Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Acer Says It's Not Making Any Money From $799 Ultrabook

Tags:
Last response: in News comments
Share
March 8, 2012 7:11:35 PM

cheaper price is always welcomed..
March 8, 2012 7:28:33 PM

It's a risky move but they can get a bigger base in the market which can pay off in the long run.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
March 8, 2012 7:29:16 PM

I've always been under the impression that a "race to the bottom" in any industry, reduces profits. Apple's made a business model (for their computers) on premium parts + higher price = more profits. If they aren't making money at $800, why is the answer "lets lower the price?"
March 8, 2012 7:29:33 PM

Reduce the size of the board and then they can make room for a larger cooler which will allow for a higher tdp cpu for more speed.
March 8, 2012 7:30:15 PM

Quote:
A recent example of this is Amazon's Kindle Fire, which is priced at $199 but costs more to manufacture. For Acer to sell its Ultrabooks at a loss is more of a risk than selling a games console at a loss. It'll be interesting to see how fast Acer can take the Ultrabook price down to $499.


WHAT? I can't believe that a single Ultrabook can take more than 499$ to manufacture... :fou: 
I always thought that those things were manufactured in groups and cost only 200$ for 10 ultrabooks.
March 8, 2012 7:32:23 PM

nforce4maxReduce the size of the board and then they can make room for a larger cooler which will allow for a higher tdp cpu for more speed.


Lol an Ultra(large)book... :D 
March 8, 2012 7:35:33 PM

I would buy an Ultrabook for $500. Let's hope battery life improves too. So far it looks like the HP Folio has the best battery life.
March 8, 2012 7:36:45 PM

It's not true that Acer is not making money on an $800 thin laptop.
They don't even cost $500 to make, let alone $600 or $700.
Unless this supposed $800 price includes a gigantic TV ad campaign, it's nonsense.
March 8, 2012 7:42:16 PM

heman8400I've always been under the impression that a "race to the bottom" in any industry, reduces profits. Apple's made a business model (for their computers) on premium parts + higher price = more profits. If they aren't making money at $800, why is the answer "lets lower the price?"


Because their product is already in-shelf and they can't afford paying an revision (taking back all products and improving them), so the best they can hope is to lower the price... (at least they don't loose 100% of the price that took to make products)
March 8, 2012 7:59:54 PM

bloc97WHAT? I can't believe that a single Ultrabook can take more than 499$ to manufacture... I always thought that those things were manufactured in groups and cost only 200$ for 10 ultrabooks.


My thoughts exactly, these Ultrabook are underclocked laptops with a Solid State Drive and a lot slimmer too, so how could they not make any money out of them? Must be the Solid State Drives prices which were affected by the Thailand floods.
Anonymous
March 8, 2012 8:00:54 PM

Cheaper is not always welcomed. It could really mean a poorly put together system. Ultrabooks will be expensive. No way around it due to the expense of its parts. You'll need an SSD (but you can ditch the video card with Ivy and Trinity), USB3, eSata, and possibly Thunderbolt for external GPU. You will also need an expensive LCD display plus some kind of capability for tablet functionality. This will make it hard to put out cheap systems. I wonder also, will they have some kind of 3G/4G capability on board?
March 8, 2012 8:00:59 PM

No wonder the ultrabooks are somewhat expensive. The idiots of intel convinced the laptop makers to use medium to high end components. Which includes high end i3, i5 and i7s, along with SSD at 128, 240 and 256 GB range. The problem is that the intel CPUs and SSD are expensive on their own, combined with a laptop and you got yourself a desktop-on-the-road, pun intended (without an adequate graphic processor). If acer wants a 500 dollar ultrabook, they should look at AMD or ARM. I bet the price tags will go down along the manufacture costs.
Anonymous
March 8, 2012 8:06:11 PM

Neoverdugo, you are probably right. The Ultrabooks Intel envisions are fully capable road warrior PCs that can do anything your desktop can do PLUS the mobility of a tablet with long bettery lives and touch capability. That is not a cheap system.

Sub $500 systems are probably traditional netbook type machines with ATOM, C-50, ARM type systems with little hardware that are very specific in functionality. Still much more functional than tablet, but not overly useful for large scale business.
March 8, 2012 8:10:04 PM

The Acer Ultrabook is OK, but the Zenbook is still better.
March 8, 2012 8:26:00 PM

treetopboyNeoverdugo, you are probably right. The Ultrabooks Intel envisions are fully capable road warrior PCs that can do anything your desktop can do PLUS the mobility of a tablet with long bettery lives and touch capability. That is not a cheap system.Sub $500 systems are probably traditional netbook type machines with ATOM, C-50, ARM type systems with little hardware that are very specific in functionality. Still much more functional than tablet, but not overly useful for large scale business.


If you don't mind going a little thicker, there are $300 or so laptops with fairly good performance, especially the A6 Llano ones. It's not having mobile performance that's the problem, it's having it in such a thin form factor. Cheap notebooks don't need to have crap Atoms, C-50s, ARMs, etc, the ultrabooks are just too thin to use the cheaper notebook components.

For example, it wasn't until a month or two ago that high performance CPU coolers came out for ultrabook form factors that were cheap to make when a company developed a thinner, high efficiency heat pipe technology.
March 8, 2012 8:35:40 PM

You're going to have to pay for mobility, but at $799 I thought they'd be making some money. Intel might be ripping the OEMs off in this case.
March 8, 2012 9:08:20 PM

eddieroolzYou're going to have to pay for mobility, but at $799 I thought they'd be making some money. Intel might be ripping the OEMs off in this case.


I agree with you, sub-1000$ Ultrabooks (good quality) are somewhat rare. And this Ultrabook at 799$ should sell very well...
March 8, 2012 9:09:55 PM

If only others would do the same, I would love to pay $100 for the new iPad.
March 8, 2012 10:27:31 PM

jaber2If only others would do the same, I would love to pay $100 for the new iPad.
You're talking unrelated gibberish.
March 8, 2012 11:34:21 PM

mikenygmailIt's not true that Acer is not making money on an $800 thin laptop. They don't even cost $500 to make, let alone $600 or $700. Unless this supposed $800 price includes a gigantic TV ad campaign, it's nonsense.
It has to include ALL costs if they're talking about "profitable". An add campaign is absolutely necessary or nobody will know what an "Ultrabook" is.

A lot of people here are confused about "high-end parts". Apple uses the same parts inside. The only difference is a higher quality case and Apple software, for the most part.

Blazorthon brought up a good point that Ultrabooks are expensive because they all use new proprietary parts. Once there are standard ultrathin coolers produced by the millions instead of quantities of 8,000, it'll get substantially cheaper. Right now, these things actually do cost 1.5x as much to make as a typical laptop, maybe 2x as much. Considering that laptop manufacturers are pretty much all losing money on these sub $500 laptops, of course $800 is hard to profit from with an Ultrabook.

Once Ultrabooks can get down the to $500 range and pull of i3-370M/A6-3400M performance, I think they'll displace laptops for most people, which wouldn't be a bad thing.

Now the AMD ultra-slim line has a lot of potential, I think. That's assuming they can do it for less than Intel, although Sandy Bridge i3's and lower are pretty cheap.
March 9, 2012 12:39:28 AM

bring out trinity!! hopefully it'll undercut intel's prices and deliver very good igpu unlike intel's. for example, compare cheap 4-core llano laptop prices with a 4 core from intel's.
March 9, 2012 1:25:54 AM

de5_roybring out trinity!! hopefully it'll undercut intel's prices and deliver very good igpu unlike intel's. for example, compare cheap 4-core llano laptop prices with a 4 core from intel's.
I'm admittedly more excited about Ivy Bridge, but I'm still curious to see how Trinity does. For most users, Intel's HD Graphics are more than enough. But it's not Intel holding back the form factor. These low power i5's are only $225 (tray, cheaper for OEM). Even if Trinity shaved a $100 off the price (it won't), when we're still a far cry from $500 Ultrabooks.

I really think the Ultrabook form factor is a blunder for Intel. It's reminding people that they don't need Intel's full CPU power with these low-power versions--helping people to realize that AMD CPUs would also be plenty adequate for any similar laptop.
March 9, 2012 3:02:49 AM

rename to kamasutra book, preloaded with all private movie, sell it like hot cake
March 9, 2012 3:42:14 AM

they are selling it at break even prices... good business strategy.

you don't take a loss, you don't make a profit either, the point of this is to get the product out there, and get people to think of it next time they upgrade, and hopefully by than, you can make a profit.

that said, i would never get acer because of all the screen problems i hear they have.
March 9, 2012 4:45:37 AM

Ultra book is going to repeat the failure of ULV tiny notebooks if they are keeping the price high. Get the price down to $400-500 then is good.
March 9, 2012 4:51:01 AM

Acer Says It's Not Making Any Money From $799 Ultrabook? No S#!T!?
... i think, that the near future will suck for the wintel world... why... intel try to copy MacBook Air... they got the hardware spec's right, because they do the same for apple, but... windows is a different beast than OS X... so? Windows is more universal OS... it can run different hardware combinations, but there is the problem... because windows is not specifically written for intel's ultrabook, the results differ from MacBook Air with OSX... the power management is different, so the ultrabooks don't get the battery life, like Air's... there is no specific version of windows for a ultrabook to get it right... and the other thing is windows 8... i like the tech under the hood of win8, but the UI suck's sooOOoo much... my dad is in the 50's, and the first reaction waz W.T.F. ... so... my point waz... next windows version will suck because there will be no option to turn of the metro ui... i hope, that i'm wrong on that point... intel try to copy the MacBook Air, but will not get the project profitable because of the hardware is not fully optimiset for windows, like OSX is optimized for MacBook Air... and there is the thing about software... apple builds the hardware and the optimized software with all api's... apple can afford to lose some profit from the hardware sales, but they will get the money back, because of the functioning software library... intel's ultrabook is dependent on how windows will do... and it seems, that windows will suck badly on desktops and laptops... so add intel and microsoft together and it is a recipe for suck badly... intel should stick to what they do best and improve on it... and with the new iPad... wow... i think that the Win8 experience on a tablet will suck too...
March 9, 2012 5:14:59 AM

poor poor acer. "sarcasm"
March 9, 2012 5:58:48 AM

Classic error in thinking in the PC community. It will only erode margins even more and the exclusivity that sells Apple for example is gone with pooly finished product (based on the assumption that it will be as all other lower-cost laptops put on the market)
March 9, 2012 11:18:47 AM

heman8400I've always been under the impression that a "race to the bottom" in any industry, reduces profits. Apple's made a business model (for their computers) on premium parts + higher price = more profits. If they aren't making money at $800, why is the answer "lets lower the price?"


Kill your competition, hike up the price. It's what John D. Rockefeller (or Reckafellow) did...
March 9, 2012 12:00:29 PM

Im waiting for AMD's ultrathin platform and then I am buying. Sure it may not have quite the CPU horsepower Intel ultrabooks have but at least I will be able to play games on it. I want to be able to play BF3 (even if its ultra low settings) on a super thin and light (and cheap) laptop!!!!!!
March 9, 2012 2:32:33 PM

Acer can do it, if they dropped Intel and went AMD, and dropped SSD's for now and went with HDD's. At least until the prices on SSD's go down and HDD's prices plummet down to earth. Leave SSD's and Intel cpu's as higher costs options. Then you can cover the really low end $500 price point and still make money.
March 9, 2012 2:56:40 PM

slabbo ^ Exactly !! like if you had stolen my words O.O!
March 9, 2012 3:14:27 PM

@heman8400: It should be Racketfellow cuz he's an old money mobster.
@cknobman: So do I. I know many of us are gamers and we like to take our games on the road, but sometimes its not a good idea to install power hungry (on cpu, gpu, mem, watts) games on the laptops even on low settings. As an electronic engineer, I need a well balanced laptop for engineering programs (labview, ltspice, matlab, solidworks, etc.) than games (crysis, bf3, mw3, re5, etc.)
@slabbo: What acer needs to do is offer an ultrabook customize service. In other words, that the client can choose what type of storage (HDD or SSD), amount of memory, and the option of having which OS the customer want (or None at all). In my case, I format the factory set OS on the laptops along with the bloatware. As for the cooling, add an Peltier diode on the heatsink of the cooling system.
March 9, 2012 4:09:40 PM

mikenygmailIt's not true that Acer is not making money on an $800 thin laptop. They don't even cost $500 to make, let alone $600 or $700. Unless this supposed $800 price includes a gigantic TV ad campaign, it's nonsense.

It may not include advertising costs (though who knows), but it probably includes the amortization on production facilities. Similar to how processors don't really cost much to make but the up-front investment in R&D and fab facilities is enormous.
March 9, 2012 5:29:12 PM

And this is WHY Acer will never be Apple, for which they have talked publicly of wanting to be.

Apple builds with quality parts (they costs more) and sell at market price that is willing to pay. When you compare a high end Windows notebook to an Apple, the price isn't much different.

Acer's race to the bottom is stupid. Going with even cheaper parts to hit $500 is STUPID. There is a market for basic-quality $350~500 notebooks. Those buyers DON'T really care about Ultrabooks. So you see Acer notebooks with their cheap-ass junk keyboards, flimsy body and bottom end pricing.

Those of us who buy ThinkPads (even todays) are running for years. I guess the ACER model is to constantly upgrade their customers with 1-2year product-life span.
March 12, 2012 2:17:48 PM

so........ where's thunderbolt and external gpu's?
!