|
|
Posted by Sammy on 09/09/05 00:19
In article <aojuh19nat8unv6546e1nsptb3v9ndsl64@4ax.com>,
Allan <Spamstillsucks@buffyandkantica22arebrianlamb.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:29:40 -0700, Sammy <sammy@xxx.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In article <7l7axi8xdpe1.dlg@tarkus.karnevil9.com>,
> > Tarkus <karnevil9@beer.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Regarding cost, Samsung's stuff is generally competitively priced, so I
> >> doubt if it will be THAT much more than a single format player from their
> >> competitors.
> >
> >Haven't you read Samsung's latest press release? They intend to become a
> >top tier company. And that means top tier pricing.
>
>
> Like this Press Release from today?
>
> "Samsung lowers its sights
>
> Samsung president Lee Ki-tae has indicated that the South Korean
> vendor will turn its attention to low-end handsets, an area that it
> has traditionally steered clear of."
>
> http://www.ovum.com/news/euronews.asp?id=3129
>
> or
>
> "David Steel, vice president marketing at Samsung's Consumer
> Electronics Unit, told Reuters although Samsung was the world's No. 20
> brand in 2005, taking over the position of Japanese rival Sony Corp,
> which fell to No. 28, according to Interbrand the company feels it
> does not yet have an exclusive place in a consumer's heart."
>
> http://www.smartofficenews.com.au/Business_And_Finance/News?article=/Business%
> 20And%20Finance/News/News/J3P6H4N7
>
Well, it sounds like Samsung want to be both a top tier and bottom tier
company. No reason they can't do both, it there?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|