Again iPhone
or lose Apple marketing
Just my thoughts as Apple tried to get high ROI for iPhone and why it didn't happen. Original idea looked very promising, like Apple issued iPhone priced similarly by features to iPod nano plus cell phone and PDA. So it looked as $200+$200+$200. Then Apple anticipated commissions for signing a customer for a new contract. These commissions are also in range $200-$300. Getting $800 for every unit with manufacturing price as $100 is very good. Doing these calculations Apple forgot about targeted audience of iPhone and common practice of selling cell phones. Most of vendors take cost of unit as commission, i.e. signing a customer on a contract. Apple quickly realized that and price went down by $200. However quick ROI didn't happen even after that. Why? Most of targeted audience as young people already have some contract active, so they can't change telephone easily. Even if you are on a contract of AT&T, you still can't upgrade to iPhone for free. High price for young people, change contract limitation lowered ROI. I think that Apple should offer unlocked iPhone (+$200 more expensive). In addition, Apple has to also negotiate a possibility to use the phone on pay per use base. First, iPhone can be purchased by people having contracts freely, targeted audience can be extended by business people who are traveling and need world phone. Finally low minutes users, pay per call base certainly appreciated a device which has triple functionality. Conclusion: Apple marketing wanted to get $200 as cell phone price and $200 as commission lost these both. Finally people realized as unlock iPhone, so Apple clearly lost phone feature return. Now Apple can't get back and introduce (+$200) unlocked phone due negotiations with AT&T. Do not be so greedy, do not lost double.
Cheap marketing tricks, like car downloaded maps
or why car makers struggling with good ideas for car electronics
A modern car isn't only a good engine, strong brakes and marvelous steering. Latest electronics and computers are an essential part of car maker competition, However some makers attempt to get a lead in some strange way. How is practical feature to send maps from web sites to car navigation? At first glance it looks really impressive, when you can send directions from some web site to the car. However let's look in details.
1. Privacy aspect, why do you need to share your car VIN and destinations with 3rd parties? Do you want more targeted SPAM?
2. Feature cost, you have to pay significant annual fee for tele aid system which involves satellite managed transfer to get a little piece of information to your car.
3. Limited accessibility. If you are on the road and you need to get new direction, then you hopeless. Luckily you may have your cell phone working and somebody you can call have access to a computer to get new directions and send them in your car. Note that when you are on the road out of city limits, your cell phone will be out of service.
As you can see this feature is completely useless. Obviously a question appearing why it can't be done in more appropriate way, like:
1. introducing portable direction format, which is open standard and can be supported by any web site (not only Yahoo or Goggle)
2. Add USB reader in a car on board computer
Now you can fill USB drive with multiple directions from any web site and load them in navigation system without involving so costly solution. with satellite
3. Want more? WiFi or EDGE/3g for car on board computer to access Internet directly, it will be accessible in city limits and on some major roads, so no reason of involving 3rd parties. Giving real Internet access to the car has unlimited number of benefits, traffic info, weather, point of interest, news, music, movies...
Now get more functions from car on board computer. For example, all iPod adapters are dealing with very limited iPod interface. However, why do not consider iPod as USB drive and give full functional access to all music, movies and photos stored on iPod? This solution will amaze even Jobs.