A letter to The New York Times

Dear The New York Times journalist,

I do realize that Apple’s 3G iPhone is one of the most talked about consumer products today. I do realize that people are still interested in hearing about 3G iPhone, its merits, and demerits. But then, haven’t you already discussed this issue to death?

When you came up with the brilliant discovery that the new 3G iPhone actually costs more than the old one, I was really taken back. And if you remember, I already wrote a rebuttal for that. And now, you come up with this. What do I say?

The story is this – Apple sells its iPhone for $600 to those who don’t want the two-year contract with AT&T. Those who come under the contract can pay just $199. You see, we’re fine with that. But then, when you quote some market research firm and say that the iPhone is actually worth only around $170, aren’t you stretching things a little too far?

And how the hell did someone come up with that arbitrary figure? Based on the cost of the hardware components in the phone alone? Hello, ever heard of something called R&D? When you price a product, you have to take the cost of R&D, designing, and marketing into consideration. So, claiming that the iPhone is worth only around $170 based on the value of its components is not just incorrect, it’s plain stupid.

Sensationalizing issues is better left to bloggers like me. You, being a journalist, are supposed to be neutral and most importantly, well informed.

Thanks.

Categories: Rant, Apple iPhone.

0 comments.

Debunking the myths about mobile advertising - III

When I first read this, I thought of writing a line-by-line rebuttal. But then, I saw no need for that. So, I’ll just highlight a few points and express my views on that. First of all, I wanna say that I respect everyone’s point of view. You’ve got your point of view, your own opinions, your take on certain issues, and so on. But Mike, I have a little problem with your write-up. That is, you went on to ‘assume’ certain things about mobile advertising. Let me explain.

‘It audibly interrupts your life like telemarketing.‘

Well; just like you have a DND (Do Not Disturb) option for telemarketing, you have an option for mobile adverts too. You are presented with a choice. You can either opt in to mobile ads or just say ‘no thanks.’ So, there is no question of mobile ads interrupting your life.

‘But you know that once the floodgates open, and the spam comes rushing in, everyone will hate mobile advertising.‘

Well; It may happen. But then, it may not. Why? Just check out - exhibit A and exhibit B. Perhaps the largest network carrier in the world, China Mobile, learnt a lesson the hard way regarding mobile spam. That, my friend, should reassure folks like you that advertisers and carriers can’t get away with mobile spam. There will be severe repercussions to face.

‘Some marketers are talking about respecting the privacy of users and putting consumer in control of what they get and when. Do you find that reassuring? I don’t.‘

Why do you think so?

‘And support any movement or legislation that seeks to block or criminalize mobile advertising.’

Don’t you think it’s kind of a knee-jerk reaction?

Categories: Cell Phone Advertising, Rant.

0 comments.

On why experts shouldn’t talk for people - II

Let me state two things.

First, mobile advertisers and cellular operators, at least as of now, give you the option of opting out of mobile advertisements. I, like every other mobile user, believe that it will stay that way.

Second, don’t ever predict things. Operators know their customers too well to do any such stupid thing like making mobile adverts compulsory. They know that customers can switch to some other network at the flick of a finger if they want to. So, operators will be careful enough not to push their customers too far to make them take a strong decision against them.

I’m done. Now you can read what David Haskin said about ‘the demon’ that is mobile advertising and why I said what I said in the beginning.

PS: Now don’t come up with another post which states that mobile operators around the globe will conspire against mobile users and make mobile ads compulsory, thereby leaving them with no choice or some crap like that. If you actually think that way, contact Mr. Steven Spielberg and get your script ready for the next sci-fi movie.

PPS: I already wrote a rebuttal for an expert who ‘claimed’ something similar. Now, here comes another. Let me see how long this series goes!

Categories: Cell Phone Advertising, Rant, All things mobile phones.

0 comments.