About the only fire-based pun you didn't throw in there Reg........
...........was a reference Samsung's burning ambitions.
Re: About the only fire-based pun you didn't throw in there Reg........
Things are starting to heat up for Samsung and to be fair the article points out that with the new note some people won't want to get burnt.
I should hope that the S8 is successful
given the amount that they must have spent on TV Advertising in recent months and that those adverts used young, attractive female millenials in almost every shot.
Tech company has business model not based of selling adverts shocker
It's getting a bit strange all these companies building huge profits from just selling advertising, e.g. facebook, google, and just about every game app developer. So it's quite refreshing to hear it is possible to make money actually making tangible things, not just pushing adverts in peoples faces. Personally quite tempted to get the Note 7 Fan edition, but just worried about airlines freaking out about allowing Note 7's on board.
And What is the story with game apps pushing adverts, which are usually just for other game apps, which, if you install them, push more adverts for other game apps. I assume they are all paying each other for showing each others ads, but at some point, somehow, they have to actually get money? Is it the one in 10, genuine ad that appears, usually for a car maker or fast food joint. that greases the whole game app to game app advertising model? Or do they make enough from in-app purchases? I don't think so, as they seem way more focused on making you watch ads than in-app purchases.
"punters reluctant to acquire mid-range phones"
That's because what most manufacturers now consider a mid-range phone is really no such thing. With flagships pushing their way to four figures, a supposedly mid-range phone can now cost £500 or more. Here's a quote from Wiki about their latest "mid-range" Galaxy A-series:
"this model was never sold in that region because it was being deemed too expensive and also due to near-direct competition against Samsung Galaxy S7."
Samsung didn't even bother trying to sell it in Europe because it was obvious no-one wanted to buy a "mid-range" 6" phone that costs the same as their flagship. The slightly smaller A5 still costs nearly £400. People aren't buying mid-range phones because as far as actual consumers are concerned, mid-range means no more than £200, maybe £250 at a push, and there are plenty of perfectly decent phones available at the price.
The problem is essentially that the top-end phones keep getting more expensive, but the low end hasn't moved at all. The people who want a cheap phone can have one for <£100, the people who are happy to pay a bit more can get a very good one for <£250, and the people who want the best phones available are now paying £800+, There's simply no market for anything in between; no-one wants to pay £500 for something that isn't the best, and is hardly distinguishable from something half the price.
Super profits ....
But putting up the price of your handsets by £80 to £100 every new release will put customers off.
The original Galaxy S was £400 now we're hitting £900 for the current equivalent.
Ripping punters off does generate money ..... in the short term.
Apparently some firms
Really are too big to fail.