Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Surveys and Polls
Retrevo Study: Apple needs to price tablet at $600 or less to attract PC users
Consumer electronics shopping site Retrevo.com surveyed 753 Americans distributed across age, gender, income, and location, asking them what they'd be willing to pay for an Apple tablet computer. While 68% of Mac users said that they'd willingly drop $600 or more on a tablet, only 36% of PC users said that they'd pay that much.
What does that tell Apple? If they want to continue to make inroads into the PC market, particularly in the netbook sector, the new device should have a price point around $600 so that price is not an issue for PC users. Retrevo's Gadgetology study also noted that Apple has already lost potential sales to early adopters like iPhone users, 59% of whom said they either already own or plan to purchase a netbook this year.
Not only is pricing of the Apple tablet key to making it a runaway success, but the study results show that Apple needs to get this device out the door as quickly as possible to capture the slower adopters who are planning on making a netbook purchase in the next year.
The study does not answer the question on how many dissatisfied netbook owners would make the switch to an Apple tablet, but we can only hope that Retrevo asks that question soon.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
KP said 2:35PM on 10-26-2009
So... less than the cost of an iPhone? Yeah. Don't see that being possible.
Reply
Ben said 2:35PM on 10-26-2009
And studies will also say that Apple won't make it through the recession without a netbook.
Reply
Jeff said 6:34PM on 10-26-2009
I think that was from this exact same company. Hacks.
jwfnla said 2:37PM on 10-26-2009
I just want to keep saying it in hopes that it becomes a meme -- if it doesn't run OSX, I'm 75% less interested in it altogether.
Reply
Jordan said 4:31PM on 10-26-2009
If it runs OSX i'm 75% less interested. If it runs a modified version of OSX to fit the device, then we'll talk.
jwfnla said 5:46PM on 10-26-2009
I agree, Jordan. I just have no use for a giant iPod touch. I need it to run Word.
brian said 6:54PM on 10-26-2009
That makes me think we need a second pair of charts: how low would a PC tablet have to be priced to attract Mac users?
Dave Wood said 2:39PM on 10-26-2009
It's pretty stupid to ask someone how much they'd pay for something when they don't know what it is. 0 of these people asked have seen the device, know what it does, know how big/small it is, know when it's coming out, or anything. This is a 100% pointless survey.
Reply
hmlong said 5:21PM on 10-26-2009
Ditto. Besides, price it at $800 and they get a third of the PC market and two thirds of the Mac market. That's entirely an Apple thing to do.
Besides, the cheapskates in both categories are probably "customers" you wouldn't want to have anyway.
waiownsyou said 2:42PM on 10-26-2009
Most of the PC users that I know argue that they're not Mac users simply because they can't afford the premium.
So basically, it's just two pie charts showing poor vs rich. Let's call it a day.
Reply
KarlW said 2:56PM on 10-26-2009
Not really. I could argue that mac users (and fanboys are a serious minority, so I'm talking about the wider mac community) know the value of Apple products more than windows users do.
Apple has one of the best customer satisfaction ratings in the industry (if not the best). People like their products, so it makes sense that they would still see the value in a more expensive product. The fact that it's made by Apple carries additional importance to people who like their approach to products.
KP said 3:33PM on 10-26-2009
Well it's a little more complicated than that. I have a low income for my cost of living, but I buy a new top-of-the-line Mac every 3 years or so, and have bought 3 iPhones so far. This is because maybe 95% of the money that doesn't go to rent, bills and food goes to computer hardware and software.
You have to have some disposable income to be able to buy anything but the absolute lowest-priced computer available, but beyond that it's just about priorities. Some of my friends with similar incomes say they want a Mac but can't afford it, and then buy a big plasma-screen TV, or take $30 cab rides home from the bar at 3AM instead of spending an hour and a half on the subway. Not everyone has to care that much about how nice their computer is, but unless you're absolutely dirt poor and can't afford anything, you can buy Apple products if it's that important to you.
Joey said 9:51PM on 10-26-2009
Couldn't agree more. I've been a Mac user for over 15 years and it still amazes me that the Apple devout insist that there's no price disparity. Certainly part for part, Macs are essentially on par with the high end of the PC market. I don't think anyone denies that. However as Apple has virtually no presence in the low end of the market and really doesn't compete on expandability and performance.
While this works for the high end of the consumer market, it really rubs me the wrong way as a professional who makes his living on his Mac. I don't need shiny cases, custom board designs and fluff. I need an affordable, expandable system and Apple simply doesn't offer this. So I'm stuck buying out of my price range just for the privilege of buying Mac.
Paul said 2:43PM on 10-26-2009
Hmm ... isn't Retrevo the company that suggested (from surveying visitors to their website) that Apple laptops weren't selling well last quarter?
Reply
R. Ahrens said 2:47PM on 10-26-2009
And yet by pricing it at $700 or $799, Apple could lick up a net 36% of PC users - not a bad market share bump to still maintain the famous Apple margins...
Reply
aroubini said 2:59PM on 10-26-2009
I think you're on the money there.
Yada said 3:07PM on 10-26-2009
Even further, with a price point of above $800, Apple could pick up as much as 20% of PC users and 41% of current mac users. Given the price history of the iphone, I would bet they would start at above $800, since they would be unable to meet a great demand anyway and then start lowering the price gradually to expand their market share.
Eddie said 3:14PM on 10-26-2009
Yeah, agreed. I'd get one of the Apple tablets even at $799. I have one of those "netbooks" that I paid $399 for. And boy did I get what I paid!! It was horrible. I gave it to Goodwill because it was so underpowered to do anything. Just surfing the web was an exercise in frustration. I've been thinking about getting an Apple laptop because my Thinkpad is showing signs of distress and it's not even 3 years old yet. I've read that Mac Pros just tend to go on and on.....
Markus said 4:03PM on 10-26-2009
@Eddie: I really don't know what you did - but I have a standard MSI Wind running OS X and Windows 7, the only thing I did was upgrade the memory to 2 Gigs for 20 bucks - and that thing runs extremely well, doesn't lag while web surfing or using office, and can even play 720p videos flawlessly if you set the codecs up right. As long as I don't want to game, I can use that machine for everything as long as I cope with the small display and keys ;)
Level 5 said 8:39AM on 10-27-2009
Precisely. I feel for this reason alone, Apple should had kept the last-gen(ish) hardware in the Whitebook and lowered the price to $799. While those who need a "basic" notebook for school or what have you will still want one, anyone in a professional field will put up the extra $200 and get the 13" Pro instead. It's no shock I'm a PC guy, but honestly a lower cost Mac gives potential switchers much less of a reason to say "the hell with it, I'll get a Dell".
While it wouldn't make any sense to tune down the Whitebook now, perhaps in the next CPU refresh, Apple could keep the current unibody design/specs going, but for a lower price point. Apple as a whole knows that lowering prices WORKS. Look at the growth of Macs in Q2. The company is realizing that the lower end machines are worth staying vested in, look at the Mac Mini. People who don't even care about Apple are buying them because they make a great server, or great HTPC. I feel that the same would work for the Whitebook, even without bleeding edge specs.