Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC has announced that it will begin volume production of 16nm FinFET products in the second half of 2015, in late…

More...
AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD has missed earnings targets and is planning a substantial job cuts. The company reported quarterly earnings yesterday and the street is…

More...
Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

As expected, Google has finally released the eagerly awaited Nexus 6 phablet and its first 64-bit device, the Nexus 9 tablet.

More...
Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 03 October 2011 12:59

Amazon sells Kindle Fire at a small loss

Written by


Hope to make money on content
Amazon’s Kindle Fire is the all the rage these days and according to IHS, Amazon is losing money on each tablet it manages to shift for $199.

The bill of material cost for the Fire is estimated at $191, just $8 less than the price, which means Amazon has a rather tight margin. However, if you add manufacturing and other costs, each Fire tablet sets Amazon back about $209.

Amazon hopes to recoup the loss in the long run, selling content to Fire users. With its vast content library, the concept makes sense. Of course, the BOM cost is also subject to change. Component costs tend to drop over time and if Amazon manages to ship a lot of tablets, prices should be lower, too.

Of course, Apple boasts and equally impressive content vault and it could do the same with its iPad. It just chooses not to.
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments