After a smashed AppleWatch strap was exposed for 330% of profits in the previous few days, the famous headphone brand Beats also shot recently. After dismantling and calculating by a foreign engineer, the estimated cost of the Beats SoloHD headset priced at US$199 was only US$16.89. This included a packaging fee of US$4, which was more than any single element. The cost of the device is high. At the same time, because it is a mature mass-produced product, even if it counts the investment in R&D, logistics, and retail, its comprehensive cost is only 18 US dollars. However, such brutal comparisons have also been questioned by many people in the industry!
In the field of consumer electronics, the discussions on costs and profits have never stopped, and the rhythm of domestic and foreign markets does not seem the same. Domestic hardware manufacturers shouted at the same time every day that they “lose money and earn money†while overseas hardware manufacturers Earn huge profits from the hardware itself, but the truth behind it may not be that simple. This is actually two propositions. Do not believe you see.
Are domestic manufacturers really selling hardware at a loss?
A few days ago, Zhou Hongqi led the newly-arranged cool giants and Xiaomi to wage a price war. The F12GB version of the Great God, with a material cost of 544.58 yuan, was reduced to 499 yuan and directed at the same price of red rice 2A. On the other hand, everyone is crying out for a loss at a loss. As the saying goes, there is no sale, and no real business can be done. Among these tricks, there are three situations to consider:
1. You think he is selling at a loss, but it is not.
The typical case is Xiaomi.
When Xiaomi released its first mobile phone product in 2011, its retail price of RMB 1999 was considered by many to be below cost at the time. According to estimates from supply chain stakeholders, the main material cost of this product using the Qualcomm dual-core processor, Sharp's 4-inch display, and the latter’s 8-megapixel camera can easily exceed 200 US dollars (at the exchange rate price at that time, approximately Together with 1300 RMB, plus R&D, logistics, and marketing costs, the profit margin left for Xiaomi is insignificant.
At the same time, from the launch to the sale of a period of up to six months, the appointment purchase mode of suspected hunger and thirst marketing, is also considered to be due to cost and capacity issues caused by frustration.
However, Lei Jun also acknowledged in an interview afterwards that although many components are inflexible and rigid costs, Xiaomi, who mainly takes online shopping channels, can significantly reduce elastic expenses such as marketing. “We should not lose money.â€
2. You think his hardware is losing money, but in fact he earns more in accessories and services.
The typical case is LeTV.
On the one hand, Jia Yueting once claimed to be the first mobile phone manufacturer in the world to publish the BOM (bill of materials) and sell it at the mass production cost price. At the same time, he proposed a slogan that does not require making money through hardware or even hardware.
On the other hand, Leighton Mobile's president, Feng Xing, said in an interview that his mobile phone business does not make money. "Traditional mobile phone manufacturers make pure hardware to make money. Hardware does not make money is to lose money. Letv mobile is an Internet company. We provide users not hardware but a mobile Internet system. We not only sell hardware, but also start serving and operating users. We charge a reasonable fee for content applications and services, and form a closed-loop ecological business support, so there is no theory of how much it costs to pay for mobile phones."
Let's not talk about the above statement a bit moisture, but LeTV did indeed receive a lot of content service fees - super cell phone from 1499 yuan, but need to pay 190 yuan after the offset conversion full screen movie membership fee; Super TV , music as the box, empathy.
3. Make money and lose money in order to stand to make money.
The typical case is the logic between red rice and millet Note.
With the help of the Red Rice, Xiaomi successfully cut into the Thousand Yuan Machine Market by the role of the hardware “Run for Fever†running Saburo, and greatly expanded his user base. Since then, the millet Note starting at 2,299 yuan has been released, and its top version has reached 2,999 yuan. As a domestic mobile phone brand, this pricing will allow it to directly face competition from international giants such as Apple and Samsung. However, Xiaomi Note's sales are also remarkable based on the size of its users and the huge demand for replacement.
In a similar case, there was Huawei. After gaining a foothold in low-end and mid-range products, its mid- to high-end models represented by Mate7 also successfully helped Huawei to get rid of the price war and the low brand image and gained consumer recognition.
Can overseas companies make money by relying on hardware?
When the millet bracelet swept the domestic market at a price of 79 yuan, the smart bracelet with a base price of 99 dollars was still the mainstream in North America. Whether it is Apple, Samsung, or start-up companies such as Fitbit and Nest, it seems that most of them can make huge profits from the hardware itself. Some of them, like the ones mentioned in the opening paragraph, are even more ridiculous. In fact, I believe that this situation needs to be viewed in two situations:
1. Brand positioning and premium ability make consumers willing to save money.
Whether it is Huawei's Xiao Meizu or many small and medium-sized smart hardware manufacturers, from the point of view of manufacturing process, "Chinese goods" is not inferior to Apple's Samsung, and even some products have a better user experience. However, the accumulation of brands does not happen overnight. It is still difficult for domestic consumers to pay for the brand's own value. Apple and Samsung have joined forces in the global market to capture more than 90% of the profits of the entire industry. The brand's role should not be underestimated.
2. The implicit cost is much higher than the BOM cost.
What BOM can express is only the basic material cost. R&D, logistics and marketing expenses are also the big expenses that a product can't ignore.
According to VR-Zone's statistics, in 2014, Intel's investment in scientific research was as high as 11.537 billion U.S. dollars (approximately 7.16 billion yuan), ranking first in the technology industry, followed by Qualcomm and Samsung, which also reached 5.501 billion U.S. dollars. And 29.65 billion U.S. dollars. In terms of marketing, in 2013 alone, the Samsung family spent 10 billion US dollars.
In fact, simply calculating the material cost cannot obtain accurate product profit information. The higher R&D, marketing, and even human resource costs of overseas manufacturers will have an impact on the final profit.
Are domestic manufacturers really selling hardware at a loss? Perhaps this is not the case; overseas companies can make a profit by relying on hardware? Perhaps you only saw one side of the problem. However, in my opinion, one conclusion is clear: most consumers are willing to pay higher prices for high-quality products. The cost structure of a certain product that we go to skin is more to understand the information in order to develop better products. In fact, whether it is the former or the latter, the hardest thing is not the enterprises on the surface, but the foundries at the bottom of the manufacturing industry. For China's manufacturing industry, they account for a large proportion.
By the way, the Beats SoloHD, which costs less than US$18 in total, costs about 1,400 yuan in China.
In the field of consumer electronics, the discussions on costs and profits have never stopped, and the rhythm of domestic and foreign markets does not seem the same. Domestic hardware manufacturers shouted at the same time every day that they “lose money and earn money†while overseas hardware manufacturers Earn huge profits from the hardware itself, but the truth behind it may not be that simple. This is actually two propositions. Do not believe you see.
A few days ago, Zhou Hongqi led the newly-arranged cool giants and Xiaomi to wage a price war. The F12GB version of the Great God, with a material cost of 544.58 yuan, was reduced to 499 yuan and directed at the same price of red rice 2A. On the other hand, everyone is crying out for a loss at a loss. As the saying goes, there is no sale, and no real business can be done. Among these tricks, there are three situations to consider:
1. You think he is selling at a loss, but it is not.
The typical case is Xiaomi.
When Xiaomi released its first mobile phone product in 2011, its retail price of RMB 1999 was considered by many to be below cost at the time. According to estimates from supply chain stakeholders, the main material cost of this product using the Qualcomm dual-core processor, Sharp's 4-inch display, and the latter’s 8-megapixel camera can easily exceed 200 US dollars (at the exchange rate price at that time, approximately Together with 1300 RMB, plus R&D, logistics, and marketing costs, the profit margin left for Xiaomi is insignificant.
At the same time, from the launch to the sale of a period of up to six months, the appointment purchase mode of suspected hunger and thirst marketing, is also considered to be due to cost and capacity issues caused by frustration.
However, Lei Jun also acknowledged in an interview afterwards that although many components are inflexible and rigid costs, Xiaomi, who mainly takes online shopping channels, can significantly reduce elastic expenses such as marketing. “We should not lose money.â€
2. You think his hardware is losing money, but in fact he earns more in accessories and services.
The typical case is LeTV.
On the one hand, Jia Yueting once claimed to be the first mobile phone manufacturer in the world to publish the BOM (bill of materials) and sell it at the mass production cost price. At the same time, he proposed a slogan that does not require making money through hardware or even hardware.
On the other hand, Leighton Mobile's president, Feng Xing, said in an interview that his mobile phone business does not make money. "Traditional mobile phone manufacturers make pure hardware to make money. Hardware does not make money is to lose money. Letv mobile is an Internet company. We provide users not hardware but a mobile Internet system. We not only sell hardware, but also start serving and operating users. We charge a reasonable fee for content applications and services, and form a closed-loop ecological business support, so there is no theory of how much it costs to pay for mobile phones."
Let's not talk about the above statement a bit moisture, but LeTV did indeed receive a lot of content service fees - super cell phone from 1499 yuan, but need to pay 190 yuan after the offset conversion full screen movie membership fee; Super TV , music as the box, empathy.
3. Make money and lose money in order to stand to make money.
The typical case is the logic between red rice and millet Note.
With the help of the Red Rice, Xiaomi successfully cut into the Thousand Yuan Machine Market by the role of the hardware “Run for Fever†running Saburo, and greatly expanded his user base. Since then, the millet Note starting at 2,299 yuan has been released, and its top version has reached 2,999 yuan. As a domestic mobile phone brand, this pricing will allow it to directly face competition from international giants such as Apple and Samsung. However, Xiaomi Note's sales are also remarkable based on the size of its users and the huge demand for replacement.
In a similar case, there was Huawei. After gaining a foothold in low-end and mid-range products, its mid- to high-end models represented by Mate7 also successfully helped Huawei to get rid of the price war and the low brand image and gained consumer recognition.
Can overseas companies make money by relying on hardware?
When the millet bracelet swept the domestic market at a price of 79 yuan, the smart bracelet with a base price of 99 dollars was still the mainstream in North America. Whether it is Apple, Samsung, or start-up companies such as Fitbit and Nest, it seems that most of them can make huge profits from the hardware itself. Some of them, like the ones mentioned in the opening paragraph, are even more ridiculous. In fact, I believe that this situation needs to be viewed in two situations:
1. Brand positioning and premium ability make consumers willing to save money.
Whether it is Huawei's Xiao Meizu or many small and medium-sized smart hardware manufacturers, from the point of view of manufacturing process, "Chinese goods" is not inferior to Apple's Samsung, and even some products have a better user experience. However, the accumulation of brands does not happen overnight. It is still difficult for domestic consumers to pay for the brand's own value. Apple and Samsung have joined forces in the global market to capture more than 90% of the profits of the entire industry. The brand's role should not be underestimated.
2. The implicit cost is much higher than the BOM cost.
What BOM can express is only the basic material cost. R&D, logistics and marketing expenses are also the big expenses that a product can't ignore.
According to VR-Zone's statistics, in 2014, Intel's investment in scientific research was as high as 11.537 billion U.S. dollars (approximately 7.16 billion yuan), ranking first in the technology industry, followed by Qualcomm and Samsung, which also reached 5.501 billion U.S. dollars. And 29.65 billion U.S. dollars. In terms of marketing, in 2013 alone, the Samsung family spent 10 billion US dollars.
In fact, simply calculating the material cost cannot obtain accurate product profit information. The higher R&D, marketing, and even human resource costs of overseas manufacturers will have an impact on the final profit.
Are domestic manufacturers really selling hardware at a loss? Perhaps this is not the case; overseas companies can make a profit by relying on hardware? Perhaps you only saw one side of the problem. However, in my opinion, one conclusion is clear: most consumers are willing to pay higher prices for high-quality products. The cost structure of a certain product that we go to skin is more to understand the information in order to develop better products. In fact, whether it is the former or the latter, the hardest thing is not the enterprises on the surface, but the foundries at the bottom of the manufacturing industry. For China's manufacturing industry, they account for a large proportion.
By the way, the Beats SoloHD, which costs less than US$18 in total, costs about 1,400 yuan in China.
ultraviolet lamp has 254nm wavelength,can kill all sorts virus incluing coronaviros at 99.99% rate. The uv light doesn't generate ozone,which smelly and unhealthy to people.
uv germicidal lamp, ultraviolet lamp, uv disinfection lamp, uv light, uv tube
Shenzhen Zhenyang Century Technology Ltd. , https://www.growlightzy.com