This is a different take on the video that macflynn posted:
forums.macrumors.com
From the video:
The most expensive part in the headset is the 1.25 inch Sony Semiconductor display that goes in front of the user's eye… Apple pays about $228 for the "Micro OLED" displays it uses, according to the Omdia estimate. Each Vision Pro needs two of them, one for each eye." 08:15At $1,500, the selling price begins to make more sense. With a $3,499 retail price, the Vision Pro sells for about 2.3 times the cost of the parts inside it, and puts the gross profit margin at about 56%.08:29 That’s pretty standard for Apple, but, that's just the gross profit. Net profit, including marketing and most of all that gigantic R&D cost, makes things much worse. Even assuming the lower end, Apple spent around $20 billion developing 08:46 Vision Pro and sold roughly 600,000 units. That works out to more than $33,000 in development costs for every headset sold. While, Vision Pro retailed for $3,499. So, including the material cost and the price, Apple lost, on average, $28,000 per Vision Pro.
1. The biggest unknown variable is that huge development cost. The number I had seen earlier was ~10 billion $. ChatGPT gives a range of $20-$30 billion. No one outside Apple actually knows. If you take the lowest number, $10 billion, divide by 600k it comes out to $16k. $16K-3.5K = 12.5K loss per unit
2. The 600k number seems more solid. First year shipments were limited by the number of panels Sony could make, which was as I remember 400k. Sales have certainly slowed since then so 200k subsequent sales seems about right. The 600K estimate seems reasonable.
3. This is the loss per unit today. The costs may be reduced in the future by such things as
a. Using VP software elsewhere elsewhere such as in a future glasses product or the Gaussian splatting pipeline software in photo reframing
b. Future hardware. Given that the only product in the immediate pipeline is the glasses given how much the 2 products differ not sure how much of the VP hardware costs could be amortized there
Anyway you look at it as of today the VP is sold at a significant loss. Whether that loss will be recovered in the future is yet to be seen.
Apple Vision Pro - Apple's worst product?
Worst apple product? That's what this YT describes the AVP, it goes through many reasons. I like how this YTer mentioned that where apple succeeded in a product, it was in a previously established market, i.e., MP3 players were already popular, Apple improved it with the iPod. Cell phones...
forums.macrumors.com
From the video:
The most expensive part in the headset is the 1.25 inch Sony Semiconductor display that goes in front of the user's eye… Apple pays about $228 for the "Micro OLED" displays it uses, according to the Omdia estimate. Each Vision Pro needs two of them, one for each eye." 08:15At $1,500, the selling price begins to make more sense. With a $3,499 retail price, the Vision Pro sells for about 2.3 times the cost of the parts inside it, and puts the gross profit margin at about 56%.08:29 That’s pretty standard for Apple, but, that's just the gross profit. Net profit, including marketing and most of all that gigantic R&D cost, makes things much worse. Even assuming the lower end, Apple spent around $20 billion developing 08:46 Vision Pro and sold roughly 600,000 units. That works out to more than $33,000 in development costs for every headset sold. While, Vision Pro retailed for $3,499. So, including the material cost and the price, Apple lost, on average, $28,000 per Vision Pro.
1. The biggest unknown variable is that huge development cost. The number I had seen earlier was ~10 billion $. ChatGPT gives a range of $20-$30 billion. No one outside Apple actually knows. If you take the lowest number, $10 billion, divide by 600k it comes out to $16k. $16K-3.5K = 12.5K loss per unit
2. The 600k number seems more solid. First year shipments were limited by the number of panels Sony could make, which was as I remember 400k. Sales have certainly slowed since then so 200k subsequent sales seems about right. The 600K estimate seems reasonable.
3. This is the loss per unit today. The costs may be reduced in the future by such things as
a. Using VP software elsewhere elsewhere such as in a future glasses product or the Gaussian splatting pipeline software in photo reframing
b. Future hardware. Given that the only product in the immediate pipeline is the glasses given how much the 2 products differ not sure how much of the VP hardware costs could be amortized there
Anyway you look at it as of today the VP is sold at a significant loss. Whether that loss will be recovered in the future is yet to be seen.
