Skip to main content

Why The Amazon Fire Phone Failed Hard

 
Amazon isn't the world's worst hardware designer, its Kindle / Kindle Fire ebook readers and tablets are actually pretty good at what they are intended to do. Yet when it launched the Fire phone it missed the target by such a wide margin you had to wonder where it was aiming.
 
There are many reasons why the Fire Phone failed but the primary reason was that it confused what was good for the customer with what was good for Amazon and as a result delivered a phone that nobody in their right mind would have paid the asking price for.
 
The Fire Phone clearly had one design consideration when it was making its way to market - to make it as easy as possible for a Fire Phone owner to spend more money at Amazon.
 
Now I might be wrong here but I don't imagine that many people, when asked what they wanted from a smartphone, responded 'make it easier for me to buy from Amazon'. Not even the most ardent Prime user.
 
Given the product they built Amazon should have been giving the damn thing away to Prime customers. And probably throwing in a few months of line rental too. The payback would have been immense.
 
The value to Amazon wasn't in the phone, rather in what it could have enabled. Imagine a one-click for real life. See a product (anywhere, not just in a shop), scan it and accept Amazon's offered price. Have the product arrive at your home. Rinse and repeat.
 
With frictionless purchasing potential, unlimited free delivery and competitive pricing Amazon would have had a real winner of a service on its hands.
 
Instead it tried to sell its customers a dud and ended up blowing the whole concept by executing it poorly.
 
There's a lesson in there somewhere.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…