From a Wired magazine article published this week:
“But these early numbers indicate that Nokia’s flagship Windows Phones will likely cost the same as the phones from the more established manufacturers like Apple, Samsung and HTC”
“But why buy a 920? What is the lipstick on this that justifies [the price]? The case isn’t prettier. It doesn’t purr. I don’t see it. That’s why it won’t work,”
I don’t know were to start. Not is it only bad journalism, it’s also ignorant journalism. Wired suggests that the Lumia 920 shouldn’t be priced for what it is: a high-end, premium, and innovative smartphone, but as a cheap alternative to more “established” phones such as the Galaxy and One lineups. (Which in my opinion, just rip ideas off from Apple). Wired and their economics professor also haven’t bothered to look at a comparison chart, and see there’s enough lipstick in the 920 to beat “established” manufacturer’s offerings.
Pricing the Lumia 920 cheaper than its equals would create a value perception problem for Nokia. If the 920 is cheaper than the iPhone 5, for example, the consumer will assume it’s because the i5 is just a better smartphone, hence the premium in the price. Now, if the 920 costs around the same price, the customer knows she is getting something valuable, a cutting-edge piece of technology that is known to come at a certain price.
If Nokia goes out and gifts the 920; people won’t appreciate it! Nokia has done well in pricing the Lumia 920 for what it is, possibly the most complete and best smartphone all around in the market. It certainly looks good on paper, beating the i5 on almost every corner from the screen, to the battery life, and supplemental technologies such as NFC and wireless charging. We’ll know once we review this exciting piece of technology.