Breaking News

Q'comm Feels Smartphone Squeeze

View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
User Rank
Re: Pot. Kettle. Me me mine
DMcCunney   1/31/2017 8:58:48 PM
@Jimelctr: Why should I pay more for an iPhone than a Galaxy S-whatever that does the same thing?

Because Apple can get it.

Value is in the eye of the beholder, and something is worth what someone else will pay for it.  The cost of the hardware is irrelevant.  What Apple is selling is intangibles.

Smartphones are better viewed as fashion accessories than as technology, and for many and perhaps a majority of the buyers, the purchase decision has a lot to do with being able to say "My phone is cooler than yours!", and Apple has spent a lot of time and money making their products cool.

They've also carefully staked out the high end of the market where price is far less a factor in the purchase decision, and has created a class of customers who will pay more because Apple's name is on the device.

Smartphones are recapitulating what happened to PCs.  They became commodities with commodity pricing, and the market got saturated.  There is still a market for replacements and upgrades, but new sales are hard to come by, and PC manufacturers are all suffering in consequence.  Now the smartphone market is getting saturated and the same dynamics apply.

Apple will continue to generate high revenues and profits, but the growth beloved of the financial markets will be increasingly hard to come by.

It's hard for me to see this case as much more than a large customer putting the screws on a key supplier to force them to charge less for what is bought from them.



User Rank
Re: Pot. Kettle. Me me mine
Jimelectr   1/24/2017 3:29:37 AM
No love for either Apple or Qualcomm.  Why should I pay more for an iPhone than a Galaxy S-whatever that does the same thing?  And why should Qualcomm charge exhorbitant royalties on basically ONE patent?  Bound to catch up with you eventually.  The day of reckoning is near.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again; it's very telling that Qualbomb's customers are suing it.  If your competitors are suing you, that's one thing; it just means you're successful, but if your customers are suing you, you're doing something very wrong.

Frank Tu
User Rank
Pot. Kettle. Me me mine
Frank Tu   1/23/2017 3:42:01 PM
Poor (cash-strapped) Apple thinks it's not getting a fair shake on IP royalties?  I want more Apple pie.
Who thinks rounded-rectangle form factors are patentable and should be defended aggressively?Don't today's cars, TVs, and houses look 98% the same? Compare that to 25 years ago.
Does it cost Apple $100 more for double the Flash I buy on their non-expandable phone? (hint: Fry's 64GB Flash $13)
Does Apple play by others' rules or set its own rules that give it an advantage? (hint: B is often the best guess to multiple-choice)
Does Apple play well with competitors?  Should it expect different treatment?

Are my tears from laughter or agony?

User Rank
realjjj   1/21/2017 7:18:28 AM
I think it is wrong to deflect and make it about the lack of growth in smartphones.

It's about right and wrong and the attempt to fix this wrong is enabled by some regulators finally doing their jobs.

Have you read the allegations the Korea regulator makes? Read the entire thing, it's worth it (PDF warning)

And it's a lot of money, some 8 billions in revenue for Qualcomm this year at some  80% margins. Every phone consumers buy, costs a few percentage more because of this abuse.

Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed