I thought it was a piece of toast at first.
How much is it?
There is no doubt that they are going to make some profit on them, maybe not as much as they would like though.
A business is not going to sell something if they don't make any profit from it.
Well, for that price it's worth a pop?
Amazon sells the Kindle Fire at a loss. Gillette sells razors at a loss. Sony sells the PS3 at a loss.
This is a play for market share by Google, which they will more than make up in advertising and content revenue.
Have we got any hard evidence for those items though?
I have never seen/known a company to sell an item where they aren't getting any profit at all, it completely defeats the purpose of having a "business"
you can never be too gadgety!!!!
the sd card slot omission wouldn't probably be a deal breaker, the thing with the hdmi is just that i have a cheapo £80 sumvision tablet that i quite pleased with and i've really got in the habit of playing all my media on the tv with it. it's played everything i've thrown at it and i even use it to use stuff like iplayer on the tv - all works really well and just the fact that you see hdmi on loads of cheap stuff.
i do appreciate though that if you want to hit a price point you have to stop somewhere - i'm often thinking if only mine had gps, or btooth...but then it wouldn't have cost £80!!!!!
Just been googling and at the risk of going off topic heres a few of the things i was looking at
http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/6/3067386/acer-iconia-tab-quad-core-tablet-price
http://www.theverge.com/products/eee-pad-memo-me370t/4728
but them there's always something to hold out for....you'd end up not buying anything!
I know that some stuff is sold using that method for those reasons (but not for big items like the consoles and tablets etc.), first that I have heard of the PS 3 etc. being sold at a loss.......
They certainly weren't cheap when they were first released!
Although do we have any real "hard evidence" from a trust worthy source as I wouldn't believe it if it just because Sony and Microsoft told us that therefore it must be true........
I know that some stuff is sold using that method for those reasons (but not for big items like the consoles and tablets etc.), first that I have heard of the PS 3 etc. being sold at a loss.......
They certainly weren't cheap when they were first released!
Although do we have any real "hard evidence" from a trust worthy source as I wouldn't believe just because Sony and Microsoft told us that therefore it must be true........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playstation_3
The PlayStation 3's initial production cost is estimated by iSuppli to have been US$805.85 for the 20 GB model and US$840.35 for the 60 GB model.[268] However, they were priced at US$499 and US$599 respectively, meaning that units may have been sold at an estimated loss of $306 or $241 depending on model, if the cost estimates were correct,[269] and contributing to Sony's games division posting an operating loss of ¥232.3 billion (US$1.97 billion) in the fiscal year ending March 2007.[270] In April 2007, soon after these results were published, Ken Kutaragi, President of Sony Computer Entertainment, announced plans to retire. Various news agencies, including The Times[271] and The Wall Street Journal[272] reported that this was due to poor sales, while SCEI maintains that Kutaragi had been planning his retirement for six months prior to the announcement.[272]
Is it wrong that I quite like that case?