>Does your definition of AAPL's customers include people who purchased clones???<
I have no problem with anyone looking for a bargain. I also have no problem with cloners per se -- provided they're willing to bring something to the table.
UMAX pushes the lowend and Asian market and has added some nice hardware features. They have twice approached AAPL about an equity investment. Motorola makes the PPC chips and also pushes the Asian market. IBM likewise contributes on the hardware side, co-designing the 2400 laptop.
Power Computing, on the other hand, adds nothing in hardware, let alone software design. They advertise nowhere outside of the existing Mac market. They cherry pick the best customers with tweaked hardware and mini-margins, much like an HMO advertises and offers the best rates to the youngest and healthiest customers.
AAPL is totally justified by demanding contributions in kind.
If rumors prove correct, and AAPL buys back their license (and picks up the customer support responsibilities), Power will have exactly the free-market world they want. Only problem is, they'll be competing directly with Compaq, Dell, Gateway and every corner chop shop.
>What is the current business model for AAPL?? It sure doesn't seem to be working to
stem market share decline. Maybe that's the problem with AAPL. They don't have any
defined business plan, no blueprint model to rebuild themselves.<
1) Keep the high end, value added hardware market for itself.
2) Cede the foreign and low end markets to cloners.
3) Maintain niches in education, graphics/content-creation/internet.
4) Use Rhapsody to (initially) drive server sales until it ships broadly in 8/98.
5) Use Rhapsody to expand user base into Pentium hardware.
6) Position Newton technology as a low-mid priced, cross-platform laptop killer.
7) Position Claris Filemaker, Works, HomePage products as cross-platform solutions.
8) Continue MacOS (Allegro) are the premium home user platform.
What can't you see? What am I missing?
soup |
