Seeking Alpha

Paulo Santos  

View Paulo Santos' Comments BY TICKER:
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    I know the difference between a premium and a deductible, but we're talking about a simple "rather cheap" electronic device here. The $99 premium all by itself is already wildly excessive and the deductible is needed to see if the expected value of that insurance makes sense.

    If you want to do a specific case, first you need to assign a probability of that scenario happening. That will give you the expected value, which you then need to compare with the insurance premium + deductible.

    Since we're not talking about a large ticket item, you don't need to go further than that because theoretically you should have the ability to pay both alternatives (the same wouldn't apply to auto insurance or home insurance, where part of the value has to do with your ability to pay if you get unlucky).

    Since you're always talking about ignorance and what not while having no idea who you're talking to and what I know or don't know, I'll leave this debate here because of your lack of manners.
    Aug 16, 2015. 12:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Vulpine, the gov representatives never presented it as such. Give as a source to prove your claim, as there is none (except conjecture by media outlets).
    Aug 16, 2015. 11:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Well, I was now quoted 20 bucks to repair the unrepairable damage. We will see how that goes.

    As for the rest, you didn't address the problem: the apparently wildly inflated margins on that "insurance" Apple seems to be selling (and you proposing).

    I imagine you buying a car for $50000 and then paying $10000 in insurance for it over the next 2 years. Nice price!
    Aug 16, 2015. 11:53 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Again, read more about the problem, pk.

    The stagefright vulnerability relies on a buffer overrun technique. However, more than 90% of android devices already apply address space layout randomization (ASLR), which negates that type of attack due to the attacker not being able to know where the buffer is, in memory.
    Aug 16, 2015. 10:15 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Ratty, even before the fix like 90% of the phones weren't vulnerable.
    Aug 16, 2015. 10:14 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    pk, she was electrocuted and died out of charging her official iPhone with, as far as we know, an official charger. And that happened AFTER Apple decided to penalize third party chargers and cables which didn't pay the tax, not before.
    Aug 16, 2015. 10:14 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    $178-$257, if the $79 fee is actually charged per incident, though that's for accidents and not for the device crapping out due to bad quality.

    Yes, your use does seem extreme for a phone that's not water proof. Maybe with the 7 Apple will water-proof them (Samsung did, but then quit again with the S6, hence me buying the S5 among other reasons).

    As for Apple foregoing the charge -- you can't rely on Apple arbitrarily favoring you.
    Aug 16, 2015. 10:13 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    pk de cville, if you read more about that Stagefright problem, you'll actually find out that 90% or more of the devices were never vulnerable to it to begin with ...
    Aug 16, 2015. 10:10 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Ratty:
    * It wouldn't make much sense to pay $79 "if the screen breaks" but nothing if you replaced the whole device. Anyway, I believe you since Apply has these types of idiosyncratic things about it.

    Anyway, $79 if nearly what it costs to replace the screen even if you have no insurance (85 EUR here in a regular place, probably well below that in a cheap shop since you can buy the necessary parts for under 40 EUR).

    Also, 3 issues with a 2-year-old device is really outside of what I would call "quality". Something is wrong with these things.
    Aug 16, 2015. 09:03 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    lugoltd, you'll notice that I had already highlighted that error ($178 instead of $169) - these comments are made in haste or I would never be able to answer so many comments from others. Hence typos, things not so perfectly worded or indeed, that kind of small mistake are all possible.
    Aug 16, 2015. 07:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Btw, the original report has the sister claiming original iPhone (which isn't in doubt) and original charger.

    http://bit.ly/1J91ATr

    Plus it's not like people getting more chargers is the most likely scenario. Some people do, most people don't.
    Aug 16, 2015. 07:09 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Brad, if Apple knew for sure that it was a third party charger, the wording would be completely different. That statement, by being written that way, means that:
    * Apple was not sure or, worse still;
    * Apple KNEW it was the original charger.

    Why? Because Apple makes it seem that it was a third party adapter without actually stating it, but doesn't directly say it WAS a third party adapter. Read the thing again and you'll understand.

    ----------

    If it was a certainty that it was a third party adapter, it would be worded straight as being so. "Third party charger involved in the incident, some third party etc, etc, we recommend, etc, etc".
    Aug 16, 2015. 06:56 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Ratty, it's not me who should do more research before mouthing off, it is you and Brad, which need to actually know a bit more and do a bit more research before mouthing off.

    That insurance thing, structured like that, is basically the same as buying extended insurance at Best Buy -- something most buyers know they should do. Why? Because it's a ripoff. But surely, Best Buy and Apple really REALLY want you to buy it.
    Aug 16, 2015. 06:53 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    Brad, you said it costs $99, plus $79 for the replacement. You are right, it's not $169, it's $178. My bad.

    Most insurance policies don't run at a large underwriting profit, I think you might not understand how insurance actually works. An insurance policy running at a very large underwriting profit (like that Apple thing will run) is basically a ripoff.

    The phones would have to die at a massive rate to make sense to buy that stuff.
    Aug 16, 2015. 06:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: There Won't Be An iPhone 6s Bump [View article]
    So you think iPhones break in such numbers that it makes sense to pay $169 to insure a $649-$949 device for 2 years, or would you recommend that just to people prone to break their devices?
    Aug 16, 2015. 12:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
More on AAPL by Paulo Santos
COMMENTS STATS
26,452 Comments
39,390 Likes