iDont want to make any more of this stuff ...
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Why the iMac aint so good
Next: iPads here in the UK!
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 05:25 On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:40:21 +0100, chris <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On 27/05/10 08:44, T i m wrote: >> My thoughts ... (and this is ignoring corporate greed etc), if it cost >> �50 to assemble an iPhone in China and �75 to have it assembled in the >> UK, would that just knock Apples profits by �25? > >I don't have any hard figures, but I'd imagine the cost difference is >*much* larger than that. Something in the region of �20 in Taiwan and >�200 in the UK. Don't forget we have unions, pensions, NI, sick pay, >maternity/paternity pay, corporation tax, health and safety, etc. that >all add to the cost of manufacturing any product here. Ok. > >There's a reason why Dysons are much more expensive than similar >products. It's partly the technology and partly the higher costs of >being a UK-based company. I don't buy Dyson (I get them from Freecycle or the tip). Where are Miele made? ;-) > >> If so, wouldn't it be better (ethically) for it to be that way or is >> it still better to provide this sort of work to someone in the far >> East even with their known working conditions? > >It comes down to what the consumer is prepared to pay, though isn't it? >It's taken a long time for Fairtrade to be accepted by the general >consumer and not just a niche who care about this kind of thing. For >coffee the price difference is very small. For something like an iPad >the difference would be huge. Then maybe that's how it should be? Is the cost of a sharks life 'right' because someone just wants a bowl of sharks fin soup? > >Apple products are already perceived as being expensive, but people >accept it because they are better quality or a better 'cool factor'. >Push the price up even more and the market disappears. I think some of the market would disappear yes, but if someone wants something and they 'value' the features you mention then I think they will pay 'the price'. What's more I think they could even sell 'The price', if they can add the 'Fairtrade' ideals in their marketing? > >I have to agree that Apple is being unfairly singled out here. It's the >cheap as chips manufacturers that need to be targetted, as they are the >ones driving prices and standards down. e.g. Primark and George(a)Asda >have been criticised for the labour they use, but not the likes of M&S. Agreed but like I said, I'm not sure there isn't some slack in the system when I can buy a new phone with camera for �9.99 on PAYG? If the problem in this instance (Foxconn) isn't the actual working conditions or wages but a managerial issue, how much would Apple have to add to the price of an iPhone to be able to pay to have their people re-trained or to keep someone on-site all the time? (Whilst George suggests Apple may be better than some they may be in a better position to put some leverage on <suppliers> to do better. More so than people selling phones or motherboards for a fraction of the price of Apple products etc). Apple buyers may also typically be more able to afford such (as has been the case for decades). Cheers, T i m
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 05:26 On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:12:15 +0100, Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: >> Hmm, but on something that is already 'expensive' would that really be >> an issue? > >No, especially as they could absorb some of that (their profit margins tend >towards 30%). Additionally they could play the 'locally made' card for all >they're worth, which would be great advertising for them. > >The fact that they don't tells me that it would cost a lot more than �25 > Maybe I'm just more more cynical then. ;-) Cheers, T i m
From: Woody on 27 May 2010 05:28 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > On 2010-05-27, Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>and probably lots and lots of others. > >> > >> Yup. ;-) > >> > >> There is nothing any of those supply that is worth someones life. > > > > True, but you have to remember that Foxconn is _huge_. We're talking about a > > company that has a workforce with numbers close to that of a city. The > > I've just checked - according to CNN they employ close to half a million > people (486,000 as of 2009). > > <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2009/snapshots/11204.html> In which case 10 suicides is a remarkably low figure as it is a long way below average -- Woody
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 05:30 On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:18:13 +0100, Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: >> >> There is nothing any of those supply that is worth someones life. > >True, but you have to remember that Foxconn is _huge_. We're talking about a >company that has a workforce with numbers close to that of a city. The >suicide rate may well be just the national average. And again, remember >we're dealing with a culture that regards losing face with much more >seriousness than we do. > Oh indeed, put into proportion etc, however, because Apple is selling 'Quality' (at a price) I think it might have made itself more of a target here (as you say, the same factory makes loads of goods for other Co's yet only Apple were mentioned on the news I saw). No one is interested / bothered about a company making PC motherboards that retail for �27. Cheers, T i m
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 05:31
On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:23:39 +0100, Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: >On 2010-05-27, Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>and probably lots and lots of others. >>> >>> Yup. ;-) >>> >>> There is nothing any of those supply that is worth someones life. >> >> True, but you have to remember that Foxconn is _huge_. We're talking about a >> company that has a workforce with numbers close to that of a city. The > >I've just checked - according to CNN they employ close to half a million >people (486,000 as of 2009). > ><http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2009/snapshots/11204.html> > Feck. Mind you, Tesco are trying to go the same way over here aren't they and the concept has been in use for quite a while throughout the world. Cheers, T i m |