I'd be pretty surprised if Nokia's marketing team haven't already some some price sensitivity analysis (maybe based on past promotions or variations in pricing across carriers or territories) to determine the expected change in revenue from this line. I would guess that you're right, and this level of price change as presented to the end consumer isn't going to drive sales to any meaningful degree. It's possible though that the promotional effect will have a bigger impact (i.e. some percentage people who haven't heard of or noticed the device before will purchase based on other factors).
Either this, OR some marketing director somewhere needs to be seen to be doing something.
It's not cutting price in half.
Non-subsidized price was 400 USD. Now it's 350 USD.
Why would you ever mention subsidized price? It depends on carrier and contract details.
Maybe they would have sold more if it were available on more than one carrier. My service with Verizon is too good for me to switch carriers over a phone.
10 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 33.6 ms ] threadEither this, OR some marketing director somewhere needs to be seen to be doing something.
Citation needed.
AFAIK, the price-per-unit AT&T is paying to Nokia is a trade secret.
With a 2 year contract. So not free at all, in the same way that the Lumina isn't $50