Hi Karen, We can agree to disagree on this one.
I'm not sure I understand your argument, though: how would the appropriate battery address any of the topics we're discussing, and: how would an appropriate battery make anything we've discussed redundant? (ADJECTIVE: 1. Exceeding what is necessary or natural; superfluous. 2. Needlessly wordy or repetitive in expression) Another question for you: who determines value? Apple sold 700,000 of them in, what, the first week? Apparently a lot of folks found sufficient value there. Value isn't the issue, the timing and size of the inevitable price reductions are, along with what that timing and size indicate about Apple's motives, methods, or what have you. Anyway, I still love my Treo 755p, even though I could buy it for quite a bit less now than I did in late May!! :-) Cheers, Don -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Karen Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 10:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Treo] iPhone price cut Don, I respectfully disagree. Their only fault was not offering value for money. If they had offered the iPhone with an appropriate battery this would all be redundant. Karen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Ferguson Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 9:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Treo] iPhone price cut Technology has worked this way for as long as there's been technology. Early adopters pay more for (especially) hardware and then as the volume of sales rises, and new technology enters the horizon, the price goes down. It's not wrong, it's economic reality in an industry like tech. Every Palm device since 1996 has followed this model, along with nearly every other tech toy in the last 15 years. For example, I could have waited two or three months to buy my 755p and paid less for it than I did. I didn't want to wait, paid more for it, and now the price is slightly lower than it was in May when I bought it. Not DRAMATICALLY lower, and that's the key. Apple's only faults were: lowering the price SO much SO soon, and disco'ing the smaller unit so quickly. That's not marketing savvy, that's short-sightedness on many fronts (marketing, technology, sales forecasting, demand estimating), with predictable results that nearly everyone who bought one of the things in June would feel something been slight discomfort and outright anger at their recent actions. If the price had dropped 15% instead of 33%, if they'd done this in concert with an announcement of a 16gb iPhone, and if they'd kept the smaller one around through Christmas with maybe a rebate or something - say another $50 at the Apple store - only the whackos would have complained (and you know who you are!). As it is, 90+% of the iPhone owners are still gently caressing its sleek form daily, and loving showing it off, but with some level of negative reaction to Apples recent action. Apple did this to themselves, and they deserve fallout because of the misstep, but all they did was grossly exaggerate and publicize their response to the normal business concepts of early release technology, volume-related pricing, and technological advancement. Cheers, Don No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.9/994 - Release Date: 9/7/2007 4:40 PM Yahoo! Groups Links
