Fire-Phone sales are in the toilet, Surprising no one

[JeffDenver]

You mean to tell me people don't want a gimmicky shopping-centric smartphone specific to Amazon? I, for one, am shocked.

Amazon has sold no more than 35,000 Fire phones, data suggests | Technology | theguardian.com

 

[STARGATE]

I'm surprised since many people love amazon.

 

[sting7k]

I was actually sort of annoyed when I got home yesterday and my Amazon package was sealed with tape featuring Fire Phone logos all over it. No Amazon, no.

 

[JeffDenver]

I'm surprised since many people love amazon.

I love Amazon as well.

But this phone was a horrible gimmicky mess. Add to that the fact that it was WAY overpriced for the hardware and exclusive to one carrier to boot. It's failure was completely predictable.

 

[LeoRex]

I'm surprised since many people love amazon.

Right, and they can access it any number of ways, without that Fire phone. Amazon has made it very easy to spend a ton of money, all without a gimmicky phone.

I played with one and it kind of reminds me of smartphones from 5 or 6 years ago when OEMs had no idea what they were doing yet... And were just throwing stuff against the wall to see what stuck.

 

[Ed Briggs]

I'm surprised since many people love amazon.

But it doesn't mean they need or want an amazon phone. People can get enough amazon on their computers. Besides, a lot of people just buy stuff from amazon and don't need them to take over their phones. Not surprised it's not selling.

 

[bembol]

Now this is a phone with gimmicks.

What I'm wondering is who sets the price, is it amazon and/or carrier? IIRC, the two year contract price for this is $199.

 

[Almeuit]

To me it wasn't gimmicks... It's the fact that it's an exclusive so you're cutting out customers just because they don't use AT&T.. Even iPhone moved away from that mistake so they can cash in everywhere.

 

[LeoRex]

To me it wasn't gimmicks... It's the fact that it's an exclusive so you're cutting out customers just because they don't use AT&T.. Even iPhone moved away from that mistake so they can cash in everywhere.

Yeah, but they still sold a TON of iPhones when they were AT&T only.... and people WANTED the iPhone. Even if it was widely available, it wouldn't change the fact that it is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. And ignoring the Amazon tie-in, it's just not a very good phone running a pretty messed up OS. The consensus on the FP's OS is summed in one word: incoherent......

If they had released it to everyone, their numbers would have been higher, but that would have just meant they fleeced even more unsuspecting people.

 

[Almeuit]

Yeah, but they still sold a TON of iPhones when they were AT&T only.... and people WANTED the iPhone. Even if it was widely available, it wouldn't change the fact that it is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. And ignoring the Amazon tie-in, it's just not a very good phone running a pretty messed up OS. The consensus on the FP's OS is summed in one word: incoherent......

If they had released it to everyone, their numbers would have been higher, but that would have just meant they fleeced even more unsuspecting people.

Sold a ton because it was on the rise of smartphones. It wasn't a super huge market back then ... Now that it is ... What did Apple do? Allow iPhone everywhere. .

 

[JeffDenver]

To me it wasn't gimmicks...

That stupid 3D thing just screamed "gimmick" to me.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Yeah, but they still sold a TON of iPhones when they were AT&T only.... and people WANTED the iPhone. Even if it was widely available, it wouldn't change the fact that it is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. And ignoring the Amazon tie-in, it's just not a very good phone running a pretty messed up OS. The consensus on the FP's OS is summed in one word: incoherent......

If they had released it to everyone, their numbers would have been higher, but that would have just meant they fleeced even more unsuspecting people.

It's like that HTC Facebook Phone. Nobody wanted that either. But why would they when there already are Amazon and Facebook apps?

 

[Accentudate]

It's not for lack of promotion that's for sure. As another member mentioned, several of my recent packages from Amazon were sealed with Amazon Fire Phone tape.

 

[petvas72]

I am surprised it sold 35,000 phones. Who bought it? I would expect that it sells zero.

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[LeoRex]

I am surprised it sold 35,000 phones. Who bought it? I would expect that it sells zero.

People will buy anything if it's sold right. And on the surface, with the right dude demo'ing it, it might lead people to believe that it's some awesome phone. Then the poor saps get home and start using it and think "HOW THE F DO I GO BACK A SCREEN?".... Reviews and word of mouth are probably destroying sales regardless of the marketing hype.

This is one of those devices that could cause higher ups to lose their job. How would you like to be the exec that sold Bezos on this hunk of crap right now (if he's not already gas-piped)?

It's like that HTC Facebook Phone

That's exactly what I thought.

 

[Almeuit]

That stupid 3D thing just screamed "gimmick" to me.

Please don't quote only a tad of my post and respond since you're not reading what I said... I'm saying it wasn't just the gimmicks as to why it didn't sell...

 

[JeffDenver]

Please don't quote only a tad of my post and respond since you're not reading what I said... I'm saying it wasn't just the gimmicks as to why it didn't sell...

You said it's gimmicks were not the reason. Quoting your whole post would not have changed that would it? If not, I don't see what quoting the whole post would have changed except to take up more space.

I quoted the part of the post I was responding to. I find it eliminates a lot of confusion. The quote itself () links back to your original as well.

 

[Almeuit]

You said it's gimmicks were not the reason. Quoting your whole post would not have changed that would it? If not, I don't see what quoting the whole post would have changed except to take up more space.

I quoted the part of the post I was responding to. I find it eliminates a lot of confusion. The quote itself (View attachment 134279) links back to your original as well.

Again I said I don't think it was the gimmicks.. It was the exclusive deal that hurt them more imo.

 

[barth2]

I heard Bezos was very hands on with development. I don't think he'll fire himself.

I think they figured people bought the fire tablet, so why not a phone. The tablet makes sense strategically since it allows people to consume media from Amazon and look them in the Amazon ecosystem. Since a phone isn't great for reading books or watching movies, I'm not sure what the thinking is, considering practically nobody besides apple and Samsung is making much profit from smart phones.

 

[LeoRex]

Again I said I don't think it was the gimmicks.. It was the exclusive deal that hurt them more imo.

No way.... AT&T has over 100 million subscribers and Amazon has KILLER name recognition. I see little reason to think that if Amazon released on on all the major carriers, this phone would have been a success. Yes, they would have sold MORE, but nothing near what you would consider even a mild success. People sniffed this phone out as a POS pretty early on and there's probably 35,000 annoyed people yelling at their phones.