Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
I agree with the gist of this comment, but not the numbers. I don’t have sources to hand at the moment, but while Apple’s margins are notoriously high, they’re not that high. OLED screens are quite expensive.
Here's a source that says the cost is $415. You're right that the OLED is expensive, it costs $23 more than the LCD it replaces.
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
I agree with the gist of this comment, but not the numbers. I don’t have sources to hand at the moment, but while Apple’s margins are notoriously high, they’re not that high. OLED screens are quite expensive.
It should be taken with a massive grain of salt, but [1] suggests $431 BOM cost for an iPhone 12 Pro.
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
But that reflects an ignorance of how cost accounting works. Sure, it might include $400 of parts, but a hell of a lot of R&D, equipment, labor, and overhead are amortized into that phone. A very cursory look at Apple's latest income statements shows that the net profit margin on their revenue is about 20%, meaning that the phone's actual cost to produce is somewhere around $1200 (assuming a $1500 retail cost).
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
That sort of item might benefit from displaying upfront costs instead of BoM. It'd be an interesting study.
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
I'm willing to buy a $1500 phone w/ $400 in parts because it has a better user experience than $150 phone with $50 worth of parts.
Why are you comparing a $1500 phone and a $150 phone? And how is that even relevant?
"People said they were 14.2% more likely to buy this chocolate bar when they were shown the version with a cost breakdown." What people say they would do and what they actually do are 2 very different things. The conversion rate of actual behavior needs to be tested for this to mean something useful.
It’s been a while since I worked retail but unless something has drastically changed most people don’t read product packaging very closely. I would constantly have people walk up to me with an item and ask a question that was not only clearly answered on the package, but the information was _highlighted_ for them. I just don’t think most people would even notice the cost breakdown let alone read it and think about wh…
People have been ignoring the highlighted bullshit on the package since long before they were pop-up ads on the internet
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
Point taken, but perhaps a bad example. When I buy an iPhone, I'm paying a little for materials, but mostly I'm purchasing the culmination of tens of billions of dollars of R&D that possibly surpasses any other product on Earth.
A better example might be a luxury brand wallet where they sell the illusion of better quality, but that may or may not be true.
"People said they were 14.2% more likely to buy this chocolate bar when they were shown the version with a cost breakdown." What people say they would do and what they actually do are 2 very different things. The conversion rate of actual behavior needs to be tested for this to mean something useful.
It’s been a while since I worked retail but unless something has drastically changed most people don’t read product packaging very closely. I would constantly have people walk up to me with an item and ask a question that was not only clearly answered on the package, but the information was _highlighted_ for them. I just don’t think most people would even notice the cost breakdown let alone read it and think about wh…
You're sure it's most people? The people coming to ask you questions are a self selected set...
Most "premium" products costs are mostly Advertising, R&D, paying employees/shareholders, etc. They're valid things to spend money on, but don't reflect the "top quality ingredients" that consumers expect the money to be spent on. I suspect many consumers wouldn't like to know that the $1500 iPhone they just bought only has $400 worth of actual parts in.
But that reflects an ignorance of how cost accounting works. Sure, it might include $400 of parts, but a hell of a lot of R&D, equipment, labor, and overhead are amortized into that phone. A very cursory look at Apple's latest income statements shows that the net profit margin on their revenue is about 20%, meaning that the phone's actual cost to produce is somewhere around $1200 (assuming a $1500 retail cost).
Yes, but will you be the one to explain that cost accounting to each buyer?
"Yes Maaam, we'll spend $200 of the money you're about to give us on a fancy campus with hammocks to try to attract good engineers. Oh, and the massive billboard outside that made you walk into the shop in the first place."