Aussie iPad likely to nudge $1,100

n1ck0 (New user):

250 MB NOT GB!!!

Phred (Cornerstone member):

Once again, its good to see that the Free trade agreement with the USA is working to its fullest with Australia paying more for just about everything.

Pauly (User):

us pricing doesnt take into consideration state taxes. us retailers sell more items hence economies of scale say they can sell for cheaper and then shipping fees.
Still doesnt make it any more than an oversized itouch, underpowered netbook and overpriced 7 years of bad luck if you press too hard on it.

apt.pupil (Advanced member):

pfffft. $1099 for the ipad with a decent sized SSD and 3G capabilities?
no thx

Anonymousewiuu2945u389 (Frequent poster):

I know I commented on a different article about not being interested unless it had a user-replaceable battery. Now, at this price, I don't think I'd be interested if it had a user-replaceable battery, RAM and HDD.

The iPad seems to be in the middle of nowhere-land in terms of sizing - too big to fit in a pocket, but without the screen protection of a keyboard if it is put into a bag. And to be honest, from what I've heard, the feature set is more iPod touch than proper computer, and netbooks are how much cheaper for how much more functionality?

TimR (User):

The entry level model would suit me perfectly and at $649 I'll be getting one as soon as I can... At least, I was going to say that but then I looked at all the other comments and realised I was in the wrong place.

ps. By the way, the title for this article might just as easily have been "Aussie iPad likely to start at $649". Why did you decide to highlight the most expensive possible model?

pps The mention of the Free Trade Agreement in an earlier makes no sense to me. Apple Australia have to account for the exchange rate, import costs (Customs), freight, GST, administration, and the wages of the staff of Apple Australia including expensive support staff. I don't think there is any arbitrary Government tariff at either end which could be considered a breech of the Free Trade Agreement.

TimR (User):

The entry level model would suit me perfectly and at $649 I'll be getting one as soon as I can... At least, I was going to say that but then I looked at all the other comments and realised I was in the wrong place.

ps. By the way, the title for this article might just as easily have been "Aussie iPad likely to start at $649". Why did you decide to highlight the most expensive possible model?

pps The mention of the Free Trade Agreement in an earlier makes no sense to me. Apple Australia have to account for the exchange rate, import costs (Customs), freight, GST, administration, and the wages of the staff of Apple Australia including expensive support staff. I don't think there is any arbitrary Government tariff at either end which could be considered a breech of the Free Trade Agreement.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TimR:
The mention of the Free Trade Agreement in an earlier makes no sense to me.

That may be true but it was still a valid reference.


Quoting TimR:
Apple Australia have to account for the exchange rate

92c in the dollar, how does that explain Apples AU prices?


Quoting TimR:
import costs

probably less to import into AU than the US, the stuff is made in Asia remember.


Quoting TimR:
(Customs)

how long since you have imported/exported, customs charges generally covering as part of a totalised importation bill. And again there is no glaring difference between US and AU costs.


Quoting TimR:
freight,

cheaper to AU than US from Asia.



Quoting TimR:
GST

Yes that's 10% upon landing, but hang on what about the sales tax your not paying in AU?


Quoting TimR:
administration

I'll concede some economies of scale, but admin in AU over admin costs in US still does not explain the pricing.


Quoting TimR:
and the wages of the staff of Apple Australia

as opposed to the wages of staff of Apple US? Or has Obama decreed they'll work for free?


Quoting TimR:
including expensive support staff

yes you cover costs of expensive support staff, but wait for it you are not using (or imposing cost) on support staff on the other side of the planet. So still no explanation for the price gouge by Apple.


Quoting TimR:
I don't think there is any arbitrary Government tariff at either end

There isn't, the pricing is just a result of Apple gouging a mark for as much as it thinks it can get away with. Simple really. Free trade yeah right.

TimR (User):

I see where the problem is. The term Free Trade Agreement, with the capitals, is to do with government tariffs imposed on imports. If I have this right, you are suggesting that Apple Australia's profit margin is also a factor. I believe you will find that this is not correct.
To address your point though. When you buy a product off Apple in the US, only Apple US makes a profit on it. When you buy a product off Apple Australia, both Apple US and Apple Australia need to make a profit on it. Now Apple Australia will be given a discount by Apple US as they are quite a large customer, but there is still a significant margin in there for the parent company.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TimR:
I believe you will find that this is not correct.

Oh really? How exactly do you substantiate this claim?


Quoting TimR:
When you buy a product off Apple in the US, only Apple US makes a profit on it. When you buy a product off Apple Australia, both Apple US and Apple Australia need to make a profit on it.

Do what? Apple is Apple. Apple AU is a part of Apple INC. Apple corporate structure is no excuse for any price discrepancy. The cost of selling a US engineered Asian made product is no greater in Australia than it is in the US. End of the day it's Apple taking an inflated whack no matter how you look at it.


Quoting TimR:
Now Apple Australia will be given a discount by Apple US as they are quite a large customer

Discount? This get curiouser and curiouser!


Quoting TimR:
but there is still a significant margin in there for the parent company.

Yep charge what the market will pay, good business, still does not explain the taking of another gouge in non US markets.

By this reckoning Aussie Coal sold overseas should have another mark-up applied by Aussie Coal OS Inc, good business, eh?

Raindog shakes his head.

TimR (User):

*sigh*
Sorry Raindog. Life's too short for me to be bothered bringing you up to speed.
I know these things because this stuff is precisely what I have done for a living for 28years.
Life will be eternally baffling for you if you will not make the effort to do your own research. I have given you some pointers. That's as much as I can be bothered doing.
You can lead a horse to water... *you look up the rest*
Best of luck.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TimR:
Life's too short for me to be bothered bringing you up to speed.

Up to speed with what? The gentle art of wild speculation?


Quoting TimR:
I know these things because this stuff is precisely what I have done for a living for 28years.

Your the one eh? You've been the sole expert on the vagaries of import/export while the rest of us grew turnips? Right? It may be a complete surprise to you but maybe just perhaps a few more of us have the odd decade or two of experience moving stuff into and out of Asia, Europe and the US.


Quoting TimR:
Life will be eternally baffling for you

Not for me, I have no trouble discrimination fact from speculation and rumour.


Quoting TimR:
I have given you some pointers.

Phrenology is of no interest to me and i care little about the shape of your head.


Quoting TimR:
That's as much as I can be bothered doing.

Mostly because if you bother to put the numbers and percentages of your supposed causes up it would prove you wrong. So spin away.


Quoting TimR:
you look up the rest

I know the rest, I had already explained this to you, horses, water all that. Your second attempt got somewhere near the truth, quite different from your initial claims that a collection of outside influences somehow inflate Apple's AU pricing. As your second attempt goes part way towards explaining, any major price discrepancy is at the hand of Apple and nothing to do with the comparative costs of distribution into AU.

Postulate all you wish it will not change that reality!


Quoting TimR:
Best of luck.

Thanks all the same but I've never considered Luck a good basis for conducting any business.

TimR (User):

This thread is now so old as to be effectively dead. So it is just you and me here Raindog.

The urge to educate is hard to resist even when the case is surely hopeless. So here's one more go.

Rather neatly, the answer you gave before this last one is a good place to start as it was was wrong in every particular.

Apple Australia is not Apple US.

www.asic.com.au

Name APPLE PTY LIMITED
ACN 002 510 054
ABN 46 002 510 054
Type Australian Proprietary Company, Limited By Shares
Registration Date 02/08/1982
Next Review Date 02/08/2010
Status Registered
Locality of Registered Office Sydney NSW 2000
Jurisdiction Australian Securities & Investments Commission

Despite some indications to the contrary, we are not a part of the US. For Apple to exist here they have to start a new corporate entity - Apple Pty Ltd. Despite all its shares being held by the parent company, it is an Australian Company, follows Australian laws, and pays Australian taxes. It is a for profit company. Once it has paid its taxes and kept what profit it needs to build new stores and cover all its other expenses it sends the rest of the profit back to the US.

It doesn't have to be this way. Instead of a subsidiary they could have just sold through resellers. Australian companies with Aussie shareholders - who would want to see a profit as well.

So, whether they use a reseller or a subsidiary, someone in Australia has to add a markup to maintain their infrastructure in Australia.

Now, it was Apple US that designed the iPad. Not Apple Australia. They expect to see profit from each machine sold. Their control of their receipt of these profits from their subsidiaries is much more direct and effective, from an accounting point of view, if they treat the subsidiary as a foreign company (which it is) and sell the the product to them a discount.

As an aside, you appear to be railing against the workings of a free market. Apple are free to charge whatever they like for their products and we are free to buy them or not as we wish. If you believe them to be over-priced then you won't be buying them - and I have no doubt you don't. Others though reach different conclusions. If your assessment is correct and you believe that other people will share your view then Apple will fail to sell these devices. They will have to lower their prices or withdraw the product. You will be vindicated. :-) At this point I can't help but remember the US$40 billion that Apple US have in the bank...

So, your final comment about Aussie Coal was spot on... in a way. If Aussie Coal has a subsidiary called Aussie Coal OS Inc then, when they ship coal to them, Aussie Coal OS Inc will indeed apply another markup as they on-sell it in their country. If Aussie Coal does not have an Aussie Coal OS Inc then they will be selling it to say, China Coal Inc, and they will put on a mark-up as they on-sell it throughout China.

The problem is that all these folks in the middle, the ones between the factory that makes the iPad and the arrival of the iPad in your, err let's say my, hands, have kiddies that want to eat and have a roof over their heads. The profit that you resent, the "gouge", is what keeps these folks going to work so that we can have these things. The other bit of profit in the US is what keeps the people who actually own Apple US happy so that the company can keep designing these things.

If things ran a simply as you seem to wish, there would be no motive left for the shareholders of Apple US to want their stuff sold in Australia. We would have to buy these things in the US and import them ourselves. I have seen people frustrated with the same things that frustrate you, try and do just that. It can be done, but it turns out to be far more trouble than it is worth. It is that discrepancy in value that represents the value that Apple Australia is adding.

(An interesting aside here is digital data... If the local company can add no value, what is their reason for existence? When it comes to buying digital books for instance, your arguments and passion become much more telling.)

So, the corporate structures that frustrate you are the logical consequence of us being in another country with our own corporate laws. If your iPad blows your leg off you have an Aussie corporate entity that is responsible and can be sued. You have a level of protection that would not exist if they did not. (Oh yes. One of their expenses is professional indemnity, which these days may be substantial. Imagine if 10,000 people claimed that their iPod sent them deaf. the potential damages would be ... large.)

Time for coffee. See what you make of that lot.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TimR:
Apple Australia is not Apple US.

www.asic.com.au

Oh woo hoo an AU registration, should I be convinced now. Nah I don't think so. Apple AU couldn't sneeze without head office approval as you very well know. Hell those retards are attempting to sue Woolies for a not even similar logo, sure Apple AU is independent,and look I just saw flying pigs.


Quoting TimR:
As an aside, you appear to be railing against the workings of a free market. Apple are free to charge whatever they like for their products

And I'm free to highlight a blatant rip off, and to call your attributing the higher price to import and distributions costs a load of apologist spin.


Quoting TimR:
If you believe them to be over-priced then you won't be buying them - and I have no doubt you don't.

Well actually I seem them as comparatively WELL over priced.



Quoting TimR:
So, your final comment about Aussie Coal was spot on..

Of course I would not have said it if it was anything less.


Quoting TimR:
have kiddies that want to eat

And hundred of Chinese assembly workers desire bells for their bicycles, and starving Haitians would be glad of some simple shelter, equally emotive and equally unrelated.


Quoting TimR:
The other bit of profit in the US is what keeps the people who actually own Apple US happy

Apple US, were you on about Apple AU being so independent?


Quoting TimR:
We would have to buy these things in the US and import them ourselves.

Why in blue blazes would you buy an Asian made product from the US, that is just dumb on so many levels.


Quoting TimR:
If the local company can add no value, what is their reason for existence?

Now your going to Tell me Apple AU distribution Inc, adds value, right?


Quoting TimR:
So, the corporate structures that frustrate

doesn't frustrate me, I never buy through expensive over-hyped distribution channels. What's that you say? How would i get along without the aid of a local genius bar? Well the answer to that is fine actually.


Quoting TimR:
are the logical consequence of us being in another country

No they are the logical consequence of a bloated and expensive way to distribute. Sure you'll argue in the favour of the local operation,you've apple juniors braces to pay for right. But i have no desire to fund that unless you actually deliver me a good or service that i need and wish to pay for.


Quoting TimR:
If your iPad blows your leg off you have an Aussie corporate entity that is responsible and can be sued.

Were talking some consumer electronics here, not abseiling equipment, get a grip.


Quoting TimR:
You have a level of protection that would not exist if they did not.

And it reduces the risk of snake bite too. Exactly how many iSlabs do you predict will explode. 1 in 100, 1 in 10, hell with your current markups I'm ahead by the third on a direct import. Real value eh.


Quoting TimR:
Oh yes. One of their expenses is professional indemnity

And another of their expenses is trestle table and dexion shelving so we'd better add a mark up for that too, eh?

Your talking nonsense, don't all those costs apply in every market? The cost discrepancies are not there between major western countries, but the Apple has sure managed to install some price discrepancies. The cost justification does not wash.

agami (User):

You do this all the time. You take a logical conglomerate statement, i.e. where someone illustrates how there are a bunch of variables that MAY contribute to the price discrepancy. Again, the attempt is to illustrate, but you take short statements out of the overall context and load them each with the burden of being the sole answer.

Examples:
Nobody reading TimR's comments, apart from you, expects that he singled out GST as the single culprit, just one of the contributing factors. Also, when TimR talks about Australian wages he expects that the reader understands it as a shortened statement about differences in the wages of Australian workers compared to those of their American counterparts; Full global manufacturing, logistics, and retail reports are not necessary.

There is nothing wrong when someone illustrates that the economics of distributing a consumer electronics device are multifaceted. PhD in economics is not required.

petert (Senior member):

Quoting agami:
You take a logical conglomerate statement


This is one of the frustrating aspects of these types of fora. One person bakes a cake and another tries to disassemble that cake into its component parts. It doesn't work because all you end-up with is crumbs! It is easy to focus on one word or one sentence in order to "prove" a point, in order to "prove" oneself correct, but it generally leads to the author being taken completely out of context. This is exactly what happened to Tony Abbott and his comments regarding female virginity only a few days ago. Steven R. Covey summed it perfectly when he said, "Seek first to understand before being understood".

These are typed fora. There is a limit to how much any person wants to write and there is a need to readers to often "read-into" what the author is saying. I, for, do not want to read a refereed and referenced dissertation for every posting! A critical deconstruction of an argument or comment requires more than simply commenting on every individual sentence outside of the conglomerated context in which they were written!

But there is an even more important issue. Quite often an author gives an opinion only to be told by someone else that their opinion is wrong. An opinion is just that - an opinion! It is not a fact. An opinion is a personal view or attitude. On the most part, opinions cannot be wrong (albeit that they might be ill-conceived or based on incorrect information or an incorrect understanding of information). Facts can be wrong (at which point they are probably not a fact, but that is quite a separate issue to discuss), but opinions are opinions.

Me In Oz (Cornerstone member):

Quoting petert:
It is easy to focus on one word or one sentence in order to "prove" a point, in order to "prove" oneself correct

You and agami are being very diplomatic ................. Or should we all just call "A spade, a spade"

Cheers :)

petert (Senior member):

To be tongue in cheek, I should have ended my previous posting with the words, "But this is just my opinion" :-)

Me In Oz (Cornerstone member):

Quoting petert:
"But this is just my opinion" :-)

Are we allowed to have those? ;-)

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Me In Oz:
Are we allowed to have those?

Sure you are. Even when they are wrong. :>

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting agami:
You do this all the time.

Then you should be used to it? But then it's apparent logical conclusions aren't something that comes naturally to you. Rather than put forward any valid point of view your prepared to stand by you prefer to piss and moan without offering a single valid contribution. But I digress (much like you have).


Quoting agami:
You take a logical conglomerate statement,

Logic? The 2 plus 2 equals 42.7 kind of logic? I've clearly debunked your claimed logic, both point by point and in it's totality.


Quoting agami:
where someone illustrates how there are a bunch of variables

Those variables were proposed as the major reasons for a disparity in pricing, that is logically not the case.


Quoting agami:
but you take short statements out of the overall context and load them each with the burden of being the sole answer.

No I offered brief descriptions of why each of those factors would have minimal if any influence on Australian pricing. And debunked each in isolation and as part of a combined proposal.


Quoting agami:
Nobody reading TimR's comments, apart from you, expects that he singled out GST as the single culprit,

Nobody except you see GST as being singled out, as you have already stated each factor was refuted. Nobody but you singled out GST in isolation. Clearly Pot, Kettle, Black, You Egg, Face.


Quoting agami:
Also, when TimR talks about Australian wages he expects that the reader understands it as a shortened statement about differences in the wages of Australian workers compared to those of their American counterparts;

Do what? The lack of detail enables any number of conclusions to be drawn, including your spurious references to US wages. What tiny influence would US wages have upon devices build by robots and assembly lines in Asian factories?


Quoting agami:
Full global manufacturing, logistics, and retail reports are not necessary.

Not that's fine you can go on believing myths about US wages, green cheese moon surfaces, yowies on bicycles and whatever else you wish. It wont change simple facts whatever you believe.


Quoting agami:
There is nothing wrong when someone illustrates that the economics of distributing a consumer electronics device are multifaceted.

Even if the conclusions are totally erroneous? I can see why your adverse to science of any kind. Thank you for you valuable contribution maybe next time you could even have something of substance to contribute.

Zig (User):

For $1,099 I can buy any number of notebooks that can run Windows 7 or Linux.
I can install just about any software I please on it and customise it to my liking. It can have all sort of ports for just about every purpose.

I can even close the lid to prevent the screen getting damaged.

TimR (User):

And that's what I love about free markets.
You do that and be happy and I'll buy an iPad and be happy.
Everyone wins.

apt.pupil (Advanced member):

Quoting Zig:
For $1,099 I can buy any number of notebooks that can run Windows 7 or Linux.

According to Steve Jobs, why would you want to own a laptop? pc software is ugly, slow, and worst of all- able to be used on a variety of different devices


Quoting Zig:
I can install just about any software I please on it and customise it to my liking.

once again with the pc software. why would you want to?



Quoting Zig:
It can have all sort of ports for just about every purpose.
give it 12 months. the ipad will have a gen2 that adds in extra firewire, USB3, and eSATA ports


whats the bet that Steve Jobs owns a pc himself?