Another dent in the "Affordable Flagship" armor.
I recently criticized Microsoft for not releasing a new high end phone in such a long time and argued that the lack of a hero device may be partly to blame for slumping sales. Not saying it is the whole story, but while I acknowledged that MS gets most of their sales at the moment from lower end phones, the issue is not about where sales are. It is about generating hype. If people aren't excited about Windows phone they are more likely to pick up a bargain phone where there is hype; Android.
Many still hold on to (and even buy new) the Lumia 1020 for example. This phone was more truly a hero phone than any I've seen since maybe the original iPhone. Years on it still has arguably the best camera on something you can still call a phone. And it did generate hype and sales. Windows Phone grew the most in the time around that release. If they had a larger market share at the time it was released it may have been a catalyst for something great.
But, hype is only one side of the story. While looking at carrier web sites today another problem occurred to me. Price point matters more for subsidized phones than not. I imagine the story is the same elsewhere, but here is Canada you basically have 3 tiers of phones with slightly different names and price points across all Canadian carriers; Pay as you go (typically in the region of $100 or less phones off contract), budget smart phones (typically anywhere from $100-$500) and "true" smart phones (everything else).
Now, the Lumia 830 (the highest end phone sold) from my carrier fell into that second tier. Which meant I could get it free or close to free on a cheaper 2-year plan. Whereas the "true" smart phones get you stuck with the most expensive plans. And regardless of what the customer or Microsoft wants, it is the devices in this category that carriers want to sell. And, as many have noted, the average person doesn't buy products, they are sold them. With little to no options in the category with the money for the carriers, they are actually incentivized to sell you on Android or iOS instead.
Many still hold on to (and even buy new) the Lumia 1020 for example. This phone was more truly a hero phone than any I've seen since maybe the original iPhone. Years on it still has arguably the best camera on something you can still call a phone. And it did generate hype and sales. Windows Phone grew the most in the time around that release. If they had a larger market share at the time it was released it may have been a catalyst for something great.
But, hype is only one side of the story. While looking at carrier web sites today another problem occurred to me. Price point matters more for subsidized phones than not. I imagine the story is the same elsewhere, but here is Canada you basically have 3 tiers of phones with slightly different names and price points across all Canadian carriers; Pay as you go (typically in the region of $100 or less phones off contract), budget smart phones (typically anywhere from $100-$500) and "true" smart phones (everything else).
Now, the Lumia 830 (the highest end phone sold) from my carrier fell into that second tier. Which meant I could get it free or close to free on a cheaper 2-year plan. Whereas the "true" smart phones get you stuck with the most expensive plans. And regardless of what the customer or Microsoft wants, it is the devices in this category that carriers want to sell. And, as many have noted, the average person doesn't buy products, they are sold them. With little to no options in the category with the money for the carriers, they are actually incentivized to sell you on Android or iOS instead.
Comments
Post a Comment