Let's be honest - this thing isn't going to compete at $299

[JustToClarify]

Joking aside, yes iPhone can sell at that price because of the name recognition. It's actually really frustrating how na?ve most consumers are. A friend just went and bought an iPhone 4 because it was an iPhone and "it was free!". I tried telling her that she got ripped off buying a nearly 3-year-old phone with outdated specs that is stuck on 3G and how she would've been much better getting a different free phone (Nokia Lumia 822 or the HTC8X, which was recently free, etc.) but she had never even heard of them and didn't even think about looking into other options. It's a huge hill Microsoft and Nokia need to get over.

yupp but that's what some here can't understand, you first have to make reputation and then you can sell your phones at higher prices, Nokia reputation with 2 last CEOs went down to virtually zero so...

 

[Nataku4ca]

Sure. But I can't think of an example in tech where a struggling company INCREASED a price and succeeded. Here's two high priced tech products of recent memory I can remember failing because they were high priced.

The HP Touchpad came out and was priced the same as iPad. Nobody bought them. When they dropped to $99/$149, there were lines at Best Buys for them.

Recently, Blackberry priced the Z10 at $199 on contract, competitive with the Samsungs and Apples of the world. Nobody is buying them at that price, despite better multitasking, better messaging and email, blah blah blah. So now they have to slash prices to $49 on contract. If they had launched at $49 on contract, maybe the Z10 becomes a surprise hit.

there is a problem with the two examples you brought up, Touchpad didn't fail because it was high priced, the OS the app store the marketting all had to do with it (lets not forget HP's crappy efforts..) The 99 firesale sold the product because IT WAS TOO CHEAP to pass by (that's what I yelled in my head when I saw the headline, didn't get my hands on one in time though... ), and plus the syndrome that I mention earlier had alot to do with it (high reg price, super low sales price), the most important part of it all is that companies make devices to make money not to just simply sell as many as they can, had HP sold the thing at 99 right from the start, the device is either very crummy or HP would have had to lost a good 1~200 dollars on every sale, would've doomed the management

as for blackberry, they still aren't selling like fire at $49 on contract are they? even if they did come out at $49 it still would've sold at similar rate, there are several problems with the blackberry but none of it has to do with the price (at least I didn't hear ppl crying it's too expensive), heck I showed bb10 to several people, but a lot of the reaction I got was that it was too complicated. why? im not 100% sure if this is why, but i think it's because the GUI isn't exactly easy to understand right off the bat and there are alot of gestures to remember rather then buttons, after toying with it for awhile i think they didn't balance it right where WP actually had a good balance of buttons and gestures

beside Nokia didn't "increase" the price, the 1020 is coming out "at" that price point, it's not like they don't have other products for other price points... (I saw a bunch of 520s popping up around me, something to cheer for)

 

[Rem97]

it just might be the thing that forces MS to buy Nokia.

I really hope this happens.

 

[maj71303]

Sure. But I can't think of an example in tech where a struggling company INCREASED a price and succeeded. Here's two high priced tech products of recent memory I can remember failing because they were high priced.

The HP Touchpad came out and was priced the same as iPad. Nobody bought them. When they dropped to $99/$149, there were lines at Best Buys for them.

Recently, Blackberry priced the Z10 at $199 on contract, competitive with the Samsungs and Apples of the world. Nobody is buying them at that price, despite better multitasking, better messaging and email, blah blah blah. So now they have to slash prices to $49 on contract. If they had launched at $49 on contract, maybe the Z10 becomes a surprise hit.

Thats the big ? there has never been a tech company that became a hit after raising prices.I think they underestimate the smartphone fatigue and without the app ecosystem of the big two people aren't just gonna switch. The U.S. market is kind of also saturated with smartphones so I'm going to wait and catch this at a lower price point or wait for the real flagship later this year that has undated specs.

 

[theefman]

I really hope this happens.

Hopefully it never will, would be the biggest travesty in the history of technology.

 

[Rem97]

Hopefully it never will, would be the biggest travesty in the history of technology.

Why would it? (just curious about why you think that)

 

[Colby Lee]

Why would it? (just curious about why you think that)

I second the question, why?

 

[Bkr11]

I haven't taken the time to read all the responses, but I'm growing so tired of the pricing debate. There are obvious massive misses in relatively recent tech history (HP Touchpad and to a lesser extent Surface RT), and then there are less obvious situations that are too numerous to list. I think people have nailed it in saying that this isn't intended to be a mainstream phone that everybody could/should buy, despite us WP/Nokia fans wanting it to be a massive sales success.

The fact of the matter is just because a person likes a certain gadget/car/house/boat/plane doesn't mean that the manufacturer should price to get every last potential buyer. If your margins are slim to none "making it up on volume" doesn't exactly work. IMO, if anybody could/should subsidize this it's MSFT and their war chest of cash, not Nokia. Perhaps them bundling the camera grip through the MSFT store is a small example of this.

On the other end of the spectrum has anybody followed the saga of Ouya? Very cool concept, great price point ($99) and an innovative concept (that is now being copied). Unfortunately, outside of the big believers a lot of people are complaining about it being underpowered, quality of the controller, etc. WTF does one expect for $99? I just want to yell "You can't have it all people"...but instead I just move on.

I've been looking forward to this phone for a very long time. I'm pretty sure I'll be upgrading, need to see more low light samples before doing so. If I don't I'll be looking at the Fuji X100s. The X100s is considerably more expensive (and presumably much better quality) than this phone, and probably overkill for me, but that's what I've decided. If buying this for either $300 or $700 on/off contract happens, it will "save" me either $900/$500...so in my opinion that's great value. Probably flawed logic, but they are the buying choices I've settled on.

The price will come down eventually, but for the early adopters that really want this (and can afford it) $300 vs. $100 or $200 isn't exactly a big deal. If the price difference is a big deal then perhaps that person shouldn't be spending $300 on a phone and should consider the lower cost alternatives. Sounds harsh, but economics aren't always "fair" to nobody is entitled to low prices just because they can't afford the market rate. If the market rate is too high the cost will eventually come down or the product will go away because it can't be sold at a profitable enough level. Just my $.02 worth.

 

[gkrew]

1. Photographers not cameras take great photos.
2. The price + AT&T exclusivisity does not bode well for Nokia and Windows Phone.

 

[JustToClarify]

1. Photographers not cameras take great photos.

really, using what?

 

[ninjaap]

MS offering free camera grip on their site? I'll pay $299 for that deal!

 

[WavingReds]

I would buy it in January when it'll be a full year since I got my 920

 

[crystal_planet]

But you're still comparing incorrectly. Let me put this in a different perspective.

In the "online streaming world" Netflix seems to be king, with Hulu and Amazon right behind them. Let's say a new company starting streaming content - only they had 1/3 as much as everyone else for the same price. Why would you "switch" or join that "new" company when you can get more for the same money?

The only way the "new" company could get you to check it out, is if it offered its product at a very cheap price.

Apple and Google have built up massive ecosystems that people are tied in to. In order to convince them to "give that up", there HAS to be an incentive. The 41mp camera IS an incentive, a big one - but NOT at $299. My point is that if they had just taken a small loss here, you could've had huge adoption of the platform. At $99 on contract with the free pro grip, you have MILLIONS of NEW WP8 users. Instead, at $299, you've got, I dunno, maybe a few hundred thousand throughout the world? And most of those will probably be people already in the Windows Phone world.

The idea here is to gain marketshare, not stick with the 5% you have now.

People seem to forgot how aggresive Nokia was with their Lumia 900 launch - it shocked people how great of a deal it was when it launched. And THAT didn't sell that well. So they think the answer is to go super expensive? WTF?

Listen, no one gives as much of a crispy crap about the ecosystems as you think. People defect back and forth between Android and Apple all the time, regardless on how invested in the ecosystem they are. And the Netflix comparison is pretty lame as well - let's say a fledgling streaming service starts up. Netfix has three times the catalogue but you're only interested in 25% of its content. The new service has better definition streaming, less titles but they have a better percentage of quality titles and that's what some folks are interested. You make it sound like WP stinks compared to the others because it only has one fart app compared to Apple's seven.

And your Lumia 900 example is laughable. Wanna compare WP7's popularity to WP8's?...I didn't think so. 5% isn't much compared to 100%, but if we had this conversation at this time last year, we'd be talking about 2.5% and what it would take for WP to catch BlackBerry.

 

[crystal_planet]

Considering WP is the weakest ecosystem out there, and WP specs are on par if not weaker than the latest iPhone and well behind Android, its rather sanctimonious and ignorant for you or other people on this forum to be looking down on other people's smartphone choices. The fact that the iPhone 4 isn't a thick heavy plastic brick should account enough for the price premium. And WP users of all shouldn't be talking about specs, because they will get completely trashed by your typical Android phone. Oh wait, in that case, you'll argue specs don't matter. But you said the complete opposite just a minute ago! You want integrity and hypocrisy free discussion? I sure don't see any of that here.

Maybe you didn't see the "Wpcentral" banner at the top? WP will be trashed by the specs of a high end Android - that much is true. Want to know why? Because Android needs powerhouses to run properly with all that bloat. Oh sorry. I meant to say "features". Oh, and where will you get this so called integrity? Android Central? Maybe iMore? Crackberry?

 

[Jazmac]

I think the same thing was said about the the Rolex. Have you seen the exchange going on the main board with those having discussion about Purity Headphones or those JBL wireless speakers? Them boys are mad pricey for me BUT not for a lot of people who invest in Quality. One thing I've noticed about Nokia is that they don't do much half way. True, they have price points but in the strata where they do their best work, Nokia isn't building much on the cheap. And since we are being honest, have you listened to the 920 with a pair of decent head phones? OMG. Even game music sounds outstanding. I can't imagine what this phone would do in a pair of Purity Headphones.

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

Sure. But I can't think of an example in tech where a struggling company INCREASED a price and succeeded. Here's two high priced tech products of recent memory I can remember failing because they were high priced.

The HP Touchpad came out and was priced the same as iPad. Nobody bought them. When they dropped to $99/$149, there were lines at Best Buys for them.

Recently, Blackberry priced the Z10 at $199 on contract, competitive with the Samsungs and Apples of the world. Nobody is buying them at that price, despite better multitasking, better messaging and email, blah blah blah. So now they have to slash prices to $49 on contract. If they had launched at $49 on contract, maybe the Z10 becomes a surprise hit.

But you have to remember with such powerful Samsung and Apple marketing, you'll have people that Nokia could say "We're giving out the Nokia Lumia 1020 for free with no contract to everyone" and they still wouldn't get it, just because it's Windows Phone, and use that they're giving it away to convince the world not to get it either... Doesn't matter what they do, it'll still be an uphill battle.

 

[vlad0]

Doesn't matter what they do, it'll still be an uphill battle.

Spot on.

 

[Michael Spencer]

Had they priced 1020 lower - the 925/928 sales would take a hit - and those just started to ship.
That said, much until now - the smartphone choice is more or less defined by OS. But now if you must have the best cameraphone - there isn't any alternative.
It's good for Nokia to build up high-end perception.

 

[tissotti]

And what is the worse kind of compete? Price war. That will just ruin your company in a long run and nobody wins.

I got a say i'm quite surprised Nokia chose US/NA to launch the phone when their revenue source quarterly is smallest after Africa for Nokia. 6 times higher from Europe and slightly over 5 times in Asia.
And Nokia has the easiest and fastest road for success in Europe because of the brand reconition and operators not choosing what phones you can actually buy. Also people in Europe are way more open to buy 600-700 euros phones as people actually realize the real price of these phones without being divided to 24 and a bit extra.

In the end Lumia 1020 is a very specific device that will sell for specific market. That active motorized OIS, totally new sensor developed by Nokia and Toshiba wont come cheap. We will have Nokia World coming somewhere in September already and we will see phone(s) with quad core and 1080p screen with GDR3 that will take Lumia 920 place on the more traditional flagship space.


If anything i'm stoked to see Nokia getting back to its quircky itself on Windows Phone. Nokia will have its generic sellers and plently of weirder phones around it. This goes in hand on what Ahtisaari said 5 months ago about Nokia developing more specific devices next to its more traditional phones.

 

[Chris_Kez]

really, using what?

I've seen you post a lot of intelligent things, so I'm surprised by this one; maybe you forgot to the add the
Obviously gkrew is pointing out that a camera is only a tool, and that much of the skill and artistry expressed through photography is attributable to the photographer. Was it Ansel Adams who said "a good photograph is knowing where to stand"? Still, a great camera can certainly help the rest of us to not screw things up too badly.