Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey  I agree that there are differences. They were a computer company then, and they are more of a consumer electronics company now. That obviously does change things. My arguments for congruency are more oriented towards the overall way that they are structured, which is very similar to before (i.e. closed, vertical, upscale pricing being necessary to drive the R&D engine.) |
It's hard to say if this business model is flawed. Back before Jobs took over Apple was in decent financial health, they were just losing market share rapidly.
It's easy to think that this wouldn't be a sustainable model to move forwards but we won't know since Jobs did take over. However looking at companies like Bose and Bang & Olufsen, of course much smaller enterprises but with a similar product concept and prices. Both of them are doing good afaik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey It sort of requires that they stay pricey, so if a reasonable competitor comes along for a better price, particularly if it's some company that is marketing savvy and manages to position Apple as the now staid status quo, they could be very vulnerable. |
No one can challenge Apple at the moment but you are absolutely right.
My personal feeling is that it will be a company who's yet to really show themselves. A company that will face the competition with a product based on a great idea and innovative concept rather than brute dollar force.
However could be that Samsung becomes the new Nokia of the day and takes over by just consistently coming out with the right product. They're still just imitating thought, chasing the same market share as Crabbable.