Lady sues Apple over IPhone price cut.

[Titi]

She wants $1 million in damages because the price of the IPhone came down after 2 months.

Apple has already offered an $100 store credit to anyone who bought it at the higher price. But she can't resell it for the "for the same profit as those who bought the cell phone following the price cut. "

http://news.aol.com/business/story/_...01235709990001

[Banrion]

I hate how these people make the news. In this country, you can file a suit for ANYTHING, whether or not it goes anywhere is an entirely different story. $1M is well beyong the realm of small claims court, so she would have to prove to the courts not only that she has suffered actual damages, but also she will have to cite a legal cause of action (ie she will have to prove that Apple either willfully or negilgently caused those damages) Also, in order for her to get $1M she will have to cite a statute that allows for punitive damages. It's not going to happen.

That's all without taking into consideration that Apple can in about a day put together a study showing that the resale value of an IPhone is diminished by more than the price difference as soon as it is used. Also, unless this woman is an authorized Apple dealer, she has no reasonable expectation to profit from the resale of the merchandise, and it is not Apple's liability to make her able to profit from it.

My prediction...This case will never see a court room. As soon as Apple is officially served, their attorneys will file for dismissal on the grounds that she has no cause of action, and it will be granted.

[CancelMyService]

I heard it was a class action suit for anyone who bought the iPhone when it first came out. Yes Apple is offering a rebate but the whole ordeal was pretty shitty on their part, they basically took all the early adopters and Mac addicts (aka their core fanbase) and kicked them in the nuts with this.

I'm sure this will never see the light of day inside a courtroom, but I can't blame someone for trying in this case.

[Kara]

I love this story. She's suing because she can't make as much money by selling it. Boo-hoo. Apple makes a product and sells it to make a profit, as do all companies. They couldn't give a rat's ass about how much you make selling it. They didn't sell it to you so that you could turn around and make a profit by selling it to someone else. They sold it to you because you were buying a product they manufactured. The intent of the sale is that you use the product.

This is especially true when it comes to a product like the iPhone that is sold for a price over the cost of manufacturing it (profit to the manufacturer). My company sells phones for far below cost, we lose money. The most basic entry-level phones available which is usually tossed around for free costs about $100. We make up that money during the time you are in service with us for 1 or 2 years (hence the contracts, we're protecting our investment in you). I've never seen an actual figure, but I've heard the iPhone only costs around $200 to produce. If a customer sells my free phone for $30 on ebay, they think they've pulled one over on me, when in fact, they are still selling the device for much less than its actual value. But they got it free, so they are none the wiser. The iPhone is going to be sold for more than its value, regardless of the retail price. The difference is that she is losing money that she put into the purchase. Well, tough. The fact that you can't make a profit off someone else's product doesn't mean jack shit to the manufacturer, as it shouldn't.

[DesignFox]

Frankly, I think people need to stop complaining about the iphone price-cut. Like Jobs said, "That's technology."

If you have to be the first on the block to have it, and it's worth spending $500 for the first time around, what makes it worth so much less to you 2 months later?

Not for nothing, but if you were willing to pay $500 for it, don't be mad at all the other smarter people who waited and paid $200 less. And don't be mad at Apple- that's business. It always has been and always will be.

And these price changes happen with just about EVERY phone. Trust me. It's just never a big deal because there is nothing else out there that everyone is getting a hard-on about.

[chops]

I'd heard about that one...and so had the guys at Applegeeks.

Someone seems a little greedy here...

[Irving Patrick Freleigh]

Oh pah-leeze. This is how it is with every new technology. The price starts out high and then comes down eventually.

For example, Sony recently cut the price for their Play Station 3. Does that mean everybody who bought a PS3 when it first came out can sue? Does that mean Sony is guilty of gouging the play station geeks who just HAD to have it on the release day?

[Broomjockey]

I think the main issue is that usually the price drop takes more than two months. Also, Sony's PS3 is having issues, and they cut the price to clear the current stock to bring out the version with a smaller hard drive. Unless Apple's doing something similar, a price cut that quick is still odd.

[Nephy]

What bugs me about the "Apple is so greedy!" people is that they didn't actually have to offer the $100 in store credit. They could have just said "Sucks to be you" like most other companies out there that reduce the price of their products.

It is however a little bit early for a price reduction. But then again, they can reduce or raise the price whenever they want. Not much we can do about it.

[allniter]

Tommy, played by Joe Pesci in the movie Casino, had the right idea for taking care of these types of people who cry out murder over a torn shirt.

Too bad we can't make it a crime to file negligent lawsuits. That would at least make people think twice before instigating them.

[marasbaras]

That's what she gets for being a sucker ... oops, I mean early adopter.