Global Hardware 13 October 2018

[PortisheadBiscuit]

Kerotan said:

PortisheadBiscuit said:

So you've contradicted yourself, you said Apple offers the best value while at the same time admitting Apple has the highest profit margins. How is that the best "value" if customers are technically paying more for a product that isn't necessarily better than the competition? You are in essence saying Nintendo offers the best value since their products generally cost more than the competition, no? 

I don't think you understand economics. We're talking the consumer here not literally. Value to the consumer is the perceived bundle of benefits they get in return for their money. 

 

"Perceived value is the benefit that a customer believes he or she received from a product after it was purchased."

 

So to the high end customer who buys apple products, despite it being more expensive they view the iPhone as the most valuable purchase from their point of view. Status, culture, self image, software, hardware, price etc are all  just a few of the benefits they perceive.

 

This is why apple are genius. They sell the most profitable phone to a large group of loyal customers who see the purchase as valuable to them. Apple would prefer to be the most profitable company rather then the company who sells the most units. If they can have both then great. 

Lol at not understanding economics as if you've provided Socrates level of insight yourself. 

 

So you're admitting Nintendo is genius as well. They have very similar business practices as Apple, rarely incentivizing their loyal fanbase. They don't (and won't) sell their hardware at a loss to compete. Whereas Sony and Microsoft have been doing this since the beginning, taking me back to my original point which started this stale dialogue. Sony giving alot more to compete with Smash, and nulling Drake's point of Smash not competing with AAA titles.