Resolves YES if you can order a version that is more expensive.
Resolves NO if you can not.
Market will close when the pre-order is open and we can configure it.
Clarifications:
Add ons such as extra lens or head strap does not count
If they charge for more storage, material, or any other configurations it counts.
Example: For Apple watch, it would've resolved YES since Apple released one in Steel and Gold at higher prices.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,259 | |
| 2 | Ṁ608 | |
| 3 | Ṁ496 | |
| 4 | Ṁ480 | |
| 5 | Ṁ462 |
@esusatyo I don't understand how one could be surprised. The only surprising thing is that they don't charge even more for the additional storage that costs them only a few dollars in production. It's apple, c'mon
Dang, i'm dumb
@DanBrandt As a percentage of the base price, this is actually a very small increase to max it out.
A maxed out Mac can be like 3x the base price, easy.
@DavidFWatson I agree that the markup for maxing out is not bad. About $400 for 256-1T of memory. My comment is more about the actual take home cost some of us might have paid for this first gen device. It is equivalent to a high end laptop I'll grant you but with no software to speak of at present. One last thought, having played around with the simulator, it's a must buy for anyone serious about development for it.
@DanBrandt Listening to today's Dithering episode, it seems like developers excited about releasing software for Apple's new platform are going to be a bit less common than Apple expected!
@DanBrandt Adjusting for inflation, 1984 Mac would actually be more expensive. It’d be equivalent to around $10k USD current dollar.
@esusatyo I don't think it that straight forward that you can make a $ comparisons like that. The current M2 Mac is maybe 10K to 100K times more powerful than the 1984 Mac. In some sense they are not really the same product. One could argue that the Apple Vision Pro has some of the same comparisons and I guess that's why so many people are willing to pay that much. The difference in my view is that the Vision Pro is a bet where the M2 Mac is a sure thing :)
I can't believe it.
256->512 and 512->1TB storage upgrades for $200 each tier are priced exactly the same for iPhone, iPad, and Mac, there is no premium for Vision Pro. AppleCare coverage (whether 2y or paid monthly) is even a lower fraction of the cost than for iPhone (depending on the model). And taxes are of course the same percent of the bill. No one would expect Apple to charge less for same storage and coverage as other products, or waive the sales tax, so I wonder why would you?
@deagol I completely agree. I totally think the Vision Pro is an amazing piece of hardware and it's technology is fully worth those prices. I even wonder if Apple is taking a loss on each unit. I'm just enjoying the feeding frenzy (present company included) for a product most have never even used and may find very limited in terms of software for some time (ex. Apple Watch launch - present company also included). Given that EBay is already listing one for $10,499, one wonders what the price elasticity for this product is. Apple likely could have changed even more. I don't think the price reflects anything more than a marketing and positioning decision (i.e. some balancing act of not to much consumers couldn't imagine it being in their price range some day and not to little so as not to take a major loss and to attract the FOMO crowd ).
@HenriThunberg so Gurman calls it "farfetched" if they do, while quoting himself calling it "incredibly strange" if they don't. 🤷♂️ Typical.
@HenriThunberg I agree it’s not an oversight. My read is that they don’t want to put even more attention on how expensive it can get.
A 512 sku would probably cost a few dollars more and net a huge margin if they charge, say, $200 more for it. And anyone paying $3500 for that headset isn’t very price sensitive. So foregoing a large amount of margin like that would seem weird to me, hence my yes.
Sounds unlikely but I'll ask since it's just 10 days left: If the pre-order (from 19 Jan) allows the $3,499 model as only option, and there is then a more expensive alternative model available from Feb 2 in stores/online – would this resolve NO?
Seems to me like that would go under "by the time we can order one".
@HenriThunberg I’m curious about your thesis as the biggest no holder. Why do you think it’s unlikely that Apple will try to charge more for higher SKUs?
@HenriThunberg Yes I reckon that would go under NO. However I do think it’s pretty unlikely that what you can order in 19 Jan is different than 2 Feb.
@voodoo I don't think it's unlikely, but I'm willing to buy NO shares at 80% – those feel quite different to me :)
✅ Rumors don't seem substantial, and we're getting quite close
✅ They've explicitly mentioned 256GB and nothing else
✅ Seems like it would be to their benefit to have shoppers think about preferred size already (I'm unsure about this one, maybe not their strategy)
✅ It seems like they've been hard pushed when it comes to timelines in production, hiccups with parts etc. Any complexity taken out seems like a benefit.
❌ The "starting at" phrasing
❌ Incentive of squeezing more money out of customers that aren't price-sensitive
❌ The 9to5mac article linked below by Joel
I think it seems plausible that they go simple this first time around, then start building more of a range with non-Pro sets as well as differing sizes. Size additions could be later this year in some minor update.
@HenriThunberg The first generation iPhone followers this model to your point. Launched with 4GB and then had the 8GB option revealed a few months after that.
That was 2007 though and Tim Cook wasn’t CEO.