Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

If PalmOne could make Tungsten E for US $200, then why does the Z72
have to be $300?

Really people, the parts in Z72 are dirt cheap. The cost of making
bluetooth chips is probably $15, and the 1 MP camera is probably
around $30. I'm not sure about exact Z72 part expenses, but look at
the Sony Clie TJ37. Some stores are selling it for US $230, and that
has WI-FI FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE. Wi-fi parts are really cheap, so, why
should bluetooth and a flaky 1 MP camera cost more?

Also, I also believe Z31 is overpriced. My reasoning is this: $99
should have been the price for the old archaic m130-styled 160x160
color screen Z31 has. But at its $150 pricemark, it really should have
been 320x320. Tranflective high-res isn't THAT expensive to produce
anymore, as Tungsten E has shown. Remarketing older technology at
higher than expected prices is something PalmOne is good at, though

PalmOne is just screwing themselves over by overpricing products
again, and Z72 is the latest example. When will they learn that
pricing things low will help them sell more? (e.g. Tungsten E and the
original Zire are best sellers for low price/high value)

Feel free to flame me away, thanks.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

Christopher wrote:

> If PalmOne could make Tungsten E for US $200, then why does the Z72
> have to be $300?
>
> Really people, the parts in Z72 are dirt cheap. The cost of making
> bluetooth chips is probably $15, and the 1 MP camera is probably
> around $30. I'm not sure about exact Z72 part expenses, but look at
> the Sony Clie TJ37. Some stores are selling it for US $230, and that
> has WI-FI FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE. Wi-fi parts are really cheap, so, why
> should bluetooth and a flaky 1 MP camera cost more?

Well, there are two other features that the Zire 72 has over the
Tungsten|E:

1. It has a 312 MHz processor, where the T|E has only a 126 Mhz one.
That's a big speed difference. It makes the T|E slower than the
T|T (the slowest Tungsten ever, except the T|W of course) and
it makes the Zire 72 almost as fast as the fastest two Palms
around: the T|T3 and the T|C (both at 400 MHz).

2. The Zire 72 has voice memo and the T|E doesn't.

Also, the Zire 72 is a newer device and newer devices typically cost
more because, assuming they're not a total flop, there is a period
of higher demand. In 3 or 6 months, the price difference might be
more like $60 or $80.

- Logan

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

if it is overpriced and doesnt sell they will lower the price. the mac
zealots thought that the ipod mini was apple gouging the public at $249, and
now how friggin stupid does that make them? apple cannot begin to make
enough of the minis.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

darkcomet@att.net (Christopher) wrote in message news:<be09aeca.0405081553.6ef330c1@posting.google.com>...
>
> Feel free to flame me away, thanks.

palmone is a loss-making company, so hey, give em a break. I wish them
the very best and true palm-o-philes like me don't mind paying them a
little extra to keep them in business.

I can't say i have the same sentiment about Microsoft, HP or Dell.
Actually, not at all.

I have an HP 2210/5 and a zire 72... which one kept me happy over the
past couple of days? it's the zire 72, worth every penny.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote in message news:<6005702b.0405090903.3f4e46a1@posting.google.com>...

> palmone is a loss-making company, so hey, give em a break. I wish them
> the very best and true palm-o-philes like me don't mind paying them a
> little extra to keep them in business.
>

I don't think "true palm-o-philes" are people who unconditionally
support Palm. They are people who appreciate the Palm OS, but still
can criticize it if things go wrong.

I'd rather not pay PalmOne money to keep them in business for shoddy
products, Rather, a loss of profits will make them improve their
products

Sony learned this the hard way with TJ35's backlight failing ------ I
wonder how the TJ27/TJ37 are selling?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

Christopher wrote:
> Good point, if you're talking about desktop PC's. I feel that
> processor speed isn't that crucial through for PDA's. The TE's "slow"
> 126 MHz still gives you instantaneous speed when navigating between
> apps, running programs, etc.

True. Palm apps for the most haven't gone the "well, we can afford
it, so let's be really bloated" route. Unlike on some other operating
systems I could name.

But there are some applications for which it's useful. For instance,
if you're using an e-book that has compressed text, it'll decompress
faster. Or if you're using Filez to browse files, it will load faster.
Or if you're using a JPEG viewer, it will load faster.

Some users will care about that, and some won't. It just depends on
what you use the device for. If you mainly use it for the datebook
and stuff, then you won't care at all. A one MHz processor would be
adequate for that.

- Logan

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

darkcomet@att.net (Christopher) wrote in message news:<be09aeca.0405081553.6ef330c1@posting.google.com>...

> Feel free to flame me away, thanks.

I love it when someone dares me to "flame away", like waving a red
flag in front of a bull...

> If PalmOne could make Tungsten E for US $200, then why does the Z72
> have to be $300?
>
> Really people, the parts in Z72 are dirt cheap. The cost of making
> bluetooth chips is probably $15, and the 1 MP camera is probably
> around $30. I'm not sure about exact Z72 part expenses, but look at
> the Sony Clie TJ37. Some stores are selling it for US $230, and that
> has WI-FI FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE. Wi-fi parts are really cheap, so, why
> should bluetooth and a flaky 1 MP camera cost more?

This is an old and totally fallacious way of attacking the price of
any manufactured product. A PDA, or car, or airplane, is not a "bag of
parts" whose value is the sum of the cost of the parts. You could
apply this same logic to Shakespeare and say his works are just a
bunch of letters, and therefore worth no more than these emails we
type here. Why not say the the Palm is just so much plastic, copper,
insulation, etc., and worth only the commodities market value of the
compounds it's made of? Is there no value in the effort of the experts
who designed it? I bet they charge PalmOne for their efforts! Is there
no value in the money PalmOne invested to bring a product to market?
No value in the risk they took that it might flop, leaving them to pay
they're bills with no revenue to offset the expense? Forget about
marketing, advertising, etc.

It's easy to criticize any business when you have no idea what their
business model is and what their margins are. As a business
consultant, I can tell you that most are trying to get buy on an
overall margin that is just enough to get by and stay in the market.
When they introduce a new model into a techy market such as PDA's,
they start with a high marginto take advantage of the "coolness
factor" to that market segment that can afford to buy it at that
price, and to offset developmental and pre-manufacturing costs so they
can start to realize profits as soon as possible, and before the
product becomes obsolete, which happens very quickly in today's
markets.

What is the product life cycle of a PDA these days? I don't follow it
closely, but I'll guess and say a year, maybe a bit longer. One with a
few flaws in it will get some bad press and will cycle even faster. A
really good one, maybe 2 years tops. Not a lot of time to pay off
investments and make some profit.
I won't argue with your opinion that these products are, to you,
overpriced. But please don't claim that the value of something is the
sum of the cost of it's parts. It just doesn't hold water. The truth
is, it's your OPINION that they are overpriced, not a fact. The "bag
of parts" argument is an attempt to make an opinion into a fact.
Obviously, to the many people who are buying them, they aren't
overpriced. They may be the bargain of the year.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

In article <e5ec863d.0405092101.1e0a462c@posting.google.com>,
davegb@clearsurf.com (davegb) wrote:
> Is there no value in the effort of the experts
> who designed it? I bet they charge PalmOne for their efforts! Is there
> no value in the money PalmOne invested to bring a product to market?
> No value in the risk they took that it might flop, leaving them to pay
> they're bills with no revenue to offset the expense? Forget about
> marketing, advertising, etc.
>
> It's easy to criticize any business when you have no idea what their
> business model is and what their margins are.

Well said! It's amazing the number of armchair CEO's who can 2nd guess
their real-life counterparts, with much less information.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

Component and part of Palm don't justify the price and you should
include the cost of R & D (Research and Development).

R & D on hardware and software (Palm OS) involve a lot of money.

--
WebWalker
webwalker@eudoramail.com
PGP Key ID : 0xB3F1A279

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

Schmidt <bt_schmidt@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <e5ec863d.0405092101.1e0a462c@posting.google.com>,
> davegb@clearsurf.com (davegb) wrote:
>>
>> It's easy to criticize any business when you have no idea what their
>> business model is and what their margins are.
>
> Well said! It's amazing the number of armchair CEO's who can 2nd guess
> their real-life counterparts, with much less information.

On the other hand, the average armchair CEO spends a lot more time checking
the results that are available than the average CEO, whose only concerns are
how to dazzle the board and investors with high flying visions, and whether
to bring a 4 iron or a 7 wood. The day-to-day details (like product line
and profit margins) is filtered through at least half a dozen VPs of various
levels on the way from the people who really know details up to the CEO.
Then again, Palm has become so small now (not counting the outsourced
services) that the CEO might actually know a bit about the company.

--
*Art

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

In article <vdt1a0d2e8emldkkv3cdp92pe5ka6218bm@4ax.com>, WebWalker
<webwalker@eudoramail.com> wrote:

> Component and part of Palm don't justify the price and you should
> include the cost of R & D (Research and Development).
>
> R & D on hardware and software (Palm OS) involve a lot of money.

What the market will pay also enters the equation. The only way the Zire
72 is overpriced is if it doesn't sell in sufficient quantities to make
PalmOne a profit.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

Guy Bannis wrote:
> What the market will pay also enters the equation. The only way the Zire
> 72 is overpriced is if it doesn't sell in sufficient quantities to make
> PalmOne a profit.

Or the maximal profit. If they are making 10% profit and they could
knock 5% off the price and sell 4 times as many (at 5% profit), they'd
make twice the profit. Probably they can't, but in some cases dropping
the price does make you more profit. But you probably knew that.

Actually, I used to work at a company that specializes in pricing,
and it turns out pricing is extremely complex. Much more complex than
I would have thought. But honestly, not very interesting. :-)

Then there is another point of view (which I am sympathetic towards)
that you should pick a price that gives you good profits but is also
fair. That is, you should maintain a good balance between benefitting
society in general and maximizing your own profits. Of course, they'll
probably kick me out of the United States for believing that. ;-)

- Logan

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

In article <WNuoc.94840$hR1.16841@fe2.texas.rr.com>, Logan Shaw
<lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote:

> Or the maximal profit. If they are making 10% profit and they could
> knock 5% off the price and sell 4 times as many (at 5% profit), they'd
> make twice the profit. Probably they can't, but in some cases dropping
> the price does make you more profit. But you probably knew that.

Yep. You're referring to the price elasticity of demand.

> Actually, I used to work at a company that specializes in pricing,
> and it turns out pricing is extremely complex. Much more complex than
> I would have thought. But honestly, not very interesting. :-)

It's interesting to me, but frustrating because market data is hard to
find. The products I've dealt with aren't sold in the open market which
makes an accurate picture of the competition's pricing hard to come by.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:WNuoc.94840$hR1.16841@fe2.texas.rr.com...
SNIP

> Then there is another point of view (which I am sympathetic towards)
> that you should pick a price that gives you good profits but is also
> fair. That is, you should maintain a good balance between benefitting
> society in general and maximizing your own profits. Of course, they'll
> probably kick me out of the United States for believing that. ;-)
>

I only agree with this when it comes to products that I consider to be
necessities of life, medicine, food, water etc... When it comes to luxury
items like cars, tvs, PDAs, VCRs etc... I say whatever the market will bear.

The problem is agreeing on what is a "good" profit. For example, my wife has
a small business in which she makes a product that cost about $.15 in
material and she sells for $1.00. Not counting labor that's somewhere in the
neighborhood of a 600% profit. If you translate than into an hourly wage
(she can make 10-12 of these items in an hour) that works out to be
$8.50-10.20 per hour and no benefits! So it's actually not all that great
from a wage standpoint and she certainly can't make a living just on that
income.

Cheers
TC

Archived from groups: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot,comp.sys.palmtops (More info?)

"Tony Clark" <curiousgeorge1964@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:WNuoc.94840$hR1.16841@fe2.texas.rr.com...
>SNIP
>
>> Then there is another point of view (which I am sympathetic towards)
>> that you should pick a price that gives you good profits but is also
>> fair. That is, you should maintain a good balance between benefitting
>> society in general and maximizing your own profits. Of course, they'll
>> probably kick me out of the United States for believing that. ;-)
>>
>
>I only agree with this when it comes to products that I consider to be
>necessities of life, medicine, food, water etc... When it comes to luxury
>items like cars, tvs, PDAs, VCRs etc... I say whatever the market will bear.
>
>The problem is agreeing on what is a "good" profit. For example, my wife has
>a small business in which she makes a product that cost about $.15 in
>material and she sells for $1.00. Not counting labor that's somewhere in the
>neighborhood of a 600% profit. If you translate than into an hourly wage
>(she can make 10-12 of these items in an hour) that works out to be
>$8.50-10.20 per hour and no benefits! So it's actually not all that great
>from a wage standpoint and she certainly can't make a living just on that
>income.
>
Her labor costs are too high, and her factory is antiquated. Your wife needs to
lay herself off and outsource to China. ;-)