|
苹果和摩托罗拉在平板电脑战场开战了。 最终胜利的，估计还会是苹果公司。那么，是不是苹果公司的产品就肯定比摩托罗拉的同类产品要好？或者“至少”是性价比更高呢？从下面这篇文章的分析来看似乎并不是。很多年之前，相对于微软拥有明显技术优势的苹果，在双方的争夺和绞杀之后，在最终惨败到接近破产的边缘的时刻，还算有自知之明。在许多年的“深山”修炼之后，苹果总算明白了一个道理：企业之间的竞争，最后制胜的最重要武器，肯定不应该只是技术本身。技术只是企业成功的一个原因而已！在这里，科技是第一生产力，恐怕也是一句忽悠自己的外行话了！如果上升到国家层次的管理，你就会明白，为什么有的国家能够做到长久的繁荣，而有的，只能够很阿Q地自叹“分久必合，合久必分”之类“哲理”的真理性和不可违抗性了。 今天面对摩托罗拉和其他的竞争者，苹果明显老练了许多。按照下面这篇文章的说法，在高端市场，特别是在和无线手机（3G、4G）服务捆绑之后，苹果的平板电脑“应该”是没有优势的，但是，为什么苹果能够给人一个性价比最优的印象呢？就是因为苹果的斯蒂夫忽悠人的水平比较高的原因吗？ 我看未必。在美国消费品市场，想靠忽悠消费者来长期大赚特赚，恐怕很难。 我倒是觉得，摩托罗拉应该好好合计、琢磨一下，像苹果这样的公司的战法，为什么就能够在如此长时间内还是战无不胜？其中的核心奥秘是什么？这才是最重要的。我不觉得，在摩托罗拉公司内部没有那个认识到这一点的人，但是，为什么这样的人在摩托罗拉就成不了气候呢？他们在那里，可能还是刺头呢？为什么？（如果你想海归，你又是这样的人才，那么，如果不小心选择了摩托罗拉，最终你就是自找倒霉。如果你很运气地撞上了苹果，你可能就是一个人才，而且可能还是一个大人才！这是题外话了。） 苹果公司花重笔强调自己产品价格的低廉，从表面上看，它是在强调自己最初级产品价格上的优势，那么，对手为什么不也这么做？即使想做，能够做成功吗？苹果的低档款产品供给，对于公司经营战略而言的主要功能，恐怕不仅仅只是在打广告，还应该是在满足为数并不小的低档市场了。在这一块，至少苹果能够做到有钱可赚，这也是一种本事。 作为投资者，你在苹果好摩托罗拉之间，到底会将赌注压在谁的身上呢？ 在我的印象之中，摩托罗拉似乎是个“全才”，什么都能够折腾出来。但是，它就是没有像苹果这样的出色表现，从它那不争气的股票表现就很容易看出。结果，就像是在和英特尔竞争的AMD一样，一再成为常态的失败者。不同的文化和企业制度，可能已经决定了， 摩托罗拉在和苹果的未来争夺战中，也难以善终。 附录：How the iPad could cost you more than the Xoom 12:00 AM ET 3/8/11 BOSTON (MarketWatch) -- What a showman Steve Jobs is.
Last week the chief executive of Apple Inc. (AAPL) -- emerging from sick leave -- took to the stage to unveil his latest technological marvel, the new iPad 2. And in a bravura performance he successfully persuaded most of the world that it's better and cheaper than its new competitor, the Xoom from Motorola.
No wonder shares of Motorola Mobility Holdings (MMI) have tumbled 10% since last week's iPad moment, falling from $30 to $27. Apple's stock, meanwhile, is up about $4 to $354 -- near a record high.
There's just one problem.
The price difference isn't quite what it seems.
Some of the new iPads will be cheaper than the Xoom.
But for some people, the Xoom will actually be cheaper.
If you've been following the media coverage over the past week, you've probably missed this fact. Why? Because it doesn't seem to have caught the attention -- of analysts or, perhaps, many in the media.
The headline figures look pretty straightforward: The iPad 2 starts at $499. The Xoom costs $799. So far, good for Apple.
But the $499 iPad 2 is the bare-bones model. It only comes with WiFi, lacks a 3G connection on a cellular network, and it has a mere 16 Gigabytes of memory.
The $799 Xoom has 3G, and 32 gigabytes of memory.
A comparable iPad -- with a 3G connection, and 32 gigs of memory -- costs $729.
So the iPad 2 is still cheaper, only not by so much, right?
Not so fast.
If you buy the Xoom, and sign up for a two-year wireless contract with Verizon Wireless, you'll only have to pay $599 for the device. You get an upfront subsidy of $200, like the subsidy you get on most cellular smartphones.
What's the equivalent subsidy on the iPad 2?
Nada. Zip. Squat. There isn't one.
So someone who wants the 32 gigabytes of memory, and wants to use the 3G connection every month, may actually save money by buying the Xoom instead of the iPad 2.
You didn't hear that on stage in San Francisco last week. And you haven't heard much about it since either.
And it doesn't stop there.
What about someone who wants a tablet with even more memory?
You can get an iPad 2 with 64 gigabytes of memory. That's a lot of videos, songs, and photos. It will cost you $829.
But the Xoom has something the iPad 2 doesn't: A micro-SD slot. So -- after a forthcoming update -- you will be able to add memory yourself. And that's likely to be cheaper. You can buy 32 gigabyte micro-SD cards for $65, and if you just want, say, 16 gigs you can get them for less than $30. The price is dropping all the time.
Furthermore, heavy data users may find the Xoom costs them less each month as well. Someone using a massive 10 gigabytes of data a month on Verizon Wireless would pay $5 less per month on the Xoom than the iPad 2.
None of this, naturally, is to suggest the Xoom is inherently the better product or that you should buy one instead. But it does counter the suggestion that the iPad is always the much cheaper alternative. It isn't. Despite what Jobs would have you believe, the picture is more mixed.
In terms of technical specifications, the Xoom is heavier, but it has a better screen. It will run Flash, which means you can pretty much watch Web video as you do on your laptop or PC. The iPad won't, partly, at least, because Jobs wants you to pay money to watch programs through iTunes. The Xoom has access to many fewer third-party applications.
Later this year the Xoom will also run on Verizon's (VZ) "4G" network, dubbed LTE. A spokeswoman explains that this runs 10 times as fast as current 3G networks.
Of course, that's all in the future. Motorola, for reasons best known to itself, has managed to bobble the new product launch. Folks buying a Xoom today will have to wait for updates from Motorola before they can use micro-SD cards or watch web videos using Flash. It's errors like this that keep Apple on a roll.
But the most important implication of the rising competitive environment may be financial. Apple makes its biggest margins, naturally enough, on higher-end products with the most memory. That's been especially true of iPods, iPhones, and iPads. (So the iPad with 32 gigabytes of memory will cost you $100 more than the one with just 16 gigabytes, even though a 16-gigabyte memory card at Amazon.com costs less than $30.) But it's precisely at the higher end that Motorola's Xoom is more competitive. Sure, Apple wins the battle of the bare-bones tablets. But that's not the most lucrative end of the business.
Too many fans view this as a battle. You will hear all sorts of people telling you Apple is the "winner." But for investors, it's not always like that. It's not a zero-sum game. If you have serious competition, that's going to compress profit margins.
The best news for Apple investors? The company's amazing marketing magic continues, unabated. Regardless of whether the iPad 2 is actually better or cheaper, the Wizard of Oz has successfully wooed the world to think it is. And in the age of the Internet, where there are no facts, only opinions, isn't that what matters?
|
|
