We first heard reports of an upcoming Apple hardware subscription back in
March of last year, with two subsequent reports – the most recent one yesterday – stating that it’s been delayed, but the company still plans to launch it.

The program would differ from an installment program in that the monthly
charge wouldn’t be the price of the device split across 12 or 24 months. Rather, it would be a yet-to-be-determined monthly fee that depends on
which device the user chooses.

An Apple hardware subscription is almost certainly a smart move for the Cupertino company. Monthly recurring income is the holy grail, and the
reason Apple got into services in the first place. Converting hardware
revenue from lump sums on an unpredictable schedule to fixed monthly
payments – while also encouraging more frequent upgrades – is clearly a win for the company.

But what about customers?



https://9to5mac.com/2023/02/13/apple-hardware-subscription/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 10:57, badgolferman wrote:

We first heard reports of an upcoming Apple hardware subscription back in March of last year, with two subsequent reports – the most recent one yesterday – stating that it’s been delayed, but the company still plans to
launch it.

The program would differ from an installment program in that the monthly charge wouldn’t be the price of the device split across 12 or 24 months. Rather, it would be a yet-to-be-determined monthly fee that depends on
which device the user chooses.

An Apple hardware subscription is almost certainly a smart move for the Cupertino company. Monthly recurring income is the holy grail, and the
reason Apple got into services in the first place. Converting hardware revenue from lump sums on an unpredictable schedule to fixed monthly
payments – while also encouraging more frequent upgrades – is clearly a win
for the company.

Services amounts to $20.8B / quarter (as of last Q1) or 17% of sales
overall.

On boarding of a "service" bit of hardware would not be at a different
pace or cycle than whole item sales. So would not really affect
cashflow variance month to month, quarter to quarter. [1]

The article points out that such a service is ripe opportunity to sell
other services as a bundle. Caveat Emptor.

IAC, Apple keeps massive cash reserves (which activist shareholders
consider "locked up value" - but good managers consider strategic
reserve). So tighter cashflow management is not an especial concern.

But what about customers?

If this allows more people to buy Apple products, then that is the smart
move for Apple and could be a good move for customers.

Further it probably implies a non-stop warranty for the duration of the contract.

A side benefit to customers could be a large inventory of "certified
pre-owned" products that are only 1, 2 or 3 years old at interesting
prices and warranties. Really depends on the "buy out" provision in the contract.

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible.
and keep them longer than most people.

OTOH, a lot of people struggle to make ends meet and end up in the rent
cycle on many things. Regrettably this piles up and leaves scant room
to save money for big purchases.

[1] An accountant might find this reduces recognized sales: when you
sell something for $1000, the revenue is booked now and WIP assets are
reduced; when you lease or rent something as a service, you book the
sale month to month. So you've committed inventory to assets and have
to work it off over a period of time per the contract. That said, I'm
not a bean counter and Apple surely have many.

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne <[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible.
and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

--
Jim S

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 13:07, Jim S wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne <[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible.
and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Generally agree, but in the end you have to look at the full offer and
do the numbers. The "buyout" if exercised is usually what either makes
it a good decision (if not optimal). More likely people just jump from
one 2 year "lease" into another - this is sure to be bad for the
customer's finances in the long term just to have the latest thing.

OTOH if you do such in a "financials" frame of mind then you could
include the opportunity cost of not placing that cash in (a) higher
return investment(s) which could make "renting" look like the sound
financial choice. (Such consideration would be for << 1% of Apple
customers).

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/13/2023 10:57 AM, badgolferman wrote:

We first heard reports of an upcoming Apple hardware subscription back in March of last year, with two subsequent reports – the most recent one yesterday – stating that it’s been delayed, but the company still plans to
launch it.

The program would differ from an installment program in that the monthly charge wouldn’t be the price of the device split across 12 or 24 months. Rather, it would be a yet-to-be-determined monthly fee that depends on
which device the user chooses.

An Apple hardware subscription is almost certainly a smart move for the Cupertino company. Monthly recurring income is the holy grail, and the
reason Apple got into services in the first place. Converting hardware revenue from lump sums on an unpredictable schedule to fixed monthly
payments – while also encouraging more frequent upgrades – is clearly a win
for the company.

But what about customers?

https://9to5mac.com/2023/02/13/apple-hardware-subscription/

BOHICA

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/13/2023 1:23 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

On 2023-02-13 13:07, Jim S wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible.
and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Generally agree, but in the end you have to look at the full offer and
do the numbers.  The "buyout" if exercised is usually what either makes
it a good decision (if not optimal).  More likely people just jump from
one 2 year "lease" into another - this is sure to be bad for the
customer's finances in the long term just to have the latest thing.

OTOH if you do such in a "financials" frame of mind then you could
include the opportunity cost of not placing that cash in (a) higher
return investment(s) which could make "renting" look like the sound
financial choice.  (Such consideration would be for << 1% of Apple customers).

Investment returns vary...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <news:tse139$27cu6$[email protected]>, News <[email protected]>
says...

OTOH if you do such in a "financials" frame of mind then you could
include the opportunity cost of not placing that cash in (a) higher
return investment(s) which could make "renting" look like the sound
financial choice.� (Such consideration would be for << 1% of Apple
customers).

Investment returns vary...

If we match a typical common consumer versus a corporate conglomerate (who knows how to run rental depreciation math) the consumer will always lose.
--
Jim S

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as
possible. and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Consumers aren't forced to subscribe.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as
possible. and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Consumers aren't forced to subscribe.

True. Why I dropped Photoshop. It's the only option they offer and I
don't use it enough to justify renting it when I'm not actually using it.


--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 13:55, News wrote:

On 2/13/2023 1:23 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

On 2023-02-13 13:07, Jim S wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible. >>>> and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Generally agree, but in the end you have to look at the full offer and
do the numbers.  The "buyout" if exercised is usually what either
makes it a good decision (if not optimal).  More likely people just
jump from one 2 year "lease" into another - this is sure to be bad for
the customer's finances in the long term just to have the latest thing.

OTOH if you do such in a "financials" frame of mind then you could
include the opportunity cost of not placing that cash in (a) higher
return investment(s) which could make "renting" look like the sound
financial choice.  (Such consideration would be for << 1% of Apple
customers).

Investment returns vary...

Not much over the long term.

So your retort would be "well you can't be sure what happens over a
given 2 year lease cycle"

and I'd reply, "quite right, but with a long series of them in sequence,
it would average out in the long term to your advantage."

(Plausibly - IAC, I doubt many (if any) will be making this decision
based on opportunity cost of not investing elsewhere...)

Easier to just buy the damned things and wring the f--- out of them over
7 - 10 years.

For someone who works on a lot of computer generated content, I could
see where this sort of deal could make eminent business sense.

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 17:29, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

On 2023-02-13 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as
possible. and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Consumers aren't forced to subscribe.

True. Why I dropped Photoshop. It's the only option they offer and I
don't use it enough to justify renting it when I'm not actually using
it.

Right. I stopped sending Adobe tons of cash long ago, and transitioned
to software with more reasonable prices and better ROI, like Serif's
Affinity products.

If Apple's hardware subscription turns out to be unpopular after a few
years, I would be the last person to be shocked by it ending. But part
of me thinks there are probably enough consumers of the "rent
everything" mentality to justify it. And Apple apparently sees a
significant sliver of the market for it. Time will tell.

"Rent everything" could be a feedback loop that takes more and more of consumers disposable income to the point where they can no longer make
payments on things bought on credit / nor save to do so.

To be sure, those doing the renting out are making both interest on the
capital as well profit in that interest charge.

Sole offset to it that I might see is that the model makes more money
for Apple in other ways (services and content) that the rental of the phones/pads/macs can be done at nominal retail divided by n periods.

(Or in the evil Apple universe, they raise the prices for those who pay
up front and pretend to divide by n periods w/o more charges for those
who "subscribe").

In Canada you can "finance" an Apple purchase via Paybright on the Apple
site with 0% APR. You pay the sales tax portion on close and then
1/12th every month.

This means that Apple are paying Paybright some charge out of the revenue.

I'd rather that "charge" be credited to me because I pay in full upfront.

So when I buy my next Mac (imminent) I'll take full advantage of
Paybright and invest the capital elsewhere. Pay the installments out of ordinary revenue.

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

On 2023-02-13 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as
possible. and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Consumers aren't forced to subscribe.

True. Why I dropped Photoshop. It's the only option they offer and I
don't use it enough to justify renting it when I'm not actually using
it.

Right. I stopped sending Adobe tons of cash long ago, and transitioned
to software with more reasonable prices and better ROI, like Serif's
Affinity products.

If Apple's hardware subscription turns out to be unpopular after a few
years, I would be the last person to be shocked by it ending. But part
of me thinks there are probably enough consumers of the "rent
everything" mentality to justify it. And Apple apparently sees a
significant sliver of the market for it. Time will tell.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-02-13 18:24, Sail Fisherman wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:06:05 -0500, Alan Browne <[email protected]> scrit:

So when I buy my next Mac (imminent) I'll take full advantage of
Paybright and invest the capital elsewhere.

Then why your long thread on the Windows ng about buying a Windows PC?

That's for a specific solution to a particular problem with some legacy
s/w. Though once I go that way I may move Raspberry Pi development to
the Windows platform too. In the end might just keep this iMac with
WinXP or 10 under Fusion.

The upcoming (i)Mac is to replace this iMac (2012). I've been waiting
for the next iMac after M1 - that is a M2 or M3 version. Or go with the
Mac Mini M2 higher spec and throw displays at it.

It's this upcoming Mx iMac that pushed the question about possibly
getting a Windows machine.

(I'm probably making things more complicated than need be - the overall
best solution is to find s/w for the new Mac that replaces the need for
the Windows machine outright. It's an old image viewer that I like for
rapidly going through very large sets of photos very quickly - I haven't
quite found the right thing on Mac so far - could even write my own in
Python I think - but that's probably 10x more work than I imagine).

--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:06:05 -0500, Alan Browne <[email protected]> scrit:

So when I buy my next Mac (imminent) I'll take full advantage of
Paybright and invest the capital elsewhere.

Then why your long thread on the Windows ng about buying a Windows PC?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 05:07:21 +1100, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne <[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as possible.
and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Depends on your circumstances. Works fine for car rental, house
rental and when you only need what you are renting for a limited time.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 10:06:05 +1100, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

On 2023-02-13 17:29, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

On 2023-02-13 16:15, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2023-02-13, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:X1uGL.857032$[email protected]>, Alan Browne
<[email protected]> says...

I personally purchase everything and avoid "rents" as much as
possible. and keep them longer than most people.

Renting a depreciating asset is never a good deal for the consumer.

Consumers aren't forced to subscribe.

True. Why I dropped Photoshop. It's the only option they offer and I
don't use it enough to justify renting it when I'm not actually using
it.

Right. I stopped sending Adobe tons of cash long ago, and transitioned
to software with more reasonable prices and better ROI, like Serif's
Affinity products.
If Apple's hardware subscription turns out to be unpopular after a few
years, I would be the last person to be shocked by it ending. But part
of me thinks there are probably enough consumers of the "rent
everything" mentality to justify it. And Apple apparently sees a
significant sliver of the market for it. Time will tell.

"Rent everything"

Not going to happen.

could be a feedback loop that takes more and more of consumers
disposable income to the point where they can no longer make payments on things bought on credit / nor save to do so.

To be sure, those doing the renting out are making both interest on the capital as well profit in that interest charge.

Sole offset to it that I might see is that the model makes more money
for Apple in other ways (services and content) that the rental of the phones/pads/macs can be done at nominal retail divided by n periods.

And with business operations, the cash flow advantages can
be significant, most obviously with car and plant leasing.

(Or in the evil Apple universe, they raise the prices for those who pay
up front and pretend to divide by n periods w/o more charges for those
who "subscribe").

In Canada you can "finance" an Apple purchase via Paybright on the Apple
site with 0% APR. You pay the sales tax portion on close and then
1/12th every month.

This means that Apple are paying Paybright some charge out of the
revenue.

I'd rather that "charge" be credited to me because I pay in full upfront.

So when I buy my next Mac (imminent) I'll take full advantage of
Paybright and invest the capital elsewhere. Pay the installments out of ordinary revenue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 06:52:39 +1100, Jim S <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <news:tse139$27cu6$[email protected]>, News <[email protected]> says...

OTOH if you do such in a "financials" frame of mind then you could
include the opportunity cost of not placing that cash in (a) higher
return investment(s) which could make "renting" look like the sound
financial choice. (Such consideration would be for << 1% of Apple
customers).

Investment returns vary...

If we match a typical common consumer versus a corporate conglomerate
(who
knows how to run rental depreciation math) the consumer will always lose.

Bullshit with car rental, house rental, hotel room rental, etc etc etc.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)