Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of the whole thing with pharmaceuticals. pills 2-X cost $.10 to make - the first pill, however, costs millions.
Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense, but it's not; it's advertising.
IPhone 4 costs $188 to make
31–33 of 33 posts
Re: IPhone 4 costs $188 to make
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of the whole thing with pharmaceuticals. pills 2-X cost $.10 to make - the first pill, however, costs millions.
Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense, but it's not; it's advertising.
> Unsourced claim here: saw somewhere that about 75% of the cost of medication goes to advertising. We're taught to believe that it's the R&D that's the expense, but it's not; it's advertising.
A huge fraction goes to marketing. However, that includes doctor education, free pills for poor people, and so on. Which of those do you want to give up?
The amount that goes to nd-user advertising is relatively small. Since at least some of that gets folks to go to the doctor to fix something that they didn't know could be fixed, and thus improves their lives, I'm not convinced that it's bad. Then again, I think that the goal of a health system is to improve health, not control costs. (Hypocondriacs do their thing regardless of advertising.)
Re: IPhone 4 costs $188 to make
#33Windows 7 costs $1.20 to make. 20 cent dvd + 20 cent packaging + 80 cent booklet (or whatever is in there.) A high end CPU costs below $3 in material costs. (Numbers purely guessed) Given these examples I find it wrong to accuse Apple for selling the iPhone at that price point. At least to me these "Product X costs Y USD in production" articles sound a bit accusing.
How can you claim this if your numbers are purely guessed?