"do not open" stock arriving in stores today

[awshux]

We don't need to look at the base cost of the company because that's just silly.

If you want to get into the economics of it - why not use actual data as opposed to your own unscientific, and skewed, perceived value? Here's the iSupply article that outlines why the Air is Apple's highest margin notebook: http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...ther_Apple_laptops_says_analyst?taxonomyId=12 . The last gen cost $718 dollars in materials and manufacturing, not including R&D and marketing, but those costs for sales volume of over 1 million per quarter would likely be less than $20 per machine. Apple's margin on the base model is 28% for the base model, and a whopping 37% for the 13 inch ultimate vs. 20% average for the Macbook Pro.

That's the data - one can argue either way about whether or not they should be making that much, or whether their already impressive sales volume would be increased at lower price points, but it's academic. Telling people they don't know how the market works, and calling them "foolish" when you are using absolutely fictional data, on the other hand is out of line.

TLR - In the words of Daniel Moynihan - "You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts" Stop lecturing people with novel length posts, when a quick Google search shows that you are full of it.

 

[orfeas0]

If you want to get into the economics of it - why not use actual data as opposed to your own unscientific, and skewed, perceived value? Here's the iSupply article that outlines why the Air is Apple's highest margin notebook: http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...ther_Apple_laptops_says_analyst?taxonomyId=12 . The last gen cost $718 dollars in materials and manufacturing, not including R&D and marketing, but those costs for sales volume of over 1 million per quarter would likely be less than $20 per machine. Apple's margin on the base model is 28% for the base model, and a whopping 37% for the 13 inch ultimate vs. 20% average for the Macbook Pro.

Which means it would be fair and "easy" (I mean it wouldn't cost them much) to give us 4gb standard, at the same or a bit reduced prices.
Hey ! Hey! Hey ! I'm an orange! (sorry I saw the apple logo and thought, hey!)

 

[Alchematron]

It would be so cool if these mysteriously wound up on the blackmarket a week before release!

 

[PaulWog]

If you want to get into the economics of it - why not use actual data as opposed to your own unscientific, and skewed, perceived value? Here's the iSupply article that outlines why the Air is Apple's highest margin notebook: http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...ther_Apple_laptops_says_analyst?taxonomyId=12 . The last gen cost $718 dollars in materials and manufacturing, not including R&D and marketing, but those costs for sales volume of over 1 million per quarter would likely be less than $20 per machine. Apple's margin on the base model is 28% for the base model, and a whopping 37% for the 13 inch ultimate vs. 20% average for the Macbook Pro.

That's the data - one can argue either way about whether or not they should be making that much, or whether their already impressive sales volume would be increased at lower price points, but it's academic. Telling people they don't know how the market works, and calling them "foolish" when you are using absolutely fictional data, on the other hand is out of line.

TLR - In the words of Daniel Moynihan - "You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts" Stop lecturing people with novel length posts, when a quick Google search shows that you are full of it.

Again, I am not full of it. Try buying Intel's Sandy Bridge 17W or 25W processors at less than their suggested retail value. You simply won't be able to, unless if you have access to the Intel retail-discount plan (offered in limited annual quantities to salespeople who meet certain requirements set out by Intel).

I already said that all my estimates were rough values (save for Intel's processor estimate as well as the RAM estimate). I said they were my own estimations based on intelligent guesses. I already said my numbers were not factual, however they should be close to the factual amounts.

So you are the one, again, who is getting out of line here. You're taking my words out of context, and skewing them into a strawman argument. My argument with the others who quoted and bashed me was simple: One was arguing market values vs. base costs. Another was arguing a similar point. I pointed out that my estimations were based on market values. And the third person I argued with I wasn't bashing; I simply was arguing why I think he might be wrong... all the while I accepted that he made a good argument.

So what I am getting is this: You're mad that I posted a guesstimation of what the market value of each particular part in the Macbook Air costs. Some is based on actual fact, and the rest based on factual analysis of what it probably would be (again, I made it VERY CLEAR that it was my own estimation and subject to a +/- difference, and that it was a quick estimation to get a very generation idea which could go either way in terms of a factual total).

I don't get what's with you people and swarming me with all these hate follow-up comments. I was very clear and concise in my original post, and I keep on having to reiterate what I already laid out clearly for you: I was giving an quick estimation to argue someone else's point that the Macbook Air is overpriced.

You should read your own quote and then get back to the facts: Read my original post and see that I never claimed I was stating exact fact. I simply claimed I was treading as closely as I could, given estimates, to what the Macbook Air's fair market price likely is (given all the parts put into it), as opposed to its actual list price on the market. It seems that you are trying to change the fact and are saying that I was claiming a factual statement; you are entitled to an opinion, which I will likely argue... but don't try to put words into my mouth (or in this case, post) that simply never existed to begin with. You claim I said this or that, and argue against it with a final "hora look at my quote! in your face!"... but in the end... why not take into consideration what I typed, rather than what you think I typed between the lines.

 

[holycat]

No offense, but I'd prefer it if you read everything I say before you bash what I have to say. I said it costs $30 to customers, however you are required to already have Snow Leopard on that computer prior. That means that you've already invested something into their previous OS. To say that Apple's OS isn't worth $50 is just silly.

Disagree.

The cost of Lion is nothing to do with what you have already paid for Snow Leopard. You paid for Snow Leopard (SL) and fully utilized the OS itself. In another word, you have get back what you have already paid (SL).

 

[Scarrus]

It would be so cool if these mysteriously wound up on the blackmarket a week before release!

I'd get one and mail it to Steve - just for the sakes of it

 

[PaulWog]

Disagree.

The cost of Lion is nothing to do with what you have already paid for Snow Leopard. You paid for Snow Leopard (SL) and fully utilized the OS itself. In another word, you have get back what you have already paid (SL).

Fair enough. But it is a sort-of club member thing. You do have to have Snow Leopard in order to buy OS X Lion. Otherwise, you have to buy a computer from Apple.

My main point is not that it's worth X amount of dollars; my main point is that it is reasonable to argue that the OS is worth more than its list price of $30, given the fact that there are certain pre-requisites to purchase it at the cost of $30. The first being you must own an Apple computer. The second being you must have Snow Leopard on your computer.

I definitely understand where you're coming from though. And while I am in agreement with the fact that people have already gotten their money's worth out of Snow Leopard, I do feel that my point still stands validly.

 

[awshux]

I already said that all my estimates were rough values (save for Intel's processor estimate as well as the RAM estimate). I said they were my own estimations based on intelligent guesses. I already said my numbers were not factual, however they should be close to the factual amounts.
.

Fact - your estimate was off by almost 25% which makes it neither close, accurate or intelligent. You don't have a source for anything, and it's beyond doubt that every single one of your numbers was just plain made up.

Opinion: Your tone is beyond patronizing, you post to hear yourself speak, and you get defensive when called out for fabricating figures.

The sad part is that I agree with the fact that it isn't overpriced - the easy way to make that point is to point at the sales numbers (which are phenomenal, 1.1 million a quarter), because if it was overpriced, it would hurt sales, which clearly isn't the case. That's it, and all that needed to be said.

 

[blueroom]

Live Cobra trained to attack nosy Apple employees.

 

[PaulWog]

Fact - your estimate was off by almost 25% which makes it neither close, accurate or intelligent. You don't have a source for anything, and it's beyond doubt that every single one of your numbers was just plain made up.

Opinion: Your tone is beyond patronizing, you post to hear yourself speak, and you get defensive when called out for fabricating figures.

The sad part is that I agree with the fact that it isn't overpriced - the easy way to make that point is to point at the sales numbers (which are phenomenal, 1.1 million a quarter), because if it was overpriced, it would hurt sales, which clearly isn't the case. That's it, and all that needed to be said.

Now you're really truly falsifying numbers. Apple's profit margin on the Macbook Air is not representative of the fair market value of each particular component within the Macbook Air.

I actually don't post to hear myself speak, nor do I post to read what I've typed. I neither speak while I type nor read what I've already typed (unless if I'm proofreading). First you mentioned you dislike my "novel-like" posts, and now you are claiming that I somehow get off to my own tone or words or something? Maybe you need to re-evaluate yourself here.

And again, my information on the processor is correct: I am not going to source Intel's suggested retail prices on their Sandy Bridge processors. However it's there. You already mentioned you've performed "simple google searches", so do yourself the favor of googling that. A forewarning: I was basing that on memory. Their actual retail prices may differ by a few bucks. In fact, there was a post in this forum earlier where someone was linking it (that's what I was basing it on... the post was citing Intel's retail pricing on their 17W & 25W processors). As for the RAM and SSD: Maybe you don't build computers, but I do. Just look at what RAM and SSD's cost for mobile devices... I gave a relatively intelligent estimate. And for the rest (I don't know what I'm going at this for you again): I already strongly made it clear that it was an arguable estimation on the keyboard, touchpad, and case.

Would you mind getting off my back now? All I've been doing is defending myself against some rather unintelligent remarks (ex. "You're wrong Apple makes a profit because they make it for less than that!" <-- of course they do... I know that... that's not the point). I am simply reiterating on what I already said, and clarifying for those who are being rather unintelligent about what I said (bashing me) exactly why they are wrong. And yes, I did it in a bashful tone for the most part.

And when I say "those" and "others", I am referring to a small number of users. Most who are posting in this thread are well-mannered, read, and appear to be rather intelligent. I am clarifying this as well, since I foresee you making some sort of attack, labeling me as a "forum troll" or something of the like.

 

[xkmxkmxlmx]

Awshux you're just as snide and condescending. Can both of you actually get on topic?

 

[AppleDApp]

As for the RAM and SSD: Maybe you don't build computers, but I do. Just look at what RAM and SSD's cost for mobile devices...

Are you saying you build laptops or desktops I'm confused I partially agreed with your first post about pricing of the MBA components.

Back to the topic who is pulling an all nighter to see what is released?

 

[ghsDUDE]

Are you idiots really arguing how much it cost to make?

Let's just appreciate the awesome update and stop taking this thread off topic.
It's an eyesore to see such long stories (yeah, paragraphs long) in a thread where it's talking about new stock.

Start your own thread and stop spamming.

 

[awshux]

Now you're really truly falsifying numbers. Apple's profit margin on the Macbook Air is not representative of the fair market value of each particular component within the Macbook Air.

Your estimate was $950, and the actual was $718, which is a 25% difference. I know you have a hard time with numbers, but the sourced, actual article I linked to, written by experts who actually know what they are talking about stated that the margin is 28% at least. So I wasn't falsifying anything, just stating that the record shows you don't know what you are talking about.

There's a difference between market value (cost of individual components, manufacturing, R&D, marketing, etc) and perceived value by a consumer. You are conflating them, and it's pretty clear that you have a tenuous grasp at best of economics. For someone who joined the forum last month, it's a pretty big request to have other people let you off the hook for fabricating stats vs. owning up to the fact that you were wrong. Admit that your earlier estimate was wrong, and I'll totally leave you, and your wrongness, alone.

 

[PaulWog]

Your estimate was $950, and the actual was $718, which is a 25% difference. I know you have a hard time with numbers, but the sourced, actual article I linked to, written by experts who actually know what they are talking about stated that the margin is 28% at least. So I wasn't falsifying anything, just stating that the record shows you don't know what you are talking about.

There's a difference between market value (cost of individual components, manufacturing, R&D, marketing, etc) and perceived value by a consumer. You are conflating them, and it's pretty clear that you have a tenuous grasp at best of economics. For someone who joined the forum last month, it's a pretty big request to have other people let you off the hook for fabricating stats vs. owning up to the fact that you were wrong. Admit that your earlier estimate was wrong, and I'll totally leave you, and your wrongness, alone.

The numbers you are stating are gross profits. Those aren't market value numbers on the particular parts put into the Macbook Air. There is a very key difference.

Anyways, I understand what you're getting at. And you have a valid point. However the approach I was giving was a tad bit different than that. I made it clear. I won't reiterate again, as I think I've made myself very clear. If you don't agree with me, or simply don't understand, that's alright.

I understand the angle that you're getting at. I don't think you're quite getting my angle. And no, I'm not talking about "perceived market values". I'm talking about actual available market values. Once again, I don't want to reiterate on my reasoning.

Let's just agree on this:

1) The Macbook Air is not overpriced.
2) We both are getting into a heated argument. No one cares about it except for us two.
3) You're wrong. [/jk but seriously let's stop arguing]

 

[awshux]

Awshux you're just as snide and condescending. Can both of you actually get on topic?

But I'm snide and condescending in shorter form . On topic, I've been looking for any Twitter confirmation that anyone else has seen anything similar, and haven't seen much of interest outside of this:

@BestBuyUK
BestBuy.co.uk
Apple’s MacBook Air is getting a facelift. We can’t get over all of the new features… http://cot.ag/nKzwXd [via @cnetuk]

Interesting that a retailer is priming the pump, not sure what the lag is for BB to get stock.

 

[gcans]

Back to the topic who is pulling an all nighter to see what is released?

I am! I'm gonna play Gta4 all night...

 

[getyup]

If you want to get into the economics of it - why not use actual data as opposed to your own unscientific, and skewed, perceived value? Here's the iSupply article that outlines why the Air is Apple's highest margin notebook: http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...ther_Apple_laptops_says_analyst?taxonomyId=12 . The last gen cost $718 dollars in materials and manufacturing, not including R&D and marketing, but those costs for sales volume of over 1 million per quarter would likely be less than $20 per machine. Apple's margin on the base model is 28% for the base model, and a whopping 37% for the 13 inch ultimate vs. 20% average for the Macbook Pro.

That's the data - one can argue either way about whether or not they should be making that much, or whether their already impressive sales volume would be increased at lower price points, but it's academic. Telling people they don't know how the market works, and calling them "foolish" when you are using absolutely fictional data, on the other hand is out of line.

TLR - In the words of Daniel Moynihan - "You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts" Stop lecturing people with novel length posts, when a quick Google search shows that you are full of it.

Very well said

 

[gcans]

well its thursday and there are no signs of lion or macbook airs

 

[PaulWog]

well its thursday and there are no signs of lion or macbook airs

It's 9:55PM here in British Columbia. I presume California is the same time or close to it (I'm not good with time-zones, I just know California is pretty close to BC).

My guess: We're not going to hear about Lion for at least another 3 hours minimum. More than likely we'll hear about it in 6+ hours.

Why? I just think so.

 

[axu539]

well its thursday and there are no signs of lion or macbook airs

I doubt Lion would show up until like 9 AM or noon PST anyway, since that's when the DPs and the GM were posted. As for the Airs, I really wouldn't expect the store to even go down until 12 AM PST (this is what happened for the 2011 MBPs, which I stayed up late for). The store went down at 12:01 AM, then came back up at some point in the middle of the night. I ordered in the morning. If the Airs are coming tomorrow, they'll follow the same pattern. Also, the most definite 2011 MBP rumors came at like 11:30 PM PST the night before they were released, so I really wouldn't give up on anything until tomorrow morning.

 

[Macdude2010]

My source, Mr. Y, has confirmed this rumor. It's supposedly Apple's first step in their new end game code named "K48.5". It's a revolutionary step of time machine... time travel. Rather than using space to backup, they just have you travel back in time to the appropriate time to where the document was where you want it to be.

Now that I could use, but we could have leaked the iPad before the 1984 intro of the Macintosh

 

[iZeeshan]

Does Apple usually go by EST or PST? Because if it's PST, we still got 2.5 more hours of hope

 

[gcans]

Does Apple usually go by EST or PST? Because if it's PST, we still got 2.5 more hours of hope

i think pst...

 

[axu539]

Does Apple usually go by EST or PST? Because if it's PST, we still got 2.5 more hours of hope

It's definitely PST. They are in Cupertino, and go by Cupertino time.