[Wondercow]

[quote name='KPO'M']



>

Wondercow said:

> > {quote:title=
> > }{quote} I don't mean to sound negative, but, well, no. The realization of iPhone revenues over two years is tied to accounting practices not the contract. In some countries the service contract is less than (or more than?) two years yet Apple still realizes the revenue over the same 24-month period as in the U.S.
>
> As for the scenarios, they're not "when the customer pays, not how much". If you get the phone for free you get the phone for free--this is usually accompanied by heftier service fees but the phone is still free, not to mention that it's the service provider who offers it free, the maker still gets their price.

>Therefore, it is entirely a "when you pay, not how much you pay" issue to the extent that Apple struck a deal with AT&T to offer the phone for an initial price of $200 in exchange for AT&T increasing the cost of the data plan by $10 per month.

I must have missed the news that Apple lowered the price on the condition that AT&T increase the monthly rate. Can you provide a link to that?

>They are bundled, and thus should be viewed as a single arrangement (albeit with multiple deliverables provided by two parties).

I once bought a Mac that came bundled with Internet Explorer for Mac. I had problems with I.E.--should I have sought troubleshooting from Apple or MS? What about Graphic Converter that came bundled?

I don't disagree that the total cost of ownership has increased (and you guys have it easy! Have you seen the rates up here [Canada] or some of the European regions? Yikes!!) and as such you're actually paying more in the end for the package. But the iPhone is half price--Apple doesn't get revenue from AT&T anymore nor do they have any say in AT&T's pricing.

While the two are a package deal it's AT&T who raised the rate. If AT&T suddenly dropped the contract to $25/month would you say that Apple cut the price of the phone or that AT&T dropped the price of the plan?

[BigIslandMac]

I live on the Big Island in Hawaii, hardly a major metro area. I get decent to excellent reception and connection speeds with my iPhone 3G. It's most noticeable with attachment downloads in emails. What used to take forever is now pretty quick, on pace with the downloads shown on Apple's commercials. When 3G's not available, the phone switches pretty seamlessly to Edge. In fact, I've never had a problem with either my original iPhone (which I've passed on to my daughter) or my 3G, though it is my second 3G; the one I got after standing in line on 7/11 was defective (the screen would black out during calls and never come back) so I returned it and ordered a new one. When you sell millions of units within less than two months, there are bound to be lemons (like my first 3G). The natural and common sense response is to exchange your unit if it doesn't work. And if the new one doesn't work, get your money back and buy a Blackberry or something. Suing over something like this is the adult equivalent of a child's temper tantrum. It makes the plaintiff look like an idiot and gives lawyers everywhere (and I happen to be one) a bad name.

[warlock7]

Your acronym, while being more precise, is way too long and doesn't flow well...

[sdwood]

What exactly are you referring to as "a large VC grant"? I thought I kept up with Apple business and I have not heard of such a thing. I do know this quote, from Apple's July 2008 report: ?We?re extremely pleased with the growth of our business and the generation of almost $5.4 billion in cash in the first three quarters of fiscal 2008,? said Peter Oppenheimer, Apple?s CFO." And I know that Apple now has about $28 billion in current assets, including almost $10 billion in cash. Nothing mentioned about a VC grant, which frankly makes no sense for any company anywhere near the size of Apple. Details, please.