[CrackedBarry]

[QUOTE=Roo Zilla;9034562]

<Sigh>

Lesson No. 1 from Economics 102:

Price is not dependent on cost. Price is determined by the intersection of supply and demand. Remember that and don't forget it.

Does crude oil from Saudi Arabia cost 10X-20X more than it did in the early 1970's even adjusted for inflation? Of course not. Worldwide demand though is at least 20X what it was in 1970's. If cost determines price, then how do you determine the price of something that inherently has no cost? For example, stock prices. How do you explain things like real estate bubbles? How do you explain how prices differ on an apartment on the 3rd floor as opposed to the 33rd floor? There are million things that defy the simple explanation of "price is determined by cost" idea.

Yeah, that post added absolutely nothing to this thread, unless the purpose was to make yourself sound mighty smart and oh-so well versed in economics.

Crude oil, stock and housing prices have absolutely nothing to do with smartphones.

Your post made even less sense considering that:

A: There is very low demand for Blackberry products. Even if the demand was higher, which it is in some markets, Blackberry faces intense competition from lower priced competitors.

B: Another lesson from economics 102: Sometimes it's necessary to sacrifice profit margins for marketshare.

C: The phone in question is specifically aimed at very price sensitive markets. Price is highly dependent on cost, since its the major factor governing the retail price in most markets. The price is one of theist important differentiators and competitive advantages in the markets where this phone is meant to compete.

[lnichols]

[QUOTE=Roo Zilla;9034562]

<Sigh>

Lesson No. 1 from Economics 102:

Price is not dependent on cost. Price is determined by the intersection of supply and demand. Remember that and don't forget it.

Does crude oil from Saudi Arabia cost 10X-20X more than it did in the early 1970's even adjusted for inflation? Of course not. Worldwide demand though is at least 20X what it was in 1970's. If cost determines price, then how do you determine the price of something that inherently has no cost? For example, stock prices. How do you explain things like real estate bubbles? How do you explain how prices differ on an apartment on the 3rd floor as opposed to the 33rd floor? There are million things that defy the simple explanation of "price is determined by cost" idea.

So why are the BB10 devices that are in low demand but with plenty of supply, enough to cut back production yet again, still selling at too high of a price to move units? Perhaps you should be giving your basic economic lessons to BlackBerry management and not CrackBerry members.

Posted via CB10

[the_igg]

I, for one, feel this price is perfectly competitive and will purchase 10 of it when it comes out! BlackBerry totally knocked this out of the park!




























Said no one ever...

Posted via CB10

[bekkay]

So why are the BB10 devices that are in low demand but with plenty of supply, enough to cut back production yet again, still selling at too high of a price to move units? Perhaps you should be giving your basic economic lessons to BlackBerry management and not CrackBerry members.

Posted via CB10

Look at the downward sloping demand (MB) curve. Just because the price is artificially high (or higher than the equilibrium) does not necessarily mean there won't be any sales.

[lnichols]

Look at the downward sloping demand (MB) curve. Just because the price is artificially high (or higher than the equilibrium) does not necessarily mean there won't be any sales.

I didn't say they wouldn't sell any, but it is obvious that they aren't selling many.

Posted via CB10

[itsnotaboutart]

Price is not dependent on cost. Price is determined by the intersection of supply and demand. Remember that and don't forget it.

Thanks for the lesson, professor. I honestly don't know if you r post was a response to mine. But since it quoted mine, I will assume that it was.

Posted via CB10

[itsnotaboutart]

Allow me to retort.

First, I was responding to a bald assertion about what BlackBerry's profits would be at a particular selling price. Price - cost = profit.

Second, are you saying that the supply curve is independent of the suppliers' costs? If so, you might want to hit the Economics textbooks again. Price is not solely dependent on costs, perhaps, but it is not independent of it. But that was not even the point of my post.

Posted via CB10

[jr4941]

Perhaps it's important to remember that 60% of BBRY sales last quarter were BBOS. That being said, having a 'new' device at a higher pricepoint that is seen as 'new' means it will perhaps sell at a higher price (and margin) and won't have a reduced price already (like the 9900, etc).

The 9320 is selling at Bell in Canada for $199.99 outright. Is this better than that phone? Probably.

Now, we also don't know the costs to produce this phone. Was it really, really cheap? Who knows. In my view, this is why they are looking for a strategic partnership. They need someone to make cheap *** phones running BBOS.

[Bbnivende]

The 9720 has a bigger screen with a higher pixel count than the 9320. The Camera has a higher pixel count as well. Still I would think that a good used or cheaper 9900 with a larger after market battery would be the best BBOS phone. BB should offer a BBOS Q10 for those markets that can use it or at least upgrade the 9900 with a better battery and camera.

[Roo Zilla]

So why are the BB10 devices that are in low demand but with plenty of supply, enough to cut back production yet again, still selling at too high of a price to move units? Perhaps you should be giving your basic economic lessons to BlackBerry management and not CrackBerry members.

Posted via CB10

Because demand is negatively sloped referencing price on the vertical. Sales of BlackBerries are hitting left side of the intersection, thus few units sold, and many units in inventory. Ideally, you want units sold and units produced to be equal, and that's where the demand and supply curves meet. BlackBerry's situation is that units sold is left of the intersection, thus there's a big gap in units demanded, and units supplied.

[Roo Zilla]

Allow me to retort.

First, I was responding to a bald assertion about what BlackBerry's profits would be at a particular selling price. Price - cost = profit.

Second, are you saying that the supply curve is independent of the suppliers' costs? If so, you might want to hit the Economics textbooks again. Price is not solely dependent on costs, perhaps, but it is not independent of it. But that was not even the point of my post.

Posted via CB10

Price is independent of supplier cost. A person wanting to buy something doesn't care what it costs the producer to make. For example, a person wanting to buy a smartphone might have a particular price in mind, but he sure doesn't care how much it costs Apple to make an iPhone. The supplier makes up his mind to produce a good if he can make a profit on it. That's the supply curve, its slopes positively with price, not cost.

That doesn't mean these curves are static. Over time things like technology improvements lower costs, and the supply curve tends to shift outward, as more suppliers are willing to produce a good as costs go down. By the same token, demand for things also tends to shift outward over time, as something that was once seen as a luxury good, (ie. smartphones) becomes a staple good. Which curve shifts faster is dependent on multiple factors, including things like brand loyalty.

[bekkay]

Just an update on how even more competitive the 9720's price is becoming

The Nexus 4 is now priced at $199/$249.

[notfanboy]

Just an update on how even more competitive the 9720's price is becoming

The Nexus 4 is now priced at $199/$249.

I honestly can't imagine how BlackBerry can stay in the hardware business for much longer.

[belfastdispatcher]

It's not as bad as initially thought, this phone is sold at the exact same price the 9320 was originally sold at, �140 on prepay in UK. The 9320 is now �100 or less.

[Fuzzballz]

Interesting that this is the exact reason I switched to Android, 6 months ago! The exact reason.

I'd had my Tour for almost 4 years, I was looking for a new phone. Waiting for Bolds to come down in price. They never did. My eye started wandering to Android and I saw that I could get a solid new Android phone for less than half the price of the OS7 Bold. I did, and I'm glad I did.

[greggebhardt]

I just read an article where they mention that Blackberry is pricing their new BB7 device at $280. I cannot believe my eyes! I am losing all faith in Blackberry and their management. How can you price a phone with 1 core, 512 ROM and a 10 year old OS at that price?

The newest Lumia phone has better specs, a modern OS (WP) and is priced at 150$. This is where BB7 needs to compete. They can even lose money on the hardware, but make this money up in BIS. Blackberry has an advantage over all other OEMs, where they collect service fees for each BB7 device that is sold. This should allow them to outprice the competition and still make up the money in service revenue. Why they aren't doing this is beyond me!

BlackBerry's New Phone Is Its Most Outrageous - Forbes


Into Starcraft? Join our Channel: C001242DE

How can you "just now" be loosing faith in Blackberry management? These phones were cheap for them to make and will sell OK.

[SteveBB10]

Wow at 199 I kinda want to pick one up.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

BlackBerry is counting on BIS and special carrier data packages to off set the higher device cost. And this will work in some markets. But as markets mature and data speeds increase to 2G, 3G and up speeds. Those BIS devices are going to suffer the same fact in those markets as they did in places like the US. BBOS is dead, BlackBerry just want to get as much out of it as they can. Will they sell some devices, yes. Will it become a major seller in any market, no.