[Brandon Orr]

It's absolutely ridiculous how telecommunications companies have turned smartphones into a commodity that only has a 1 year life cycle before obsolescence. Cars change models every year but last at least a few years, smartphones are basically worthless a year after release. The trend towards Android will only benefit hardware manufacturers as it makes it easy for consumers to easily switch their hardware and still retain all their apps, contacts and information. It's really a hardware battle now as opposed to a software battle in terms of the actual devices. The vast majority of hardware providers coming online have never touched software. Yet, at the same time you, as a consumer, can never be sure if the specs really live up to the expected performance. With an iPhone you know it is built for the software and with a BlackBerry you know as well, with Android devices there really is a wide margin between excellent performance devices and poor performance devices.

- Developer of PinGuin

[RubberChicken76]

BlackBerry devices are overpriced. Apple devices are (more than)overpriced. Samsung devices are overpriced. Sony devices are overpriced... and so on. New companies NEED to propose aggressive pricing in order to attract costumers ;-)

"Sound like the sales guys I used to work with. The response from them was always "cut the price", "we have to undercut", "buy now and saaaaaave!:"

We did a pricing study a little while later and pricing groups and found something shocking ... they had hacked the price so low that people thought the product was a pile of garbage and didn't want to look at it. The next version was $20 higher ... it sold more units and made more revenue because of the higher price.

Not suggesting BlackBerry shouldn't adapt their pricing structure (I thought the Q5 especially was way too high), but just under-cutting isn't always the way to go.

[early2bed]

So does anyone here even own an Oppo product? I do. They seem to cater to spec-hunters. Back when DVD player specs mattered, players that output HD were all close to $1000. Video hobbyists on the AVI Forum always liked Oppo DVD players because the specs were great and the price was cheap. My Oppo DVD player was super clunky looking, had a horrible remote, and ridiculous UI. But it was cheap and had HD output.

It's all about specs. Their marketing, design, and R&D is nonexistent. You can probably shave off 25% of the price of technology gadgets right there. Cut out the retailer (or retail operation like the Apple Store) and you save another 25%. Voilla, you can afford to charge half the price. That's how it's possible.

You know how iFixit or whatever tears down a premium smartphone and adds up the component prices and says it costs $200 to build? Oppo actually builds it and sells it for $300.

[aha]

Which is smart, isn?t it.

Posted via CB10 with Z30 on 10.2.1.2141

[Jakob Greve]

You should never compare something that hasn't been released to something that has

[anon(1464249)]

Yup, caught that sry .thanks for the link
So whats the price for the 7 qHd $599+?

To your point, yes its amazing the value you get for your money. A year later and your getting 2x the phone for around the same price or less

The price is €100 more.

So does anyone here even own an Oppo product? I do. They seem to cater to spec-hunters. Back when DVD player specs mattered, players that output HD were all close to $1000. Video hobbyists on the AVI Forum always liked Oppo DVD players because the specs were great and the price was cheap. My Oppo DVD player was super clunky looking, had a horrible remote, and ridiculous UI. But it was cheap and had HD output.
It's all about specs. Their marketing, design, and R&D is nonexistent. You can probably shave off 25% of the price of technology gadgets right there. Cut out the retailer (or retail operation like the Apple Store) and you save another 25%. Voilla, you can afford to charge half the price. That's how it's possible.
You know how iFixit or whatever tears down a premium smartphone and adds up the component prices and says it costs $200 to build? Oppo actually builds it and sells it for $300.

That makes sense because they need to make a profit on it. I'm not saying it's wrong to do so, i'm saying either their margins are too high or their build cost is. I don't mind what profit margin they take but they need to be realistic and see how it plays out in the market.
The OPPO is just an example, I could've just as easily taken a Nexus 6.

You should never compare something that hasn't been released to something that has

The video in the first post is actually a review of the unit...Either way this isn't about comparing, it's about pricing a product.

[irweezyy]

Before I start the nitty gritty of this post and my rant, a little intro...

Anyone remember the original price when the Z10 was first released? In Belgium you got a brand new Z10 for the low low price of �599 ($800 USD). Currently (after 1 year) it sits at �245 ($337 USD) which in my humble opinion is the right price for this device and the Z10 should have been sold around this price from the beginning.

Keep this in mind when reading the rest of the post.

/rant

I was talking to a friend who owns a Z10 and he told me he was looking at an OPPO N1 for his next device. I had never heard of OPPO before, so I decided to google it and see why he was interested in it.
I noticed the N1 was a phablet and offered some nice features at a great price but what really caught my eye was OPPO's new and unreleased FIND 7 device.

For people unfamiliar with it have a look:


Looking good right? Right? Damn right!
Just take a look at the specs: OPPO Find 7 specs

I'll summarize some of them:

• 5.5 inches (1440x2560) 538ppi display (2K)
• Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 8974-AC chip
• Quad-core 2500mhz Krait 400
• 3GB RAM
• 3000 mAh battery (which charges from 0 to 75% in 30 minutes)
• Custom ColorOS
• ...

This thing sounds like a monster and it pretty much is but the real kick in the teeth here is not a superior Phone in terms of hardware, cause comparing this unreleased beast to the Z10 which is 1 year old is unfair, but the price tag.
The OPPO find 7 is priced at only �399 ($550 USD). Source => http://europe.oppostyle.com/14-find-7

I mean seriously? A 2K display, latest Snapdragon chip, Quad-core CPU, big battery, 3GB RAM and only �399?
How did they do it?

It has been mentioned before and it will be mentioned numerous times over, BlackBerry pricing is nuts. Just image what this Phone would cost if BlackBerry released it...

Companies like OPPO are given people the incentive to switch, they provide top of the line hardware at fair prices.

I love BlackBerry, I love it as a company and I love it as my phone. The biggest reason I stay with BlackBerry is the OS. The hardware itself is limping behind the market but it works for me and I don't need a quad-core CPU or 3GB of RAM as long as my Z10 runs smooth, and it does, thanks to the OS. BlackBerry affectionado's like me and I'm sure a whole bunch of other people are just staying because of the OS, but we like hardware too... I'm a techie, I love hardware, I love to push hardware to the limits and see what it can do. My Z10 is aging and I'm not interested in a Z30 cause it's ridiculously overpriced (Belgium doesn't do subsidized phones, we need to pay for it outright) for the hardware it brings compared to other offerings available.

For anyone saying that techies are rare, true, but there are only 3 groups when it comes to buying a smartphone.

1. Techies => they buy the phone they want cause they know what it can and can't do.
2. Sheep => they buy the brand they want cause it's "their" brand
3. The rest => they buy whatever the techies, sheep and the marketing departements tell them to buy because they have no idea that a Snapdragon isn't a fire hazard.

And let's face it, most people, even some techies conclude that a quad-core CPU is superior to a dual-core CPU because quad is 4 and dual is 2. They don't care about the OS being optimized or running smooth on dual-core, they care about it's more, it's better and it's cheaper (compared to BlackBerry)...

I'd just like the BlackBerry engineers to sit down for a minute, sketch a Phone that stands out in terms of hardware and have the sales team bring it to market with a fair price. This is IMHO their biggest nemesis. Getting a phone out there with a fair price and not acting like a premium brand, overpricing their handsets.

/rant

Due to technical limitation, what can your z10 not do?

Posted via CB10

[anon(1464249)]

Due to technical limitation, what can your z10 not do?
Posted via CB10

Amazing how you quoted the entire first post but obviously didn't read it.

This is not a comparison, this isn't about the Z10 not being able to do stuff other phones can. This is about all BlackBerry phones being priced too high.

[nycspaces.]

RIM was a year late in launching BBOS10 and when it hit last year it was a year behind where it needed to be to take back market share. If they had launched in 2013 with an OS at a 10.2.1.XXXX level of functionality there would have been little question about the pricing. I agree it was a little high but if the core OS functioned and Android runtime was functional at today's levels the reviews would have been entirely different and BBRY would have held more of its base and had a chance to expand their market share.

Certainly we are seeing decent reviews of the Z30, if you go back and look at Z10 reviews they were not so kind....and realitically they were correct.

[aha]

Amazing how you quoted the entire first post but obviously didn't read it.

This is not a comparison, this isn't about the Z10 not being able to do stuff other phones can. This is about all BlackBerry phones being priced too high.

Long posts are less likely got read unless it's really really interesting.

Posted via CB10 with Z30 on 10.2.1.2141

[RubberChicken76]

Certainly we are seeing decent reviews of the Z30, if you go back and look at Z10 reviews they were not so kind....and realitically they were correct.

I remember them being mixed. Some were definitely not so kind, but I also remember plenty that liked it fine. The over-arching theme I remember was not as much criticism of Z10 or BlackBerry10, but what is the differentiator to make up for the lack of apps compared to iPhone and Android. that applies as well to the Z30

[--TommesJay--]

The low labor costs in China while I agree are beneficial are also found in Mexico.

You don't sell a $250 device for $800 if you are struggling to stay relevant. This is my point.

The point is that this is not about labor cost only. It's about the whole company. Any square foot of real estate, every engineer's (R&D) work hour, in OPPOs case, is based in China. The entire process from the first idea to the product on the shelf is (likely much) cheaper in OPPOs case. Also any administrative job position - it's a lot of work to run a company of this size.

So you say "a $250 device"....dude that's BOM only. That has nothing to do with actual costs of goods manufactured. And even the latter costs don't count in any marketing, distribution or administrative costs on the company itself.

I grand you that a Z10 shouldn't cost $800 at some place, but if a company like OPPO cranks out a top notch flagship for retail $550 it doesn't mean that any price for a Z10 over $350 is 'unfair'.

[kbz1960]

Put BB11 on it and sold.

[RedFoxOne]

The market has a good way of telling us if something is overpriced - it doesn't sell - Apple devices are very clearly not overpriced.

Ha! Same old argument "because it sells the most, it is the best OS". "Because it sells well, it's not overpriced."

[RedFoxOne]

Oppo does look good. Competitive price with quality as good as Samsung premium line I think. And I also think Oppo positions itself as a Chinese made premium brand.

[iN8ter]

BlackBerry devices are overpriced. Apple devices are (more than)overpriced. Samsung devices are overpriced. Sony devices are overpriced... and so on. New companies NEED to propose aggressive pricing in order to attract costumers ;-) The market is full of phone producers and the ONLY way to gain a tiny place in there, is to throw in devices with BIG specs product at LOW price. Just my 2 cents..

Posted via CB10

I disagree that all phones are overpriced, and the S5 is actually slightly cheaper than the S4 so I dunno what to say about that.

OEMs can attract customers by innovating and offering unique and useful features.

If users think it's worth paying for, they will pay for it.

Also, the price of the phone is offset or broken up in so many ways here (Subsidies, Edge plans, etc.) that most people simply don't care. They get the phone they want, pay their bills, and move on with their lives.

The issue with the BB devices is that they introduced a new OS with no traction and priced it on par with Android/iOS flagships. Not only was it ludicrous because people immediately assign it a lower "value" level than established players but the when you add the cost of moving platforms to that (rebuying apps, etc.) it just wasn't worth it to a lot of people. Nokia was smarter. Their 2012/2013 devices were noticeably cheaper than Blackberry's out of the gate ($449 ($99 Subsidized) Lumia 92x vs. $550-600 ($199 Subsidized) Z10), so they sold more handsets as a result. For someone with no brand/OS loyalty, it was a no-brainer - easily saved money.

[anon(1464249)]

Long posts are less likely got read unless it's really really interesting.

Posted via CB10 with Z30 on 10.2.1.2141

Then why even post a comment?

The point is that this is not about labor cost only. It's about the whole company. Any square foot of real estate, every engineer's (R&D) work hour, in OPPOs case, is based in China. The entire process from the first idea to the product on the shelf is (likely much) cheaper in OPPOs case. Also any administrative job position - it's a lot of work to run a company of this size.
So you say "a $250 device"....dude that's BOM only. That has nothing to do with actual costs of goods manufactured. And even the latter costs don't count in any marketing, distribution or administrative costs on the company itself.
I grand you that a Z10 shouldn't cost $800 at some place, but if a company like OPPO cranks out a top notch flagship for retail $550 it doesn't mean that any price for a Z10 over $350 is 'unfair'.

I know, I'm oversimplifying things. According to CrackBerry (Here's what the BlackBerry Z10 costs to make | CrackBerry.com) the Z10 costs $154 to put together. Add to that the R&D, Software, various licenses and a profit margin and you hit the price of $800 retail (unsubsidized). Seriously? While I agree there is a higher costs than the average Android device because of the OS being made in-house and in-house manufacturing it's still way off the mark. Belgium carriers and i'm sure other carriers around the world don't practice the subsidizing technique so we get to pay full retail value if we want it. Pricing at $800 while there are other phones out there that do the same or more is just plain stupid, maybe this worked in the days the name BlackBerry still had meaning but people are getting more conscious about their spendings and choosing a $500 phone or a $800 phone with the same abilities is a no-brainer for most.

They got greedy possibly hoped on customers practicing brand loyalty but it's all about the mighty buck these days than it is about being loyal to a brand. Unfortunaltey in the process they alienated a bunch of their customers who switched and pushed away who knows how many potential customers all for that mighty buck.

In comparison, an iPhone 5 costs about $199 to build and has a manufacturing cost of $8 (thanks to Foxconn). What we're seeing with the Z3 being priced below $200 is the lower manufacturing cost (Foxconn) and the lower costs for the OS who has matured and is now being maintained rather than being created. If they were to pump out a high-end device with Foxconn I see no reason why they can't stay below the $500 mark. I'm not holding my breath though as Chen stated that the high-end devices will still be build by BlackBerry.

[JulesDB]

The difference between Oppo and BlackBerry prices arises from the fact that at Oppo they did not need to pay the programmers for developing the operating system, because they find it practically already developed.

They only have to develop the hardware, wich is quite simple especially in China where everything is more competitive.

Anyway let's stop on focusing on Android, it is a different experience: those who love it, also know where to find it !!! (everywhere)

[kbz1960]

The difference between Oppo and BlackBerry prices arises from the fact that at Oppo they did not need to pay the programmers for developing the operating system, because they find it practically already developed.

They only have to develop the hardware, wich is quite simple especially in China where everything is more competitive.

Anyway let's stop on focusing on Android, it is a different experience: those who love it, also know where to find it !!! (everywhere)

The point isn't about OSes, it's about selling price.

[Troy Tiscareno]

If you ask me all smart phones are over priced. Advances in technology should be bringing all phones down in price. remember big flat screen tvs?
They are a lot cheaper now than they were when they came out.

Smartphones ARE much cheaper.

2 years ago, a "great" phone was a 1.2GHz dual-core - essentially the Z10's specs, and people happily paid $650 for them. What does it cost for such a phone today?

The reason you can't compare TVs to phones is because a TV's cost is mostly in the display panel, and while the costs of those have come down, TVs don't have INTERNALS that increase in cost and complexity every year. Your average high-end smartTV made today has a single-core, 1 GHz processor of the type that powered the original Samsung Galaxy 1 back in 2010.

[anon(1464249)]

Smartphones ARE much cheaper.

2 years ago, a "great" phone was a 1.2GHz dual-core - essentially the Z10's specs, and people happily paid $650 for them. What does it cost for such a phone today?

The reason you can't compare TVs to phones is because a TV's cost is mostly in the display panel, and while the costs of those have come down, TVs don't have INTERNALS that increase in cost and complexity every year. Your average high-end smartTV made today has a single-core, 1 GHz processor of the type that powered the original Samsung Galaxy 1 back in 2010.

While your argument is valid, it can easily be cast aside. The internals of most phones aren't made in-house, they're just licensed and bought in bulk. As you can verify from every iSuppli teardown of any smartphone to date, the internals aren't the bulk of the cost. A BlackBerry Z10 costs $154 to build, add about $10 to assemble and you get $164. So that's seriously cheap IMO. While updated or new parts could and probably will cost more they still won't be the bulk of the cost.

Take a guess and add 100% of costs to the phone so that makes $164 + $164 = $328 add on a profit margin of 25% and lo and behold you get $410 if they were to take a profit margin of 50% you'd get $490 but let's add $9 cause it looks good. So $499.00, that should have been the retail price at launch. If sales started to slow they'd easily go to $399.00 and if sales stalled completely they'd go to where they are now $299.00.

These calculations are pure fiction as I have no idea what the added costs are on a BlackBerry Z10 but considering the fact they're selling them now at $299 I won't be far off. If somehow the added costs truly are a lot more, than BlackBerry has no business in hardware and hardware R&D and should just offload it all on Foxconn.

The story remains the same. The phone is cheap to produce and assemble but what gets added in the mix and why is the retail price on any newly released BlackBerry device always sky high.

[cgk]

Ha! Same old argument "because it sells the most, it is the best OS". "Because it sells well, it's not overpriced."

I never mentioned the OS - a factor I actually have no interest in because I think with the maturity of modern OSes it's an irrelevant question, it's all about ecosystems, carrier incentives and marketing dollars.

[RedFoxOne]

it's all about ecosystems, carrier incentives and marketing dollars.

Yes I agree with that point, but we can't just say if it doesn't sell then it's overpriced or if it sells well then it's not overpriced. There are things people won't buy if overpriced, but there are also things people would still buy even if overpriced. Mac and PC for example. Or take Z10 as another example, it was overpriced and didn't sell much. Now the price drops to a reasonable price, sales is better but not yet at a point we can say it sells well.

[--TommesJay--]

Then why even post a comment?



I know, I'm oversimplifying things. According to CrackBerry (Here's what the BlackBerry Z10 costs to make | CrackBerry.com) the Z10 costs $154 to put together. Add to that the R&D, Software, various licenses and a profit margin and you hit the price of $800 retail (unsubsidized). Seriously? While I agree there is a higher costs than the average Android device because of the OS being made in-house and in-house manufacturing it's still way off the mark. Belgium carriers and i'm sure other carriers around the world don't practice the subsidizing technique so we get to pay full retail value if we want it. Pricing at $800 while there are other phones out there that do the same or more is just plain stupid, maybe this worked in the days the name BlackBerry still had meaning but people are getting more conscious about their spendings and choosing a $500 phone or a $800 phone with the same abilities is a no-brainer for most.

They got greedy possibly hoped on customers practicing brand loyalty but it's all about the mighty buck these days than it is about being loyal to a brand. Unfortunaltey in the process they alienated a bunch of their customers who switched and pushed away who knows how many potential customers all for that mighty buck.

In comparison, an iPhone 5 costs about $199 to build and has a manufacturing cost of $8 (thanks to Foxconn). What we're seeing with the Z3 being priced below $200 is the lower manufacturing cost (Foxconn) and the lower costs for the OS who has matured and is now being maintained rather than being created. If they were to pump out a high-end device with Foxconn I see no reason why they can't stay below the $500 mark. I'm not holding my breath though as Chen stated that the high-end devices will still be build by BlackBerry.

Okay, again: your $154 Z10 and $199 iPhone are just BOMs = Bill of Material. BOM hasn't anything to do with actual costs of a manufactured product and especially nothing with a product on a shelf you can actually buy. Even those $8 for manufacturing an iPhone are, simply put, bogus.

[cgk]

Yes I agree with that point, but we can't just say if it doesn't sell then it's overpriced or if it sells well then it's not overpriced. There are things people won't buy if overpriced, but there are also things people would still buy even if overpriced. Mac and PC for example. Or take Z10 as another example, it was overpriced and didn't sell much. Now the price drops to a reasonable price, sales is better but not yet at a point we can say it sells well.

You seem unable or unwilling to understand the concept of added value - for its target audience, the mac sells - it's not intended for people who want to spend only $400 on a cheap PC or laptop - in the same way, the iphone would only be overpriced if it didn't sale to the audience it was aimed by - but it does sell, so in a market sense it cannot be overpriced.

The Z10 sells now in the same way the Touchpad sold - to bottom feeders not the intended premium audience.