- Samsung’s Galaxy Note 20 Ultra is priced at $ 549.
- The figure does not include other costs such as research and marketing.
- Somehow, the firm seems to be making a healthy profit.
Manufacturers make a big profit on every premium smartphone sold, and it seems to be no different with the Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra.
Counterpoint Research has published its analysis of the Bill of Materials (h / t) of the Note 20 Ultra: SamMobile), Claiming that it costs just $ 549 to make the phone. This figure includes the apparent cost of components as well as other figures such as assembly, testing, in-box accessories, and S-Pens.
The bill of materials does not include costs related to marketing, licensing and R&D. So Samsung is not making ~ $ 750 in profit on a $ 1,300 smartphone, but it certainly points to a larger profit margin.
Counterpoint analysis indicates the Snapdragon 865 Plus chipset, the X55 modem, and Samsung’s various RF components that set Samsung back at around $ 154. This is in line with the disclosures of analysts and Xiaomi’s cost. The Chinese firm reported earlier this year that the Snapdragon 865 and X55 combo is twice the cost of the Snapdragon 855 and 4G modems, with CEO Lei Jun later saying it cost ~ $ 70 extra on the Mi 9’s silicon.
High cost of 5g
The research company says that the mmWave 5G version of the Galaxy Note 20 Ultra is significantly more expensive than the sub-6GHz 5V model. According to senior analyst Ethan Qi, “the mmWave version costs about 10% more than the sub-6 GHz version compared to the total component costs.”
We have also previously seen a lack of microSD storage in the MimiWave Galaxy S20 and offering less RAM than the standard S20, which is generally lower due to design and price considerations. It is unclear if the mmWave-toting Note 20 Ultra has suffered any kind of cut.
In any event, it is clear that Samsung is making a good profit with every Galaxy Note 20 Ultra. But we will have to wait and see if sales actually increase or if the high price has scared some customers.
ahead: Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra revisited – good and bad, after six months