cost Xseries vs Tseries...a case of price discrimination??

As far as "very/ultra portables" such as the X61, (im not talking macbook air or x300 that have SSD and LED displays), the price is almost double a comparably spec'd Tseries.

To the lay person (me), it seems that all the components are relatively the same. Ie, they all have same processor, same case, same chipset. The only difference is that the keyboard is shrunked, screen is shrunken. This seems like it should only reduce, not increase cost.

The only true "miniturization" I can think of is the actual MB. And since everything is the same, I question whether how much more sophisticated this shrinking could possibly cost. I cant imagine it being 50-100% of the cost of an otherwise same Tseries.

Is there anyone knowledgeable about this??? It seems like manufacturers like intel/nvidia have already put down the initial capital expenditure on shrinking the processor and other components and that price should be constant across all model lines.

Are OEMS systematically colluding on price discrimination in the ultra-portable market??? Is there anyone with this kind of expertise to know how much more it costs to build an X61 vs T61???

 

As with all portable electronics, anything smaller is always harder to achieve, and because of this, it is always more expensive. We may think they're the same components, but fitting them into a smaller form and still as reliable/usable is not as easy as we think.

 

1. Get your terms right. Price Discrimination != Price Fixing.
2. No.

 

1) my terminology is correct. "colluding on price discrimination". Collusion is "price fixing" as you put it. Price discrimination is charging excess premium on cost trivial upgrades just b/c you can charge rich people more. The first is illegal, the second is not. both can happen simultaneously.

For example, MS is accused of monopolizing OS market "price fixing". But stripping windows ultimate down to basic and selling ultimate for more is price discrimination. They can occur simultaneously.

I say colluding b/c all OEMS are doing the same. So that suggests that either there is collusion, or it is truly more expensive to manufacturer.

 

Don't forget that the ultraportable segment is much more niche than the mainstream market. Therefore even if the cost of R&D, components, manufacturing... are the same, divide that amount by fewer buyers and the unit cost will be higher.

And marketing probably has a hand in the price decision as well.
Ultraportable = highend = expensive!

 

yes! that is exactly what i mean...is this basically the same as MS stripping down Corporate versions of windows and selling basic to consumers.

 

It's just a case of charging what the market will bear. Why make $700 when you can make $1700?

The Microsoft thing you're referring to is called "catering to the market". Offering different versions to suit the different wants/needs and budgets of the consumers.

 

sure, i think we are pretty much in agreement lithus. Don't let semantics distract the main point. Price discrimination is just an academic term that sums up what we've been saying. Its not meant to be pejorative. I bought MS Office Ultimate for $60 from my university, which was a good thing for me in that particular case.

We can call it whatever we want. My question was: is there any major technical innovation between T61 and X61 that is reflected in the cost of production?

 

Miniaturization. Making all the parts fit without burning the f-up.

 

yeah...that was my question. It seems to me that most of the miniaturization has already been done courtesy of Intel.

I was wondering if there was anyone with more of a computer/electrical engineering background that could offer a more sophisticated explanation.

 

Uhh, you mean like someone with a Computer Engineering degree from one of the nation's top engineering universities?

Intel makes a CPU, slaps a TDP on it. It's up to the ODM to make sure their laptop has the proper cooling solution for the said TDP, not Intel.

 

yeah...thats what i mean.

 

You'd be surprised how little those degrees have to do with the stuff that's discussed on these forums.

 

The laptop components you mentioned are part of the variable cost. You should look at the fixed cost.

To release a new laptop, the entire process requires designing the blueprint, prototyping, testing, making the final motherboard, molds for chassis, assembly line configuration, training for workers, design of manuals & shipping box, support related activities, marketing activities, sales activities, etc. Basiclly, tons of work to release just one line of laptop.

The high volume of T61 gives it the advantage of economy of scale, which is lower fixed cost per unit. X61 has a higher fixed cost per unit due to lower volume.

The ultra-portable X61 laptops were in a niche market compare to the popular T61. As ultra-portables becoming more mainstream, their fixed cost per unit goes down as volume goes up.

There is a way to lower the price on ultra-portables quickly. That is if all consumers suddenly decide to buy the ultra-portables instead of the big and clunky 15" 6 pounders, then the situation will be reversed. History tells us that it takes time for the market to change from one state to the next, so it won't happen overnight. But the trend is on your side. Laptops are getting smaller and cheaper all the time.

 

They charge what the market will bear, plain and simple. I'd agree, there is a price premium. They'll cover their costs and charge what the market will bear for the device, and the remainder is profit.

I'd agree that there are probably tons of common components and the costs are probably not that much different, but as other posters have indicated, there is a smaller market for the ultraportables and folks are willing to pay more for these devices to get that "feature".