Is the Amazon Fire Phone 2014's biggest Tech flop?

[smitbret]

Right? We have people that still defend Blackberries for crying out loud.......

.... you are usually so much better than that.

 

[poofyhairguy]

.... you are usually so much better than that.

I apologize smitbret, just a joke! You get down to it and I would take a Blackberry over a Fire Phone.

 

[Roland00Address]

I do find it interesting that I know quite a few Amazon employees and none of them have or are interested in this phone.

You just showed why it was stupid to fight Google on this. Even sympathetic people such as Amazon's employees did not see the benefits and were not enthusiastic on the phone. Sure Amazon can make amazing stuff but Google already has the amazing stuff and has more of a track record and since the prices were comparable what was the reason for the fire phone again? Where is the Wow Factor that will cause people to give up all the good things that google or iOS brings. You are asking people to cut off their nose to spite their face. You are asking them to do a self destructive task that is not in their interest.


In other words why are they fighting google again?

Because they're huge rivals in multiple categories?

Customers don't care about this.

They do not care about some corporate war between corporate entities. They want to know what you will do for them. You are the one who is asking for their money, who is asking them to surrender $650 to get their phone (or the cheaper subsidized phone that you only get 1 of every 2 years).

So I ask again what does Amazon bring to the table, and what do you lose with going an Amazon exclusive route. Understand that you are not the only person doing this. Google devices such as Samsung, HTC, LG, etc are all bring their offers to the table to get this $650. Apple is doing the same thing.

To succeed you have to be better than those other guys to gain marketshare and the Customer's dollar.

Everyone kicks and screens about those. People wouldn't be happy about that, either.

First the nerds complain about skins, not the common person who buys phones. Skins for skin's sake is stupid. You should only modify your skin if it actually helps and the way it helps you sell the phone is by pointing out features.

To borrow and modify a Carville phrase from a different line of work. Its the features, stupid!

You have to realize that what you care about is not what the customer cares about, so you have to show them that your interests align and by choosing my phone I make your life simpler, better, and thus more awesome.

You need to tap into primal needs of the customers. Learn a little advertising and a little salesmanship. The best form of advertising that convince someone to switch instead of staying with the status quo is by activating the emotional/limbic system. Stop trying to convince them instead challenge them, motivate them, or inspire them. You need to get their attention, and give them something that will command their focus and cause them to switch.

In other words 3D was stupid (we have seen for decades that 3D is a fad and not an emotional motivator), the price was stupid, forcing them to make a choice was stupid. Amazon set itself up for failure, it was a self destructive self immolation with the Amazon Fire Phone.

 

[poofyhairguy]

What kills me about the 3D is its like the Amazon developers went into a room in 2011 and stayed blocked off to society until this phone. I mean, the Evo 3D flopped and that LG 3D phone didn't do great- time to take a hint.

 

[Ravynmagi]

What kills me about the 3D is its like the Amazon developers went into a room in 2011 and stayed blocked off to society until this phone. I mean, the Evo 3D flopped and that LG 3D phone didn't do great- time to take a hint.

That's probably exactly what happened. Amazon says they spent a few years working on it. The dynamic perspective (or whatever) probably sounded like an awesome idea when they started working on this, with 3D TVs, 3D bluray players, and other 3D gadgets getting a lot of attention a few years back. And for whatever reason nobody let these poor guys out of Amazon's dungeon for fresh air and an update on reality.

 

[senseamp]

Get rid of 3D nonsense, drop the price to $350, ship it unlock the bootloader, take the price spot that Google Nexus abandoned.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

How many sales of the FIre Phone so far? Does the general public even care or do only nerds care? Because honestly I don't know a single person who's mentioned this phone or seriously considered it except my 2 buddies who work at Amazon who after the initial launch decided to post a bunch of photos saying how this low light capability beats the iPhone 5s.

 

[zerocool84]

What kills me about the 3D is its like the Amazon developers went into a room in 2011 and stayed blocked off to society until this phone. I mean, the Evo 3D flopped and that LG 3D phone didn't do great- time to take a hint.

Well technically it's not 3D, it just moves the images as it tracks your head with the cameras so not the same thing. For some reason they thought it was a killer feature but it did nothing useful.

 

[Zaap]

Even most non-techies I know had zero interest in the Fire phone and questioned why would they get one vs. an iPhone. Spot on that it was an idea from several years ago that got lost in a fog of development-blindness.

 

[Deeko]

You just showed why it was stupid to fight Google on this. Even sympathetic people such as Amazon's employees did not see the benefits and were not enthusiastic on the phone. Sure Amazon can make amazing stuff but Google already has the amazing stuff and has more of a track record and since the prices were comparable what was the reason for the fire phone again? Where is the Wow Factor that will cause people to give up all the good things that google or iOS brings. You are asking people to cut off their nose to spite their face. You are asking them to do a self destructive task that is not in their interest.


In other words why are they fighting google again?

This is a long paragraph of nonsense. The fact that the Fire Phone was a flop is not proof that you shouldn't try to compete. It shows that your effort at competing was sub par. Windows 1.0 sucked pretty hard too - should Microsoft have said "oh well, Apple already does that whole GUI OS thing better than us, let's just get on board with them"? Bill Gates would likely say no.

Customers don't care about this.

Shareholders do. Shareholders generally don't want you filling your competition's coffers. If it's not really helping you, why help them? Have you seen how incredibly poorly most Android phone manufacturers do? It's generally not a cash cow for the phone maker, just Google. Amazon has nothing to gain from making a run of the mill Android phone with Amazon apps installed - those apps are already available on Android.

So I ask again what does Amazon bring to the table, and what do you lose with going an Amazon exclusive route. Understand that you are not the only person doing this. Google devices such as Samsung, HTC, LG, etc are all bring their offers to the table to get this $650. Apple is doing the same thing.

To succeed you have to be better than those other guys to gain marketshare and the Customer's dollar.

You also have to do something DIFFERENT than those guys. Time and time again it's been proven that doing something the same way as the status quo is a surefire way to fail. The flash-based Zune was a great device - arguably better than the iPod Nano at the time - but it didn't matter. It's not enough to be slightly better at the same thing. You need to be different to break an established competitor.

Look at the iPhone. Microsoft and RIM had the smartphone market basically pinned in 2007. They could have tried to make a slightly better Blackberry. Instead they made something radically different. And it worked.

I'm not saying the Fire Phone has those qualities. I'm trying to explain to you why a company needs to try their own thing to break into a market, rather than just copying everything HTC has already done.

First the nerds complain about skins, not the common person who buys phones. Skins for skin's sake is stupid. You should only modify your skin if it actually helps and the way it helps you sell the phone is by pointing out features.

To borrow and modify a Carville phrase from a different line of work. Its the features, stupid!

You have to realize that what you care about is not what the customer cares about, so you have to show them that your interests align and by choosing my phone I make your life simpler, better, and thus more awesome.

You need to tap into primal needs of the customers. Learn a little advertising and a little salesmanship. The best form of advertising that convince someone to switch instead of staying with the status quo is by activating the emotional/limbic system. Stop trying to convince them instead challenge them, motivate them, or inspire them. You need to get their attention, and give them something that will command their focus and cause them to switch.

In other words 3D was stupid (we have seen for decades that 3D is a fad and not an emotional motivator), the price was stupid, forcing them to make a choice was stupid. Amazon set itself up for failure, it was a self destructive self immolation with the Amazon Fire Phone.

You have a very long winded way of saying nothing. The Fire Phone was poorly done, it didn't do a good enough job differentiating itself, and it was overpriced. No one is denying this. No one is saying more people should have bought it. That's not the point. The point is that its nonsense to say "they should just have taken Google's version of Android and pre-installed Amazon". The problem with the Fire Phone is not the lack of the Android Market (yes I know it's current name, please don't correct me). The problem is that the phone was underpowered, overspecced, and needs more polish in the software. Releasing a heavily skinned Google-compatible phone that's pre-wired into Amazon the same way as the Fire Phone would have failed just as bad.

We don't need yet another 5" Android slab that's exactly the same as all the others.

 

[deathBOB]

Definitely a flop, but Amazon doesn't seem to be pushing it very hard. I don't think it's a "big" flop.

 

[sweenish]

It seems like Amazon used to try to appeal to the savvy in the market. Those who actually read books, like cutting edge tech, and who appreciate Amazon for giving them a good hardware value.

I feel they looked over at Apple's profit margins and began to think "we need to come down a notch." Hence things like the Mayhem feature, which might as well be called the "Yes Grandma can have a tablet too" button. Somewhere along the way, Amazon went from devices tech savvy people loved to devices they could stand to devices you would have to pay us to use.

The Fire Phone is the end result of this thinking- an expensive phone filled with more gee-wiz gimmicks than a Michael Bay movie. Unlike the Fire tablets which have some fans on here, NO ONE has said they want a Fire phone despite it being on every box I buy from Amazon. That is telling.

It was about the time they introduced their first Kindle Fire.

 

[jpiniero]

I think the Nexus 6 will be actually.

 

[Roland00Address]

Deeko your opinions and judgment of the situation is laughable. Comparing Google's Android in 2014 to Windows 1.0 in 1985 means you miss the point. Your zune analogy also misses the point for with zune vs iPod, zune had comparable features to the iPod so you did not lose much, what does Amazon have that is comparable in features to google.

Whatever continuing the conversation will be a waste of time even though I disagree with you I hope you have a great day.

 

[Deeko]

Deeko your opinions and judgment of the situation is laughable. Comparing Google's Android in 2014 to Windows 1.0 in 1985 means you miss the point. Your zune analogy also misses the point for with zune vs iPod, zune had comparable features to the iPod so you did not lose much, what does Amazon have that is comparable in features to google.

Whatever continuing the conversation will be a waste of time even though I disagree with you I hope you have a great day.

What features does the Fire Phone comparable to Google? Is that actually a question you're asking? The Fire Phone is nearly spec for spec a match for the Moto X. It has access to the Amazon app store which actually has a pretty decent selection. It's comparable from a feature perspective, even if it isn't nearly as good in the end. Your question of "what comparably features does it have" is the worst you could have asked - it has ALL the same features, it just doesn't execute them as well. And the fact that you dismissed my Windows analogy because it's 30 years separated shows you don't understand the issue.

Anyway, it's obvious that you are struggling with reading comprehension. Can you find where I said the Fire Phone is a good purchase? Can you find where I said it's as good as a well-regarded Android phone? I'm guessing you can't, because I plainly said the opposite.

What you can't understand, for incompressible reasons, is that just because the Fire Phone sucked doesn't mean Amazon was wrong to try to compete. You have this incredibly backwards opinion that because Google has a product that sells well, that no one should try to compete with it. There has never been a more asinine opinion than that. That flies in the face of everything to do with capitalism. Competition is good, for everybody, including Google / Android fans.

The absolute worst thing that could ever happen to smartphones would be for everyone other than Apple or Google to give up. Complacency is terrible, and I am truly sad for you that you think it's the way to go. I hope you have a good day as well, sport.

It was about the time they introduced their first Kindle Fire.

Despite the fact that it hasn't exactly taken over the market itself, the Kindle Fire fundamentally changed the tablet market. It was a massive win for Amazon's strategy even if not in sales. Before that, everyone was trying to make $500 iPad competitors, and they all failed miserably. If it weren't for the impact of the original Kindle Fire, the Nexus 7 would not have existed (or the plethora of other cheap sub-8" tablets...maybe not even the iPad Mini).

That aside, the new Kindles that Amazon is releasing is reverting back towards the high end. The Voyage is a premium device for people that are willing to pay more for it. I'm glad to see it - now that they've effectively run the competition out of the e-reader market, there is serious risk of complacency. At least for now, it's nice to see they're still pushing high end devices.

 

[Roland00Address]

Deeko I am done with this conversation for you are not understanding my points, and you are ascribing words to my mouth that I have never said. I will not continue this conversation any further for going back and forth with you is not worth my time. You are allowed to have your opinions, and you are obviously not understanding my opinions. Please have a great day.

 

[Commodus]

I'd sum up Amazon's problem this way: it (or rather, Jeff Bezos) desperately wants to be Apple with a tightly integrated ecosystem, but it doesn't really understand Apple's approach. Amazon designed the Fire phone for itself, not for actual users -- it's more interested in putting shopping links on your home screen than things you'd actually like. It also forgot that special features aren't special if they're just ooh-ah party tricks, like Dynamic Perspective; they have to be useful.

And of course, Amazon's strategy of heavily modifying and locking down Android takes away the advantages of an open ecosystem and heavy customizability. You end up with this platform that's neither as polished as iOS nor as flexible as regular Android... there's just no reason to use it.

 

[Bateluer]

Shareholders do. Shareholders generally don't want you filling your competition's coffers. If it's not really helping you, why help them? Have you seen how incredibly poorly most Android phone manufacturers do? It's generally not a cash cow for the phone maker, just Google. Amazon has nothing to gain from making a run of the mill Android phone with Amazon apps installed - those apps are already available on Android.

Amazon would have been better off simply releasing their 'services' onto Google Play in the first place, instead of wasting how many millions of dollars developing this boondoggle.

 

[WelshBloke]

Amazon need to stick to content and their shopping experience (both of which are excellent). Keep pushing that to be on all the things. That's where they need to complete not trying to get into the massively competitive phone market.

 

[Deeko]

Deeko I am done with this conversation for you are not understanding my points, and you are ascribing words to my mouth that I have never said. I will not continue this conversation any further for going back and forth with you is not worth my time. You are allowed to have your opinions, and you are obviously not understanding my opinions. Please have a great day.

So in essence, you took what I said in my last post, reworded it, and claimed it as your own thought. You must be an LG fan!

Amazon would have been better off simply releasing their 'services' onto Google Play in the first place, instead of wasting how many millions of dollars developing this boondoggle.

Well, aren't most of their offerings available from Google Play, now that Amazon Instant Video is available? Other than some of the camera features integrated into the Fire Phone's camera, most of their stuff is available already. Which is why I'm saying they'd have little to gain from a vanilla, stock Android phone. Those already exist, do the job just fine, and already have Amazon's software available.

 

[WelshBloke]

Well, aren't most of their offerings available from Google Play, now that Amazon Instant Video is available? Other than some of the camera features integrated into the Fire Phone's camera, most of their stuff is available already. Which is why I'm saying they'd have little to gain from a vanilla, stock Android phone. Those already exist, do the job just fine, and already have Amazon's software available.

Instant Video wasn't available on android until post fire fail.

Pretty much what you wrote is why it's pointless for amazon to compete on hardware and OS fronts with Google (or anyone else) .
They just need to stick all their services on every form of OS available. They don't need to own the hardware or software environment.

 

[poofyhairguy]

So I was looking on Swappa today. because I am now addicted to doing that, and I noticed the Fire Phone sells on there for $260-ish new- and I mean the 64GB version! Hell, this thing is like the Touchpad where it flopped so hard it now has a real hardware value on the secondary market!

 

[Commodus]

Instant Video wasn't available on android until post fire fail.

Pretty much what you wrote is why it's pointless for amazon to compete on hardware and OS fronts with Google (or anyone else) .
They just need to stick all their services on every form of OS available. They don't need to own the hardware or software environment.

Amazon may be learning the hard way that Apple envy doesn't really mesh with a Netflix-style model. If you're trying to be on everyone's devices, you end up with a "lowest common denominator" product that can't do much to stand out on a given platform. Part of why Apple succeeds is because iTunes' presence is limited to iOS, the Mac and Windows, with most of the fancier features limited to its own products; it's not trying to be everything to everyone. What is there to get on a Fire phone or Kindle Fire that would genuinely make you give up regular Android or iOS?

 

[Commodus]

Just to support this thread: it's official, the Fire phone is a flop.

Amazon had to take a roughly $170 million charge in its latest quarter due to "inventory valuation" and "supplier commitments." In other words: it's sitting on a pile of unsold stock, and it had to pay manufacturers despite cutting orders short. Unless that price cut suddenly turned things around, Amazon's going to be eating a lot of humble pie.

 

[gotsmack]

Why would anyone buy an android phone that didn't have the suite of Google apps?

It would have to be free in order for me to even consider it (for my parents).

If I wanted a top tier phone that didn't have access to Google maps, an AOSP phone is the last phone I'd consider.