Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Crime Handhelds Apple

Bloomberg: Steve Jobs Behind NYC Crime Wave 311

Posted by timothy
from the well-of-course-he-was-duh dept.
theodp writes "Rudy Giuliani had John Gotti to worry about; Mike Bloomberg has Steve Jobs. Despite all-time lows for the city in homicides and shootings, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg said overall crime in New York City was up 3.3% in 2012 due to iPhone, iPad and other Apple device thefts, which have increased by 3,890 this year. 'If you just took away the jump in Apple, we'd be down for the year,' explained Marc La Vorgna, the mayor's press secretary. 'The proliferation of people carrying expensive devices around is so great,' La Vorgna added. 'It's something that's never had to be dealt with before.' Bloomberg also took to the radio, urging New Yorkers who didn't want to become a crime statistic to keep their iDevices in an interior, hard-to-reach pocket: 'Put it in a pocket in sort of a more body-fitting, tighter clothes, that you can feel if it was — if somebody put their hand in your pocket, not just an outside coat pocket.' But it seems the best way to fight the iCrime Wave might be to slash the $699 price of an iPhone (unactivated), which costs an estimated $207 to make. The U.S. phone subsidy model reportedly adds $400+ to the price of an iPhone. So, is offering unlocked alternatives at much more reasonable prices than an iPhone — like the $299 Nexus 4, for starters — the real key to taking a bite out of cellphone crime? After all, didn't dramatic price cuts pretty much kill car stereo theft?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bloomberg: Steve Jobs Behind NYC Crime Wave

Comments Filter:
  • The real issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cunniff (264218) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:38PM (#42422759) Homepage

    It's not the *cost* of the iPhone. It's the *black market resale value* that drives theft.

    It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.

    As always - back up your data, and don't store important personal information on your easily-stolen device...

  • by kthreadd (1558445) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:40PM (#42422767)
    Interesting statistics, but seriously Steve Jobs died in 2011. And even if he was still alive he personally would not be responsible or connected to any form of crime wave in New York.
  • by CajunArson (465943) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:43PM (#42422777) Journal

    So they are saying that it is "unfair" that iWhatevers cost a bunch so making them cheap means nobody will steal them.

    So using this jumping-the-tracks train of logic, we should make guns free so no criminal will ever want to steal one. BINGO!

  • by doku_hebi_ryu (864351) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:44PM (#42422785)
    It's not just the headline. The whole thing is google fanboy trash.
  • by itsphilip (934602) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:44PM (#42422787)
    The way this is written is so absurdly biased; if you want to promote Android devices, just come out and say it. Don't use some arbitrary statistic to promote your agenda. That's like blaming the former CEO of Lexus for making a desirable vehicle that is prone to theft as a result of its desirability or popularity.
  • Victim blaming (Score:2, Insightful)

    by enabran (1451761) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:45PM (#42422803)

    If you don't want to have your iPhone stolen stop using it in public.

    Great.

  • Ban IPhones (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:47PM (#42422815)

    If banning guns will cut down on crime, this is absolute proof that banning I-Phones and I-Pads will also reduce crime. At the very least I-product owners need to have background checks and get registed and licenced to carry them. Also I-Pad 2s should be outright banned. Who in their right mind actually needs and I-Pad 2? The retina display isn't that much better and all it is doing is fuleing a crime wave.

    Challenge: Tell me why my post is wrong, but banning gus is right.
    LOL

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:49PM (#42422831)

    Always has been and always will be.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:49PM (#42422835)

    Really? Are headlines like this what Slashdot has become?

    I've been reading this site for over 10 years, and posts like this are just sad link-bait.

  • by dfenstrate (202098) <dfenstrate.gmail@com> on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:52PM (#42422853)

    ...Being a lecturing nanny to actually see that the normal functions of a city government are performed.
    Note his wars on large sodas and restuarant menus, while bedbugs run rampant.
    He wags his finger at Apple because crooks are loose in his city. And he has his PIs make straw purchases of firearms in far-away states, violating federal law for masterbatory political posturing.
    Why do New Yorkers elect this clown?

  • Re:The real issue (Score:3, Insightful)

    by icebike (68054) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:56PM (#42422891)

    Agreed.
    Now that the major carriers have all agreed to kill phones that are reported stolen [pcmag.com] (like most European carriers) , the in-country black market value should drop to zero.
    There is still the export option for stolen phones.

    But to a certain extent the price of the phone sets the black market value as well. And that price is just too high.

    And further, I have my doubts about the claim at the bottom of the summary:
      The U.S. phone subsidy model reportedly adds $400+ to the price of an iPhone.

    According to Apple's own web page [apple.com] the cost of an unlocked an contract free iphone5 (cheapest model) is $649. ($849 for the one with the big GBs).

    So how does the subsidy enter into that equation?

    It shouldn't unless Apple is propping up the price to support Carrier subsidy plans.

    But why would Apple do that? The carriers make every cent of that subsidy back and never reduce the price of your monthly bill. Apple could sell at 100% markup and still beat carrier pricing. Instead Apple sells at well over 200% markup even when you buy direct with cash up front. No other manufacturer rakes in that much cash.

    T-Mobile is ending subsidization of phones. (You can still buy it on time, but its a separate contract that has an end date).

  • Re:The real issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by clarkkent09 (1104833) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @07:59PM (#42422911)

    The cause of theft: people carry items worth stealing!
    The cause of rape: ?

    Please follow the same logic and see how idiotic it is.

  • Re:The real issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ironhandx (1762146) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:34PM (#42423101)

    The thing protecting the S3 is obscurity. Its harder to identify amongst a host of other cheaper products, On the other hand if they steal an apple phone they know the price is high and that theres a resale market for it and its ridiculously easy to identify.

  • Re:"Wearing"? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Rockoon (1252108) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:37PM (#42423123)

    Who "wears" an iPhone or iPad? Usually they are kept in pockets or jackets or backpacks.

    In my experience they are usually kept about chest height in front of the owner, in their left hand, and the owner is paying almost no attention to anything other than their iDevice.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:39PM (#42423137)

    There isn't even an article here. It's just a troll summary with a bunch of unrelated links pimping Android devices. At least if they would have compared the SIII to the iPhone, it would be so blatant. The Nexus 4 has no storage or even LTE... It's right inline with the free phones.

    How the hell does he equate "Crime Is Up and Bloomberg Blames iPhone Thieves" to "Bloomberg: Steve Jobs Behind NYC Crime Wave"? That is libelous, since using the "Bloomberg:" prefix implies that it is a Bloomberg quote, which it isn't.

  • Re:Ban IPhones (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:40PM (#42423143)

    My guns must be defective. They've never killed or maimed anyone despite being fired tens of thousands of times.
     
    Understand, Tapefuck, I will never... EVER... disarm. So get that shit out of your mouth right now.
     
    Don't blame the law abiding citizen for what a criminal does. Guns are not only designed to maim and kill. So go fuck yourself in the ass. Your memes are lies and they're tired lies at that.

  • Re:The real issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BasilBrush (643681) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:48PM (#42423199)

    Plus the majority of smartphones in America are iPhones and the majority of tablets are iPads. Even if thieves were blind, and stealing randomly, they'd steal more iDevices than all the other brands added together.

  • Re:The real issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tnk1 (899206) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @08:58PM (#42423257)

    I think that Apple charges that price not to support subsidies, but rather, because they know they can charge what they want and subsidies will make it affordable for end users. It's like health care or education. If the government makes it so you can get grants or low interest loans, then that means you can make your undergrad programs 25-30K a year, and most people will still be able to pay it. Apple counts on the cell phone companies for spreading the very high cost out so that it doesn't look like it is as much as it is.

    Of course, there is certainly a level of symbiosis involved, but I think Apple looked at existing situations with subsidies and saw a pricing scheme that would allow them to break into a market with their high markup items and have it not sting as much for the end user. Apple can not, and to their credit, will not compete in situations where there they will be unable to secure a high unit price for their product. The wireless market was a slam dunk for them, in that regard.

  • Re:The real issue (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Half-pint HAL (718102) on Saturday December 29, 2012 @09:00PM (#42423267)

    The cause of theft: people carry items worth stealing! The cause of rape: ?

    Please follow the same logic and see how idiotic it is.

    Let's take your logic the other way:

    The cause of being kidnapped and executed in drug-lord-controlled areas of foreign countries: visiting drug-lord-controlled areas of foreign countries

    Well you're right: it's not the cause, but a contributory factor. I would appreciate being told where these drug-lord-controlled (or guerilla-rebel-held) areas are so that I can avoid them. And if I have to pass through them, I would appreciate advice about how not to get kidnapped for ransom.

  • Even if thieves were blind, and stealing randomly, they'd steal more iDevices than all the other brands added together.

    Precisely. BTW I'm pretty accustomed to Slashdot's ever-declining state of "quality" over the last several years, but this story takes the cake - it's 1/2 article and 1/2 ludicrous Fandroid rant that somehow the real cause of the problem of increased theft of small, highly valuable electronic devices in NYC is that Apple charges too much for the 64 GB iPhone and that somehow Google's pricing for the 8 GB Nexus 4 is the solution? Are you shitting me? Can you possibly be serious?

    Slashdot, who do do you have at the wheel these days approving stories? Is it someone that actually cares, or are they just looking for the biggest flamebait submissions they can find? Through all the ups and downs, Slashdot have been my homepage for more than a decade. Please don't make this latest acquisition the one that drives me away for good.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 29, 2012 @11:34PM (#42423987)

    lashdot, who do do you have at the wheel these days approving stories? Is it someone that actually cares, or are they just looking for the biggest flamebait submissions they can find? Through all the ups and downs, Slashdot have been my homepage for more than a decade. Please don't make this latest acquisition the one that drives me away for good.

    If I didn't have the foreknowledge that Slashdot.org is now a corporate subsidiary of Dice Holdings (that shitty job site dice.com), I would say Slashdot.org sold out. That ship has obviously sailed.

    I can't even bring myself to use the hack-period symbols to reference it. Because that's actually too nerdy for what Slashdot.org is today. Stories like this bullshit one and banning proliferate posters (seriously, in 2012 who the fuck bans someone that isn't a spammer? Slashdot.org has an entire section named "Your Rights Online" that banning users literally shits on the spirit of) make me want to stop coming here.

    However, posts like yours still make it worthwhile. I hope you never get banned, braj.

  • by jazuki (70860) on Sunday December 30, 2012 @06:17AM (#42425279) Homepage

    "Markup" (and its relative "gross margin") are defined in terms of selling price versus the cost of sale.

    For a producer, the selling price is the wholesale price, for a retailer, it is the retail price. Despite Apple's own retail presence, the vast majority of iPhone sales is through carrier and other retailers, not through Apple Stores.

    The cost of sale includes not just the production cost (materials, labor) but also supply chain, unit tariffs and royalties, shipping in, etc.

    Anyways, Apple's gross margin over all products has ranged between ~40% to ~47% percent since the rise of the iPhone. This works out to a markup of 66% to 88% across all sales. Now if we assume that iPhones are particularly profitable, with estimated margins of up to 55%, that works out to a markup of ~120%. While not bad, it isn't 200%.

      And, it doesn't include R&D, administration, marketing, legal, rent, taxes, etc., which also go against profit.

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Working...