Bloomberg: 7-8" iPad Mini in ~October

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here are some interesting bits from transcript of Apple's Q2 2012 Results Earnings Call on April 24. When asked about how the iPad 2 was doing at lower entry price ($399).

Tim Cook:
Tony, on iPad 2, we're -- with the change in the entry price to $399, we're actually thrilled with the results that we've seen, although, as Peter said, it's only been a few weeks. And so it's too early to make a -- come to a clear conclusion. But from what we are seeing, this unlocks some education demand that is probably a more price-sensitive customer. Also, in several other countries, there was a marked change in demand at that price point. And so on the early going, we feel great about it. But I'd also point out that the new iPad is -- was current -- was supply constrained last quarter for the full 3 weeks or so it was shipping and is actually still constrained. And so the mix of the new iPad to the iPad 2, we're not certain of what that is yet. But we are certain, with what we've seen so far, that the absolute sales of iPad 2, at least in the early going, is very exciting.

As you know, we launched mainland China in January of this year, and so China was not able to get into the Q1 period. So all of that is in Q2. We also have very strong demand for iPad 2.

Peter Oppenheimer:
Look, Katy, we're just learning about be the elasticity of demand and the $399 price point. It's doing well. But I have to tell you, the new iPad is on fire, and we're selling them as fast as we can make them. So we'll learn more over this quarter especially as we get through the education buying season, which looks terrific for us especially on the iPad.
 
You don't think? I'd imagine an iPad Mini that matches the N7's price would damage Google/Android's penetration into the tablet market considerably, 4 months isn't enough to make a great enough penetration into the market.
An iPad mini can't fully hurt the Nexus 7 from making enough inroad to establish & strengthen the low-cost Android tablet market. The N7 is well priced and is a quality product, it should do well.
 
No retina screen?

I wonder what Apple will push as the stand out feature of this thing if this rumour is true.

I think people overplay the importance of the retina screen. It's nice, but it's not oh my god, it's a deal breaker. I bet a significant number wouldn't even notice unless it was pointed out to them.

Asus Transformer was cheaper and no one cared. Apple does not need to match Google when it comes to price and the 16GB N7 is $249.

No one cared about the Asus Transformer because it had no marketing and very little presence. Asus had a great product with no way of really telling anyone about it. I don't know if Apple needs to match the price dollar for dollar at this point in time but a properly marketed device can certainly push Apple towards that.

He's advocating competition?

He is?
 
Isn't that what every company tries? Isn't that what competing is? "No guys, let's make this just good enough to be sort of better than their thing."

Weird rage over semantics here.



It is what a company goes for, but it is a weird thing for consumers to want to happen. Apple destroying Google would be horrible for everybody.
 
He's saying apple should go for the jugular, aka. Kill the competition, don't see how that was unclear
Everybody wants to release a product that aims at beating the competition, that's what competition is. Should they aim to release a product that only sorta somewhat is a bit competitive, if you split hairs here or there? Google went for Amazon's jugular with the Nexus 7, Amazon is going to try to hit back with something that tops it.

Think of the term in how it's used in sports.
 
There is no tablet market, just an ipad market.

this sentence is a meme at this point, right? if you said it last year with the xoom 1 as the only iPad competitor, maybe. but between the kindle fire, transformer prime and the upcoming nexus 7 there definitely IS a tablet market, even if the ipad is still by far the strongest competitor.

lets see how that changes once people start to throw tablet-hybrids with windows 8 at the customers.
 
It's ashame this thing will likely be "budget" I'd love to have a 7inch iPad with the same ppi as the ipad3 and processor specs.
 
Hasn't this been rumored since the very first iPad? They just bumped up the resolution for the new iPad, why would they create yet another resolution for developers to work with?
 
Hasn't this been rumored since the very first iPad? They just bumped up the resolution for the new iPad, why would they create yet another resolution for developers to work with?



Maybe it will be the same resolution as the Ipad 2.
 
Isn't that what every company tries? Isn't that what competing is? "No guys, let's make this just good enough to be sort of better than their thing."

Weird rage over semantics here.

You are a customer like everyone else here, wanting an end to competition between companies as a customer is just ignorance and stupidity. I'm not trying to be mean but it's like me saying I love Honda cars, I wish all other car companies would go bankrupt and cease to exist.
 
You are a customer like everyone else here, wanting an end to competition between companies as a customer is just ignorance and stupidity. I'm not trying to be mean but it's like me saying I love Honda cars, I wish all other car companies would go bankrupt and cease to exist.
He didn't say that. He just said "go for the jugular." As in, compete.
 
This could explain the die shrink recently introduced to the existing iPad 2. I doubt Apple will bother with $199, $299 sounds right. They will still significantly disrupt the developing 7" market. Also the new 16:10 aspect ratio rumored for the next iPhone could make this thing narrow enough to hold with one hand (current aspect ration would make it nearly impossible I think).

And this

This time next year:

iPad mini WiFi
8GB: $249
16GB: $299

iPad (third-gen) WiFi
16GB: $399

iPad (fourth-gen) WiFi
16GB: $499
32GB: $599
64GB: $699
128GB: $799

iPad (fourth-gen) WiFi + Cellular
16GB: $549
32GB: $649
64GB: $749
128GB: $849

could be a dominant lineup for AAPL next year (don't know about the 128gb or the new price points on 4th gen though)
 
You are a customer like everyone else here, wanting an end to competition between companies as a customer is just ignorance and stupidity. I'm not trying to be mean but it's like me saying I love Honda cars, I wish all other car companies would go bankrupt and cease to exist.

Maybe you don't understand the use of the phrase...

Think of the term in how its used in sports.
 
Maybe you don't understand the use of the phrase...

Think of the term in how its used in sports.

I don't think you do, and it's not a good comparison to sports. When one team beats the other team, the other team still exists, and next year there is a new season where everything starts from scratch. Here, it would mean the dominance of Apple in all avenues of the market which means a lack of competition which in turn is bad for us as a consumer.
 
I don't think you do, and it's not a good comparison to sports. When one team beats the other team, the other team still exists, and next year there is a new season where everything starts from scratch. Here, it would mean the dominance of Apple in all avenues of the market which means a lack of competition which in turn is bad for us as a consumer.

Does this mean Microsoft is going to kill Apple? http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-21539_...oft-aims-for-the-jugular-with-xbox-ecosystem/

Hoping Apple introduces a new product to compete strongly with others means a lack of competition?
 
Does this mean Microsoft is going to kill Apple? http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-21539_...oft-aims-for-the-jugular-with-xbox-ecosystem/

Hoping Apple introduces a new product to compete strongly with others means a lack of competition?

Again as someone already pointed out, it's one thing for companies to want to aim to do this, it's another when the end consumer is advocating it. All companies if they had their way would like complete dominance. It's still weird when an end consumer is advocating them to do it.
 
Again as someone already pointed out, it's one thing for companies to want to aim to do this, it's another when the end consumer is advocating it. All companies if they had their way would like complete dominance. It's still weird when an end consumer is advocating them to do it.

No its not, you want to see all companies (or teams in sports) to try everything they can to beat the other, that's what competition is.
 
No its not, you want to see all companies (or teams in sports) to try everything they can to beat the other, that's what competition is.

Sure, I want to see all companies do well and release great products for good competition. I don't advocate for one company to finish the competition off which is what going for the jugular means. It has never meant you want them to compete. It means you want them to win.
 
I'm advocating apple actually competing with android tablet OEMs. Usually people see the iPad as a high cost tablet and in a different figurative weight class as 7 inch android tabs.

I want to see Apple see Bring the fight to their house. Showing they want all consumers and they are willing to fight for it.

It's not about apple removing choice from the market. I want to see them really go in.
 
I'm advocating apple actually competing with android tablet OEMs. Usually people see the iPad as a high cost tablet and in a different figurative weight class as 7 inch android tabs.

I want to see Apple see Apple bring the fight to their house. Showing they want all consumers and they are willing to fight for it.

A better phrase would have been giving them a run for their money though. That's competing.
 
Sure, I want to see all companies do well and release great products for good competition. I don't advocate for one company to finish the competition off which is what going for the jugular means. It has never meant you want them to compete. It means you want them to win.
You want them to go for the jugular.
You want Google to release a Nexus 7 that completely removes any reason to get a Kindle Fire, so that Amazon won't be sitting on their laurels and will be responding with something that beats the Nexus 7 soundly.
Many people said the Nexus 7 went for the Kindle Fire's jugular (even on GAF). That doesn't remove competition though, it increases it.
 
You want them to go for the jugular.
You want Google to release a Nexus 7 that completely removes any reason to get a Kindle Fire, so that Amazon won't be sitting on their laurels and will be responding with something that beats the Nexus 7 soundly.
Many people said the Nexus 7 went for the Kindle Fire's jugular (even on GAF). That doesn't remove competition though, it increases it.

We all want Apple, the market leader, to win and beat the competition for complete dominance? Why? I think you're using the phrase wrong. We want them to give the competition a run for their money; we don't want the dominant player to win.
 
We all want Apple, the market leader, to win and beat the competition for complete dominance? Why? I think you're using the phrase wrong. We want them to give the competition a run for their money; we don't want the dominant player to win.

You don't understand the phrase. He even explained what he meant, and you are still willfully ignorant by applying your own interpretation.
 
MARTY CHINN, EVERYONE.

Yes, because clearly I'm the only one who thinks that the phrase is being used incorrectly. You clearly don't see a difference between the phrase "Give them a run for their money" versus "Going for the jugular"? They don't mean the same. They never have. Yet, somehow some of you are equating the two.

You don't understand the phrase. He even explained what he meant.

He explained what he meant, but that doesn't change the fact that it's poor usage of the phrase.
 
I'd like to see Apple compete hard and push innovation in order to push the product line for the better. I don't want to see a monopoly or dominance.

So there's no argument, everyone's on the same page.

Unless you want to argue over semantics. But you don't want to do that, right?
 
How is this preemptive?
The low-cost tablet market isn't really established yet. This gives the chance for Apple to make themselves a big player in that range and eventually will slow all these upcoming platforms trying to potentially creep up to Apple from below toward their iPad business, which makes a lot of revenues, hence the idea of a preemptive move.
 
Can you imagine just how huge a 200-250 iPad would be this christmas season? My God. The "expensive" iPad is already averaging 15 million a quarter on it's own. A cheap mini-iPad released in the holiday season? I can't even fathom what would happen. They'd sell as many as they could produce that is for sure. iPad sales could cross 30 million that quarter if Apple could make that many.

I'd feel bad for the Wii U though lol.
 
The problem with this device is that it's an iPad. Can't wait for the Microsoft Surface (Pro) to come out, I just hate the iOS with a passion. Apple really wasted an opportunity to make a "real" computer.
 
(Assuming it happens this year) I'm surprised it took this long for Apple to introduce a second size/form for this platform, considering how successful it has been.
 
How is this preemptive?

It's certainly not preemptive, but I wouldn't call it too late either. The low-end tablet market is just about to heat up with the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire 2, a cheap iPad has the potential to stop those devices in their tracks.
 
Can you imagine just how huge a 200-250 iPad would be this christmas season? My God. The "expensive" iPad is already averaging 15 million a quarter on it's own. A cheap mini-iPad released in the holiday season? I can't even fathom what would happen.

I'd feel bad for the Wii U though lol.
it would be ridiculous lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom