finally the MacBook Air gets the retina display that is long overdue, but starts at $1199. Even the base, older non-Retina, starts at $999. You can say the older version is sub $1K even with brick and mortar discounts, but it's not the new sub $1,000 Apple laptop most analysts or rumors have predicted.

Still pricey, but a well deserved upgrade. Those on the fence, it's probably better just to spend the extra $100 for the machine if you don't need Touch ID. Just my two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frou
What is clear is that Apple has gone even more upmarket and luxury. This is even true after adjusting for inflation. It also is even more amazing considering the trend of computers to come down in price over the years as they have become increasingly commoditized items.
People have no problem with this if there is something materially better about their products or new innovations. Even by apples own standards, their new designs aren’t even new at all. So there is no reason to justify price hikes for pure aesthetic or design reasons.

So I can not think of any conceivable reason for the increase in price across the board for their iPhone, iPads, and macs other than increasing profit margins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DVD9, LiveM and rafark
All those so called accurate analysts have been wrong about so many things so many times - people just remember the things they got right. If you look at all their claims over the past 5 years, they have a less than 50% accuracy rate.
 
smallcoffee said:
I don’t think that’s the case. And even if it is, that’s a good reason to encourage production in countries outside of China, such as, oh idk, the United States?
Click to expand...

I wonder how much they would have cost if it wasn’t recycled materials that they used :D
 
smallcoffee said:
I don’t think that’s the case. And even if it is, that’s a good reason to encourage production in countries outside of China, such as, oh idk, the United States?
Click to expand...
Well, we'll see soon enough when the tariffs are lifted. If Apple doesn't lower the prices then we have our answer.
 
Howard2k said:
Price and cost are not typically directly correlated.
Click to expand...

Price and cost are directly related - just not the only factor in determining total cost. You’d be silly to think that cost doesn’t directly impact prices..
 
Apple seems to know their target audience and many people I know have no problem with Apple pricing.

Apple hasn't competed on price and won't in the near future from what I see. I also don't see Apple wanting to turn their products into commodity products that resemble Windows products.
 
Ma2k5 said:
Price and cost are directly related - just not the only factor in determining total cost. You’d be silly to think that cost doesn’t directly impact prices..
Click to expand...

No. The price for the MBA is set by Apple based on the most they believe that people will pay for the MBA. It's not based on the cost of the MBA.

They of course look at the cost too, because if the cost is higher than the price there's a significant issue. They still need to ensure that the profitability is sensible, but they don't create the price of the MBA by saying "Well it costs $1,299, and we want to make $100 per unit". That's not how prices are set, typically.
 
Howard2k said:
No. The price for the MBA is set by Apple based on the most they believe that people will pay for the MBA. It's not based on the cost of the MBA.

They of course look at the cost too, because if the cost is higher than the price there's a significant issue. They still need to ensure that the profitability is sensible, but they don't create the price of the MBA by saying "Well it costs $1,299, and we want to make $100 per unit". That's not how prices are set, typically.
Click to expand...

You need to look up direct vs indirect costing to price, because material cost isn’t indirect.

Markup/margin due to supply/demand is another factor, it doesn’t mean you can ignore the cost of components or consider them “indirect”.

All companies have a target margin they aim for on each product, to justify the R&D, it’s not some finger in the air exercise.
 
I mean, they could theoretically (and I would add logically) drop the 12" MB price to $999 before xmas and there you go. AFA why they wouldn't do that now, it would cannibalize some of the new MBA's sales.
 
Prices are crazy. ASP must be way up across every apple product line. iPad pro starting at $800 (and going up to $1800!) is nuts. $1200 for the entry level laptop is too (not counting the 2015 junk they won't kill).
 
First of all, my initial statement was more vague than it could have been. Price and cost are always correlated as part of due diligence. I sort of figured that was obvious, I think we both agree that it is, but I should ensure that you're not misunderstanding. The point I was trying to make was that Apple didn't say "The MBA costs us $x to make, we have a target margin of y%, therefore the price shall be $z, as a function of $x and y%". I believe that's what you were trying to infer, but since I need to clarify my own post, I should give you the opportunity to clarify yours too.

So for the avoidance of doubt: Apple didn't say "The MBA costs us $x to make, we have a target margin of y%, therefore the price shall be $z, as a function of $x and y%".

Therefore, a reduction in the cost of aluminium should not affect the price. A reduction in the price of aluminium would reduce the price if the price was set based on the cost. Which I think is what you're stating is the case. I'm stating that's not correct.


Ma2k5 said:
You need to look up direct vs indirect costing to price, because material cost isn’t indirect.
Click to expand...

No I don't.

Ma2k5 said:
Markup/margin due to supply/demand is another factor, it doesn’t mean you can ignore the cost of components or consider them “indirect”.
Click to expand...


I didn't say cost could be ignored. I actually explicitly stated that cost does need analysis to ensure profitability.

Ma2k5 said:
All companies have a target margin they aim for on each product, to justify the R&D, it’s not some finger in the air exercise.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a finger in the air exercise.
 
Howard2k said:
First of all, my initial statement was more vague than it could have been. Price and cost are always correlated as part of due diligence. I sort of figured that was obvious, I think we both agree that it is, but I should ensure that you're not misunderstanding. The point I was trying to make was that Apple didn't say "The MBA costs us $x to make, we have a target margin of y%, therefore the price shall be $z, as a function of $x and y%". I believe that's what you were trying to infer, but since I need to clarify my own post, I should give you the opportunity to clarify yours too.

So for the avoidance of doubt: Apple didn't say "The MBA costs us $x to make, we have a target margin of y%, therefore the price shall be $z, as a function of $x and y%".

Therefore, a reduction in the cost of aluminium should not affect the price. A reduction in the price of aluminium would reduce the price if the price was set based on the cost. Which I think is what you're stating is the case. I'm stating that's not correct.




No I don't.




I didn't say cost could be ignored. I actually explicitly stated that cost does need analysis to ensure profitability.



I didn't say it was a finger in the air exercise.
Click to expand...

Maybe we are misunderstanding each other.
 
Price hike an effort to get us cheapo lowlifes to finally buy into replacing our preferred tech with Apple's preferred tech - an iPad Pro. They are still desperately trying to kill off the Air as the de facto 'coffee shop office' device - the MacBook has bombed on that front - with the iPP. Hence also the USB-C port on the iPP.

Meanwhile, perfectly aware of the likelihood of a new Air this month (and seeing what they've done to the MacBook range so far and what 'features' they might foist upon us), I opted in July to update my 11" to a 2017 13" from their refurb store, upgrading both my RAM and storage - and paying $CDN270 less than a new 2018 base model. Couldn't be happier with the decision.
 
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