[soren203]

I was planning on grabbing a z10 on launch but if thats true I guess Im going to have to wait for my contract to end :S

[nocturnal123]

when I purchased my Torch 9800 off contract from Bell I paid $700 taxes in. So I fully expect to pay $700 again off contract for the Z 10 when it first comes out, I've already started saving.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9860 using Tapatalk

[Skeevecr]

At this point I think they're better off selling the Z10 and the X10 lower than other flagships, get a good buzz going, and THEN ask premium prices for the Aristo once the "BB is back" reports are well documented and there are concrete gains in mindshare.

This approach doesn't really make sense for Rim, they cannot afford to sell these things near cost and they will not greatly affect sales by dropping it by a smaller amount, also those people who are eager to get bb10 early are going to do so providing the price is reasonable anyway. Note, I am expecting it to be priced competitively with high end android devices rather than an iphone's pricing.

If there is any device where it would make more sense for them to cut margins to increase volumes would be on the first mid to lower range model as this one will be coming out after the initial batch of upgraders have got their bb10 devices and this would provide more momentum to the platform.

[aragone79]

I know that RIM has their own MSRP, but if RIM cannot cooperate well with carriers and major main distributor for the MSRP, it will be disaster for Blackberry 10. USD 500 - 600 is somehow a reasonable price, IMHO. Z10 is a bate, a trigger for RIM to come back from the graveyard of smartphone world. I myself never doubt about what blackbery 10 can give for me or others. But in many market all over the world, price is one of the main factor of why people wants to buy.

So, Z10 must be affordable from the 1st tier country to the 3rd world. Much more and better if low to middle economic class can afford it. IMHO

[bbmme]

If it was $1000, i would still buy it eh.

[bk1022]

If it was $1000, i would still buy it eh.

You and who else? When buying a new bb10 keep in mind that you may have to pay for bis in the future. Is this going to become a consumer phone or not?

The msrp can anything, but the actual cost has to be less than the two current best phones on the market right now. You can get a gs3 almost for free right now on contract so RIM needs to be realistic and not pull a repeat of the playbook disaster.

[cjcampbell]

MSRP and retail price do not always co-exist. Retailers, in this case carriers, will inflate the MSRP to offer discounts and therefore perceived value. Just look at multiple carriers and the cost of the phones they offer. The only exception to this rule is Apple.. they set their price and that's that.... only Walmart offers their product less and that's by like 2 cents. As consumers, it's our job to be educated and work for what we feel is best for us. My current phone plan is not as high as it would be if I had just said "this is what I want. How much will it cost me?". Retailers rely on people to be uneducated so that they can make their high margins. I, personally, will fight for the best price on almost everything, and that will include the new Z10. My carrier can either give me a break, or allow me to shop other carriers. The best price, along with the proper coverage, will win my business..... Yes.... WIN.... this is a competition amongst retailers to win ALL of us. They need us to keep the lights on... we have choices.

[taz323]

Within the terms and conditions of Bell�s BlackBerry 10 contest (see here) is some fine print. Up for grabs are 5 new BlackBerry 10 devices and the legal states they have an �Approx retail value $700.00 Cdn each.�

No word if this will be the no-term price of the all-touch BlackBerry 10 device, but it certainly gets the conversation started. RIM will unveil the new devices, specs, official launch date and carrier support on January 30th.

Bell says the BlackBerry 10 Smartphones have an "Approx retail value $700.00 Cdn" | MobileSyrup.com

hope not, need to save more, or use an upgrade I've been trying not to use.

[StampyBeaverbrook]

I think the windows phones would be a better comparison point.
Maybe they will launch at a high price to get the loyalists then drop it for everyone else. I suspect this is what is happening with the windows tablets at the moment.

[auditman]

$500 is the sweet spot for bb10


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Superfly_FR]

$500 is the sweet spot for bb10
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry for those who can't afford it, but nope.
Current main problem of RIM/BlackBerry device image :" It's mid/low range devices for kids, low-level employees and developing countries" (exaggerated +, but usual).
They must state the new BB10 flagship devices are high/top range, and there's no reason they don't price them at the same level than others.
Add to this that RIM must reconnect with device high profitability and the (end user off contract) price will likely be in that area of $700.
Then, there might be incentives (both by RIM and/or Carriers), but I believe it is a very bad idea to sell off at launch.

My2cts.

[lnichols]

Sorry for those who can't afford it, but nope.
Current main problem of RIM/BlackBerry device image :" It's mid/low range devices for kids, low-level employees and developing countries" (exaggerated +, but usual).
They must state the new BB10 flagship devices are high/top range, and there's no reason they don't price them at the same level than others.
Add to this that RIM must reconnect with device high profitability and the (end user off contract) price will likely be in that area of $700.
Then, there might be incentives (both by RIM and/or Carriers), but I believe it is a very bad idea to sell off at launch.

My2cts.

I can afford it, I'm simply not paying more than iP5 $649 US (or same for that matter), or GS3 $549 US (almost identical hardware and smaller screen), or Note 2 $649 US. Flagship BBOS7 devices failed because of premium pricing for old hardware. Just because RIM didn't have their OS ready to take advantage of the Qualcomm S4 processor 9 months ago when it was released and could maybe justify that price is their problem. If they price it like an iPhone, majority of people will buy iPhone. Samsung doesn't even try to price like an iPhone even though they have superior tech in device. If they price it too high get ready for PlayBook like sales figures, huge price drops in both products and stock price after a couple earnings calls where they announce huge writeoffs and admit mistakes. RIM must rebuild its name in the established markets where people are defecting to iOS and Android, and build back marketshare. Premium pricing over similar spec'd devices with a much smaller ecosystem is not going to work!

[qbnkelt]

This approach doesn't really make sense for Rim, they cannot afford to sell these things near cost and they will not greatly affect sales by dropping it by a smaller amount, also those people who are eager to get bb10 early are going to do so providing the price is reasonable anyway. Note, I am expecting it to be priced competitively with high end android devices rather than an iphone's pricing.

If there is any device where it would make more sense for them to cut margins to increase volumes would be on the first mid to lower range model as this one will be coming out after the initial batch of upgraders have got their bb10 devices and this would provide more momentum to the platform.

Interesting. I do not think that.
Time will only tell, no? Let's see what happens in 2013.

In any case, there is a white (or red?????????) Z10 being manufactured and boxed just for my adorable wee hands.....

[silversun10]

RIM will have to make money, and raising the price after introduction never goes down well, so you can only expect the
first BB10 phones to be highish in price, also if they start off high they have a built in a margin for promotions and finally people are already
lining up pre-ordering BB10 without knowing the price yet, RIM definitely would want to cash in on that.

[koolrosh]

Why can't RIM price their hardware the same as iPhone. Almost everyone here agrees that BB10 phones are better than iPhone 5: better resolution, better specs, new OS with many new features, choice of physical keyboard, removable battery, expandable storage, etc

If they promote these features well, then there is no reason why they cannot sell their phones at these prices. Especially when the carriers in NA will subsidize to 150-199 on contract.

[berklon]

Why can't RIM price their hardware the same as iPhone. Almost everyone here agrees that BB10 phones are better than iPhone 5: better resolution, better specs, new OS with many new features, choice of physical keyboard, removable battery, expandable storage, etc

If they promote these features well, then there is no reason why they cannot sell their phones at these prices. Especially when the carriers in NA will subsidize to 150-199 on contract.

Because RIM is trying to catch up to Apple who has a huge ecosystem. The hardware doesn't mean as much if there's less software for it.
We already saw what happened with the Playbook - which is a decent tablet hardware-wise, but with software that was unfinished and an ecosystem that was piddly in comparison - the price they were asking was a joke.

Plus if people aren't happy with the limitations of the iPhone, they can still go and get a SGIII (which they are in droves) and get most of those BB10 advantageous you mentioned while having a much larger ecosystem to boot.

RIM needs to give people a reason to buy a BB10 device. If they don't offer a killer feature that no one else has which people want, they have to undercut in price to have some sort of advantage.

[koolrosh]

Because RIM is trying to catch up to Apple who has a huge ecosystem. The hardware doesn't mean as much if there's less software for it.
We already saw what happened with the Playbook - which is a decent tablet hardware-wise, but with software that was unfinished and an ecosystem that was piddly in comparison - the price they were asking was a joke.

Plus if people aren't happy with the limitations of the iPhone, they can still go and get a SGIII (which they are in droves) and get most of those BB10 advantageous you mentioned while having a much larger ecosystem to boot.

RIM needs to give people a reason to buy a BB10 device. If they don't offer a killer feature that no one else has which people want, they have to undercut in price to have some sort of advantage.

First off, you cannot compare the playbook launch with the BB10 launch because:

1. The tablet OS was half baked and didn't have email, contacts, BBM, Maps, notes, etc. on the other hand BB10 will have all these features and they are implemented In a better way than on iOS or Android.

2. There was a lack of Apps when the device was launched. Most of the good Apps on the Playbook were available several months after the tablet launched, by that time the Playbook was already designated as a failure and people made up their minds. BB10 will have all of the playbook apps and many more big names at launch.

3. RIM did not give the playbook a big advertising push, because the plan was to only sell to BB users. Thorsten has said that RIM will spend big bucks in advertising BB10 and will work with carrier partners to promote the phones.

4. Carriers did not support the playbook. A lot of carriers in the US didn't even offer the playbook for sale because of the lack of 3G/LTE model and others refused to push the device. In Canada, the carriers and retailers were a bit more supportive and apparently they have 30% of the tablet market there. So with carrier support BB10 has a higher chance of being a success and RIM has said that carriers are fully behind the new phones.

5. The tablet market is smaller than the smartphone market and BB has a big user base to upgrade from.

[koolrosh]

Plus if people aren't happy with the limitations of the iPhone, they can still go and get a SGIII (which they are in droves) and get most of those BB10 advantageous you mentioned while having a much larger ecosystem to boot.

RIM needs to give people a reason to buy a BB10 device. If they don't offer a killer feature that no one else has which people want, they have to undercut in price to have some sort of advantage.

To your other point about price. It is a poor strategy for a company to compete on price. The only way to compete on price and be successful Is if you have a cost advantage, meaning that you can produce the product cheaper than your competitor. Samsung is known for having a cost advantage because they make most of the components that go inside the phones that they sell like memory, screen, battery, etc. Even Apple, until recently bought the screen and memories from Samsung because they were cheaper. Samsung doesn't even pay anything for their OS, so they do not have the OS/Software costs that RIM and Apple have. So RIM cannot compete with Samsung on price.

The better strategy is to have a competitive advantage and then charge a premium for it. That was Apple's strategy back when it was unprofitable. Had they just made their computers cheaper than IBM and HP, they would be out of business now. Instead they made better computers and a unique OS to differentiate themselves and they charged a 500-1000$ premium for the computers. They did not sell a lot of computers but at least thy were profitable and this allowed them to make their other products: iPod, iTunes and that differentiated them even more and that's when Apple's ecosystem started.

So I think for RIM it's better to follow a strategy of differentiation and charge a premium for their phones and their advantages: security, email, Messaging, multitasking OS, Car integration with QNX, etc.

[Superfly_FR]

I can afford it, I'm simply not paying more than iP5 $649 US (or same for that matter), or GS3 $549 US (almost identical hardware and smaller screen), or Note 2 $649 US. Flagship BBOS7 devices failed because of premium pricing for old hardware. Just because RIM didn't have their OS ready to take advantage of the Qualcomm S4 processor 9 months ago when it was released and could maybe justify that price is their problem. If they price it like an iPhone, majority of people will buy iPhone. Samsung doesn't even try to price like an iPhone even though they have superior tech in device. If they price it too high get ready for PlayBook like sales figures, huge price drops in both products and stock price after a couple earnings calls where they announce huge writeoffs and admit mistakes. RIM must rebuild its name in the established markets where people are defecting to iOS and Android, and build back marketshare. Premium pricing over similar spec'd devices with a much smaller ecosystem is not going to work!

I go for the "similar price", thought Ip5 was more expensive ($649 is for the 16Gb ?), my base calculation is ASP (carrier price w/o taxes) around $450 (probably a little more).
For off contract, Add 25% gross margin (incl distribution costs) rounded to $100 (550), Add - say 20% avg - taxes (660) ... and you're in that $650-675 area for consumers net price.

[lnichols]

I go for the "similar price", thought Ip5 was more expensive ($649 is for the 16Gb ?), my base calculation is ASP (carrier price w/o taxes) around $450 (probably a little more).
For off contract, Add 25% gross margin (incl distribution costs) rounded to $100 (550), Add - say 20% avg - taxes (660) ... and you're in that $650-675 area for consumers net price.

Ah if that price includes high European taxes then OK. I think anything over $599.99 US before tax is a recipe for disaster based on competition inthe space. No matter how much better BB10 is then the others at launch, we know that it will take time before the ecosystem gets built up.

[narci]

Spend some of those big bucks advertising costs to lower the phone price to sell more phones via word of mouth. This can only happen if RIM is confident in the new product offering.

Burnt me once RIM (bought 64GB PB on launch day), I don't want to get burnt a second time.

[aha]

Stay patient, stay strong

[Superfly_FR]

Ah if that price includes high European taxes then OK. I think anything over $599.99 US before tax is a recipe for disaster based on competition inthe space. No matter how much better BB10 is then the others at launch, we know that it will take time before the ecosystem gets built up.

Spend some of those big bucks advertising costs to lower the phone price to sell more phones via word of mouth. This can only happen if RIM is confident in the new product offering.

Burnt me once RIM (bought 64GB PB on launch day), I don't want to get burnt a second time.

@inichols Here's the dilemma. Price it low and you qualify it as "cheap". Normal price HAVE to be high.
Then, use of temporary discount to gain attraction for a limited time is an efficient tool ... but have to be set from day 1, not as a reaction to modest sales figures.
Believe it or not, consumers like to pay the big price ... their phone is nowadays what 1980's car was to social position exposure. "My phone is expensive = 'cause I deserve it' " (see how appl users shine their devices).
The (almost) only sector that does not suffer of current crisis is ... luxury goods ... and not only for rich people.
So the balance is very difficult ... let's see witch road CEO and CMO have decided to go. I for one go for the "price = range", so that your < $600 is IMHO too much "in the middle" to get a clear price range positioning.

@narci If they are confident and believe BB10 is the best phone, there's no reason they don't invest in advertising/marketing/1to1/social, where $1 invested is supposed to return more. They can afford it with $3B cash reserve. Low pricing is to me a bad move ... even if I (as all of us) would prefer the lowest and buy L&N in a row ... but none of us is average consumer.

[Sith_Apprentice]

And it is killing their bottom line because of the much higher subsidy they have to eat on the sale of the phone!

iPhone drives Sprint growth, but drags loss to $1.3B | Mobile - CNET News



So they added 1.8 Million customers with the iPhone, but their losses grew from $900 Million to $1.3 Billion because of the increased cost to sell the phone on contract. iPhones wouldn't sell at anywhere near the levels they do now if the carriers applied the same subsidy to the iPhone as they do for every other phone out there and an iPhone on contract started at $300 to $400. Why the carriers just don't tell Apple either you drop the price or we'll make your phone way less attractive than theses Samsung phones that are selling great is beyond me.

Yes, they grew 1.8million customers. That is 1.8million additional subscribers paying $50+ per month. So they ate $400 million up front, you are looking at an additional $90 million per month in revenue, or a total of just over $2 billion for the length of the contract. I can only assume that Sprint is making roughly 25% profit on these users monthly contracts. That gives them, over 2 years, a $100 million increase over the initial expense of selling the devices.


This all being said, the pricing of the BB10 devices should be in line with the current Bold prices (off contract) perhaps a *touch* higher. Somewhere between $550 and $650.

[bk1022]

@inichols Here's the dilemma. Price it low and you qualify it as "cheap". Normal price HAVE to be high.
Then, use of temporary discount to gain attraction for a limited time is an efficient tool ... but have to be set from day 1, not as a reaction to modest sales figures.
Believe it or not, consumers like to pay the big price ... their phone is nowadays what 1980's car was to social position exposure. "My phone is expensive = 'cause I deserve it' " (see how appl users shine their devices).
The (almost) only sector that does not suffer of current crisis is ... luxury goods ... and not only for rich people.
So the balance is very difficult ... let's see witch road CEO and CMO have decided to go. I for one go for the "price = range", so that your < $600 is IMHO too much "in the middle" to get a clear price range positioning.

@narci If they are confident and believe BB10 is the best phone, there's no reason they don't invest in advertising/marketing/1to1/social, where $1 invested is supposed to return more. They can afford it with $3B cash reserve. Low pricing is to me a bad move ... even if I (as all of us) would prefer the lowest and buy L&N in a row ... but none of us is average consumer.

You make some interesting points, but I think you are putting too much weight on "luxury branding"... (a) RIM needs to rebuild its premium paying user base without delay; (b) it is suffering from a chicken-and-the-egg syndrome with its ecosystem. I think everyone here agrees (correct me if I am wrong) that it is more important for RIM to sell plenty of Z10s than it is for them to make money next quarter and maybe even the quarter after that.

To allay your concerns, RIM can claim the MSRP is $699. In reality, however, they can funnel subsidies to carriers to rebate customer purchases so that the phone is virtually free on a 3yr contract. They can also offer loyalty discounts straight from RIM if you show you've migrated from legacy BB to a Z10. Neither of these two options makes a Z10 look "cheap", but rather offers "good value" (aka, they are actually cheap to own.)