Your G1 only costs $143.89 to make

[NismoG35]

Hey Guys I just found a very interesting story talking about the costs associated with the G1. The story goes on to say that the Bill of materials (raw materials) for the G1 is only $143.89. Keep in mind this price does not include software, research and of course the development of the phone which greatly increases the costs of the phone.

The cost of the camera that we all so dearly love is only $12.13

Read the story here...http://www.isuppli.com/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=19678

[bizarro_stormy]

This would bother me if I bought it at full price....but for $179, I cant complain :P

[Fare]

This would bother me if I bought it at full price....but for $179, I cant complain :P

yea, because the price to develop the hardware, drivers and marketing equates to nothing...

Someone is taking a huge hit in profit here...and I doubt it's HTC....

[segfault]

i think it must be TMO that is subsidizing the $179 price tag. That may be the amount they pay HTC for each unit.

[Divest]

yea, because the price to develop the hardware, drivers and marketing equates to nothing...

Someone is taking a huge hit in profit here...and I doubt it's HTC....

No one is taking a huge profit hit there. T-Mobile has you locked in for two-years.

Corporations don't operate at a loss. That just isn't the way things work.

[segfault]

No one is taking a huge profit hit there. T-Mobile has you locked in for two-years.

Corporations don't operate at a loss. That just isn't the way things work.i suppose you aren't counting auto manufacturers or airlines as corporations then :P

[MobileMan]

This was posted before and the price before was $144. Oh well who cares we got the phone and Tmo and HTC makes the money. Win win.

[NismoG35]

yea, because the price to develop the hardware, drivers and marketing equates to nothing...

Am curious on how you arrived at the conclusion that price for developing a product equates to nothing? Everyone knows that the biggest cost of producing a product is usually R&D. I don’t think an HTC engineer just sat down with a paper and pencil and sketched the G1 in one sitting (although it may seem like it ;).)

As for the marketing part that is also not cheap. I wouldn’t call 1.5million cheap. Just remember this is just for this one marketing campaign and not the money spent on marketing for the lifetime of the phone.

http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/ (http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/)

[segfault]

Am curious on how you arrived at the conclusion that price for developing a product equates to nothing? Everyone knows that the biggest cost of producing a product is usually R&D. I don’t think an HTC engineer just sat down with a paper and pencil and sketched the G1 in one sitting (although it may seem like it ;).)

As for the marketing part that is also not cheap. I wouldn’t call 1.5million cheap. Just remember this is just for this one marketing campaign and not the money spent on marketing for the lifetime of the phone.

http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/ (http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/)

Your sarcasm detector is out of tune.

[Divest]

i suppose you aren't counting auto manufacturers or airlines as corporations then :P

We as taxpayers subsidize their losses, silly. Come'on, someone doesn't have knowledge of the way corporations loss mitigate. :rolleyes:

[Fare]

Am curious on how you arrived at the conclusion that price for developing a product equates to nothing? Everyone knows that the biggest cost of producing a product is usually R&D. I don’t think an HTC engineer just sat down with a paper and pencil and sketched the G1 in one sitting (although it may seem like it ;).)

As for the marketing part that is also not cheap. I wouldn’t call 1.5million cheap. Just remember this is just for this one marketing campaign and not the money spent on marketing for the lifetime of the phone.

http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/ (http://profy.com/2008/11/10/t-mobile-g1-large-scale-advertising-campaign-brings-money-to-aol/)

sarcasm?

10char.

[Divest]

sarcasiam?

...

*pat pat*

[Fare]

No one is taking a huge profit hit there. T-Mobile has you locked in for two-years.

Corporations don't operate at a loss. That just isn't the way things work.

The PS3

10 Char.

@Divest: You're posting speed > my editing speed =p

[Divest]

The PS3

10 Char.

Fare, I had this absolutely genius idea that maybe you should make decent posts that include sentences instead of lazy one-liners. Maybe you won't have to enter this "10 Char." nonsense.

Anyways, they make money off of the accessories and games. The console is just a small part of the package and is useless without all the accessories.

[Fare]

Fare, I had this absolutely genius idea that maybe you should make decent posts that include sentences instead of lazy one-liners. Maybe you won't have to enter this "10 Char." nonsense.

Anyways, they make money off of the accessories and games. The console is just a small part of the package and is useless without all the accessories. Try harder.

you see, I have this argumental style. If I can list one example that explains itself, why would I have to further elaborate upon it? It does all the work for me...

Sony sells PS3s at a loss.

Google "sells" G1's at a loss.

I could through in examples to back myself up with how the iPhone sold at a pretty penny at launch and how winMo "jesus" phones still are much more expensive, even with contracts.

[Divest]

I have this argumental style.

Ah, yes, galling laziness-palm. I first came across this style in the third grade. Didn't work too well for my adversary back then, don't think it's going to work for you too well now buddy.


gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble

I said corporations don't operate at a loss, I didn't say that they never sold products at a loss. Read much?

The idea is to sell you something at a short-term loss to gain long-term profit. Your PS3 is useless without games, for example. Do you see where I'm going with this?

[Fare]

Ah, yes, galling laziness-palm. I first came across this style in the third grade. Didn't work too well for my adversary back then, don't think it's going to work for you too well now buddy.



I said corporations don't operate at a loss, I didn't say that they never sold products at a loss. Read much?

The idea is to sell you something at a short-term loss to gain long-term profit. Your PS3 is useless without games, for example. Do you see where I'm going with this?

Yes, oh master debater, I get your point. I was only reiterating my point that the g1 can be sold at a loss in the same way that the PS3 is sold at a loss. PS3 make's it's profit (as you said) on games/accessories/services and the g1 is sold based on concept/future.

My future is bleak with my current way of living, please, teach me yours in-so-that I may be perfect...oh jesus of the debate!

(can I roll my eyes yet?)

[onebadcynos]

*grabs popcorn and waits for more **** flinging*
this thread is fun to lurk in!

[Divest]

masterdebater

Heh. Heh. Heh. Heh.

[onebadcynos]

^i see what you did there ;)

[ickyfehmleh]

i suppose you aren't counting auto manufacturers or airlines as corporations then :P

Perhaps Tmobile is the next to receive several billion dollars worth of taxpayer funds via government bailouts?

If so I'm definitely renegotiating my contract.

[ickyfehmleh]

you see, I have this argumental style. If I can list one example that explains itself, why would I have to further elaborate upon it? It does all the work for me...

Sony sells PS3s at a loss.

Google "sells" G1's at a loss.

I could through in examples to back myself up with how the iPhone sold at a pretty penny at launch and how winMo "jesus" phones still are much more expensive, even with contracts.

Protip: Google isn't selling the G1s, Tmobile is.

[Divest]

Ah just leave the poor guy alone. I feel like I'm just slapping a blind retarded kind in a dark room.

[segfault]

We as taxpayers subsidize their losses, silly. Come'on, someone doesn't have knowledge of the way corporations loss mitigate. :rolleyes:

well, you're right. I was just saying that some companies operate at a loss. What you meant in your post is that corporations don't design Business Plans that result in a net loss. Even if TMO is losing money on the hardware, they'll make it up in subscriptions, just like the console gaming industry does.

[Divest]

well, you're right. I was just saying that some companies operate at a loss. What you meant in your post is that corporations don't design Business Plans that result in a net loss. Even if TMO is losing money on the hardware, they'll make it up in subscriptions, just like the console gaming industry does.

Haha, no, no, no. I wasn't being a jerk, I was just joking; the underlying notion being that if they failed, us as taxpayers would just bail them out anyways.

[Fare]

Protip: Google isn't selling the G1s, Tmobile is.

/sigh

First my blatant use of sarcasm shots over someone's head, then my obvious superior spelling ability is called out, and now my best friend, the quotation mark is just completely ignored...

the art of subtlety is all but forgotten, but this "blind retarded kid(sic) in a dark room" still has some fight in him...

[Divest]

Maybe today just isn't your day, mate.