Working for the Apple dollar - Updated
I wrote a post about the UK pricing of Leopard the other day, complaining that the price of £85 was way above the $129 being charged in the US. Since writing that, I’ve read in a number of places the argument along the lines of “the £85 includes VAT (sales tax) but the $129 doesn’t, so when you factor that in, it’s the same price”.
On the face of it, this seems like a fair argument but the numbers don’t really work out. At today’s exchange rate, $129 is £62.87. VAT (sales tax) runs at 17.5% in the UK, which is £11, making a total of £73.87. So, £11.13 cheaper than the £85 RRP, which is an extra 15%. OK, so it’s only £11 but why does it have to be even £1 more expensive?
Of course, this is all probably just sour grapes because I’ve had to spend the money I was hoping to spend on Leopard on getting my bike fixed instead and I feel like I’m missing out!
Working for the Apple dollar
I’m a fan of Mac OS X and I love my iMac. When I was using a PC at home, my favourite app was iTunes - by far the better media player for that platform. I like the look of my iMac; I like the ease with which I can do things with OS X; I like the look of the 300+ refinements and new features that are coming in Leopard (finally announced for 26 October).
What I don’t like is Apple’s pricing.
Don’t get me wrong; I think $129 is a good price - especially when you consider that this gets you everything, including the 64-bit version (Leopard Ultimate, if you will), unlike the Windows experience where if you want the 64-bit version you basically have to mortgage the children. $129 is a good price and I’d be happy to pay it.
If I want Leopard, though, I’m going to have to pay more like $172 because here in the UK the price is going to be £85. At today’s exchange rate, I should be able to buy it for around £63 but because of the way Apple price their goods I can’t. And this is what I can’t understand; it’s the same product - probably the supposed “regionalisation” of the UK edition could be achieved by changing a couple of system preferences - so why is it a third more for us in the UK? It’s a global product, so why isn’t it a global price?
Well, you might say that we’re talking about a physical product here, which needs to be manufactured and shipped out to the various different markets. You may have a point there - but I work for a company that ships products all over the world and the price in our local market is the same price we charge for every market in the world. If it sells for £4.95 in the UK, it will sell for the dollar equivalent of £4.95 in the US. If we, as a small company, can manage it then why can’t Apple? And we don’t have to be talking about a physical product in this case; this is software. It could be made available for download - in these days of broadband connections, it’s certainly feasible. Linux distros do it all the time, so why not Apple?
But Apple don’t just alter the price when it comes to physical products, they do the same with iTunes. US downloads are $0.99, which equates to £0.48. UK downloads are £0.79, which equates to $1.60 - a US iTunes user gets three tracks for less than the price of my two. And with iTunes, there is no physical product. I can understand that they have separate stores for different countries because of the way that the content they offer is licensed, but why different prices?
Of course, Apple are not alone in this practice but - because of the current frenzy about Leopard - they are probably the most high profile example. If we’re all living in a global village, shouldn’t we all be able to shop at the same global price?
Wolfs Stuff
Wolfs Helpers
