Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Celerity

(52,487 posts)
52. the article
Fri Oct 10, 2025, 03:40 PM
Friday

https://archive.ph/J2XY

Jan. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Few products have been launched with such a blizzard of publicity as Apple Inc.'s iPhone.
To its many fans, Apple is more of a religious cult than a company. An iToaster that downloads music while toasting bread would probably get the same kind of worldwide attention. Don't let that fool you into thinking that it matters. The big competitors in the mobile-phone industry such as Nokia Oyj and Motorola Inc. won't be whispering nervously into their clamshells over a new threat to their business. The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant.

If column inches and airtime guaranteed commercial success, Apple would already have a global hit on its hands. For the past week, it has been impossible to open a newspaper or look at a Web site without reading something about the shiny new phone. Certainly, it looks like a nice piece of equipment. The iPhone combines Apple's iPod music and video player with a mobile phone as well as having wireless Internet access for e-mail. Instead of lugging around a phone for making calls, an MP3 player for listening to music, and a Blackberry for checking your e- mail, you can do all three on one device. Even better, you only need one charger. It will be released in the U.S. in June, with a rollout to the rest of the world later, and will cost $499 to $599, depending on how much storage space you want. How many might they sell? Ten million in 2008, according to Apple Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs.

Three Reasons

Not everyone is sold on the idea. ``The iPhone will not substantially alter the fundamental structure and challenges of the mobile industry,'' Charles Golvin, an analyst at Forrester Research Inc., said in a report this month. There are three reasons that Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market -- and why it is too early to start dumping your Nokia shares.

First, Apple is late to this party. The company didn't invent the personal computer or MP3 player, but it was among the pioneers of both products. Yet there is no shortage of phones out there. There are already big companies that dominate the space, all of whom will defend their turf. That means Apple will have to fight hard for every sale. Next, the mobile-phone industry depends on cooperation with the big networks. Phones -- the high-end ones in particular --are usually sold with a network contract. The provider subsidizes the handset in the U.K. and hopes to recoup its money with ridiculously expensive charges for calls and data. Yet Apple has never been good at working with other companies. If it knew how to do that, it would be Microsoft Corp.

snip

It won't come from the iPhone. Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won't make a long-term mark on the industry.

(Matthew Lynn is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)



Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Two reasons: 1) Staggered changing tariffs smeared the effect. 2) Massive uncertainty. . . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Friday #1
This is a very pro-Trump column. yardwork Friday #2
Looking thru a partisan lens it might be. Mosby Friday #4
I don't see any evidence of hysteria on the part of economists. yardwork Friday #8
This article is poorly written propaganda. Dawson Leery Friday #5
Matthew Lynn is a financial columnist and author. He writes for the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator in London. Celerity Friday #15
This message was self-deleted by its author Skittles Friday #40
JFC Skittles Friday #39
Read on! yardwork Friday #41
*SNORT* Skittles Friday #44
Way too early to celebrate being wrong. Savings KPN Friday #3
It's darker than cheerleading. yardwork Friday #12
Post removed Post removed Friday #14
Who is Lawrence? yardwork Friday #16
O'Donnell. Mosby Friday #19
Lawrence O'Donnell is not an economist. yardwork Friday #20
He has a degree in economics from Harvard. Mosby Friday #22
He has a bachelor's degree in economics. I have one too. Neither one of us is an economist. PeaceWave Friday #24
lol. I have an undergraduate degree in history but I am not a historian. yardwork Friday #26
'Liberation Day' in retrospect: 6 things that surprised investors Mosby Friday #13
The stock market isn't the economy for the average KPN Friday #49
I don't think FAFO sentiment is the same as "celebrating" Skittles Friday #45
With all due respect, this feels like Republican propaganda. By all accounts, tariffs are punishing U.S. farmers. PeaceWave Friday #6
WaPo is running a lot of Trump propaganda these days. yardwork Friday #9
because it is, see post 15 Celerity Friday #18
The rich can ride some of the effects out.................... Lovie777 Friday #7
So foreign manufacturers are lowering their prices? Bmoboy Friday #10
Bullshit edhopper Friday #11
We're still very early in the game. Wednesdays Friday #17
This is BS because he backed off a lot of tariffs, or lowered them drastically. OrlandoDem2 Friday #21
I am pretty sure this story is slanted in more than one way BootinUp Friday #23
This is an opinion piece written by a conservative writer who backed brexit and who gives TSF lots wiggs Friday #25
The US economy was so strong it withstood a huge major grifting operation by Trump. Irish_Dem Friday #27
This is the guy who predicted in a 2007 Bloomberg article that the iPhone would be a flop. Ocelot II Friday #28
the article Celerity Friday #52
Thanks! Ocelot II Friday #53
yw Celerity Friday #54
Supply chains and pricing has not fully adjusted yet. bucolic_frolic Friday #29
Post removed Post removed Friday #30
I didn't alert but this column really is nothing but right wing talking points. yardwork Friday #34
They haven't been fully implemented, and temporarily companies have been lostincalifornia Friday #31
The Gatekeepers have arrived. Kingofalldems Friday #32
Krugman had a post about this today Krazy_Kat Friday #33
It's a tired canard to suggest that "companies are absorbing costs." PeaceWave Friday #37
He makes some good points. Mosby Friday #38
Let's See What Shareholders Say DallasNE Friday #56
This column is what is sometimes referred to as an "absolute pant load". BannonsLiver Friday #35
The comments from WaPo readers concur. yardwork Friday #36
Stagflation DallasNE Friday #42
Why are we allowing right wing bullshit like this to be posted here? I thought it was against the rules. Wiz Imp Friday #43
Same here. Kingofalldems Friday #46
Wrong about WHICH tariffs? DFW Friday #47
DOW -750 NASDAQ -695 S&P -155 Emile Friday #48
For those who thought that the author of this article was full of shit, but weren't sure, this should clinch it. Wiz Imp Friday #50
WAPO OP/ED page is a hard R now obamanut2012 Friday #51
Trump DELAYED most of the tariffs, so there is no 6months in blm Friday #55
Thank you for the having the courage to post this - at the risk of being flamed, I'm not surprised at all by this. Midwestern Democrat Friday #57
You could read Krugman and learn a few things. BootinUp Friday #59
There seems to be an agenda here Keepthesoulalive Friday #58
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Economists were wrong abo...»Reply #52