- 09-27-2012, 08:38 PM #1
how much would you be willing to pay for a windows 8 phone? or surface for that matter?
initially there was a lot of speculation suggesting that windows 8 phones would be very competitive, along with the surface. now there is a lot of rumors circulating about pricing and they seem absurd!
the galaxy s3 is $549, htc one x is $499, iphone which is usually the most expensive is $649. if nokia is going to charge $899 for a phone, i am definately going to pass... in fact it will upset me to the point of never buying one. at this point in the game , they cant expect to convince people to buy one of their phones over competitors if they are going to charge nearly double. people wont see the value in that. no cell phone should cost nearly $1000 dollars after tax. same thing goes for the surface, they need to come in with a lower price point to build marketshare. until they have established that, no one will buy it... now i know those are off contract, but thats the way some of us have to buy, like myself. IMO, nokia is going to approach this all wrong with those price points... i sincerely hope for their sake, thats these prices are just rumors. im already getting aggravated:mad: with the horrible marketing. too much confusion, and not enough information:@. too many changes at the last minute. no more, zune, no more metro, no more xbox live... make up your mind already! you have a wonderful product!!! market it correctly! thus far its been sloppy, at least thats my thoughts.
so what do you think? what are these next phones worth? what would you pay?
ps. the lenove tablet is also being priced at $799, LMAO... good luck getting people to pay $800 bucks for a lenove windows 8 tablet over an ipad. regardless of how much more functional it is... not many people will be using tablets as a PC replacement... and i really want a surface, but it better be competitive, or there is along road ahead...
Last edited by Bear lx; 09-27-2012 at 08:46 PM.
- 09-27-2012, 09:08 PM #2
I am really having the hardest time waiting for windows phone 8. I Am! considering getting the galaxy nexus if the lumia 820 is more expensive than $350. The speculated $600 for an unlocked 820 is extreme overkill. i want so badly to get rid of my samsung focus :(
- 09-27-2012, 09:49 PM #5
If the ratio between EU and US prices is the same as the iPhone's, a (32GB) Lumia 920 should cost around $550 / $600 unsubsidized.
EU prices and mysterious pre-orders from eBay and shady websites really aren't an indication of anything.
09-27-2012, 10:00 PM #6
- 1,038 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
I have a budget of $1500 for my holiday expenditures for any combination of Lumia 920, Surface RT, and Xbox 360 + Kinect (with priorities in that order). I expect that the realistic pricing in the US will be $550 (out of contract), $500, and $300 respectively, so with a little flex allowed, I should be OK.
If I had to compromise, I'd skip the Xbox for now.
- 09-27-2012, 10:13 PM #7
The only reason they are being rumored that high is because they know the die hards will pay a nose bleed for it just like the isheep pay a nose bleed on opening day. Once the initial rush is over everything will level out. Just don't buy it on day one and you will be fine. I don't expect the 920 to cost more than $599 once the dust settles.
- 09-27-2012, 10:31 PM #8
The Nokia 808 started at $699 but it didn't stay at that price very long. It's currently $559:
Amazon.com: Nokia 808 PureView Unlocked Phone with a 41 MP Camera with Carl Zeiss Optics--U.S. Warranty (White): Cell Phones & Accessories
I can see the 920 starting out at $699, but it won't stay at that price very long. It's basic economics. If the demand is low and the supply is high, they'll lower the price.
- 09-27-2012, 11:20 PM #10
I'm hoping for a maximum of $600 full retail for the 920. I still haven't decided if I'll pay the unsubsidized price or just add an extra line to my account and pay the ETF on my current line to get the discounted price. I'm not terribly worried about losing my current phone number and if the 920 turns out to be as awesome as it looks, I think I'd be okay with waiting 20 months for an upgrade as opposed to 10 months if I were to pay full retail.
- 09-27-2012, 11:30 PM #11
- 09-27-2012, 11:34 PM #12
Windows Phone handsets will have to be priced significantly lower, out of the gate, to get any attention at all. A relatively unknown HTC 8X or Lumia 920 at the same price (or more) than the iPhone 5 and Galaxy S III will get completely ignored by the average user.
They'll attract a lot of attention (and sales) if the prices are much lower, however. Say, $49 for either on contract (versus $150 to $400 for the Samsung and Apple devices).
- 09-28-2012, 12:08 AM #13
- 09-28-2012, 12:36 AM #14
- 09-28-2012, 01:01 AM #15
I'm on odds at this one.
I don't want Windows Phone to be associated with cheap devices, like that Mango wave. But I also don't find it fair to sell Windows Phone at a premium price when it's so behind its competitors.
I just want WP8 to be better.
- 09-28-2012, 06:08 AM #16
The highest OFFICIAL price for the 920 is 649 Euros. If you are going by the unofficial, unauthorized ebay price of $899 and basing your assumptions on that then you are just giving yourself heart palpitations for nothing. And it will also be prudent to wait until the official price has been announced for your region and carrier before going off on an "doomed to fail, wont sell any at that price" rant.
When the 900 first released on at&t the price was very competitive, on contract and off. I know its the in thing to bash Nokia (our resident bashers are already in attendance) but I don't see why so many are rushing to condemn Nokia for unofficial pricing when they have shown they can be competitive and pricing has not been announced for all markets.
- 09-28-2012, 06:19 AM #17
- 09-28-2012, 08:07 AM #18
The iPhone 5 64GB version off contract is roughly $1,100+. Now, with that in mind I don't think anyone is crazy enough to buy it off contract but I guarantee people will.
On contract, I would definitely spend $300-400 given the phone and the carrier. If I'm going to buy off contract, I'm going to buy an off contract phone that is $300.
- 09-28-2012, 09:35 AM #19
- 09-28-2012, 09:38 AM #20
- 09-28-2012, 09:41 AM #21
I venture a lot if people would use it as a laptop replacement.
As for iPads... you're taking technology that fits in a phone and putting it in a tablet. Easy. You have a bunch of room.
For Win8 tablets, you're shrinking full laptops into a smaller package, while adding touch responsiveness. Much more complex.
I agree that RT tablets will need to be under $500. But I think people will pay more for a nice Win8 laptop replacement.
- 09-28-2012, 09:51 AM #22
sure, i see your point...
and i agree to a point, but to ultimately win marketshare they need to be competitive to give people a reason to come over. and im not talking about rational folks who have half a brain, im talking about the tech ignorant people who make up a large portion of ipads marketshare... marketshare brings devs, devs bring apps, apps bring more customers, more customers bring more oem accessories, which ultimately make happy windows 8 customers!
- 09-28-2012, 10:05 AM #23
There's a tough balancing act though. If they price themselves too low, it will be associated with "cheapness".
But even if they can avoid that stigma, they will have painted themselves into a corner. If Win8 tabs are priced so low that OEMs can't make any money, they may gain market share but lose money. But even worse, they'll establish a precedent that customers will expect to be followed in the next wave of devices. Any price increases to later devices will be met with outrage.
I will say that your business model could work if OEMs looked at their tablets as products that they'd sell for 3 yrs, with no hardware improvements. Then they could hope to make up losses in the first few months with sales in the latter years. It would be mighty risky though. I actually thought Lenovo's $799 price sounded extremely competitive considering most Ultrabooks are close to $1000.
- 09-28-2012, 10:07 AM #24
Microsoft SHOULD be the "cheap choice."
That was how it became dominant -- selling Windows PCs for 1/4 the price of Macs. It made them empowering and put a modern PC on the desktop of most anybody who wanted one (versus the Mac, which was "exclusive").
The Windows Phone "price the same as Apple" strategy has been an abject failure that Microsoft and its OEMs appear content to keep repeating (judging from US pricing for 8X and Euro pricing for 820/920), despite that failure.
It blows me away that they keep ignoring their lessons from the PC past.
- 09-28-2012, 10:25 AM #25
MS shouldn't be the "cheap choice" when comparing apples to oranges.
Bring the price of a full PC in a tablet to below iPad pricing would likely need cheap hardware parts. It also would require deals with software makers to include bloatware on the desktop side that would be a pain to remove. Not to mention the tablets being plastered with stickers.
Windows isn't seen as a premium experience because of the sacrifices that were made to become cheap. And Apple came along and offered an alternative that consumers are scooping up.
If we compare apples to apples, then yes, WinRT tablets should be cheaper than iPads. But having Win8 tablets cheaper is pushing it.