Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ben_w 701 days ago
They might be subsidising low-end models like that with the M-series, but as they were definitely overcharging for RAM way back when it was user-installable sticks… my gut feeling is RAM* is mostly a differential pricing strategy

* for laptops and desktops, storage pricing tiers also give me this feeling; however in the case of tablets and phones, the way they're used — for most people they are the primary computing device in their lives — less so.
1 comments
qwytw 701 days ago
> They might be subsidising

Any (even the slimmest) evidence that this might be the case? Because it seems like an extremely far fetched claim... And year RAM/Storage upgrades seem like a clear example of market segmentation.

link
ben_w 701 days ago
When I chose "might be" rather than "are indeed", that was to say it's not impossible rather than to outright agree. Other companies do have loss-leaders, I cannot rule out the possibility that Apple also does exactly what was asserted in the comment I was replying to.
link
qwytw 701 days ago
I'm not sure even if that was the case it would fit the definition of a "loss-leader" unless we assume that Apple makes back the loss and more through the App Store and other services which seems extremely unlikely.

Otherwise who would selling laptops at a loss increase the sales of higher-end laptops, most people don't buy both.

> I cannot rule out the possibility

That seems like an extremely high-bar.

link
ben_w 701 days ago
> That seems like an extremely high-bar.

Ironically, it was an attempt to avoid an argument about that point :P

I think it's at least possible for this scenario, given they make more from services than from macs: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/fy2024-q1/FY24_Q1_Consol...

I'd still be on the surprised side if so, but it would be mild surprise rather than shock.

link
qwytw 700 days ago
> given they make more from services than from macs:

Almost all of that comes from iPhones/iPad/etc. services. Also IIRC 1/4 of their services revenue is just the $20 billion Google is paying them every year.

> but it would be mild surprise rather than shock.

Alright, you might be right. However, while I'm not shocked but still more than mildly surprised that there are people who think that this might be possible.

link