“Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster has performed a simple experiment that says a lot about the comparative value of Apple and Android smartphones,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.
“Since April, he (or his team) has been monitoring the resale prices of six devices on eBay and China’s Taobao Marketplace — three iPhones and three Samsung smartphones running on Google’s Android platform,” P.E.D. reports. “In three months, the prices for Samsung’s Android phones fell anywhere from 14.4% to 35.5%. On the Apple side of the chart, the only iPhone to lose anywhere near that much value was the iPhone 4S in China. The price of the iPhone 4 actually increased during the three-month period, up 1.4% in China and 10.3% in the U.S.”
P.E.D. reports, “‘We believe this data tells us two things,’ Munster wrote in a note to clients Wednesday.”
Read more in the full article here.
By not buying Android and buying an iPhone instead?
I’m seeing 2 for 1 offers on TV for the latest Galaxy 4S. Looks like Samsung phones don’t very much “value” from DAY ONE.
When the Android phones are so cheap to start with, the only way is down when it comes to retained value
IMHO Android phones are not really worth are time to discuss, are they?
Unfortunately Wall Street is not remotely interested in how long a smartphone lasts or its resale value. It can probably be seen as a disadvantage for a company if users tend to hold on to their smartphones longer. It only means that buyer turnover will be slower and that company will likely sell less smartphones every quarter. Wall Street seems only interested in bulk sales of disposable products which rapidly increases market share. Apple runs its company exactly opposite to how Wall Street prefers a company to be run.
In the case of Android smartphones, they have a huge advantage of being cheap and disposable. If they don’t work all that well, the owner will just toss it and buy another one which will cause a rapid turnover within that particular platform. Google can brag about activating billions of Android smartphones because consumers buy them, activate them, get tired of them or they break and they replace them with another cheap Android smartphone. That constant turnover indicates growing market share and little else.
However, Wall Street investors seem to be fooled by this tactic and consider Android as a huge unbeatable platform. Maybe it is if most consumers can only afford cheap smartphones, but I question how satisfied consumers are with the platform. I think if Apple were to build a less expensive iPhone that were of relatively high quality, Apple might be able to create loyal users within that group but it still wouldn’t create that explosive market share growth that Wall Street is looking for.
Apple just doesn’t seem to do anything that Wall Street likes a company to do that would give it a higher shareholder value.
Yup, there’s a term I used for that type of Wall Street thinking when it comes to the Mac/PC battle, where a PC would get so slow and broken after a year or so that rather than fix the OS issues a user would just shell out $400 for a new one:
The “Broken Windows fallacy”
Completely wrong. The article had nothing to do with how long people hold onto their smartphones. It was about desirability, and the iPhone is clearly more desirable than Samsung phones based on resale value (demand vs. supply).
As for “cheap Android smartphones”, while there are cheap ones, Samsung Galaxy S4s are most certainly not cheap. They are priced right where an iPhone 5 is priced, and replacement cost for one lost while under contract is $800-$900 or more — just like an iPhone.
I own every version of iPhone till this day!
Use them as a great wifi devices.
Got $150 for my iPhone 4, so my new AT&T iphone 5 essentially cost me $50
On the negative side of things, this makes Apple’s sales numbers look bad because people are (probably) buying more used iPhones (rather than new ones). That’s why this news will probably drive Apple stock prices down…
Well, like when I bought my first Volvo … The salesman said that the entry level Volvo is a used Volvo. Maybe it’s the same for an iPhone–buy the lower cost model.
Baloney. You can get a free iPhone with a 2 year contract, or just $100 for an iPhone 4S. An iPhone 5 is $200 with a contract, not much more than you would buy a used iPhone 4 for.
I still have all three of my iPhones, a 3, a 4, and a 5. The 3G isn’t used, and as the back is cracked around the headphone socket, I figured I’d get very little for it. My 4 is in use daily, I had it unlocked, and put a SIM in on a cheap PAYG system, that has unlimited data, and I use it mostly as an iPod, and for navigation in the car. I really love that phone, it’s weight and solidity is very reassuring. The 5 is in a waterproof case, and it’s used for pretty much everything else, but particularly photography, and it’s attached to a thick lanyard for safety, when used near the sea. TBH, when I upgrade again, next year, I’ll sell the 5, and keep the 4, just getting a new battery fitted, the 5 will fetch enough to offset the cost of a 6.
You should sell yourself in Amsterdam for a dollar a blow.
You must be running low on cash and getting desperate, BLN.
I think poor Nut’s brain is degenerating badly… leaving only the most basic functions and thoughts. Sad.
I think poor Nut’s brain is degenerating badly… leaving only the most basic functions. Sad.
There, I fixed it for you.
Turn it off?
Leave it plugged in and get a really long cord.