John B. Slocomb <johnbslocomb@invalid.com> wrote in
news:578uv5dl68rt8p0h40i734lb6vifor7dv3@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010 18
4:40 -0500, DanS
> <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:
>
>>"Death" <death@rottingcorpses.x-x> wrote in
>>news:4bfee3d3@news.x-privat.org:
>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanymous.org.invalido> wrote in
>>> message news:htls7s$ouf$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870426920457
>>>> 52 70083925943178.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines
>>>>
>>>> From the article:
>>>>
>>>> "Since Mr. Ballmer took over from Bill Gates as CEO in
>>>> January 2000, Microsoft's market value has more than
>>>> halved from $556 billion to Wednesday's close of $219
>>>> billion. Rival Apple's market value has surged from
>>>> $15.6 billion to $221 billion over the same period."
>>>>
>>>> I guess Gates should fire the little shit and take over
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Apples stock price is high cause they can sell moronic
>>> devices to iIdiots at almost any price.
>>
>>If you call under 100% markup, from Apple's cost 'any
>>price', then you're right.
>>
>>http://www.pcworld.com/article/188196/apples_ipad_profit_bre
>>ak ing_it_down.html
>>
> Just a couple of points here. The costs quoted are the
> original writers estimate based on a bill of materials.
> There is no thought given to Apple's possibility of getting
> lower then market costs, and in addition the writes is
> talking about a 20 dollar contingency for possible
> guarantee repairs. While there is little doubt that Apple
> reports this number there is no guarantee that the entire
> sum will actually be spent, thus setting the stage for
> future "extraordinary earnings".
>
> Secondly, even assuming that the numbers are accurate it
> still, the writer says,allows Apple a profit of something
> like 42%. Then too, Apple charges an additional $130 for
> addition of 3G whish costs almost nothing. So Apple is
> selling the 3G version, which costs them about $290 for
> $629 for a profit of $339, which is a profit of 115% on
> costs..And that doesn't take into account a possible future
> extraordinary profit realized from unspent reserve for
> warranty.
>
> So apparently Apple is doing quite well, thank you.
All points above understood.
The point was though, that he iPhone, and the iPad, are
physical devices, that has 'real' production costs....once all
the R & D is done and the product goes to market, at some
point all the initial R & D is paid for and the product should
become self-supporting. (Not counting updates and further
design enhancements/refinements.) Still though, each and every
device manufactured has a fairly high cost associated with
it........
By contrast.....when a version of Windows is developed and
goes to market, again, at some point, all R & D is paid for
and the product becomes self-supporting. (Not counting updates
and further design enhancements/refinements.) Now however, the
production costs for each copy of Windows is what...50 cents ?
Maybe even less when they are just selling licenses instead of
physical media. So while above the highest margin stated for
the iPad was 115%, margin for a $100 copy of Windows is more
like 20,000%.......even after both products become self-
supporting......
For me, taking *those points* into account, an iPad for $500,
while *I* wouldn't buy it, it doesn't sound unreasonable at
all. (Especially since I am in the electronics biz, at an OEM
wireless data communications company, and deal with costing
and pricing all the time.)
