It's not a new product, it's a new to apple product. Smart watches have been around for some time, including ones very similar to the Apple Watch. They didn't exactly pioneer this field like they did with today's smart phones and tablets.
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.
Tim Cook: Component Cost Breakdowns on Apple Products Are Nowhere Close to Being Accurate
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not a new product, it's a new to apple product. Smart watches have been around for some time, including ones very similar to the Apple Watch. They didn't exactly pioneer this field like they did with today's smart phones and tablets.
They didn't pioneer either the smartphone or tablet fields either. My point is that Apple probably had to spend a lot of money on R&D for the Apple Watch.
And you proved my point.
All I did is call you out on a pointless and ridiculous statement. I might as well say that Android is buggy, broken, and has no apps- then have the nerve to call you an Android defender for calling me out on my crap.
I said "today's" smart phone and tablet. Which they did. If you doubt me, go ahead and use google images to see what they were like before the iPhone and iPad.
Then take a look at the after photos.
My point is that they probably didn't, since much of the work was already done by Samsung, Sony, Pebble and Motorola.
And you proved my point.
To be fair, we don't have the benefit of knowing what post-Apple Watch smart watches will look like. It's easy to assume that there won't be a big difference, but who knows?
This article isn't just about the Apple watch. Apple makes huge margins. Fact. How do you find that to be a ridiculous statement?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
...which, if true, would be precarious for Apple (profits-per-unit on this product) as only complete fools would fail to anticipate the flood of third party bands about to hit. The bands don't do anything special in terms of watch functionality so any old band with the right end (or adapter) is going to work with this watch. And if you've ever shopped watch bands, you know that there are some priced up there (but not so many priced
Watch up there) and there are tons of others priced down to just a few dollars. Similarly, expect the gold plating third party services to also pop up like crazy, much like the Mac laptop painting services. Anyone wanting to closely fake the gold one is going to be able to do so for the cost of an electroplating service. It will be relatively cheap.
Pair the two concepts, and one can buy the cheapest Watch, gold electroplate it to make it look very much like the most expensive Watch and put a gold plated band of any style with it. Or buy the band (or a replica) that goes with the most expensive Watch and fool anyone who might believe one could possibly afford the gold one.
All you need to do is not be blind. iPhones and iPads looked like nothing before them, and after them all other smart phones and tablets looked like them
The Apple Watch already looks like what's been available by other manufacturers.
There's no "to be fair" argument here. Just you know... Look at them.
fwiw..
they made $40billion last year net profit.
sold 169million iphones.
so if all they sold were iphones and made that profit, it would be ~$235 net per phone.
realistically, apple's net margins are probably very close to any other company out there.. somewhere between 10 & 20% (as in- they probably net around $130 per iphone)
Last edited:
I'm amazed at the lengths people go to defend anything Apple says or does...even when it's deflecting the fact they make ridiculous margins on their stuff.
Meanwhile insurance companies, big pharma and the oil industry get crucified if they dare to be profitable.
Guess that's one of the perks of making electronic toys everybody loves...
Meanwhile insurance companies, big pharma and the oil industry get crucified if they dare to be profitable.
Guess that's one of the perks of making electronic toys everybody loves...
But that's not what Tim Cook was saying when he made the low margins comment. He was talking about the Apple Watch specifically, and I guess you aren't. In which case pointing out the margins of the entire company means nothing if you're trying to somehow disprove Cook's comment.
Let's keep the goalposts right where they are, okay?
All you need to do is not be blind. iPhones and iPads looked like nothing before them, and after them all other smart phones and tablets looked like them
The Apple Watch already looks like what's been available by other manufacturers.
There's no "to be fair" argument here. Just you know... Look at them.
I understand your point, but I expect future smartwatches to look even more like the Apple Watch than the Apple Watch looks like other smartwatches. For example, I think we're done with the faux-circular screens now.
Realistically, Samsung sells about the same number phones worldwide but Apple is more profitable. Samsung has the added benefit of manufacturing much of their own components. So I very highly doubt their margins are the same as every other company.
Hah! Came to post that, and got beaten to it.
Admittedly, as Tubamajuba pointed out, component costs are nowhere near the representative cost of an item. For most items, the engineering and development costs are a large part of the expense. (See military aircraft - the "marginal cost per item" is *FAR* cheaper than the full-program development cost.)
They already look almost identical so I don't think you understand my point. Unless the Apple Watch 2 looks drastically different and others start copying it, your claim is rather baseless.
according to this:
http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/27/apple-q2-2015/#.wawx7q:TUHu
(Q2 2014 - Q1 2015)
it's 44billion net
and
200billion revenue
so about 22% average profit on all products
Well he would say that wouldn't he, protecting the humongous markup Apple has on it's devices. And also to try and somehow excuse the cost to the Apple Watch Edition.
Attachments
"All of these estimates, which come from IHS iSuppli, include only part costs, leaving out other expenses like research and development, software creation, marketing, and distribution"
What about the cost of putting the darn things together?
(And no, not interested in foreign labor comments)
What about the cost of putting the darn things together?
(And no, not interested in foreign labor comments)
Right. They also didn't pioneer ultralight laptops, or all-in-one computers, or tablets, or smartphones, or video calling.
What they did do - is do all those things right, and that's why people want them. And the R&D involved in getting it "right" costs a vast, vast amount of money. That's why you see such tiny, seemingly insignificant tweaks in iOS updates - changes that many might not notice. But Apple cares. I'm as sure as is reasonable that the Apple Watch cost a blindingly huge amount of money to bring to market.
apple's products are more expensive though.. they spend more per unit so they make more profit per unit.. could be the exact same percentages samsung uses but apple will make more.
like- apple doesn't just throw in 5 prime manhattan locations for free.. you pay for those stores.. it's an added cost to their product and apple profits off them.
they sell you a product but they also attempt to sell you an experience.. and it obviously works because they sell a whole lot of experiences.
What's disgusting to me is that Apple always gets dragged through the mud on this stuff while companies like Intel get away with absolutely criminal behaviour completely undisturbed!
An Intel Core i7-5960X Haswell-E 8-Core 3.0GHz CPU costs about $1050 retail. And yet I can go down to the local Home Depot and buy a 50lb sack of sand for $3.77. Fifty pounds! That's enough silicon for probably a thousand processors!
So let me break this down:
CPU (silicon) - $0.00377
Boom, that's it! 27851359% margins. Shame on you, Intel.
An Intel Core i7-5960X Haswell-E 8-Core 3.0GHz CPU costs about $1050 retail. And yet I can go down to the local Home Depot and buy a 50lb sack of sand for $3.77. Fifty pounds! That's enough silicon for probably a thousand processors!
So let me break this down:
CPU (silicon) - $0.00377
Boom, that's it! 27851359% margins. Shame on you, Intel.