Whats the point of Google marketing the Nexus 4 for $299/$349 ??

[Kelvrick]

What he said.

Ask and ye shall receive.

 

[Fire&Blood]

Given the number of people complaining about the clusterfsck web ordering process, only to come out of it with no phone at all, with the phone sold out in minutes, I think it's safe to say that the actual demand for the phone - at that price - is likely an order of magnitude larger than Google could support.

No, that still would not be anywhere near Galaxy S III numbers, but that's rather telling actually. Why can't Google even support sales of units in numbers that are likely just a fraction of the Galaxy S III's? Either they don't want to, or they are just unable to do so. I suspect the latter - it's just a poorly implemented launch. As mentioned, I see no conspiracy here, when the results are sufficiently explained by Google failing to execute.

Yes, they should have had larger quantities at launch but there are other variables as well. For me the biggest offense wasn't the meager stock, it was the way they handled that stock. Fact that it was a relatively small number makes it even worse. A product selling out isn't the end of the world, IMO the worst offenders are the clumsy checkout process and uncertainty rather than inventory.

 

[ponyo]

I think everyone kind of moved on. Yes, Google screwed up the launch. But you can order it now in the US. The end.

 

[kaerflog]

Noone answered my question earlier.
So who was able to get the $299 8gb ??
I couldn't ordered those the first go around and when they announced it would be available again, it was 7-8 weeks when I got home 1 hour later.
I actually wanted to get 2.
===> This so callled iFan was able to get 2 Nexus 8gb at launch no problem.
===> This so called iFan also have had every high end Android phone T-mobile has ever carried.

 

[Eug]

I think everyone kind of moved on. Yes, Google screwed up the launch. But you can order it now in the US. The end.

You can? It's completely sold out in Canada.

In fact, at the last sales date, yesterday, the 8 GB never was in stock in the first place. They only sold the 16 GB (until it sold out, and that was with a limit of 1 unit per account).

It makes me wonder if they're gonna pull yet another Nexus 7, and kill the 8 GB model.

 

[kaerflog]

Link such articles.

Nobody can sell a top-end phone for $299 and make any money.
Tear down of top-end phones usually reveal ~$200 for the parts but there more to a phone than just parts.
Labor, R&D is just a couple.
Its simple logic.
LG makes the same phone, Optimus G and sells it for $600++.
So they are willing to cannibalize their sale by making these phones for Google super cheap ???


http://bgr.com/2012/11/05/google-nexus-4-subsidy-rumor-319-dollars-per-unit/
http://gadgetian.com/43941/google-subsidized-price-nexus-4-299-lg-no/

 

[Eug]

It sounds like LG is selling the Nexus 4 for lower than usual wholesale price to Google, and Google is selling it to customers for basically that lower price.

The recommend MSRP for the Nexus 4 is €549 to €599, which is why basically no European retailer is selling it off contract. It just makes no sense, when Google Play is selling the exact same hardware for €299 to €349. That's a difference of €250.

ie. The cost for 3rd party retailers for an unlocked Nexus 4 is likely way more than the selling price at the Google Play Store direct to end users, since retail margins for 3rd party resellers is actually quite thin most of the time for high end unlocked phones. Given this, it's no surprise that T-Mobile in the US is charging $200 for a so-called $350 phone and still requires a 2-year contract.

 

[lothar]

Nobody can sell a top-end phone for $299 and make any money.
Tear down of top-end phones usually reveal ~$200 for the parts but there more to a phone than just parts.
Labor, R&D is just a couple.
Its simple logic.
LG makes the same phone, Optimus G and sells it for $600++.
So they are willing to cannibalize their sale by making these phones for Google super cheap ???


http://bgr.com/2012/11/05/google-nexus-4-subsidy-rumor-319-dollars-per-unit/
http://gadgetian.com/43941/google-subsidized-price-nexus-4-299-lg-no/

Your links don't make any sense.
So because LG is selling them at a higher price elsewhere than Google is at their Play Store, that automatically means Google is selling each phone on their Play Store at a $384 loss?

So because Pfizer and pharmaceutical drug manufacturers are selling their drugs at a higher price here in USA than what they sell for in Canada, that means that Canadians are subsidizing the cost?

The conclusion in your sources are laughable. A company can determine to sell it's product at different prices in different markets. One can't just assume that "Hmm...It costs $100 at Company A, but costs $90 at Company B...That means Company B is subsidizing the costs and taking a $10 loss."
Go look at the prices of a 12 pack Coca-Cola at Wal-Mart vs. Rite-Aid and come back to tell me that Wal-Mart must be subsidizing the cost of soda and selling at a loss.

Lol @ the idea that Google could be subsidizing the Nexus 4 and taking a potential loss of $384 per unit.
How about maybe LG is price grouching the Europeans because it knows they will gladly take it up the arse? You ever thought about that? The same reason why Pfizer charges more for their drugs in the US than they do in Canada, Europe, or India...Because it knows we'll gladly take it up the arse here in good old USA.
LG is simply charging what the market will bear. This is nothing new.

$200 worth of parts + $100 for labor, R&D, and everything else.
R&D should be zero or somewhere near that, given it shares the exact same parts as the Optimus G.
Regardless of if Google had chosen LG to build the Nexus 4 or not, LG would still spend nearly the same R&D due to their Optimus G.
Google could have easily gone to HTC or Samsung for the Nexus 4 and LG would still have to pay nearly the same R&D cost due to their Optimus G.

 

[Eug]

Nobody has claimed that Google is subsidizing the Nexus 4 at $384 per unit. That's ridiculous.

The point is that the Nexus 4 is either a loss leader or at best is sold at cost, so that it can generate monies for Google via data mining. This is a very significantly different pricing tier for the phone market, and Google should have known that people would jump at the price, which again is HALF the competition's for comparable hardware at retail.

 

[lothar]

Nobody has claimed that Google is subsidizing the Nexus 4 at $384 per unit. That's ridiculous. The point is that the Nexus 4 is either a loss leader or at best is sold at cost, so that it can generate monies via data mining. This is significant different cost structure for the phone market, and it should have known that people jump at the price, which again is HALF the competition's for comparable hardware at retail.

You clearly didn't click on his cited link as evidence...
http://bgr.com/2012/11/05/google-nexus-4-subsidy-rumor-319-dollars-per-unit/
BGR...lol...

So because LG is selling them at a higher price elsewhere than Google is at their Play Store, that automatically means Google is selling each phone on their Play Store at a $384 loss?
Oh, and don't forget that his supposed source has a big bright green "Rumor" tag on the article.
In other words, it's nothing but baseless speculation.

The Nexus 4 is sold at cost. It's definitely not sold at a loss or with a subsidy.
The same with the Nexus 7.

 

[Eug]

I stand corrected. I will modify my statement to say nobody in this thread has claimed Google is subsidizing it $384.

His point, which I agree with, is that Google may be losing money on the device slightly, if you ignore revenues from data mining. At best they are not making significant profit on the device from that perspective. However, they are not losing $300+ per device obviously. I believe Google's true cost price including everything (not just BOM) but not including ongoing revenues from data mining and advertising is likely very near the sale price.

With that type of price structure, nobody can compete, save perhaps somebody like Amazon, who would use such a phone as a media consumption portal.

 

[lothar]

I stand corrected. I will modify my statement to say nobody in this thread has claimed Google is subsidizing it $384.

His point, which I agree with, is that Google may be losing money on the device slightly, if you ignore revenues from data mining. At best they are not making significant profit on the device from that perspective. However, they are not losing $300+ per device obviously. I believe Google's true cost price including everything (not just BOM) but not including ongoing revenues from data mining and advertising is likely very near the sale price.

With that type of price structure, nobody can compete, save perhaps somebody like Amazon, who would use such a phone as a media consumption portal.

That statement would mean that it's being sold at cost and not at a loss or subsidy then. I've always mentioned from the very beginning that it is being sold at cost or near cost, but definitely NOT at a loss or subsidy like other people seem to be advocating.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

So it's still a $600 phone. Google's paying LG back. Not surprising. So does that mean the European versions should have more space and LTE?

 

[lothar]

So it's still a $600 phone. Google's paying LG back. Not surprising. So does that mean the European versions should have more space and LTE?

With cash? I doubt it.
By providing LG with early access to AOSP before HTC, Samsung, and everyone else? Possibly, but how exactly does one quantify the cost to Google of them providing LG this early exclusive AOSP access? How much does Google lose by providing LG this early exclusive AOSP access?

Possibly the same reason why Samsung was the first to release Gingerbread, ICS, and Jelly Bean to their phones...Because they had early exclusive AOSP access through the Nexus S and Galaxy Nexus.
Hopefully, LG will be able to take advantage of this early exclusive AOSP access and not bungle it by releasing Android updates for the Optimus G 8 months after Google does for the Nexus 4.

 

[Fire&Blood]

Actually it's not subsidized. Too lazy to find it but there is an interview out there with one of the execs. Besides, assuming price difference = subsidy amount is naive at best, even for carrier exclusive phones where it does apply. Smartphone profit margins are bigger than some imagine it to be.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

Actually it's not subsidized. Too lazy to find it but there is an interview out there with one of the execs. Besides, assuming price difference = subsidy amount is naive at best, even for carrier exclusive phones where it does apply. Smartphone profit margins are bigger than some imagine it to be.

ezackley. it doesnt cost $600 to build a phone. just look at what the prepaid companies are charging for phones. the $600 price of the average phone only costs that because of the verizon tax

 

[RaulF]

I placed my order on the 27 for both a N4 and a N7.

I can see the N4 being held back, but the N7 was and is in stock and still not shipped.

I tried to contact google to find out what was going on and heard nothing from them.

Just canceled my order for both products. The N7 was a gift, now it will be a ipad mini. and the N4 was for me, but i will just stick with my 4S and get the 5S (whatever it will be) next year.


Good luck google, looks like you need it.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Smartphone profit margins are bigger than some imagine it to be.

http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=13118850&CAWELAID=1395228580&pla=plat&cagpspn=pla

http://www.target.com/p/apple-ipod-...ck-md723ll-a/-/A-14213722#prodSlot=medium_1_6

Cell modems are $300, didn't ya know

 

[Eug]

I placed my order on the 27 for both a N4 and a N7.

I can see the N4 being held back, but the N7 was and is in stock and still not shipped.

I tried to contact google to find out what was going on and heard nothing from them.

Just canceled my order for both products. The N7 was a gift, now it will be a ipad mini. and the N4 was for me, but i will just stick with my 4S and get the 5S (whatever it will be) next year.


Good luck google, looks like you need it.

Somebody else had the same issue. If you order both, and one is on back order, then you will get neither until both are in stock. The only way around this is to order both separately, and pay for shipping twice. I'm not sure WTF they're thinking, esp. when there's a 2 month back order on the Nexus 4, and it's holiday time now.

 

[Eug]

In the UK and Germany: Google's Nexus 4 briefly reappears in UK and Germany, but 8GB version sells out again

8 GB sold out. 16 GB went from 1-2 weeks availability to 5-6 weeks hours later.

I was one of the lucky few to place an order in what must have been a pretty brief window of opportunity, albeit longer than the original availability period of, oh, whole minutes. There I was at 5pm, mashing away at the order button, having a spark of faith that I would break through the "Due to high demand, your order could not be processed. Please try again later" barrier, and indeed I did.

I know that button-mashing helped confuse the system for others, but situations such as those are really every-man-for-himself. Apologies.

If Google had a strategy with the Nexus 4 and its pricing, it was implemented in a half-hearted and confused manner at best.

Because, right now, the effect of the Nexus 4 is not positive for Google. After the handset sold out the first time, I looked around at the Android landscape and scoped out a few more high-end devices, only to turn away because they just seemed so expensive in comparison. I didn't buy those smartphones from Google's OEM partners, and I couldn't buy the Nexus 4.

In other words, I wasn't buying anything, until yesterday, when I only happened to get my order through as a result of being sat in front of my computer at the right time.

 

[abaez]

I don't understand. When Apple sells out of their iPads and iPhones with a two week wait it's seen as the greatness of Apple and how popular they are.

How is the Nexus 4 immediately selling out not a positive for Google? To me, that's a positive not only for Google, but for other manus charging $600+ for their phones.

 

[Eug]

I don't understand. When Apple sells out of their iPads and iPhones with a two week wait it's seen as the greatness of Apple and how popular they are.

How is the Nexus 4 immediately selling out not a positive for Google? To me, that's a positive not only for Google, but for other manus charging $600+ for their phones.

Cuz Apple has stock to sell, and the order process usually goes relatively smoothly. And then they sell millions of units in the first few days.

In contrast, it seems Google had very little product to actually sell, but still can't manage it properly because their online store front is crap. And then they don't know how to manage the limited orders they do have, and have had poor communication with their customers. Despite the fact they had low stock, they allowed the F5 mashers order numerous multiple units to flip on eBay. For the legitimate Nexus fans who bought both a Nexus 4 and 7 at the same time, they got neither for weeks because the Nexus 4 was not in stock, and they refused to ship them separately.

And then they don't coordinate with their own manufacturer so that 3rd party retailers refuse to sell it. Why sell it when the MSRP for third party retailers is €549, and Google is selling it for €299? There is no way a 3rd party retailer can compete if the suppliers are refusing to give them reasonable wholesale pricing. So, nobody could order from them either, although it's moot since Google had no stock to give them in first place.

What has ended up happening is that few people actually have the product in hand, and won't be able to get it before Xmas.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

ezackley. it doesnt cost $600 to build a phone. just look at what the prepaid companies are charging for phones. the $600 price of the average phone only costs that because of the verizon tax

$600 a phone has been the global standard. Stop using Ameri-centrized views about how the carriers work here and applying it to the industry. Long before you even had the iPhone, cutting edge feature phones were going for $400+.

 

[Eug]

It's bizarre. They took excellent hardware at a killer price and turned it into negative publicity.

Marketing students are going to be studying this launch for years to come.

 

[cliftonite]

$600 a phone has been the global standard. Stop using Ameri-centrized views about how the carriers work here and applying it to the industry. Long before you even had the iPhone, cutting edge feature phones were going for $400+.

Great, so $299 will be the new standard. Can't complain about that.