
Motorola Makes The Moto G Official, A “Premium” Phone Starting At $179 Unlocked - ajjai
http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/13/motorola-makes-the-moto-g-official-a-premium-phone-at-a-price-more-can-afford/
======
cs702
This phone looks like a game changer to me, because it has the specs of a
_high-end_ smartphone but is priced like a crappy _low-end_ one.

The cost of an unlocked unit is $300 to $600 LESS than that of other devices
with comparable specs, so mobile carriers should be able to offer the Moto G
to the masses for _hundreds of dollars less_ than any iPhone or high-end
Android device by Samsung, LG, etc.

Mobile carriers could offer the Moto G profitably at a _negative price_ \--
for example, zero money upfront plus an instant $300 coupon rebate if one
commits to a two-year plan. Or they could offer it with much cheaper monthly
bills than economically possible with other comparable phones -- for example,
25% off one's monthly bill if one commits to a two-year plan.

\--

Edits: added context and examples.

~~~
TylerE
If this is high-end what is the HTC One I bought 6 months ago?

~~~
differentView
Especially considering Moto G won't be out until 2014, about 10 months after
HTC One's release.

------
Derbasti
This is terriffic news! Smartphones are things that drop, that break, that
fall into water and that get lost. Shelling out $500 for something this...
ephemeral... always seemed absurd to me.

Or maybe I am just clumsy.

~~~
Raphael
Calculate the cost. If you destroy a phone on average once per year, then $500
equates to $1.37 per day.

~~~
esolyt
Except human psychology doesn't work that way. You will have lost something
that has a value of approximately $500. It will feel like someone just stole
$500 from you.

------
rtpg
I've never understood why the good cell phones (unlocked) always cost
something like 500, 600 euros. Glad to see someone trying to push the prices
down, especially if it's not Samsung or Apple, to help keep some variety in
presence.

Seeing Motorola as "a Google company" is really weird to
me.([https://www.moto-g.com/](https://www.moto-g.com/) ), for some reason it
makes me feel like Google is going to become the next GE or something.

~~~
ek
Regarding the latter part of your comment, it's actually interesting to
compare GE to Google for several reasons.

When GE was founded, it was a new kind of company for the time, and in the
same way, Google is a new kind of company for our time, together with
companies like Amazon -- their business model is built around leveraging the
Internet, in the same way that GE was built around leveraging America's
burgeoning industry.

Furthermore, Google manages to bring in a third of the revenue of GE with a
sixth of the employees, and their net incomes are remarkably close. Think
about how many products and services Google already offers, and how many more
we already know are in the works. Because it's software, you don't as readily
perceive these facets of this admittedly very large organization as you might
with a company like GE, whose primary business is to produce a diverse array
of physical objects.

~~~
Artistry121
Really good point. If you have a blog you should write more about this. Very
interesting.

------
Cowen
This sounds like a great offering for an unlocked smartphone. I'm personally
in the market for a cheap, unlocked smartphone, and if this is as good as the
reviews sound, I'll probably buy one straight away.

But I think the real test for this phone's market share will be the subsidized
price that carriers offer it at, which would have to be substantially lower
than current subsidized flagship smartphones. I don't think most smartphone
consumers value unlocked phones enough that they would pay a similar amount
for one as they would pay for a subsidized iPhone 5S. A subsidized 5C would
still be even cheaper than the unlocked Moto G.

A subsidized $50 Moto G vs. a subsidized $100 iPhone 5C though? I could
definitely see that taking off.

~~~
redidas
With such a low unlocked price, I wouldn't be surprised if this hits a
subsidized price of $0.

~~~
homersapien
At $0 subsidized you would be getting ripped off. You'd be better off buying a
subsidized iPhone, selling it, then buying the G at full price (plus pocketing
a bunch of $$ at the same time).

~~~
hackula1
I would bet cash flow is more important to which phone someone buys than
absolute value.

~~~
tesseractive
Sure, but there's so much differential that it would make sense to buy a 5S on
a contract using a payday loan, put it on eBay, and then use the proceeds to
pay off the expensive loan, buy the Moto G, and go buy a bunch of groceries
for your family with the difference.

The Moto G would be a straight-up ripoff on a traditional contract. I expect
it to be a hit in the prepaid market, however.

------
pacofvf
It's an excellent price for Latin America, I don't know other parts of the
world, at $200 USD it will kill other smartphone vendors (Samsung and other
Android mostly [http://qz.com/145704/slides-mobile-is-eating-the-
world/](http://qz.com/145704/slides-mobile-is-eating-the-world/)). Also note
that latam region already have the same amount of smartphone sales than Europe
or US/Canada.

------
pandeiro
The $179 price is total bullshit. In Brazil, where the phone was actually
launched (and being produced), the price is US$279 (8GB) and US$343 (16GB).

Not that I, as a Brazilian consumer, am not used to getting dicked on hardware
prices for everything. But reading $179 over and over again is kind of making
me want to punch my screen.

~~~
differentView
How much are iPhone 5S, Nexus 5, HTC One, and Galaxy S4 in Brazil?

~~~
pandeiro
Prices simply too obscene to mention on family-oriented hackernews

------
nicholassmith
I wonder how much Motorola makes per handset at that price point, which could
be slightly concerning for the business overall. Google can get away with tiny
margins on their physical devices as they're about pushing traffic back to
their services, making more money residually, but Motorola makes money by
selling hardware for a profit.

It's great for consumers when price comes down, but that could leave
businesses fighting to try get prices down and reduce overall profit, meaning
they're unable to throw as much into R&D, or cut back on customer support or a
dozen other areas. It's certainly an interesting marketplace at the moment,
most manufacturers seem to be slashing prices reasonably heavily.

~~~
tracker1
Motorola Mobility is now a Google (R) subsidiary...

~~~
nicholassmith
Fully aware, but it's not important as it's being run as a separate business
concern so it's a for-profit enterprise.

~~~
objclxt
> _so it 's a for-profit enterprise._

Or not, given that Motorola has been operating at a loss for quite some time
now.

------
r00fus
No way this competes with real high end phones like S4, HTC One, iPhone5 or
later.

What it does is compete very well against the iPhone4, 4S, S3, and older
premium phones.

If you're adding a line to a family plan and want a phone that isn't basic,
then this becomes very appealing as the iOS/Samsung/HTC/Nokia alternative will
cost you either a 2 year subscription, or be $300 or more unlocked.

Considering people will still buy iPhones because they want something simple,
the attack is really against Samsung and other manufacturers.

~~~
mtgx
The Moto X/G _are_ simple.

~~~
r00fus
Let me qualify my statement. People will buy Apple because the perceive it's
simpler. Apple spends a lot (time|money) on making subtle interactions
discoverable. This is simply not the case on the Android side, though it's
getting better.

Having just bought a Nexus 5, I can see how usable it is, but how frustrating
it would be for, say, my parents to use unless I got them on BigLauncher, or
did all the setup for them and support as well.

------
darrenkopp
This is great, I was ready to buy a MotoX until I saw it was $750 unlocked,
when at the same time the Nexus 4 was only $350. I'm not surprised that they
didn't sell that many of them.

~~~
ansible
I was in the market for a phone at that time. Google then dropped the price of
the Nexus 4 to $200 (8GB storage) and $250 (16GB). That was way too good a
deal for me to pass up.

~~~
TheLegace
It was kind of unfortunate since just 2 weeks before the price drop I had paid
about $350 for the Nexus 4.

Well that's life I guess.

~~~
ansible
So you just missed the cutoff for the refund? That's a bummer.

I could maybe have held off and gotten a Nexus 5, but it wasn't clear how much
it was going to sell for, or exactly when. I had previously tried out a N4,
and found it acceptable (other than the lack of a physical keyboard), so I
just went for it. No regrets.

------
mactitan
From the article: There’s no LTE on board, which makes sense given the target
market (growing, developed countries where LTE is in limited supply or
nonexistent).

~~~
patrickaljord
Such as France ;)

~~~
jb17
Or the UK.

~~~
Zenst
UK does have LTE or 4G as some call it. Not that it is priced attractivly
enough for anybody to use it compared to the lovely 3G deals out there. That
and some of the 3G services are more than fast enough and I even used 3G for a
game tornament few years back and won.

But it is out there and more than one network now - but I live in London so
kind of spoilt compared to parts of highland Scotland still to see a mobile
signal (lucky peeps).

But as said it is not priced well IMHO and if anything America may well have
better price bundles with regards to 4G. Now 3G I think the UK is around 3x
cheaper. Heck I get unlimited 3G and SMS and plenty of minutes for £15 a
month, never seen anything as close for America. But that is a less dense area
and later in the day to get 3G compared to the UK. So maybe they invested into
kit that is more cheaply upgraded to 4G basestation wise compared to earlier
models. But the UK is after all the size of a whole state in America and with
that easier population density wise to cost justify rollouts. Albiet UK
goverment flaffing about of spectrum sales and the UK mobile market getting
burned by paying over the price for the 3G spectrum many years back (rare rare
cose of a goverment selling something of not underpriced, indeed only case I
can think of).

EE (aka was T-Mobile until they merged with Orange)
[https://explore.ee.co.uk/coverage-
checker/?wt.mc_id=ON_EE_V_...](https://explore.ee.co.uk/coverage-
checker/?wt.mc_id=ON_EE_V_coverage-checker&wt.tsrc=Vanity)

O2 [http://www.o2.co.uk/4g/coverage-and-
cities](http://www.o2.co.uk/4g/coverage-and-cities)

Vodaphone [http://www.vodafone.co.uk/our-network-and-coverage/uk-
covera...](http://www.vodafone.co.uk/our-network-and-coverage/uk-coverage-
map/)

So 4G is out there, but price wise - naaa. That said it is not covering the
entire UK, though I can find places in the UK which get no mobile signal 2G
onwards. Have to love the highlands in Scotland.

------
r00fus
From the article: "The 4.5-inch display, with 720p, 329 PPI resolution is the
“hero feature” of the phone, and it outperforms the iPhone 5s according to
Motorola."

I'm assuming they're talking about the display outperforming (bizarre wording)
the iPhone5S? Because the stats don't seem to make it comparable much less
leading the current performance champ...

~~~
pbreit
Try re-reading it without the parenthetical: "The 4.5-inch display outperforms
the iPhone 5s according to Motorola."

------
001sky
This is a great product/market fit. Full Kudo's to google on this. If it is a
success, i think they will get a Halo effect for their brand. That being said,
lets hop there's no surprises in the SW bundle, performances, settings etc.

------
peterwwillis
I was talking to representatives from Lyft at a festival here in Baltimore,
and I asked them if they had any plans to support non-smartphones like mine,
or any other way to use their service. "No" was the answer.

I realized, this was genius! They could ensure only wealthy customers used
their service, creating a vacuum in which the upper class could use
transportation in style and comfort, without having to interface with "those
kinds" of people. Also ensuring their customer base was (relatively) well-
behaved and polite.

Hopefully cheaper phones like this can fuck with these digital social classes.

~~~
MichaelGG
Or perhaps maybe they realised that most people, especially those that might
use their app, are likely to have a smartphone or get one soon. That investing
on making a service targeting other platforms is a waste of time and money?

That sounds much more likely than some digital class nonsense.

Edit: Also the assumption that people with smartphones are going to be better
behaved than normal is... not based in reality. It's not like taxis are
stopping for e.g. homeless people that camp out inside the taxi all day.

~~~
peterwwillis
You're saying basically that investing money in developing your product to
gain more customers is a waste. You're also saying it somehow makes more sense
to develop two different applications for two different platforms and depend
on a THIRD service's platform (Facebook).

Instead of just making one simple web 1.0 mobile site that works everywhere,
doesn't limit your customer base, and takes less time and money to develop.

And it's not nonsense. I'll bet you that some basic research on demographics
of the user base would show a clear separation in the economic disparity of
cab users vs lyft users.

Why the separation? Easier access to cabs. Poor people will find it more
difficult to access the internet or a smartphone, but they can get easy access
to a plain-old telephone or desktop internet access.

The assumption is based on socioeconomic class differences, and is perceived
rather than actually noticeable in difference, but i'm not going to repeat
what you can find on wikipedia. The other aspect is that rich people may be
perceived to tip better.

------
Zigurd
This makes much more sense than the Moto X in terms of differentiating
Motorola and charting a course that isn't "me too" and competitive with
Google's first tier OEM partners.

------
jimktrains2
I guess it's not CMDA (Verizon) compatible.

It sure looks nice otherwise, AND it has an FM radio. I hate that most new
models have dropped that.

EDIT: Reformatting

~~~
josteink
You have that backwards.

It's Verizon which has decided explicitly not to be compatible with phones
which works everywhere else in the world.

It's like an ISP which decides that it doesn't want to use TCP/IP, but instead
goes off and makes their own network-protocol, which requires its own custom
OS preloaded on customer-computers.

You can hardly blame phone-vendors for not being on that ship. It's much more
profitable to make one model which works everywhere.

~~~
jimktrains2
As someone else pointed out, I was talking about an FM radio.

Also, you do realize that CDMA is much older than VZW and wasn't created just
to create incompatibilities?

------
yabatopia
It would be very 'premium' if it supported Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) right
out of the box. The specs only mention Bluetooth 4.0, but sadly that's not
enough for real BLE support on Android pre 4.4 KitKat. An unexpensive Android
smartphone that works with my Fitbit Flex and other BLE devices would be
awesome.

------
ccozan
I hoped it is based on the X8 architecture, but is just "normal". So it makes
not sense to compare it with Moto X, is a different phone, different target,
is no "little brother", more like a distant "poor cousin".

~~~
melling
I don't follow Android that closely. How is the performance of this phone?
Cheap phones like this will help get Android into the hands of another billion
people. It's probably more important to have a more recent version of Android
than the fastest CPU.

~~~
Touche
It's quad core. Looks like an excellent phone for the price. Interesting that
Motorola is one-uping the Nexus to some degree here (the Nexus is closer to
being a flagship, but this is significantly cheaper).

This might be my next. What's for sure is I'm never buying another $600 phone
again.

~~~
a3n
I'll never buy one of those again either, subsidized or not. One reason beyond
the cost is being at the mercy of the telco for upgrades.

So, unlocked, is this thing jail-breakable/cyanogenmodable or similar?

What's a reasonable expectation for how many years I could keep it security
upgraded?

~~~
just_bytecode
The Motorola blog says that the phone will have an unlockable bootloader (in
the U.S) which means you should be able to install custom ROMs.

------
nazgulnarsil
got an unlocked LG L9 months ago for $179 with a 4.5 inch screen and LTE. It
has been discontinued now, but I have been wondering why LG seemed to be the
only company capable of coming out with decent spec phones at decent prices.

~~~
r00fus
Perhaps it simply isn't profitable?

Motorola still hasn't posted a profit since Google's purchase. I don't see how
this product is going to turn those tables.

It could be they will simply become Google's hardware R&D arm and effectively
a cost-center.

------
tsunamifury
A competitive globally accessible phone price would be $50, not $200. This
feels more like a cheap 1st world phone than a global one.

ZTE and other have already made 50 dollar phones using Android and Windows +
Asha won't be far behind at $60.

Motorola has a long ways to go (4x price reduction) to truly get their android
devices into India, China And other poorer regions of South America and
Africa.

~~~
thewarrior
I'm from India and I've been looking to buy a smartphone in this price range
for sometime. The Lumia 520 seemed really attractive as it was the only phone
in the $200 price range that wasn't crap.

The Moto G looks really compelling and if its available for this price in
India I would buy it in a heartbeat. If this phone is as good as claimed (and
thats a big if) then Samsung and Nokia stand to lose a lot of ground.

And as for the $50 price point I'm not sure you can provide a true smartphone
experience at that price.

There is a lack of usable smartphones in this price range and the longer it
goes unaddressed the more ground Android will lose to phones like the Lumia
520.

~~~
ars
> if its available for this price in India

The blog says it will be available in India in January.

