iBullshit

Is there a $99 iPad in your future?

Analysts report that Apple slashed iPad parts orders by 25%. This may be a sign of weakening demand.

Karl Denninger, over at market-ticker.org, predicts Apple's impending fall from grace -- due to declines in sales as a result of the current and worsening economic mess, among other things:

Apple gets a lot of their sales in Europe. But Europe is a train wreck economically. To believe in the forward story and that the production cut is not "real" you have to believe Europe will avoid a Depression. Given what's going on over there, such a belief is an act of pure insanity.

Oh sure, they might not get the worst of it right now, but this is a forward projection, not a call for a crash in the morning. You also have to believe that the United States will not suffer the knock-on effects and that sales here won't get hurt. And finally, you have to dismiss the fact that HP effectively destroyed pricing power for tablets with their "blowout" of the Touchpad.

Denninger thinks that HP's Touchpad $99 blowout may have altered consumer price expectations:

The latter may well be a stake through the heart. HP's "blowout" put the $99 price point in the mind of consumers and that is not going to go away. This sort of "ratchet" mechanism has a well-documented history in America, and once it takes hold it is almost impossible to get rid of. There are already signs that this pricing pressure is eroding the edges of everyone else's tablets, with the first to succumb being RIMM's "Playbook." This will reach Apple and margin collapse is a well-documented phenomena that has a habit of trashing stock valuations.

The HP Touchpad is not an apples-to-apples comparison to the iPad. Apple products do sell at a premium, though I think it's safe to say that there are plenty of people who are not willing or able to pay Apple's current prices. If the economy worsens, that segment will grow–so there may be significant pressure to cut prices. And even though the HP blowout didn't last long, it may be returning in late October:

Fortunately, HP will be coming out with 100,000 to 200,000 TouchPads at reduced pricing, sometime around late October, giving you another chance to get your hands on one.

Some have observed that iPad sales may be reaching saturation, as well. If that's the case, Apple may be selling many iPads to repeat, upgrade customers. (Apple's fan base is known to enjoy the privilege of paying for the latest version of the product they already have.)

Will Apple be forced to reduce their premium pricing on the iPad product in order to maintain sales and preserve their market share? Will we see $99 iPads within the next year? If not $99, how about $199? $299?

Separated at birth?

I've not paid much attention to Research In Motion (RIM) over the years - though the Crackberry Blackberry was an interesting phenomenon a few years ago; I'd watch people diddling their Blackberries (sounds naughty, doesn't it?) at the office, in meetings, at lunch, while driving, at the malls, etc.

For some reason, I never took the bait and became a "Crackberry addict".

Now it seems that the world has passed them by. Apple's iPhone and smartphones in general have kicked the living crap out of RIM's Blackberry product offerings, and RIM's stock value has been hammered. What's a besieged company to do?

Well, apparently RIM's management team have said some pretty amusing things about their company and the competition over the years.

While reading this BusinessInsider story on the mistakes RIM's made over the years, the article's photo caught my eye. There was something eerily familiar about that face... then it struck me: RIM's co-CEO Balsillie reminded me of a character from one of my favorite movies, Peter Jackson's wickedly funny The Frighteners. The character? Agent Dammers, an odd, paranormal (and paranoid) FBI agent.

Perhaps BusinessInsider choose the creepiest looking photos they could find, but still. There is an uncanny resemblance, isn't there?

It's official. Google is Microsoft evil.

Brian S. Hall, writing in a recent BusinessInsider.com editorial, enumerates Google's many transgressions. Go there and RTWT.

My main quibble: Hall describes Google as a monopoly. It's not. It's very successful. While it dominates several markets, Google enjoys no legal protections that prevent competitors trying to take market share away.

Google has a variety of "unfair advantages", and can exploit those advantages to... well... Google's advantage. So it does. It has a responsibility to its shareholders to exploit those advantages, maximize profits and expand into new markets, in every legally permissible way. Hall describes some ethically questionable business practices, but nothing overtly illegal.

Regarding Google's propaganda, I've held the cynical view that:

• Their motto could be paraphrased as: Don't be evil -- until you're too powerful for anyone to do anything about it. Google's there now.
• Google will do 'evil' because it's big, successful, powerful, and a business. In today's popular culture, big, successful businesses are inherently evil. Evil is in the eye of the beholder.

Postscript

Well, another way to look at this: Google's really the Fat Elvis. Continue reading or add a comment»

I'll never own an iPhone, or any Apple device, beyond the iPod Touch I bought for web site testing.

Here's why.

Apple's closed culture of control will hurt the iPhone's dominance. I expect that the iPhone will end up with a market share similar to Apple's other long-running product: the Mac. My bet is on the Android phones; the open nature of that system will attract developers seeking the freedom to develop products as they see fit.