Comparative Resale Values of Flagship Phones, Including Variations Among Carriers

sms

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 2:01:37 AM9/8/18

to

<https://www.decluttr.com/> shows the wholesale price that they will pay
for various phone models.

Unsurprisingly, the flagship iPhone (iPhone X) retains a higher
percentage of value than the leading flagship Android phone (Samsung
Galaxy S9).

An unlocked 256GB iPhone X ($1149 when new) will be purchased by a
reseller at $610 (53% of the new price) for the unlocked or Verizon
version (Which will work on all four U.S. carriers), but only $535 (47%)
for the T-Mobile version. This is despite the fact that the new price is
the same no matter which version you purchase. For the unlocked/Verizon
version, it will have lost $539 of its value.

Currently, the closest Android phone to the iPhone X 256GB is the
Samsung Galaxy S9 256GB ($840 when new) and will be purchased for $372
(44% of the new price). It will have lost $468 of its value.

As soon as a new generation launches, the resale value of the old models
falls because the price for a new cost of the old model goes down.

You may do better selling on Craigslist than through one of the many
used phone channels like digicircle.com, decluttr, Swappa.

See
<https://www.inverse.com/article/48731-iphone-xs-data-shows-how-past-apple-phones-hold-high-resale-value>.
Some people make a lot of noise complaining that Apple flagships are
much more expensive, which is true for the initial purchase price, but
when the resale value is factored in the cost difference is much smaller.

nospam

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 2:33:42 AM9/8/18

to

In article <pmvok0$3ta$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> An unlocked 256GB iPhone X ($1149 when new) will be purchased by a
> reseller at $610 (53% of the new price) for the unlocked or Verizon

reseller prices are *not* a way to determine value, and not just phones.

checking ebay listings, that model would easily sell for $800-900,
which is consistent with reports of it holding 85% of its original
value.

<http://fortune.com/2018/07/23/apple-iphone-x-value/>
In a recent study, liquidation company B-Stock examined which iPhone
does the best job of holding its value. The iPhone X came out on top
by retaining 85% of its original value in a secondary market.
Companies that buy the iPhone X in bulk to resell the handset are
acquiring it for 75% of its retail price, B-Stock discovered,
according to 9to5Mac, which obtained a copy of the study.

> You may do better selling on Craigslist than through one of the many
> used phone channels

not may. a private sale will definitely get a higher price than using a
reseller, who is just going to turn it around and sell it to someone
else. it's more of a hassle, and craigslist in particular is risky, but
the difference may be worth it for some people.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 1:03:10 PM9/8/18

to

On 7 Sep 2018 23:01:32 GMT, sms wrote:

> An unlocked 256GB iPhone X ($1149 when new) will be purchased by a
> reseller at $610 (53% of the new price) for the unlocked or Verizon
> version

*What matters is total cost of ownership (per some time period).*

As an *educated* adult, I expect more from you sms.
Lots more.

*I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is astronomical.*

What matters isn't "resale value".
What matters is total cost of ownership.

As an obvious example, did you ever see a line outside Apple stores?
What are they doing?
a. They're ditching their old phones,
b. They're buying a new phone
*Pick both*

The point is that *total cost of ownership* is what matters.
Not resale value.

*Please think _logically_ sms - and don't spout meaningless statistics.*

If, for example, Apple users sold phones monthly (hypothetically speaking),
and if Android users sold yearly, then of course that alone would greatly
skew the resale value for heaven's sake.

And, if Apple phones averaged, oh, let's say $1000 and Android phones
averaged, oh, say $500, that also would greatly affect resale value,
especially since you're not taking the huge taxes involved in many states
(such as the state you and I live in).

So that $1000 phone is really a $1100 phone, since taxes are solely based
on sales price (for most phones). While that $500 phone is a $550 phone,
when you compute the overall return on investment, the twice-as-high tax
should be counted accordingly - and your stats ignore this reality.

If you have to add $30 batteries the first year and then $80 batteries
every year until the end of time, that also has to count into the total
cost of ownership.

While I greatly appreciate your compilation of a *technical* spreadsheet,
what you're missing in the "resale value" is the cost of ownership.

*I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is astronomical.*

That may or may not be the case when you run the math, but, if you don't
run the math, you can't refute that very clearly stated axiom.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 1:07:37 PM9/8/18

to

On 7 Sep 2018 23:33:39 GMT, nospam wrote:

> reseller prices are *not* a way to determine value, and not just phones.

*What matters is total cost of ownership (per some time period).*

As an *educated* adult, I expect more from you sms.
Lots more.

*I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is astronomical.*

What matters isn't "resale value".
What matters is total cost of ownership.

As an obvious example, did you ever see a line outside Apple stores?
What are they doing?
a. They're ditching their old phones,
b. They're buying a new phone
*Pick both*

The point is that *total cost of ownership* is what matters.
Not resale value.

And reseller prices is a *perfect* way to pick resale value.

123456789

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 10:34:17 PM9/8/18

to

On 9/8/2018 10:03 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:

> *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
> astronomical.*

Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE expensive.

> What matters isn't "resale value". What matters is total cost of
> ownership.

Depends on how broke one is. Likely people who can AFFORD to buy a
premium product don't worry too much about the total cost of ownership.

> As an obvious example, did you ever see a line outside Apple stores?
> What are they doing? a. They're ditching their old phones, b. They're
> buying a new phone

c. They're excited about getting a newly released premium phone. Most
are likely previously satisfied customers. It's a win-win for the
company and the customer.

Though IMO one is wiser to wait awhile before buying a newly released
product to let the bugs get worked out. I usually do that with my
premium Android phones...

nospam

unread,

Sep 8, 2018, 11:10:38 PM9/8/18

to

In article <pn20r8$p31$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> > *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
> > astronomical.*
>
> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word?

nope. not all iphones are expensive. there's a range of models.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:15:27 AM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 19:34:16 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE expensive.

Resale value is only one datum in that total cost of ownership equation.

There are some expensive things that can have a lower cost of ownership,
e.g., some things make money so they pay for themselves.

What matters for a depreciating asset, which most electronics are, is the
overall cost of ownership - not just the resale value.

The resale value from resellers is a *great* way to gauge the true market
value of a device - but the total cost of ownership is the metric that
matters.

You take the initial cost (which includes tax) and then you subtract things
you can't re-use such as a case that won't fit on another phone, new
batteries, whatever ... and then you divide by the number of years owned.

That's the metric that matters.
Resale value is only one datum in that total cost of ownership equation.

>> What matters isn't "resale value". What matters is total cost of
>> ownership.
>
> Depends on how broke one is. Likely people who can AFFORD to buy a
> premium product don't worry too much about the total cost of ownership.

The fact people "don't worry" is meaningless.

What matters is the metric that sms was calculating is only one datum in
the equation, where if sms wants to be *useful*, he would calculate total
cost of ownership.

So, he'd add the tax (which is appreciable on a $1000 phone, and even more
so when you consider that the tax that you never get back is a huge
percentage of the resale value you do get back).

Plus he'd add the cost of yearly batteries for those phones that need them
(e.g., the current spate of flawed iPhones).

>> As an obvious example, did you ever see a line outside Apple stores?
>> What are they doing? a. They're ditching their old phones, b. They're
>> buying a new phone
>
> c. They're excited about getting a newly released premium phone. Most
> are likely previously satisfied customers. It's a win-win for the
> company and the customer.

The line at the store is almost certainly mostly people who are:
a. Ditching their current phone as soon as they can, and,
b. Purchasing a more expensive new phone as soon as they can.

*The economics on that equation will _never_ be good, don't you think?*

> Though IMO one is wiser to wait awhile before buying a newly released
> product to let the bugs get worked out. I usually do that with my
> premium Android phones...

What amazes me when I walk by an Apple store with a long line outside on a
new sales day is how many people wait on line to *ditch* their old phones!

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:17:03 AM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 20:10:36 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word?
>
> nope. not all iphones are expensive. there's a range of models.

We've already proven in ample hardware detail that only a fool doesn't know
that you can buy from two to five Android phones of equivalent hardware
(actually better in almost all respects - but let's just say equivalent)
than an iPhone of equivalent hardware.

Only a fool can't figure that out.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:08:08 AM9/9/18

to

On 9/8/2018 8:10 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <pn20r8$p31$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
>>> astronomical.*
>>
>> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word?
>
> nope. not all iphones are expensive.

So you'd rather go with Arlen's ASTRONOMICAL then?

> there's a range of models.

EXPENSIVE is relative. There's also a range of Cadillac models.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:08:11 AM9/9/18

to

On 9/8/2018 9:15 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 8 Sep 2018 19:34:16 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

>> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE
>> expensive.

> What matters for a depreciating asset, which most electronics are, is
> the overall cost of ownership - not just the resale value.

For those who want things they can't afford, payments are uppermost in
their mind, not phone resale two years down the line.

> So, he'd add the tax (which is appreciable on a $1000 phone, and even
> more so when you consider that the tax that you never get back is a
> huge percentage of the resale value you do get back).

People who are buying a phone on how much of a payment they can afford
don't worry about taxes spread over two years.

> Plus he'd add the cost of yearly batteries for those phones that need
> them (e.g., the current spate of flawed iPhones).

Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year contract.

> What amazes me when I walk by an Apple store with a long line outside
> on a new sales day is how many people wait on line to *ditch* their
> old phones!

What amazes me is that I wait in longer lines at Six Flags Magic
Mountain for just a few minutes of terror...

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:30:35 AM9/9/18

to

In article <pn29rn$hbp$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> >>> *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
> >>> astronomical.*
> >>
> >> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word?
> >
> > nope. not all iphones are expensive.
>
> So you'd rather go with Arlen's ASTRONOMICAL then?

no.

he and others are fixated on the $1000 iphone x, completely blind to
the rest of the lineup.

the iphone x is the top of the line. there are several other iphones
that cost less.

as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone se at
$349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from walmart, no
contract, although it's locked to one of several mvnos.

<https://www.walmart.com/ip/Walmart-Family-Mobile-Prepaid-Apple-iPhone-S
E-32GB-Space-Gray/357713686>

> > there's a range of models.
>
> EXPENSIVE is relative. There's also a range of Cadillac models.

just about every product family has a range of options at various price
points.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:30:36 AM9/9/18

to

In article <pn29rq$hbp$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
wrote:

>
> Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year contract.

well beyond that, actually.

batteries are rated for 80% at 5 years, which is still very usable.

Your Name

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:35:46 AM9/9/18

to

On 2018-09-09 02:34:16 +0000, 123456789 said:
> On 9/8/2018 10:03 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
>>
>> *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
>> astronomical.*
>
> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE expensive.

"Arlen Holder" is just a braindead, know-nothing, anti-Apple troll who
continues to prove it further with every single post theat people keep
stupidly bothering to reply to.

The reality is that the "Apple cost of ownership" has been proven many
times to be less than other competing products, simply because the
Apple products have fewer issues, a longer life-span, and better
re-sell value ... as well as user satisfaction.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:06:09 AM9/9/18

to

On 9/8/2018 10:30 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <pn29rq$hbp$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
> wrote:

>> Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year contract.

> well beyond that, actually.

Makes little difference to most who make the 2 year phone switch...

> batteries are rated for 80% at 5 years, which is still very usable.

Unfortunately The iPhone 8 in my family had a battery fail at 2 years.
Stuff happens...

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:06:10 AM9/9/18

to

On 9/8/2018 10:30 PM, nospam wrote:

> In article <pn29rn$hbp$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
> wrote:

> as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone se at
> $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from walmart, no
> contract, although it's locked to one of several mvnos.

Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models. In the past I
got 2 Android smartphones on the Target clearance rack for $12 and $14
respectively. Used them like iPods. After tiring of them they were
donated to grandkids. Yesterday I saw a $24 Android smartphone on the
Target clearance rack, and several on the regular aisle for $40 and up.

>> EXPENSIVE is relative.

>
> just about every product family has a range of options at various
> price points.

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 10:49:30 AM9/9/18

to

In article <pn2d8g$78v$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> >> Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year contract.
>
> > well beyond that, actually.
>
> Makes little difference to most who make the 2 year phone switch...

yep.

> > batteries are rated for 80% at 5 years, which is still very usable.
>
> Unfortunately The iPhone 8 in my family had a battery fail at 2 years.
> Stuff happens...

it's a rating, not a guarantee.

nothing is perfect. some batteries prematurely fail and others last
longer than expected. most will be 80% at 5 years.

similarly, most people keep their phone for around 2 years, but some
keep it for only 1 year and others keep it for 3-4 years, sometimes
longer.

tl;dr the device will normally be replaced before the battery fails.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 10:49:31 AM9/9/18

to

In article <pn2d8i$78v$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> > as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone se at
> > $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from walmart, no
> > contract, although it's locked to one of several mvnos.
>
> Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models.

not with similar features, they aren't.

devices with higher specs cost more than devices with lesser specs. no
surprise there.

> In the past I
> got 2 Android smartphones on the Target clearance rack for $12 and $14
> respectively. Used them like iPods. After tiring of them they were
> donated to grandkids. Yesterday I saw a $24 Android smartphone on the
> Target clearance rack, and several on the regular aisle for $40 and up.

comparing clearance prices with non-sale prices is disingenuous.

the super-cheap android phones do not have the same features or build
quality as the cheapest iphone as well as many android phones, such as
the samsung galaxy, google pixel or even the moto g6, which is why it's
so cheap. it's also highly unlikely it's running the latest version of
android, and probably never will.

> >> EXPENSIVE is relative.
> >
> > just about every product family has a range of options at various
> > price points.
>
> Yep. And the Cadillac/iPhone range is more EXPENSIVE (on average) than
> the Toyota/Android range.

not for the same specs, it isn't.

yugos were even cheaper, but they were junk.

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:09:16 PM9/9/18

to

On 09/08/2018 07:34 PM, 123456789 wrote:
> On 9/8/2018 10:03 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>> *I posit that in almost all cases Apple cost of ownership is
>> astronomical.*
>
> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE expensive.
>
>> What matters isn't "resale value". What matters is total cost of
>> ownership.
>
> Depends on how broke one is. Likely people who can AFFORD to buy a
> premium product don't worry too much about the total cost of ownership.

Such people have more money than brains. If you earned the money you
pay attention to shit like that. You may decide that the ridiculously
expensive product is worth it to you, but you at least thought about it.
Just because you CAN buy something expensive without breathing hard
doesn't mean that you DO.

>> As an obvious example, did you ever see a line outside Apple stores?
>> What are they doing? a. They're ditching their old phones, b. They're
>> buying a new phone
>
> c. They're excited about getting a newly released premium phone. Most
> are likely previously satisfied customers. It's a win-win for the
> company and the customer.

I really despise the 'premium' descriptor. I define it as "an appeal to
the snob within the customer".

> Though IMO one is wiser to wait awhile before buying a newly released
> product to let the bugs get worked out. I usually do that with my
> premium Android phones...

We had a 'premium' Samsung TV. For the cost of a decent used car (I
know, my BIL just bought one) We got 4 years out of it before it wasn't
repairable. Screw 'premium'.

--
Cheers, Bev
Nothing is so stupid that you can't find somebody who
did it at least once if you look hard enough.

sms

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:10:35 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/8/2018 9:15 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:

> On 8 Sep 2018 19:34:16 GMT, 123456789 wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't EXPENSIVE be a better word? Most premium products ARE expensive.
>
> Resale value is only one datum in that total cost of ownership equation.
>
> There are some expensive things that can have a lower cost of ownership,
> e.g., some things make money so they pay for themselves.
>
> What matters for a depreciating asset, which most electronics are, is the
> overall cost of ownership - not just the resale value.
>
> The resale value from resellers is a *great* way to gauge the true market
> value of a device - but the total cost of ownership is the metric that
> matters.
>
> You take the initial cost (which includes tax) and then you subtract things
> you can't re-use such as a case that won't fit on another phone, new
> batteries, whatever ... and then you divide by the number of years owned.
>
> That's the metric that matters.
> Resale value is only one datum in that total cost of ownership equation.
>
>>> What matters isn't "resale value". What matters is total cost of
>>> ownership.
>>
>> Depends on how broke one is. Likely people who can AFFORD to buy a
>> premium product don't worry too much about the total cost of ownership.
>
> The fact people "don't worry" is meaningless.
>
> What matters is the metric that sms was calculating is only one datum in
> the equation, where if sms wants to be *useful*, he would calculate total
> cost of ownership.

Actually, the cost per year, or total cost of ownership, is immaterial
to a great many people. They have sufficient assets that they are
perfectly happy to pay more money for a product that they like better,
even if it isn't the least expensive option, either initially or over time.

It people bought cars based on total cost of ownership then everyone
would be buying a Toyota Corolla or Toyota Camry because the initial
cost is low, the cost over time is low, and resale value is high. No one
would be buying a Mercedes with high initial cost, high operating cost,
and low resale value, or even a Chevrolet with low initial cost and low
resale value.

I was just pointing out that if you factor in the resale value, an
iPhone is not significantly more expensive than an equivalent feature,
flagship from Samsung. There are a LOT of iPhones on the resale market,
so many people must be selling them when they upgrade to a newer model.
On the other hand, because the resale value is so high, buying a used
iPhone may not be worth it since you don't get the warranty and it may
have hidden flaws. Similar for cars.

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:15:03 PM9/9/18

to

On 09/08/2018 10:08 PM, 123456789 wrote:

> EXPENSIVE is relative. There's also a range of Cadillac models.

In my mom's experience, every single one is a piece of shit. Comfy
seats, cushy ride, either it throws a rod at 80K after regular
maintenance or it has an unfixable engine control system that tries to
kill you. Can't remember what the previous one's problem was, but its
replacement threw the rod.

My mom's last cars. I wish she'd asked me before buying them, I would
have told her to buy something like a high-end Lexus.

Carry on.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:38:33 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3glq$e88$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I was just pointing out that if you factor in the resale value, an
> iPhone is not significantly more expensive than an equivalent feature,
> flagship from Samsung.

the prices are similar for similar specs *without* including resale
value.

> There are a LOT of iPhones on the resale market,
> so many people must be selling them when they upgrade to a newer model.

yep.

> On the other hand, because the resale value is so high, buying a used
> iPhone may not be worth it since you don't get the warranty and it may
> have hidden flaws. Similar for cars.

nope.

apple product warranties stay with the product, not the original buyer.

a used iphone (or any other apple product for that matter) will keep
whatever is remaining on its existing warranty and without additional
steps to transfer it to the new owner. apple will simply look up the
serial number to check its status.

the risk with a used cellphone (and not just iphones) is if its imei
has been blacklisted, making it impossible to get service.

for iphones, an even bigger risk is if it's activation locked and can't
be used at all. this is to prevent theft.

buying from a reputable seller eliminates both of those risks.

cars are similar, but not in the way you think. like iphones and macs,
manufacturer warranties for vehicles stay with the vehicle, even if
it's sold to another owner.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 12:38:33 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3gu6$fqf$1...@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev

<bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My mom's last cars. I wish she'd asked me before buying them, I would
> have told her to buy something like a high-end Lexus.

lexus is a toyota with fancy trim.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:37:15 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/9/2018 7:49 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article <pn2d8i$78v$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone
>>> se at $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from
>>> walmart, no contract, although it's locked to one of several
>>> mvnos.
>>
>> Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models.
>
> not with similar features, they aren't.

True. I agree that when comparing iPhones with similarly featured
Android phones the prices are comparable. However we were talking total
product PRICE RANGES. And since Apple has no phones available in the
lower (cheaper) price ranges it has on average a more EXPENSIVE line of
(premium) phones.

>> In the past I got 2 Android smartphones on the Target clearance
>> rack for $12 and $14 respectively. Used them like iPods. After
>> tiring of them they were donated to grandkids. Yesterday I saw a
>> $24 Android smartphone on the Target clearance rack, and several on
>> the regular aisle for $40 and up.

> comparing clearance prices with non-sale prices is disingenuous.

The $40 dollar Android phone I mentioned was an everyday Target price.
However it is likely a loss leader hoping to snag a new subscriber
probably the same as the $139 Walmart iPhone you mentioned.

> the super-cheap android phones do not have the same features or
> build quality as the cheapest iphone as well as many android phones,
> such as the samsung galaxy, google pixel or even the moto g6, which
> is why it's so cheap. it's also highly unlikely it's running the
> latest version of android, and probably never will.

Surprisingly my $12 clearance rack Android phone did most everything I
use my premium Motorola for. And if I couldn't afford premium products I
think I could live quite nicely with a cheap Android phone.

> yugos were even cheaper, but they were junk.

Agreed on Yugos. But there are many reliable $20K economy cars that are
just as reliable as EXPENSIVE $60K premium Cadillacs...

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:37:19 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/9/2018 7:49 AM, nospam wrote:

> In article 123456789 <12...@12345.com wrote:

>> Unfortunately The iPhone 8 in my family had a battery fail at 2
>> years. Stuff happens...

> it's a rating, not a guarantee.

That's what I meant by "Stuff happens"

> similarly, most people keep their phone for around 2 years,

As I said earlier: Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year
contract. Including my 2 year old failed battery...

> but some keep it for only 1 year and others keep it for 3-4 years,
> sometimes longer.

I have a 7 year old cordless phone that is still working on the original
battery. Does that count?

> the device will normally be replaced before the battery fails.

Agreed.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 1:55:30 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/9/2018 9:09 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/08/2018 07:34 PM, 123456789 wrote:

>> Depends on how broke one is. Likely people who can AFFORD to buy a
>> premium product don't worry too much about the total cost of
>> ownership.
>
> Such people have more money than brains.

Brains is often what gets people their excess money.

> If you earned the money you pay attention to shit like that.

Fortunately for Apple that's not true.

> You may decide that the ridiculously expensive product is worth it to
> you, but you at least thought about it. Just because you CAN buy
> something expensive without breathing hard doesn't mean that you DO.

Most buy products they want if they can afford them. Sometimes even if
they can't...

> I really despise the 'premium' descriptor. I define it as "an appeal
> to the snob within the customer".

I don't see that in the dictionary definition of premium: Of exceptional
quality or amount; also : higher-priced.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:31:20 PM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 22:08:04 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

> EXPENSIVE is relative. There's also a range of Cadillac models.

*Facts don't fit into the imaginary belief system of Apple Apologists.*
It's well known that nospam is an Apple Apologist.

That means he will dance his silly childish semantic games even when
EVERYONE knows that, for similar hardware, any *intelligent* person can
find a far better Android phone for from two to five times lower cost than
the similar hardware iPhone. (And that doesn't even count that app
functionality on Android is always far better than any iPhone ever sold.)

These are basic facts we've proven time and again.
These facts don't fit into the imaginary belief system of Apple Apologists.

In order to play their silly childish games, what the Apple Apologist
nospam loves to find are companies *copying* Apple's admittedly successful
marketing tactics offering, for example, overly priced phones which exactly
try to _copy_ Apple Marketing strategy (e.g., notches, lack of headphone
jacks, non-removable batteries, lack of sdcard slots, lack of FM radio,
etc.).

Since _those_ companies are _copying_ Apple's Marketing strategy, then,
sure, those phones will be overpriced.

But only a fool like nospam can't find *better* hardware (in almost all
respects) for from one half to one fifth the price of equivalent iPhones.

Proof here for the "half the price" claim compared to the iPhone 8
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>
And here for the "one fifth the price" claim against the iPhone 7 Plus
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

*Facts don't fit into the imaginary belief system of Apple Apologists.*

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:38:02 PM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 22:30:34 GMT, nospam wrote:

> as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone se at
> $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from walmart, no
> contract, although it's locked to one of several mvnos.

Notice how the Apple Apologist nospam plays his silly games.

*Facts don't fit into the imaginary belief system of Apple Apologists.*

How does that iPhone compare, for example, in hardware, to the handful of
$130 Android phablets I personally purchased (which you know to be a fact),
just a few months ago?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

HINT: Even the five-times-more-expensive iPhone 7 Plus loses in comparison
to most of the hardware specs of that $130 phone.

And how does that iPhone compare, for example, to the hardware of the Moto
X4 which sms outlined recently?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:48:40 PM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 23:12:34 GMT, Your Name wrote:

> If you actually had the brains to compare models with similar spec
> sheets, you'll find the prices are much closer.

"Yet again, facts don't have a place in Apple Apologists' belief systems!*

We _did_ compare similar hardware phones, in gory detail.

This Android phone is half the price of a hardware equivalent iPhone 8:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>
This Android phone is 1/5th the price of a hardware equivalent iPhone 7+:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

> If you compare the
> total cost of ownership, the iPhone usually works out cheaper.

*Yet again, facts have no place in the Apple Apologist belief system!*

The total cost of ownership of iPhones, in general, is astronomical, in
comparison with Android phones, in general. That's a fact.

We've covered this before, where, of course, what matters are the gory
details, but when you *start* with a better phone that is from two to five
times less expensive than a hardware equivalent iPhone, it's going to be
hard for the Apple Apologists to claim total cost of ownership is anywhere
near comparable.

What the Apple Apologists love to do is take the *worst* case possible.
They never take the position of an *intelligent* human adult!

*Total cost of ownership for hardware-equivalent iPhones is astronomical!*

> If you
> compare user satifsfacvtion, the iPhone is always near the top, if not
> at the top, of the list.

While we'd have to look at the metric for "user satisfaction", it seems
that Android owners are pretty loyal to Android, just as iPhone owners are
pretty loyal to iPhones.

Some people cross the divide ... but I'd wager there aren't many.
a. Apple owners want to *feel* safe (IMHO); Android power scares them.
b. Android owners want price-to-performance (IMHO); Apple can't do that.
*HINT: Android apps do so much that iPhones can't that it's not funny.*

Hence, unless you can show some facts, and since we *know* that facts don't
fit into your imaginary belief system, I'll withhold judgemtnt on your
blanket statement which you'll need to prove with actual facts.

HINT: Facts don't fit into the Apple Apologists' imaginary belief system.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:52:31 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 07:49:31 GMT, nospam wrote:

>> Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models.
>
> not with similar features, they aren't.

*Yet again, facts have no place in Apple Apologists' belief systems!*

This Android phone is half the price of a hardware equivalent iPhone 8:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>
This Android phone is 1/5th the price of a hardware equivalent iPhone 7+:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

What the Apple Apologist nospam *loves* to do is find the *worst* case
scenario for comparing Apple and Android phones.

Any idiot can find a terrible price-to-performance ratio.
(And nospam, proving always that he's the idiot, finds it every time!)

It doesn't take any brains for the Apple Apologist to find the worst
phones, which, coincidentally, seem to be the ones whose marketing team is
*copying* the admittedly highly successful marketing tactics of Apple
Marketing!

Intelligent people *easily* find better Android hardware at lower prices!
This is a well-known fact which we've proven time and again.

*Once again, facts have no place in Apple Apologists' belief systems!*

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 2:55:23 PM9/9/18

to

On 09/09/2018 10:37 AM, 123456789 wrote:

> Agreed on Yugos. But there are many reliable $20K economy cars that are
> just as reliable as EXPENSIVE $60K premium Cadillacs...

See my previous post :-( I've driven two of my mom's Cadillacs. Well
maintained by the dealer for 10 years. She gave them to me because the
dealer who sold and maintained them wouldn't take them as a trade-in.
That says a lot. If you want to talk about 'premium' cars, pick
something that isn't a piece of shit.

Wrecker offered $200 for the 1988. The State of California gave me $1K
to take it off the road. That says something too.

I bought a 2013 Corolla for $16K with 18K miles on the clock 2 years
ago. I'll be buried in it. Earlier this year My BIL bought a 2004
Corolla for $3K.

Price and cost are not the same. Neither is utility value.

--
Cheers, Bev
"A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person
or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even
possibly incurring losses." -- C.M.Cipolla

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 3:58:11 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 10:37:13 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

> True. I agree that when comparing iPhones with similarly featured
> Android phones the prices are comparable

That's not true.

Did you see this thread comparing hardware with the iPhone 8?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>
Or this thread, comparing hardware with the iPhone 7 Plus?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

While anyone can find an Android phone with lousy price-to-performance
metrics which _copies_ Apple in every way, you can also find perfectly good
Android phones for one half to one fifth the price of hardware equivalent
iPhones.

That's what intelligent people do.

Don't fall into the trap of only looking at Android phones which *copy*
Apple Marketing strategy.

*Look at what's available that has great price-to-performance value!*

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:06:13 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 09:15:00 GMT, The Real Bev wrote:

> In my mom's experience, every single one is a piece of shit.

The promises of marketing don't generally survive the facts.

In the case of iPhones, the promises are never going to be functionality
(since they can't compete in functionality since they're limited in what
the apps can do).

The promises will never be in hardware either (e.g., iPhones are rarely and
actually almost never in the top five of Android cameras in the DXOmark,
and currently their are nine Android phones better than the best iPhone
camera ever made).

What iPhones compete on is a marketing 'promise' of safety and style.

They deliver on the style (for the most part), but not on the safety.

Still, I have to hand it to Apple Marketing because they make the consumer
*feel* safe, even as they're not safe (we've proven that time and again).

Back to the topic, if sms wants to put a *meaningful* statistic in his
spreadsheet, it wouldn't be "resale value" but "total cost of ownership".

We've run the math before, where I posit in almost all cases except in
those Android phones literaly copying Apple's pricing and marketing
strategy, that ... when you factor in the true costs ... that

*The overall cost of ownership of iPhones is utterly astronomical.*

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:26:26 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 10:37:18 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

> As I said earlier: Most batteries seem to last the life of the two year
> contract. Including my 2 year old failed battery...

We have established in other threads that the length of time people keep
phones is increasing every year, where it's well above 2 years, as I
recall, even for iPhones (I think they're at 2.5 years, on average).

Android phones, of course, have greater loyalty from their owners, so
Android phones are generally kept longer, but we can look up the statistics
because we covered that recently.

*People are more loyal to Android than Apple in terms of ownership times!*

HINT: They line up at Apple stores to *ditch* their current phones!

>> but some keep it for only 1 year and others keep it for 3-4 years,
>> sometimes longer.
>
> I have a 7 year old cordless phone that is still working on the original
> battery. Does that count?

My cordless phones and cordless drills are working fine, and they're, oh, I
don't know, some are ten years old or more.

The cordless drill is a DeWalt and is still going strong, while I may have
replaced the phone batteries (as I always buy AA and not AAA phones, where
the capacity, battery for battery, is better).

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:45:55 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 09:10:27 GMT, sms wrote:

> Actually, the cost per year, or total cost of ownership, is immaterial
> to a great many people.

Jesus. Think about what you just said. Think. Really. Think.

I love that you're building a specification-based spreadsheet.
I really do.

You decided to add "resale value".
I didn't decide that.
You did.

Now, I already said why resale value is meaningless.
But you are the one who decided to add it. Not me.

All I'm saying, and Jesus ... get this through your head please, as I
consider you an intelligent educated adult for heaven's sake ...

I'm backing up my assertion that, if you're gonna add resale value to your
spec spreadsheet, that this number is meaningless compared to what "total
cost of ownership would mean.

That's all I'm saying.

In addition, I posit that you'll find, in almost every case, that...
*The total cost of ownership metric for iPhones will be astronomical!*

HINT: For equivalent hardware, the original cost, and nothing else, is from
two to five times more expensive than equivalent hardware Android phones.
And that's just the starting point for heaven's sake.

HINT: The loyalty time for Android phones is appreciably greater than for
iPhones, again, which will greatly affect the total cost of ownership.

HINT: The sales tax alone (which you never get back) for high-tax states
such as where you and I live, will be a *huge* percentage of any resale
value one would get back on the iPhone.

HINT: People line up all night at the door of the Apple store to *ditch*
their current phones at the same time they're likely purchasing a new
phone, which often costs more than the old phone - which - again - will
have a huge effect on the total cost of ownership.
etc.

My point of basic logic is an *adult* point that simply argues:
a. If you're going to add resale value, then use cost of ownership instead
b. You'll likely find that cost of ownership of iPhones is astronomical.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:55:01 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3vlh$abc$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:

> We have established in other threads that the length of time people keep
> phones is increasing every year, where it's well above 2 years, as I
> recall, even for iPhones (I think they're at 2.5 years, on average).

nope.

typical ownership is *less* than 2 years, which is slowly increasing as
the industry matures.

<http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/58b898a2be967306018b45dd-1200>

> Android phones, of course, have greater loyalty from their owners, so
> Android phones are generally kept longer, but we can look up the statistics
> because we covered that recently.

absolutely false.

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:58:30 PM9/9/18

to

On 09/09/2018 01:09 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 9 Sep 2018 09:38:33 GMT, nospam wrote:
>
>> lexus is a toyota with fancy trim.

I know that. I drove my friend's. Nice, but not all that different.
Still, Mom would have been happy with it.

> Plus plenty are front wheel drive, which negates them as a well-handling
> car almost by definition.

So was her Eldorado.

> Like with iPhones, people don't understand that handling is almost always
> worse with FWD over RWD (although everything depends on the details).

You learn to use the equipment you have. Ansel Adams would have taken
great pictures with an Instamatic.

> HINT: Handling isn't defined by slow driving in five-inch snowpack.

--
Cheers, Bev

"Whatever the correct citation total - five or six - the Deepwater
Horizon's record was exemplary, according to MMS officials, who said
the rig was never on inspectors' informal "watch list" for problem
rigs.
In fact, last year MMS awarded the rig an award for its safety
history."
--AP Article

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 4:58:41 PM9/9/18

to

On 8 Sep 2018 22:35:45 GMT, Your Name wrote:

> "Arlen Holder" is just a braindead, know-nothing, anti-Apple troll who
> continues to prove it further with every single post theat people keep
> stupidly bothering to reply to.

Note the facts, which are that I buy Apple equipment all the time (which
we've proved many times), and that I currently own more than a half dozen
Apple devices, all of which is a fact on the Apple newsgroups.

I also happen to have just as many Android devices, so I know both well.

*What the Apple Apologists hate is someone who actually speaks facts.*

Given that Your Name is a well-known Apple Apologist, it's revealing that
his only response to true and correct facts is to employ childish ad
hominem attacks against the provider of facts.

He calls someone who speaks only facts "brain dead".
He calls facts "Anti Apple".

Do you see why it's always proved by the Apple Apologist themselves that...
*Facts have no place in the Apple Apologists' imaginary belief system*

> The reality is that the "Apple cost of ownership" has been proven many
> times to be less than other competing products, simply because the
> Apple products have fewer issues, a longer life-span, and better
> re-sell value ... as well as user satisfaction.

Given that we already proved that the *initial* cost alone of the iPhone 7
Plus is five times that of Android hardware that is not only better in most
ways, but which I personally own and paid for so the price is real.

Likewise, sms showed that the iPhone 8 has competition in far better
hardware in most respects which is *half* the price - just for starters.

Let's not even factor in that the loyalty times for ownership of Android
devices exceeds that of iPhone devices (and always has) even as both are
lengthening.

Those two factors alone will show that any logical thinking adult would see
that the math is against the iPhone for ever being even close to
non-astronomical in terms of overall cost of ownership.

The childish game the Apple Apologists *love* to play is to choose the
absolute *worst* Android phone (usually those that exactly mimic Apple's
marketing strategy) to form their comparisons.

Notice that logic & intelligence *never* plays a role in their statements!

If it did, they would conclude (as we have in the past) the assessment that
*overall cost of ownership of iPhones is astronomical compared to Android*

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:06:49 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn41hl$tnh$1...@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev

<bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Like with iPhones, people don't understand that handling is almost always
> > worse with FWD over RWD (although everything depends on the details).
>
> You learn to use the equipment you have. Ansel Adams would have taken
> great pictures with an Instamatic.

true, but physics limits what can be done.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:06:50 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3uks$8bj$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> > lexus is a toyota with fancy trim.
>
> Plus plenty are front wheel drive, which negates them as a well-handling
> car almost by definition.
>
> Like with iPhones, people don't understand that handling is almost always
> worse with FWD over RWD (although everything depends on the details).

fwd is cheaper to manufacture.

most people don't drive a vehicle at its limits, so they won't notice
any difference.

performance vehicles are almost always rwd.

> HINT: Handling isn't defined by slow driving in five-inch snowpack.

rwd is better there too.

Rod Speed

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:26:27 PM9/9/18

to

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote

> nospam wrote

>> lexus is a toyota with fancy trim.

> Plus plenty are front wheel drive, which negates
> them as a well-handling car almost by definition.

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that’s saying something.

> Like with iPhones, people don't understand that
> handling is almost always worse with FWD over RWD

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that’s saying something.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:29:20 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 13:55:01 GMT, nospam wrote:

> <http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/58b898a2be967306018b45dd-1200>
>
>> Android phones, of course, have greater loyalty from their owners, so
>> Android phones are generally kept longer, but we can look up the statistics
>> because we covered that recently.
>
> absolutely false.

Look nospam, some day you're going to realize that you have zero
credibility when you make false blanket statements which are not based on
facts.

I could throw up all sorts of charts also, like this, for heavens' sake:
<https://i-cdn.phonearena.com//images/articles/109567-image/chartoftheday-1903-Average-selling-price-of-Android-and-iOS-smartphones-n.jpg>

Jesus. You think throwing up any old chart proves anything?

The fact you've never once found me to be wrong on my facts, and the fact
that you're almost always wrong on yours, is all anyone needs to know.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:31:57 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/9/2018 11:55 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/09/2018 10:37 AM, 123456789 wrote:

>> But there are many reliable $20K economy cars that are just as
>> reliable as EXPENSIVE $60K premium Cadillacs...

> See my previous post :-( I've driven two of my mom's Cadillacs.

I've never owned a Cadillac (or Yugo).

> Well maintained by the dealer for 10 years.

A dealer is an expensive place to have a car serviced. Once the warranty
is up it's usually cheaper to have the car serviced elsewhere.

> She gave them to me because the dealer who sold and maintained them>
> wouldn't take them as a trade-in.

Lots of other dealers or car lots to try.

> That says a lot.

Not if she only tried one dealer or car lot.

> If you want to talk about 'premium' cars, pick something that isn't a
> piece of shit.

Your mom must have liked a Cadillac. Else why would she buy a
second one?

> Wrecker offered $200 for the 1988.

Must be more to the story. My 2004 Buick Century was worth $6K when I
got rid of it at 10 years. Course only having 25K miles on it helped...

> The State of California gave me $1K to take it off the road. That
> says something too.

Why CA taxes are so high... 8-O

Your Name

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:42:22 PM9/9/18

to

On 2018-09-09 17:37:13 +0000, 123456789 said:
> On 9/9/2018 7:49 AM, nospam wrote:
>> In article <pn2d8i$78v$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone
>>>> se at $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from
>>>> walmart, no contract, although it's locked to one of several
>>>> mvnos.
>>>
>>> Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models.
>>
>> not with similar features, they aren't.
>
> True. I agree that when comparing iPhones with similarly featured
> Android phones the prices are comparable.

Which is the ONLY sensible comparison any sane person would make. :-p

> However we were talking total product PRICE RANGES. And since Apple has
> no phones available in the lower (cheaper) price ranges it has on
> average a more EXPENSIVE line of (premium) phones.

If you want a more expensive iPhone, then the Colorware company will
repaint one in many different colours.

If you want a truely expensive iPhone, then try the gold-plated
diamond-encrusted versions priced at US$10,000+ ... which would make
Apple's models very very low-end pricing.

In both cases the iPhone itself is still of course the standard
Apple-made one. The 'enhancements' are done by a third-party company,
but if you add that to your ridiculously silly comparision "range",
then Apple iPhones are supposedly even more expensive.

Of course, the same companies will also happily repaint / gold-plate
diamond-encrust your $40 Chinese crapphone if your idiotic enough to
pay for it.

Your Name

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 5:45:45 PM9/9/18

to

On 2018-09-09 18:55:17 +0000, The Real Bev said:

> On 09/09/2018 10:37 AM, 123456789 wrote:
>
>> Agreed on Yugos. But there are many reliable $20K economy cars that are
>> just as reliable as EXPENSIVE $60K premium Cadillacs...
>
> See my previous post :-( I've driven two of my mom's Cadillacs. Well
> maintained by the dealer for 10 years. She gave them to me because the
> dealer who sold and maintained them wouldn't take them as a trade-in.
> That says a lot. If you want to talk about 'premium' cars, pick
> something that isn't a piece of shit.
>
> Wrecker offered $200 for the 1988. The State of California gave me $1K
> to take it off the road. That says something too.
>
> I bought a 2013 Corolla for $16K with 18K miles on the clock 2 years
> ago. I'll be buried in it. Earlier this year My BIL bought a 2004
> Corolla for $3K.
>
> Price and cost are not the same. Neither is utility value.

There's a car buyers guide that's been around for a long time called
"The Dog & Lemon Guide" (<https://dogandlemon.com>). It finds fault
with every single car make and model ever made ... even if it's only
driver problems like driving a sportscar too fast.

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:15:12 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3lob$ho5$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> >>> as of today, the least expensive iphone is currently the iphone
> >>> se at $349 unlocked and no contract from apple, or $139 from
> >>> walmart, no contract, although it's locked to one of several
> >>> mvnos.
> >>
> >> Still EXPENSIVE when compared to cheap Android models.
> >
> > not with similar features, they aren't.
>

> True. I agree that when comparing iPhones with similarly featured

> Android phones the prices are comparable. However we were talking total

> product PRICE RANGES. And since Apple has no phones available in the
> lower (cheaper) price ranges it has on average a more EXPENSIVE line of
> (premium) phones.

apple doesn't bother with the bottom tier, so yes there are cheaper
products, and they have lesser specs.

if someone's needs are simple, or it's only for very occasional use
(e.g., an emergency phone), that might be ok. otherwise, not so much.

the best selling phones are *not* the cheapos.

> Surprisingly my $12 clearance rack Android phone did most everything I
> use my premium Motorola for. And if I couldn't afford premium products I
> think I could live quite nicely with a cheap Android phone.

then you must not do much with it.

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:15:12 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn3loe$ho5$2...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
wrote:

> > but some keep it for only 1 year and others keep it for 3-4 years,
> > sometimes longer.
>
> I have a 7 year old cordless phone that is still working on the original
> battery. Does that count?

of course it does.

i have a 10 year old flip phone that is working quite well on its
original battery, with a week of standby time.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:16:32 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 14:06:50 GMT, nospam wrote:

> fwd is cheaper to manufacture.

Wow. I'm impressed. Rarely do you speak facts.
But you hit upon the one and only real reason that FWD exists.

Did you just guess?
Or did you figure that out on your own using logic?

> most people don't drive a vehicle at its limits, so they won't notice
> any difference.

That may be true, and, the chronic understeer actually makes some people
*feel* safe, but the lack of handling happens far more often than just at
the limits of driving.

There's a good reason almost all performance vehicles are RWD.
HINT: I've never once owned a FWD vehicle - and I never will.

> performance vehicles are almost always rwd.

Yup. There are very rare instances of performance FWD vehicles, but they're
super expensive, and they move things around to enable a 50:50 weight
ratio, plus they have to spend a LOT of energy on that front suspension.

>> HINT: Handling isn't defined by slow driving in five-inch snowpack.
>
> rwd is better there too.

The main reasons I hear proponents of FWD speak of why they like it is that
they like how it handles when they're going extremely slowly in deep snow.

Some even notice the chronic understeer, but most don't even know what I'm
talking about when I ask them about that.

HINT: The joke is that, when you miss a curve, the FWD smashes the front
fender into the tree while the RWD smashes the rear quarter panel.

Some even tout the lack of a shaft drive hump in the back seat, of all
things to care about.

The real reason is that FWD saves the manufacturer in manufacturing costs.

123456789

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:19:10 PM9/9/18

to

On 9/9/2018 2:42 PM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2018-09-09 17:37:13 +0000, 123456789 said:

>> However we were talking total product PRICE RANGES. And since
>> Apple has no phones available in the lower (cheaper) price ranges
>> it has on average a more EXPENSIVE line of (premium) phones.

> If you want a more expensive iPhone, then the Colorware company will
> repaint one in many different colours.

Not necessary. We were (at last posting) comparing off the shelf
non-sale price ranges.

> Of course, the same companies will also happily repaint / gold-plate
> diamond-encrust your $40 Chinese crapphone

iPhones are also assembled mostly in China.

> if your idiotic enough to pay for it.

Me idiotic?? You know, you really need to shape with up these personal
attacks. You fucked this one up too. You used "your" instead of
"you're". I expect better of you next time... ;)

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:22:17 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 14:26:18 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> Even sillier than you usually manage, and that¢s saying something.

*You lose credibility when you act like a five year old child, Rod Speed.*

Now you're sounding like a silly child. Again.
Stop that.

I align my own suspension (caster, camber, and toe). I change my own tires.
I replace my own clutches. I replace cooling systems, belts, alternators,
air conditioning systems, etc. (I'm renown on certain web forums.)

I haven't been to a mechanic in decades, and all my cars are more than a
decade old. I work on my neighbor's cars too. German cars. American cars.
Japanese cars.

From what you just wrote, it's clear I know cars better than you ever will.

Just like I know WISP far better than you ever will (and you know that), I
have likely forgotten more about cars than you'll ever learn in your entire
life.

*For you to say what you said, sans a shred of proof, is just childish.*

*You lose credibility when you act like a five year old child, Rod Speed.*

nospam

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 6:46:39 PM9/9/18

to

In article <pn463u$kf1$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> >> HINT: Handling isn't defined by slow driving in five-inch snowpack.
> >
> > rwd is better there too.
>
> The main reasons I hear proponents of FWD speak of why they like it is that
> they like how it handles when they're going extremely slowly in deep snow.

fwd better on slippery surfaces because most of the weight is over the
drive wheels makes it harder to lose traction.

those with rwd put sand or other heavy objects in the trunk.

the problem is when traction is lost...

> Some even notice the chronic understeer, but most don't even know what I'm
> talking about when I ask them about that.
>
> HINT: The joke is that, when you miss a curve, the FWD smashes the front
> fender into the tree while the RWD smashes the rear quarter panel.

only if the rwd driver can't control a fishtail, which is not that hard
when steering and acceleration are on *different* axles.

with fwd, the front axle is responsible for acceleration, braking and
steering, so when it loses traction, physics takes over, and with
nearly all of the weight at the front, the vehicle becomes a dart.
recovering is possible, but it's *not* easy, even for skilled drivers.

> Some even tout the lack of a shaft drive hump in the back seat, of all
> things to care about.

more interior space is always useful.

Rod Speed

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 7:13:56 PM9/9/18

to

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote

> Rod Speed wrote

>> Even sillier than you usually manage, and that¢s saying something.

> I align my own suspension (caster, camber, and toe). I change my own
> tires.
> I replace my own clutches. I replace cooling systems, belts, alternators,
> air conditioning systems, etc. (I'm renown on certain web forums.)
>
> I haven't been to a mechanic in decades, and all my cars are more than a
> decade old. I work on my neighbor's cars too. German cars. American cars.
> Japanese cars.

All completely and utterly irrelevant to your stupid claims about rwd and
fwd

<reams of your childish shit flushed where it belongs>

Rod Speed

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 7:17:37 PM9/9/18

to

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:090920181846385141%nos...@nospam.invalid...

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that's saying something.

>> Some even tout the lack of a shaft drive hump in the back seat, of all
>> things to care about.

It is with the smaller cars with fold own and removable back seats.

JF Mezei

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 9:57:51 PM9/9/18

to

On 2018-09-09 16:26, Arlen Holder wrote:

> *People are more loyal to Android than Apple in terms of ownership times!*

Not a fair comparison. The Android ecosystem includes a much broader
range of phones from very low end to models that compete against iPhones.

You'd have to use statistics with only cover ownership duration of
Android phones that are comparable to iPhones.

And this gets harder to do properly because Apple started off with a
single high end model sold each year, then started to keep previous
years model on sale as low end for an extra year and last year,
introduced 2 new models, higher end and mid range, and kept older models
as lower end. This changes replacement dynamics especially since the
"coveted" high end new iPhone is above budget for so many peoople who
see less motivation to replace their current iphone with a mid range or
low end new iphone.

Lewis

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 10:15:29 PM9/9/18

to

In message <pmvok0$3ta$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> <https://www.decluttr.com/> shows the wholesale price that they will pay
> for various phone models.

> Unsurprisingly, the flagship iPhone (iPhone X) retains a higher
> percentage of value than the leading flagship Android phone (Samsung
> Galaxy S9).

Despite the S9 being 9 months newer.

--
A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 11:45:31 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 15:15:11 GMT, nospam wrote:

> apple doesn't bother with the bottom tier, so yes there are cheaper
> products, and they have lesser specs.

Cheaper products have lesser specs?

That's only when you aren't intelligent, nospam.
You always prove you find the *worst* comparisons out there.

Intelligent people can easily find cheaper products with better specs.

For example, according to the sms spreadsheet, the Moto X4 is about half
the price of the iPhone 8, and, in almost all respects, beats the hardware.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/CxMAGla24ss/wCcQcQI8EgAJ>

*MotoX4 wins* on price (about half as expensive)
*MotoX4 wins* on Resolution functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on Screen Size functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on Pixels Per Inch functionality
iPhone wins on Geekbench functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on Battery functionality (even with the "courageous" jack)
*MotoX4 wins* on RAM functionality (with 3 or 4GB being the two options)
*MotoX4 wins* on Front Camera Pixels functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on Front Flash functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on NFC functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on SDcard functionality (up to 2TB storage)
*MotoX4 wins* on "courageous" headphone jack functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on FM radio functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on USB OTG functionality
*MotoX4 wins* on Adobe Flash Support
*MotoX4 wins* on Waterproofing (even with the "courageous" headphone jack)
*MotoX4 wins* on Price-to-performance/features/functionality (by far)

And the LG Stylo 3 Plus I bought a few months ago at one fifth the then
rate for an iPhone 7 Plus also is cheaper and beats almost all the specs
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ls71mnkj4jk>

*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on price (five times less expensive!!!)
iPhone 7 Plus wins on speed (but it may be halved in a year)
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on expandable storage*
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on screen size
iPhone 7 Plus wins on pixel density
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on main camera pixels
iPhone 7 Plus wins on front camera pixels
iPhone 7 Plus wins* on bands (Stylo 3 Plus is for T-Mobile)
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on battery capacity
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on battery access
iPhone 7 Plus wins on RAM
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on stylus
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on FM radio capability
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on courageous headphone jack functionality
*Stylo 3 Plus wins* on app functionality

These are facts.
*Facts have no place in your imaginary belief system, nospam.*

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 9, 2018, 11:56:31 PM9/9/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 16:13:48 GMT, Rod Speed wrote:

> All completely and utterly irrelevant to your stupid claims about rwd and
> fwd

*You lose credibility when you act like a five year old child, Rod Speed.*

My facts on FWD are correct.
If you dispute a fact I stated, then act like an adult when doing so.

You acted like a child.

If you act like an adult, I'll treat you like an adult.
When you act like a child - then I tell you you're acting like a child.

It's up to you.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:06:30 AM9/10/18

to

On 9 Sep 2018 18:57:48 GMT, JF Mezei wrote:

> Not a fair comparison. The Android ecosystem includes a much broader
> range of phones from very low end to models that compete against iPhones.

I know you're not an Apple Apologist, so I will take the time to explain to
you what I meant, which is a fact.

The fact is that people who own Android phones, statistically hold them
*longer* than the people who own iPHones, on average.

It's about a half year longer, as I recall, on average, but we can look up
the numbers as they're always changing (and generally getting longer).

For example, I was loyal to my Samsung Galaxy S3 for more than five years,
and only had to give it up when the inner gold contacts died. Since the USB
port had died years before, I didn't bother fixing it. So that caused me to
ditch the Samsung Galaxy after five or six years of loyal use.

> You'd have to use statistics with only cover ownership duration of
> Android phones that are comparable to iPhones.

Oh. I see what you mean now. Yes. You are correct. I do agree with you.
What I like about you is that you speak adult logic.

It's amazing, actually, and quite refreshing, to see that there are people
on this newsgroup who are adults.

I agree with you that we'd have to compare comparable phones, and then
compare the loyalty times of ownership of those phones.

I fear though, just from using logic, that this will *worsen* the
difference between iPhone loyalty and Android loyalty though.

The reason it might *worsen* the numbers is that the cheaper Android phones
are, one would think, more likely to be thrown away for a new phone
(perhaps even a new cheaper phone, as Android phones are getting cheaper
every year for intelligent people like me to choose from).

The expensive phones, like my S3 was when I got it new, are the phones that
we keep for five or six years, where the loyalty is phenomenal, I posit.

Even so, I do agree with your assessment of a fair comparison.
Adults easily agree on logic.

Logic is funny that way.

> And this gets harder to do properly because Apple started off with a
> single high end model sold each year, then started to keep previous
> years model on sale as low end for an extra year and last year,
> introduced 2 new models, higher end and mid range, and kept older models
> as lower end. This changes replacement dynamics especially since the
> "coveted" high end new iPhone is above budget for so many peoople who
> see less motivation to replace their current iphone with a mid range or
> low end new iphone.

I agree with you that a good scientific assessment of the phone loyalty
between any given set of iPhone owners and any given set of Android phone
owners could be a challenge to perform properly.

Suffice to say it's generally well known (we could look up the stats) that
the *average* for phone loyalty is greater for Android owners than for
iPhone owners. Of this I've seen in the past (although the numbers are
constantly changing).

Once we try to get details below that average, I agree, it's problematic to
make a completely scientifically valid comparison simply because the
marketing and markets are different.

However, it is a pretty good assessment that the long lines of people
outside an Apple store on "opening day" for new phones, is a line of both
a. People who can't wait to ditch their old phone, and,
b. Those same people who can't wait to buy a newer phone.

The *logical* question to ask is why aren't they at all loyal to their
original phone like I am to mine?

Arlen Holder

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:31:53 AM9/10/18

to

On 10 Sep 2018 02:15:29 GMT, Lewis wrote:

>> Unsurprisingly, the flagship iPhone (iPhone X) retains a higher
>> percentage of value than the leading flagship Android phone (Samsung
>> Galaxy S9).
>
> Despite the S9 being 9 months newer.

*I posit that iPhone total cost of ownership is astoundingly atrocious.*

Any fool can find a terrible phone to compare with, particularly since it's
clear that some Android manufacturers are directly *copying* Apple's
admittedly very successful marketing tactics of...
a. pricing the phone at stratospheric price points
b. touting meaningless differentiators such as colors & other trifles
c. eliminating basic functionality such as headphone jacks, sdcards, &
removable batteries
f. Even adding a notch, for heavens' sake

For an *intelligent* person, the total cost of ownership of Android phones,
I posit, so far outweighs the iPhones, that it's a safe assumption that the
word for iPhone total cost of ownership is *astronomical* by way of
comparison.

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:43:29 AM9/10/18

to

On 09/09/2018 03:00 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 9 Sep 2018 14:31:55 GMT, 123456789 wrote:
>
>>> Well maintained by the dealer for 10 years.
>>
>> A dealer is an expensive place to have a car serviced. Once the warranty
>> is up it's usually cheaper to have the car serviced elsewhere.

My mom made a good living. The dealer picked up her car and delivered
it freshly-washed. Her choice.

> Nobody but a fool goes to the dealer for automotive repairs out of warranty
> (IMHO).

Cars didn't have extended warranties then. She paid for everything.
Too much, but she could afford it and it was the easy way. Not my way,
but she was a grown-up and she could afford it.

> And I know cars well. Dealers too.
>
> Fact is, I work on my own cars and my neighbor's cars, e.g., last month I
> replaced a clutch, which, likely, most of you have never done (most
> likely).

Does a motorcycle count? Carb replacement/adjustment? How about
replacing motor mounts, countless starters and alternators, brake pads
and shoes, and a valve grind except for the actual machine shop work? I
know what crowfoot and Whitworth wrenches are, and that there used to be
two kinds of Japanese metric fasteners. Other stuff too trivial to
remember. I repeat: not my way.

Addendum: I bought the Corolla so I'd never have to touch a wrench
again. Tools are beautiful, though. Protos are my favorites.

> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/qEhph1MmSKs/S_R2Y4gRBwAJ>
>
> And I patch, dismount, mount and static balance my own tires, for example.
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/qEhph1MmSKs/YdHQ2KimBwAJ>
>
> How many of you mount and balance your own tires?
> (Almost none, I'd wager.)

Do motorcycle tires count? I've changed tires, but never removed a tire
from a rim. I can put on tire chains too.

> Given that I know cars well, I posit (and so do many others), that nobody
> but a fool goes to the dealer for out of warranty repairs.

In general I agree. My mom knew NOTHING about cars, though. She chose
the easy way. Her choice.

> Universally they're called "stealers".
> If people don't know why by this time, they'll likely never know why.

When I looked at some of the bills I was really angry. Does anybody
REALLY need new hoses and belts at 40K? If the tires they sold her
hadn't been replaced for free (by Bridgestone, not the dealer who
refused) I would have sued.

> Suffice to say, I've never once in my life met an *intelligent* person, who
> went to the stealer except for minor things like bolts and gaskets that
> were needed right now (and even then, the local dealers don't stock all
> that much anymore, in my experience - as witnessed in that very thread
> above where I went to them for a minor set of gaskets which they didn't
> even have in stock).
>
> IMHO, there is only one reason p[eople go to the stealer for out of
> warranty repairs, where I posit it's the same reason they buy Apple
> equipment.
>
> Fear.

#2: Laziness

--
Cheers, Bev
Why should I be tarred with the epithet "loony" merely
because I have a pet halibut? --Monty Python

Rod Speed

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 5:55:34 AM9/10/18

to

Some terminal fuckwit desperately cowering behind
Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote just
the puerile shit that always pours from the back of it.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 7:57:32 AM9/10/18

to

On 9/8/2018 7:34 PM, 123456789 wrote:

> c. They're excited about getting a newly released premium phone. Most
> are likely previously satisfied customers. It's a win-win for the
> company and the customer.

If it's an incremental change to an existing product, i.e. the iPhone
6s, 7 or 8, then it's a "win-win." But with each totally new generation
of a product, whether it's a car or a phone, there are usually
significant, but not visible to the user, changes that are made to the
product once it's been out for a while and design issues show up.

> Though IMO one is wiser to wait awhile before buying a newly released
> product to let the bugs get worked out. I usually do that with my
> premium Android phones...

Anyone that's worked in tech (or other industries that manufacture
products), is well aware of numerous changes made to a product over its
lifespan, and especially right after release, to address issues that
don't show up until after the product has been out on the market for a
while. The changes address reliability, performance, product lifespan,
etc., but aren't significant enough to warrant a recall of early production.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 8:18:01 AM9/10/18

to

On 9/9/2018 9:06 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:

> However, it is a pretty good assessment that the long lines of people
> outside an Apple store on "opening day" for new phones, is a line of both
> a. People who can't wait to ditch their old phone, and,
> b. Those same people who can't wait to buy a newer phone.

Actually it's a terrible assessment.

The reason for waiting in line has nothing to do with not being able to
wait for a new phone. The lines at the Verizon store are much shorter,
or non-existent, on launch day, but people line up at the Apple store
for very different reasons. See
<https://www.cnbc.com/2014/09/19/are-you-nuts-why-crowds-line-up-for-iphones-psychiatrist.html>.

It's very different than standing in line because you have to do so in
order to get a product that is in limited supply, i.e. Black Friday
specials with limited quantities.

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 8:39:00 AM9/10/18

to

In article <pn5ndo$of9$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The reason for waiting in line has nothing to do with not being able to
> wait for a new phone. The lines at the Verizon store are much shorter,
> or non-existent, on launch day, but people line up at the Apple store
> for very different reasons.

because it's *far* more likely that they'll actually get a phone at the
apple store on launch day than anywhere else, and most of the line
already ordered and chose in-store pickup.

carrier stores don't get anywhere near as many units, so the lack of
lines is normally because they sold what they had. no point waiting
when there's nothing left.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 11:46:36 AM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 4:57 AM, sms wrote:

> Anyone that's worked in tech (or other industries that manufacture
> products), is well aware of numerous changes made to a product over
> its lifespan

I worked for Motorola at its Western Military Division in the 60s. Some
of the stuff I worked on is on the moon. Glad there were no recalls... :-/

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 11:46:40 AM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 5:39 AM, nospam wrote:

> carrier stores don't get anywhere near as many units, so the lack of
> lines is normally because they sold what they had. no point waiting
> when there's nothing left.

Dunno about launch day but in my area there's no reason to even enter an
Apple or carrier store. Big box stores (Best Buy, Target, Walmart, etc.)
and numerous small 3rd party retailers (mostly in malls) all will be
happy to sell you a phone of virtually any persuasion.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 11:46:46 AM9/10/18

to

On 9/9/2018 9:43 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/09/2018 03:00 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
>> On 9 Sep 2018 14:31:55 GMT, 123456789 wrote:

> My mom made a good living. The dealer picked up her car and
> delivered it freshly-washed. Her choice.

If you can afford a premium car and premium services why not? My
grandfather bought a brand new Cadillac every year. He was also well off.

>> Nobody but a fool goes to the dealer for automotive repairs out of
>> warranty (IMHO).

I would amend that to: Someone who has to watch their pennies should
avoid dealer services since they can be expensive. But...if you enjoy
the premium service AND can afford them, why not?

>> IMHO, there is only one reason p[eople go to the stealer for out
>> of warranty repairs

My old Buick once flunked emissions. The dealer was the only place in
town that carried the new stock gas cap needed. I was back at the
emissions testing station within the hour and passed. Very handy...

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:15:10 PM9/10/18

to

In my area, you could walk into a Verizon store on launch day and buy
the same quad-carrier unlocked iPhone X sold by Apple, at the same
price, with no line or a minimal line. Apple made sure that the
carrier's stores had sufficient stock. Ditto for big box retailers.

I don't know about the Sprint, AT&T, and T-Mobile stores, but it's best
to purchase iPhones either directly from Apple or from a Verizon store
so it will work on all four U.S. carriers, plus you got the Qualcomm
radio instead of the Intel radio
<https://www.macrumors.com/2017/12/01/qualcomm-iphone-x-still-faster-than-intel/>.
Once CDMA goes away it may not make much difference, but for now it
does, even if you're not planning to ever switch carriers. Resale value
is also higher on the Apple/Verizon SKU.

Even at Apple stores, around here the long lines are at their flagship
stores in Palo Alto and San Francisco, but the stores in Los Gatos and
at Oakridge Mall had very short lines.

This will be the first year that the store at the new visitor center in
Cupertino is open at the time of a new product launch and it'll be
interesting to see if there's any line there. I've taken out-of-town
visitors there several times. They did a spectacular job on the visitor
center. My visitors have been impressed with the view of the spaceship
from the roof of the visitor center. The lattes are pretty good too.
Tour buses regularly stop there, it's the biggest tourist attraction in
Cupertino. The Augmented Reality experience of the new campus is as
close as the general public will get to the spaceship though I've been
inside the spaceship multiple times for meetings.

The bottom line is that standing in those lines is something people do
because they like the whole vibe. They could get the phone on launch day
in other ways, either by pre-ordering or by going to a carrier's store,
but there's no fun in that.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:24:03 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 8:46 AM, 123456789 wrote:

<snip>

> My old Buick once flunked emissions. The dealer was the only place in
> town that carried the new stock gas cap needed. I was back at the
> emissions testing station within the hour and passed. Very handy...

For common maintenance stuff, like oil changes, the dealers often have
service specials that aren't any more expensive than the quick-lube
places, plus the dealer is much more likely to do the job properly. I do
the oil changes myself though.

For more complex things, it's hard to find a mechanic that understands
all the electronics. The regenerative braking went out on one of our
Toyotas. It was out of warranty. I took it to the dealer because I
thought it would be covered under the power-train warranty. It was a
connector that had somehow become disconnected from one of the wheel
sensors. I don't know if an independent shop would have had the
knowledge to quickly diagnose the problem. I was charged for the
diagnosis but they didn't charge for plugging the connector back in.

My brother-in-law had an independent shop and he was an expert in
Toyotss because he attended classes at their factory training facility
at a local community college. But he retired and sold the shop and the
new owner doesn't have that knowledge.

JF Mezei

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:27:34 PM9/10/18

to

On 2018-09-10 08:17, sms wrote:

> The reason for waiting in line has nothing to do with not being able to
> wait for a new phone.

At some high visibility stores, Apple has been known to pay people to
stand in line to create buzz. If you know a store will be monitored by
media, it is easy to create an artificial lineup to vreate free
publicity in the media.

You'll note that after Apple was caught doing this, the stories of
lineups have diminished greatly.

What you see now are lineups while the store is opened for people who
want a phone on contract (which takes a lot more time since Apple has to
access the carrier's systems to setup the customer on new contract).

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:31:20 PM9/10/18

to

On 09/10/2018 08:46 AM, 123456789 wrote:

> My old Buick once flunked emissions. The dealer was the only place in
> town that carried the new stock gas cap needed. I was back at the
> emissions testing station within the hour and passed. Very handy...

Old cars (and others chosen randomly or maybe vindictively -- who
knows?) in California have to go to a test-only station, which costs at
least twice as much as a regular test. The only thing they're allowed
to sell you is a gas cap. Guess what my mom needed once...

I think things can still be fudged. Last time I had the Caddy tested it
passed one of the categories by ONE point.

You used to be able to go to certain stations and ALWAYS pass, but you
had to come back in a few hours rather than wait there. Old Sentra with
a bad engine. I never asked, I just paid and smiled.

--
Cheers, Bev
Nothing is so stupid that you can't find somebody who
did it at least once if you look hard enough.

JF Mezei

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:36:10 PM9/10/18

to

On 2018-09-10 12:15, sms wrote:

> In my area, you could walk into a Verizon store on launch day and buy
> the same quad-carrier unlocked iPhone X sold by Apple, at the same
> price, with no line or a minimal line. Apple made sure that the
> carrier's stores had sufficient stock. Ditto for big box retailers.

Verizon and Sprint get a "custom" model so it is a lot easier for Apple
to tell them how many units they are getting and easier for them to plan
distribution in their stores.

With the "standard" iPhone, Apple has very dynamic decisions on how many
units gets shipped to what country and within a country get shipped t o
what Apple store and what carrier, and they don't know how many they are
getting till the boxes get there.

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:36:35 PM9/10/18

to

In article <pn65ad$o2b$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> In my area, you could walk into a Verizon store on launch day and buy
> the same quad-carrier unlocked iPhone X sold by Apple, at the same
> price, with no line or a minimal line. Apple made sure that the
> carrier's stores had sufficient stock. Ditto for big box retailers.

nope. apple makes sure other stores have *some* stock, however, the
bulk goes to apple stores and to fulfill online orders.

> The bottom line is that standing in those lines is something people do
> because they like the whole vibe. They could get the phone on launch day
> in other ways, either by pre-ordering or by going to a carrier's store,
> but there's no fun in that.

most people order online and have it delivered, sometimes even arriving
a day early.

the lines have been getting shorter in recent years (while sales
continue to increase), a clear indication that people are ordering
online.

last year, news reports claimed the lines were unusually short, fueling
rumours of poor sales for the iphone 8, calling it 'a dud'. except that
when apple announced earnings shortly after, it was clear it was *not*
a dud and selling exceptionally well, the most popular iphone yet.

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:36:36 PM9/10/18

to

In article <WXwlD.139212$YL3....@fx48.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> At some high visibility stores, Apple has been known to pay people to
> stand in line to create buzz.

bullshit.

*other* companies do that shit.

> If you know a store will be monitored by
> media, it is easy to create an artificial lineup to vreate free
> publicity in the media.

there is no need to create an artificial anything.

the demand greatly outstrips supply.

> You'll note that after Apple was caught doing this, the stories of
> lineups have diminished greatly.

provide proof.

samsung was caught doing that.

The Real Bev

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:55:05 PM9/10/18

to

On 09/10/2018 09:23 AM, sms wrote:
> On 9/10/2018 8:46 AM, 123456789 wrote:
>
>> My old Buick once flunked emissions. The dealer was the only place in
>> town that carried the new stock gas cap needed. I was back at the
>> emissions testing station within the hour and passed. Very handy...
>
> For common maintenance stuff, like oil changes, the dealers often have
> service specials that aren't any more expensive than the quick-lube
> places, plus the dealer is much more likely to do the job properly. I do
> the oil changes myself though.

The dealer I bought the Corolla from gave me my first oil change free.
I had my last one done at Pep Boys for ~80 for Mobil 1. (I love the
color!). A month later I got a coupon from the dealer for $60 for
Toyota synthetic oil. I'll remember that next year. The dealer is
within walking distance.

I like Pep Boys, though. The Sentra that the State bought (smog issues
with the rebuilt engine) went to the knackers with a LOT of PB lifetime
parts. Some lifetimes are shorter than others.

> For more complex things, it's hard to find a mechanic that understands
> all the electronics.

My friend has old Cadillacs and goes to the independent GM specialist
that his car-restoring neighbor recommended to him, so I went there too.
He couldn't solve the throttle problem either (parts no longer
available anywhere, even junkyards), which is why I eventually junked
the car. He works on Toyotas too, so if I ever need anything I'll go there.

I had just started shopping for cars. Looked through Craigslist,
Carfax, etc. First stop, the dealer. I told him I was looking for a
Certified white Corolla a few years old. (Probably not worth anything
extra, but what the hell.) "Well, what about this one?" 2013 S with
18K miles. Perfect interior and a tiny dink (which I didn't see until a
friend pointed it out) on the right rear fender. Price $1K more than
I'd planned on. I drove it. I couldn't see any reason to NOT buy it,
so I did.

This is NOT how I shop. Standard practice: check all the lots and the
classifieds in the newspaper (which shows just how long ago that was!),
drive several, decide which one I want and haggle.

> The regenerative braking went out on one of our Toyotas.

What's that? I've driven rental Nissans that felt like the brakes were
hogging in for the last few seconds, but the Corolla doesn't do that.

> My brother-in-law had an independent shop and he was an expert in
> Toyotss because he attended classes at their factory training facility
> at a local community college. But he retired and sold the shop and the
> new owner doesn't have that knowledge.

I hope Art doesn't retire. He has a 100-mile round trip from home to
shop...

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 12:58:10 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:31 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 09/10/2018 08:46 AM, 123456789 wrote:
>
>> My old Buick once flunked emissions. The dealer was the only place in
>> town that carried the new stock gas cap needed. I was back at the
>> emissions testing station within the hour and passed. Very handy...
>
> Old cars (and others chosen randomly or maybe vindictively -- who
> knows?) in California have to go to a test-only station, which costs at
> least twice as much as a regular test. The only thing they're allowed
> to sell you is a gas cap. Guess what my mom needed once...
>
> I think things can still be fudged. Last time I had the Caddy tested it
> passed one of the categories by ONE point.
>
> You used to be able to go to certain stations and ALWAYS pass, but you
> had to come back in a few hours rather than wait there. Old Sentra with
> a bad engine. I never asked, I just paid and smiled.

BAR has become very sophisticated. They will look for an abnormally
large number of older vehicles passing smog at stations that are not
close to where the car is registered and then do a sting operation.
Apparently it's a felony. And they seize your equipment.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFg751IVxeY>

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 1:05:18 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:36 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

> With the "standard" iPhone, Apple has very dynamic decisions on how many
> units gets shipped to what country and within a country get shipped t o
> what Apple store and what carrier, and they don't know how many they are
> getting till the boxes get there.

The A1865 is what is sold in the U.S. as the unlocked Apple iPhone X and
by Verizon, also unlocked. Verizon doesn't lock their LTE devices
<https://www.verizon.com/about/consumer-safety/device-unlocking-policy>.

The advantage of buying the unlocked iPhone directly from Apple is that
they will finance it at 0%. With Verizon, you have to have Verizon
service in order to finance it.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 1:09:53 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:55 AM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> The dealer I bought the Corolla from gave me my first oil change free. I
> had my last one done at Pep Boys for ~80 for Mobil 1. (I love the
> color!). A month later I got a coupon from the dealer for $60 for
> Toyota synthetic oil. I'll remember that next year. The dealer is
> within walking distance.

New Toyotas now come with two free synthetic oil changes (10,000 and
20,000 miles).

> I like Pep Boys, though. The Sentra that the State bought (smog issues
> with the rebuilt engine) went to the knackers with a LOT of PB lifetime
> parts. Some lifetimes are shorter than others.

As long as the lifetime warranty includes installation. Were you the
person with the JC Penney lifetime battery?

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 1:37:00 PM9/10/18

to

In article <pn688d$clk$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The A1865 is what is sold in the U.S. as the unlocked Apple iPhone X and
> by Verizon, also unlocked. Verizon doesn't lock their LTE devices

that's changing, and they bribed ¼ to not prosecute them for violating
their agreement to keep them unlocked.

<https://www.cnet.com/news/verizon-will-lock-its-smartphones-to-combat-t
heft/>
The nation's largest wireless carrier said Monday that it would begin
locking the phones it sells to consumers, which will prevent them
from using a SIM card from another carrier. Initially, the phones
will be unlocked as soon as a customer signs up and activates the
service. But later in the spring, the company will begin the practice
of keeping the phone locked for a period of time after the purchase
-- in line with the rest of the industry.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:43:34 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:15 AM, sms wrote:

> Even at Apple stores, around here the long lines are at their
> flagship stores in Palo Alto and San Francisco, but the stores in Los
> Gatos and at Oakridge Mall had very short lines.

Even on regular days the Apple store in a local mall near me is packed.
They doubled their floor space awhile back likely because of
overcrowding and they're still packed. Amazing.

https://www.apple.com/retail/arrowhead/?cid=aos-us-seo-maps

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:43:37 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:23 AM, sms wrote:

> For common maintenance stuff, like oil changes, the dealers often
> have service specials that aren't any more expensive than the
> quick-lube places

my GUESS is that those dealer oil change sales are designed to get you
in there so they can find other expensive repairs to do.

> plus the dealer is much more likely to do the job properly.

My GUESS is that after a dealer's mechanic scours the car for any
expensive repairs the minimum wage guy does the oil change just like at
the quick lube places.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:43:40 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:36 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

> Verizon and Sprint get a "custom" model

At least the iPhone got to keep its model designation. My Motorola Droid
Turbo 2 is a Verizon re-branded Moto X Force.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:43:43 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 10:05 AM, sms wrote:

> The advantage of buying the unlocked iPhone directly from Apple is that
> they will finance it at 0%. With Verizon, you have to have Verizon
> service in order to finance it.

True. And also at 0%.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:48:53 PM9/10/18

to

But are people buying stuff? At the store at the new visitor center in
Cupertino it's usually packed, but not a lot of people buying anything
other than souvenirs and coffee. But there are a lot of Apple stores in
this area so the load is spread out. Probably only one in Glendale AZ
where you are.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:53:03 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 11:43 AM, 123456789 wrote:

> On 9/10/2018 9:23 AM, sms wrote:
>
>> For common maintenance stuff, like oil changes, the dealers often have
>> service specials that aren't any more expensive than the quick-lube
>> places
>
> my GUESS is that those dealer oil change sales are designed to get you
> in there so they can find other expensive repairs to do.

Absolutely. They'll try to sell you stuff like the Bilstein R-2000
Wallet Flush.
<https://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/is-recommended-engine-flush-really-necessary/article_d96983f0-f409-561d-b368-23599093c261.html>

> My GUESS is that after a dealer's mechanic scours the car for any
> expensive repairs the minimum wage guy does the oil change just like at
> the quick lube places.

Depends on the location I guess. Around here it's all done by ASE
mechanics, and the union put the kibash on using unskilled workers for
simple tasks.

sms

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 2:59:27 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 9:36 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

> On 2018-09-10 12:15, sms wrote:
>
>> In my area, you could walk into a Verizon store on launch day and buy
>> the same quad-carrier unlocked iPhone X sold by Apple, at the same
>> price, with no line or a minimal line. Apple made sure that the
>> carrier's stores had sufficient stock. Ditto for big box retailers.
>
> Verizon and Sprint get a "custom" model so it is a lot easier for Apple
> to tell them how many units they are getting and easier for them to plan
> distribution in their stores.

Are you sure? The model sold by Apple, Verizon, and Sprint is the same
model number. See
<https://bgr.com/2017/12/05/iphone-x-models-verizon-vs-t-mobile/>.
Except it's not clear about "SIM Free."

I'd buy it direct from Apple for other reasons, but I think it's the
same from Verizon or Apple, and it's unlocked (not sure if Sprint locks
theirs or not). With all the complaints about battery issues, I'm
surprised we don't see more complaints about the throttling of the
Qualcomm modem.

123456789

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 3:01:13 PM9/10/18

to

On 9/10/2018 11:48 AM, sms wrote:
> On 9/10/2018 11:43 AM, 123456789 wrote:

>> Even on regular days the Apple store in a local mall near me is
>> packed.

> But are people buying stuff?

Dunno. How do you tell?

> Cupertino it's usually packed, but not a lot of people buying
> anything other than souvenirs and coffee.

I guess you'd have to be there awhile and watch closely to know how
sales were going. I doubt they would move the store to a new larger
space in the same mall if they weren't making money.

> But there are a lot of Apple stores in this area so the load is
> spread out. Probably only one in Glendale AZ where you are.

My metro area has around 5 million population so I suspect there are
quite a few Apple stores. I only know of that one because the wife likes
to shop at that mall and I need to kill time... :-/

B...@onramp.net

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 3:11:23 PM9/10/18

to

This is waaay off topic.

I had an amazing situation, one that made me a believer about my
auto dealer's service department. I had an Infiniti coupe...their hot
model at the time. I had taken it to the dealer once a year for a
checkup and generally there was very little problems that they handled
well. Even after the warranty and the usual hassles came with the
attending prices I just accepted it. Sometimes I thought that they
were taking advantage but then after five years I took my car in and
told the service manager that he had a blank check from me. I wanted
them to do any and everything possible to put this car in perfect
condition.

He called me a cay later to tell me that my car was ready and I went
in to pick it up. First thing I asked was what I owed, expecting to
be shocked. I was.
He told me that I owed almost nothing. All that was needed was an oil
change and windshield wipers. That changed my thinking about
dealership service. At least this one.

I kept that car for 14 years and 260k miles until an eighteen wheel
monster did a complete makeover to it. Totaled. The only accident I
ever had...after 67 years of driving.

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 3:21:46 PM9/10/18

to

In article <pn6f1o$tmd$1...@dont-email.me>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>

wrote:

> >> Even on regular days the Apple store in a local mall near me is
> >> packed.
>
> > But are people buying stuff?
>
> Dunno. How do you tell?

he's making up shit, as usual. there's no way to tell, other than snoop
on customers. sales are done individually with handheld payment
devices.

> > Cupertino it's usually packed, but not a lot of people buying
> > anything other than souvenirs and coffee.
>
> I guess you'd have to be there awhile and watch closely to know how
> sales were going. I doubt they would move the store to a new larger
> space in the same mall if they weren't making money.

they are.

<http://time.com/4339170/apple-store-sales-comparison/>
Apple Stores, which turn 15 years old Thursday, have greater sales
figures per square foot than any other retail location, according to
data from eMarketer. The firm crunched numbers from regulatory
filings, press releases and conference calls to compare the country零
top retailers.

> > But there are a lot of Apple stores in this area so the load is
> > spread out. Probably only one in Glendale AZ where you are.
>
> My metro area has around 5 million population so I suspect there are
> quite a few Apple stores. I only know of that one because the wife likes
> to shop at that mall and I need to kill time... :-/

six in arizona.

<https://www.apple.com/retail/storelist/>

nospam

unread,

Sep 10, 2018, 3:21:46 PM9/10/18

to

In article <pn6eue$sn7$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > Verizon and Sprint get a "custom" model so it is a lot easier for Apple
> > to tell them how many units they are getting and easier for them to plan
> > distribution in their stores.
>
> Are you sure? The model sold by Apple, Verizon, and Sprint is the same
> model number.

he's correct. just because something has the same model number does not
mean it can't be configured differently per carrier.

> Except it's not clear about "SIM Free."

sim free is just that, no sim, plus it's whitelisted on all carriers.

> I'd buy it direct from Apple for other reasons, but I think it's the
> same from Verizon or Apple, and it's unlocked (not sure if Sprint locks
> theirs or not).

they do, but if someone wants sprint service, it's either a sprint
model or a sim-free model. others *might* work, but no guarantees.

> With all the complaints about battery issues, I'm
> surprised we don't see more complaints about the throttling of the
> Qualcomm modem.

that's to match performance among all models.

it also isn't anything anyone would notice outside of a benchmark, and
even then, the limiting factor will be the network at a given location
and how congested it is at the time.