Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 13th Jan 2013 14:48 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 548615
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: OEMs did it to themselves
by lucas_maximus on Sun 13th Jan 2013 19:08
in reply to "RE[2]: OEMs did it to themselves"
RE[4]: OEMs did it to themselves
by moondevil on Sun 13th Jan 2013 21:40
in reply to "RE[3]: OEMs did it to themselves"
RE[3]: OEMs did it to themselves
by Lennie on Sun 13th Jan 2013 21:22
in reply to "RE[2]: OEMs did it to themselves"
RE[3]: OEMs did it to themselves
by Deviate_X on Sun 13th Jan 2013 21:29
in reply to "RE[2]: OEMs did it to themselves"
If the price of Windows went to zero, then the cost of the laptop would drop by around $60, the volume price of Windows Home Premium for large OEMs. However, the OEMs do not get to keep this $60 for long, in a competitive marketplace. The price of the laptop would quickly get driven down by $60, as PCs are commoditized and largely substitutable for one another.
The irony here is that the OEMs are also at fault for this race to the bottom. They have actually relied on the fact that Windows was dominant to sell their hardware.
Everyone common man/women knows about iMac, Mac Pro, but can you ask the same about Dell or HP. These companies are positioned themselves and designed their products so that the only differentiator is price.





Member since:
2011-05-19
That's not how economics works in a competitive marketplace.
The price of Windows is irrelevant to the OEM -- so long as Microsoft charges the same price to every OEM. Because of the antitrust settlements, all the large OEMs pay the same amount for Windows, as Microsoft is prohibited from offering any discounts except for volume discounts.
If the price of Windows went to zero, then the cost of the laptop would drop by around $60, the volume price of Windows Home Premium for large OEMs. However, the OEMs do not get to keep this $60 for long, in a competitive marketplace. The price of the laptop would quickly get driven down by $60, as PCs are commoditized and largely substitutable for one another.
The OEMs would then end up making the same profit on less revenues. They'll see a slight improvement to working capital, but it will be otherwise ineffectual at lifting them from the pitiful margins they currently earn. In fact, CTO manufacturers like Dell would actually see slightly reduced margins if the OS became free. Dell is famous for holding negative inventory, and thus they would lose the float on the price of the Windows license.
This competitive dynamic is precisely the one that has already played out in the Android phone market. The OS is free -- and of course, Google shares part of the search revenues with the OEMs. Yet the Android marketplace is a bloodbath for every OEM except Samsung.
--
Incidentally, the same goes for Intel as for Microsoft. The price of the chip is irrelevant, so long as Intel does not practice favoritism among the OEMs.
One day, business-school students will study the PC OEM business like they currently study the American airline industry -- as an example of a super-competitive marketplace in which practically nobody (*) makes money. We haven't really seen major bankruptcies yet -- but we will.
(*) There are always exceptions. Lenovo, say, or Southwest Airlines.