Tillbaka till svenska Fidonet
English   Information   Debug  
OS2BBS   0/787
OS2DOSBBS   0/580
OS2HW   0/42
OS2INET   0/37
OS2LAN   0/134
OS2PROG   0/36
OS2REXX   0/113
OS2USER-L   207
OS2   0/4786
OSDEBATE   0/18996
PASCAL   0/490
PERL   0/457
PHP   0/45
POINTS   0/405
POLITICS   0/29554
POL_INC   0/14731
PSION   103
R20_ADMIN   1121
R20_AMATORRADIO   0/2
R20_BEST_OF_FIDONET   13
R20_CHAT   0/893
R20_DEPP   0/3
R20_DEV   399
R20_ECHO2   1379
R20_ECHOPRES   0/35
R20_ESTAT   0/719
R20_FIDONETPROG...
...RAM.MYPOINT
  0/2
R20_FIDONETPROGRAM   0/22
R20_FIDONET   0/248
R20_FILEFIND   0/24
R20_FILEFOUND   0/22
R20_HIFI   0/3
R20_INFO2   3205
R20_INTERNET   0/12940
R20_INTRESSE   0/60
R20_INTR_KOM   0/99
R20_KANDIDAT.CHAT   42
R20_KANDIDAT   28
R20_KOM_DEV   112
R20_KONTROLL   0/13258
R20_KORSET   0/18
R20_LOKALTRAFIK   0/24
R20_MODERATOR   0/1852
R20_NC   76
R20_NET200   245
R20_NETWORK.OTH...
...ERNETS
  0/13
R20_OPERATIVSYS...
...TEM.LINUX
  0/44
R20_PROGRAMVAROR   0/1
R20_REC2NEC   534
R20_SFOSM   0/340
R20_SF   0/108
R20_SPRAK.ENGLISH   0/1
R20_SQUISH   107
R20_TEST   2
R20_WORST_OF_FIDONET   12
RAR   0/9
RA_MULTI   106
RA_UTIL   0/162
REGCON.EUR   0/2056
REGCON   0/13
SCIENCE   0/1206
SF   0/239
SHAREWARE_SUPPORT   0/5146
SHAREWRE   0/14
SIMPSONS   0/169
STATS_OLD1   0/2539.065
STATS_OLD2   0/2530
STATS_OLD3   0/2395.095
STATS_OLD4   0/1692.25
SURVIVOR   0/495
SYSOPS_CORNER   0/3
SYSOP   0/84
TAGLINES   0/112
TEAMOS2   0/4530
TECH   0/2617
TEST.444   0/105
TRAPDOOR   0/19
TREK   0/755
TUB   0/290
UFO   0/40
UNIX   0/1316
USA_EURLINK   0/102
USR_MODEMS   0/1
VATICAN   0/2740
VIETNAM_VETS   0/14
VIRUS   0/378
VIRUS_INFO   0/201
VISUAL_BASIC   0/473
WHITEHOUSE   0/5187
WIN2000   0/101
WIN32   0/30
WIN95   0/4288
WIN95_OLD1   0/70272
WINDOWS   0/1517
WWB_SYSOP   0/419
WWB_TECH   0/810
ZCC-PUBLIC   0/1
ZEC   4

 
4DOS   0/134
ABORTION   0/7
ALASKA_CHAT   0/506
ALLFIX_FILE   0/1313
ALLFIX_FILE_OLD1   0/7997
ALT_DOS   0/152
AMATEUR_RADIO   0/1039
AMIGASALE   0/14
AMIGA   0/331
AMIGA_INT   0/1
AMIGA_PROG   0/20
AMIGA_SYSOP   0/26
ANIME   0/15
ARGUS   0/924
ASCII_ART   0/340
ASIAN_LINK   0/651
ASTRONOMY   0/417
AUDIO   0/92
AUTOMOBILE_RACING   0/105
BABYLON5   0/17862
BAG   135
BATPOWER   0/361
BBBS.ENGLISH   0/382
BBSLAW   0/109
BBS_ADS   0/5290
BBS_INTERNET   0/507
BIBLE   0/3563
BINKD   0/1119
BINKLEY   0/215
BLUEWAVE   0/2173
CABLE_MODEMS   0/25
CBM   0/46
CDRECORD   0/66
CDROM   0/20
CLASSIC_COMPUTER   0/378
COMICS   0/15
CONSPRCY   0/899
COOKING   32677
COOKING_OLD1   0/24719
COOKING_OLD2   0/40862
COOKING_OLD3   0/37489
COOKING_OLD4   0/35496
COOKING_OLD5   9370
C_ECHO   0/189
C_PLUSPLUS   0/31
DIRTY_DOZEN   0/201
DOORGAMES   0/2053
DOS_INTERNET   0/196
duplikat   6002
ECHOLIST   0/18295
EC_SUPPORT   0/318
ELECTRONICS   0/359
ELEKTRONIK.GER   1534
ENET.LINGUISTIC   0/13
ENET.POLITICS   0/4
ENET.SOFT   0/11701
ENET.SYSOP   33888
ENET.TALKS   0/32
ENGLISH_TUTOR   0/2000
EVOLUTION   0/1335
FDECHO   0/217
FDN_ANNOUNCE   0/7068
FIDONEWS   24094
FIDONEWS_OLD1   0/49742
FIDONEWS_OLD2   0/35949
FIDONEWS_OLD3   0/30874
FIDONEWS_OLD4   0/37224
FIDO_SYSOP   12852
FIDO_UTIL   0/180
FILEFIND   0/209
FILEGATE   0/212
FILM   0/18
FNEWS_PUBLISH   4393
FN_SYSOP   41678
FN_SYSOP_OLD1   71952
FTP_FIDO   0/2
FTSC_PUBLIC   0/13598
FUNNY   0/4886
GENEALOGY.EUR   0/71
GET_INFO   105
GOLDED   0/408
HAM   0/16069
HOLYSMOKE   0/6791
HOT_SITES   0/1
HTMLEDIT   0/71
HUB203   466
HUB_100   264
HUB_400   39
HUMOR   0/29
IC   0/2851
INTERNET   0/424
INTERUSER   0/3
IP_CONNECT   719
JAMNNTPD   0/233
JAMTLAND   0/47
KATTY_KORNER   0/41
LAN   0/16
LINUX-USER   0/19
LINUXHELP   0/1155
LINUX   0/22090
LINUX_BBS   0/957
mail   18.68
mail_fore_ok   249
MENSA   0/341
MODERATOR   0/102
MONTE   0/992
MOSCOW_OKLAHOMA   0/1245
MUFFIN   0/783
MUSIC   0/321
N203_STAT   924
N203_SYSCHAT   313
NET203   321
NET204   69
NET_DEV   0/10
NORD.ADMIN   0/101
NORD.CHAT   0/2572
NORD.FIDONET   189
NORD.HARDWARE   0/28
NORD.KULTUR   0/114
NORD.PROG   0/32
NORD.SOFTWARE   0/88
NORD.TEKNIK   0/58
NORD   0/453
OCCULT_CHAT   0/93
Möte OSDEBATE, 18996 texter
 lista första sista föregående nästa
Text 9462, 430 rader
Skriven 2006-01-30 22:26:20 av John Oellrich (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 9453 av Glenn Meadows (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: iPod business
=========================
From: "John Oellrich" <john@oellrich.us>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C625EC.324CC780
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Glenn,

But I think you see my point, even after the labels get their 66%, Apple =
still has plenty of cash flow to cover operating expenses and turn a = profit,
the question remains how much of one. But Apple selling the iPod = Nano at a
clear loss would seem to indicate Apple believes that iTunes = does (or will in
the near future) spin off enough cash to allow them to = subsidize iPod
sales.=20

I used to believe that Jobs was an idiot when it came to both technology = and
business (what he did during the gestation of the Mac and then at = NeXT should
be proof enough), but it seems he finally got grounded with = Pixar and then
returning to Apple. In fact the coup he just pulled off = with Disney appears
to be beyond brilliant. Talk about the tail wagging = the dog! So I also tend
to believe that he has his shit together when it = comes to iTunes.

In my research on this subject I also found that the major labels may be =
making out better than you thought, at the expense of the artists. At = least
from the articles I read, the artists get 12% from CD sales, but = only 6% from
iTunes sales. OUCH!

Oh couple of other points about the iTunes model. One the cost of = bandwidth
is obviously plummeting. I now have the equivalent of a = 10BaseT to the house
for $70 a month (or ~7T1s on the download side). = And the carriers really
discount on the commercial side if you make a = reasonably long term commit for
a lot of bandwidth. But I think a bigger = key issue is that iTunes effectively
doesn't have any carrying costs, = one copy of every tune in its library. If it
is a loser, no big deal, if = it is a winner, that single copy can be
downloaded millions of times for = very little expansion of its server farms or
its network.

--=20
john

john@oellrich.us
  "Glenn Meadows" <gmeadow@comcast.net> wrote in message =
news:43dd28be$1@w3.nls.net...
  I really don't know what it costs for them to run it, but I know it's =
a=20
  large staff, large data infrastructure.  I don't know what bandwidth =
costs=20
  are at that level either.

  BUT, I do know for a fact that we get 66/67 percent of the sale of =
each item=20
  sold.  I see the sales reports every month.

  Their percentage they keep is actually LESS than Wal-Mart/Target get =
on the=20
  physical good sale markup for standard retail.

  --=20

  Glenn M.
  "John Oellrich" <john@oellrich.us> wrote in message=20
  news:43dbfbde@w3.nls.net...
  Glenn,

  I'm pretty sure I read that Apple has been getting a much larger chunk =
of=20
  the music sale than that. But now I can't remember where I read it.

  As Apples revenues on iPods, of course it is a major contributor. The =
sold=20
  over 11 times more iPods than Macs of all flavors (14 million vs. 1.25 =

  million) in the last quarter. And for revenue its $2.9B for the iPods, =
$1.7B=20
  for the Macs (or $207 per iPod and $1,724 per Mac). I would argue that =
the=20
  margins are much different for an iPod than a Mac. The Mac benefits =
from=20
  using truly commodity components (other than the CPU, but going Intel =
will=20
  solve that nasty little problem) where Apple benefits from the volumes =
of=20
  the entire PC industry. The same is not true for the iPod, a lot of=20
  comparatively low volume and expensive (smaller ain't cheaper) =
components.

  When the iPod Nano was released a study of its Bill of Materials (the =
cost=20
  of the components) showed that it was in fact being sold at a loss. =
The cost=20
  of the flash in the device alone was around 40% of its list price. The =
total=20
  BOM for a device should only be roughly 33% of its list price is the =
old=20
  rule of thumb. The speculation was Apple priced it as it did for one =
reason,=20
  boost iTunes downloads.

  The revenue from iTunes last quarter was $491M (not a pure number, =
Apple=20
  rolled up some other revenue sources in the number as well, but iTunes =
is=20
  probably the lion's share). Let's ignore the fact that this isn't a =
pure=20
  number and go with your 2/3's back to the studio (oops just did a =
Google,=20
  Apple gets a tad over 34%). 34+% of $491M is $168.4M or $56.1M per =
month.=20
  How much do you really think it costs Apple to run iTunes per month?=20
  Whatever, it is not going to be anywhere close to $56.1M. Overall in =
Apple's=20
  profits, yep iTunes is small potatoes, but a potato that is growing =
very=20
  rapidly.

  --=20
  john

  john@oellrich.us
    "Glenn Meadows" <gmeadow@comcast.net> wrote in message=20
  news:43db9005$1@w3.nls.net...
    John,

    I've got to side with Rich on this.  Apple does NOT make any =
appreciable
    profit on the store.  2/3 of the revenue from the sale of a track =
goes to
    the label who owns the copyright (actually it's going up another few =

  percent
    shortly).  Then from that, Apple has to pay the full staff that runs =
the
    store, does all the previewing of the music, etc. Plus, they pay the =

  (Apple
    pays) the CC processing fees from their portion, as wall as all the
    bandwidth costs, customer support calls,etc.  And, for most of the =
majors,
    they do all the encoding and processing of the new material (at =
least they
    did for the first year to get it going).

    Within the industry, it's fairly well known, that Apple makes =
virtually
    nothing on the sale of the music, it's the drive of the content to =
sell
    iPods.  I believe that a recent news story I read said that they're =
making
    as much, or more on iPod sales, than they are on computer hardware =
sales.

    The iPod profit is a very large margin all the way through the =
retail=20
  chain
    is suspect.

    --=20

    Glenn M.
    "John Oellrich" <john@oellrich.us> wrote in message
    news:43db849c$1@w3.nls.net...
    Rich,

    Nope it is the other way around. Well they do probably make a profit =
on=20
  the
    iPod, but it has no where near the margin of iTunes.

    --=20
    john

    john@oellrich.us
      "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:43db18e3$1@w3.nls.net...
         Doesn't apple make money on the ipod hardware and little to =
none on=20
  the
    itunes store?

      Rich

        "John Oellrich" <john@oellrich.us> wrote in message
    news:43da8441@w3.nls.net...
        Talk about stupid! Yet another money losing piece of hardware =
where=20
  they
    will try to make it up in the volume ;->

        ...

        I would suggest that MS might be better off working with =
Creative if
    they want to blunt Apple's dominance in this arena. Get Windows =
Media 10
    ported to the device, and then MS could use MSN for the delivery =
vehicle=20
  for
    the purchased media which is where the real money is.

        --=20
        john




------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C625EC.324CC780
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Glenn,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But I think you see my point, even after the labels get their 66%, =
Apple=20
still has plenty of cash flow to cover operating expenses and turn a = profit,
the=20
question remains how much of one. But Apple selling the iPod Nano at a =
clear=20
loss would seem to indicate Apple believes that iTunes does (or will in = the
near=20
future) spin off enough cash to allow them to subsidize iPod sales. =
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I used to believe that Jobs was an idiot when it came to both =
technology=20
and business (what he did during the gestation of the Mac and then at = NeXT=20
should be proof enough), but it seems he finally got grounded with Pixar =
and=20
then returning to Apple. In fact the coup he just pulled off with Disney =
appears=20
to be beyond brilliant. Talk about the tail wagging the dog! So I also = tend
to=20
believe that he has his shit together when it comes to iTunes.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In my research on this subject I also found that the major labels =
may be=20
making out better than you thought, at the expense of the artists. At = least
from=20
the articles I read, the artists get 12% from CD sales, but only 6% from =
iTunes=20
sales. OUCH!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Oh couple of other points about the iTunes model. One the cost of =
bandwidth=20
is obviously plummeting. I now have the equivalent of a 10BaseT to the = house
for=20
$70 a month (or ~7T1s on the download side). And the carriers really =
discount on=20
the commercial side if you make a reasonably long term commit for a lot = of=20
bandwidth. But I think a bigger key issue is that iTunes effectively =
doesn't=20
have any carrying costs, one copy of every tune in its library. If it is = a=20
loser, no big deal, if it is a winner, that single copy can be = downloaded=20
millions of times for very little expansion of its server farms or its=20
network.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>-- <BR>john</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"Glenn Meadows" &lt;<A=20
  href=3D"mailto:gmeadow@comcast.net">gmeadow@comcast.net</A>&gt; wrote =
in message=20
  <A =
href=3D"news:43dd28be$1@w3.nls.net">news:43dd28be$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>I=20
  really don't know what it costs for them to run it, but I know it's a=20
  <BR>large staff, large data infrastructure.&nbsp; I don't know what =
bandwidth=20
  costs <BR>are at that level either.<BR><BR>BUT, I do know for a fact =
that we=20
  get 66/67 percent of the sale of each item <BR>sold.&nbsp; I see the =
sales=20
  reports every month.<BR><BR>Their percentage they keep is actually =
LESS than=20
  Wal-Mart/Target get on the <BR>physical good sale markup for standard=20
  retail.<BR><BR>-- <BR><BR>Glenn M.<BR>"John Oellrich" &lt;<A=20
  href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A>&gt; wrote in =
message=20
  <BR><A=20
  =
href=3D"news:43dbfbde@w3.nls.net">news:43dbfbde@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>Glen=
n,<BR><BR>I'm=20
  pretty sure I read that Apple has been getting a much larger chunk of =
<BR>the=20
  music sale than that. But now I can't remember where I read =
it.<BR><BR>As=20
  Apples revenues on iPods, of course it is a major contributor. The =
sold=20
  <BR>over 11 times more iPods than Macs of all flavors (14 million vs. =
1.25=20
  <BR>million) in the last quarter. And for revenue its $2.9B for the =
iPods,=20
  $1.7B <BR>for the Macs (or $207 per iPod and $1,724 per Mac). I would =
argue=20
  that the <BR>margins are much different for an iPod than a Mac. The =
Mac=20
  benefits from <BR>using truly commodity components (other than the =
CPU, but=20
  going Intel will <BR>solve that nasty little problem) where Apple =
benefits=20
  from the volumes of <BR>the entire PC industry. The same is not true =
for the=20
  iPod, a lot of <BR>comparatively low volume and expensive (smaller =
ain't=20
  cheaper) components.<BR><BR>When the iPod Nano was released a study of =
its=20
  Bill of Materials (the cost <BR>of the components) showed that it was =
in fact=20
  being sold at a loss. The cost <BR>of the flash in the device alone =
was around=20
  40% of its list price. The total <BR>BOM for a device should only be =
roughly=20
  33% of its list price is the old <BR>rule of thumb. The speculation =
was Apple=20
  priced it as it did for one reason, <BR>boost iTunes =
downloads.<BR><BR>The=20
  revenue from iTunes last quarter was $491M (not a pure number, Apple=20
  <BR>rolled up some other revenue sources in the number as well, but =
iTunes is=20
  <BR>probably the lion's share). Let's ignore the fact that this isn't =
a pure=20
  <BR>number and go with your 2/3's back to the studio (oops just did a =
Google,=20
  <BR>Apple gets a tad over 34%). 34+% of $491M is $168.4M or $56.1M per =
month.=20
  <BR>How much do you really think it costs Apple to run iTunes per =
month?=20
  <BR>Whatever, it is not going to be anywhere close to $56.1M. Overall =
in=20
  Apple's <BR>profits, yep iTunes is small potatoes, but a potato that =
is=20
  growing very <BR>rapidly.<BR><BR>-- <BR>john<BR><BR><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A><BR>&nbsp; "Glenn =
Meadows"=20
  &lt;<A href=3D"mailto:gmeadow@comcast.net">gmeadow@comcast.net</A>&gt; =
wrote in=20
  message <BR><A=20
  =
href=3D"news:43db9005$1@w3.nls.net">news:43db9005$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
&nbsp;=20
  John,<BR><BR>&nbsp; I've got to side with Rich on this.&nbsp; Apple =
does NOT=20
  make any appreciable<BR>&nbsp; profit on the store.&nbsp; 2/3 of the =
revenue=20
  from the sale of a track goes to<BR>&nbsp; the label who owns the =
copyright=20
  (actually it's going up another few <BR>percent<BR>&nbsp; =
shortly).&nbsp; Then=20
  from that, Apple has to pay the full staff that runs the<BR>&nbsp; =
store, does=20
  all the previewing of the music, etc. Plus, they pay the =
<BR>(Apple<BR>&nbsp;=20
  pays) the CC processing fees from their portion, as wall as all =
the<BR>&nbsp;=20
  bandwidth costs, customer support calls,etc.&nbsp; And, for most of =
the=20
  majors,<BR>&nbsp; they do all the encoding and processing of the new =
material=20
  (at least they<BR>&nbsp; did for the first year to get it=20
  going).<BR><BR>&nbsp; Within the industry, it's fairly well known, =
that Apple=20
  makes virtually<BR>&nbsp; nothing on the sale of the music, it's the =
drive of=20
  the content to sell<BR>&nbsp; iPods.&nbsp; I believe that a recent =
news story=20
  I read said that they're making<BR>&nbsp; as much, or more on iPod =
sales, than=20
  they are on computer hardware sales.<BR><BR>&nbsp; The iPod profit is =
a very=20
  large margin all the way through the retail <BR>chain<BR>&nbsp; is=20
  suspect.<BR><BR>&nbsp; -- <BR><BR>&nbsp; Glenn M.<BR>&nbsp; "John =
Oellrich"=20
  &lt;<A href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A>&gt; wrote =
in=20
  message<BR>&nbsp; <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:43db849c$1@w3.nls.net">news:43db849c$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
&nbsp;=20
  Rich,<BR><BR>&nbsp; Nope it is the other way around. Well they do =
probably=20
  make a profit on <BR>the<BR>&nbsp; iPod, but it has no where near the =
margin=20
  of iTunes.<BR><BR>&nbsp; -- <BR>&nbsp; john<BR><BR>&nbsp; <A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;=20
  "Rich" &lt;@&gt; wrote in message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:43db18e3$1@w3.nls.net">news:43db18e3$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  Doesn't apple make money on the ipod hardware and little to none on=20
  <BR>the<BR>&nbsp; itunes store?<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  Rich<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; "John Oellrich" &lt;<A=20
  href=3D"mailto:john@oellrich.us">john@oellrich.us</A>&gt; wrote in=20
  message<BR>&nbsp; <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:43da8441@w3.nls.net">news:43da8441@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  Talk about stupid! Yet another money losing piece of hardware where=20
  <BR>they<BR>&nbsp; will try to make it up in the volume=20
  ;-&gt;<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  ...<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I would suggest that MS =
might be=20
  better off working with Creative if<BR>&nbsp; they want to blunt =
Apple's=20
  dominance in this arena. Get Windows Media 10<BR>&nbsp; ported to the =
device,=20
  and then MS could use MSN for the delivery vehicle <BR>for<BR>&nbsp; =
the=20
  purchased media which is where the real money=20
  is.<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; --=20
  <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
john<BR><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C625EC.324CC780--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)