I think the culprit is really it's a new sales model and nobody at Google had any idea if it would work or not so they didn't have either a big launch stock or a contract to deliver anything close to demand. Remember they had tried something along the same lines with the Nexus One which had floundered. Google also exposes how little control they have of their supply chain. Whatever LG decides to ship them is what they get? Blame LG all you want but ultimately it's on you to secure adequate supply.
In addition to the problems with supply, there are the problems with the play store and customer service. Behind it all seems to be management that is not taking these problems seriously.
Here's what the managing director Google UK said [1]:
Dan CobleyDec 13, 2012+63: Folks. I am very sorry to hear about your poor experiences. I will look into it and get back to you.
Yes, on December 13 he sounded surprised by the flood of complaints on his G+ post and would 'look into it'.
Two days later all he could come up with was a generic apology and a vague commitment to do better:
Dear all, I know that what you are going through is unacceptable and we are all working through the nights and weekends to resolve this issue. Supplies from the manufacturer are scarce and erratic, and our communication has been flawed.
I can offer an unreserved apology for our service and communication failures in this process.
I am optimistic that we will be able to share some positive news shortly, but I do not want to cause any more disappointment by making a commitment until we are 100% sure we can deliver on it.
I realise that the people who ordered the Nexus 4 so early are among our most committed and loyal users and we are doing all we can to put things right.
I've seen corporates where customers are basically viewed as a nuisance and this is exactly the way they communicate.
I read it, as someone in that boat who ordered but didn't get their phone yet, despite putting in a successful order less than 60 seconds after the stock went live, that he knew they'd fucked up and wanted to make good and could we hang in there just a little longer.
I was pleased with the update and that a senior executive was looking at it, despite the mistakes already being made.
Is this really surprising though? You don't have a typical relationship with Google like you do with Apple. Their main profit center is advertising revenue so their interests aren't exactly aligned with a customer trying to purchase a smartphone or a Gmail user trying to get support for the service. I remember signing up for AdSense and I would get tons of emails from Google about calling to speak with a rep to setup an ad campaign, and it seems perfectly rational that that is where their support would be.
I buy an iPhone instead of an Android device because I don't want to be the product or an ancillary thought in Google's strategic objective of ensuring their services aren't locked out of other platforms. From Apple I get their focus as a customer and as result the user experience (both pre-sale and post-sale) has to be excellent, because that is their entire business.
Well, I suspect that part of the reason why the Nexus One didn't take off was that the phone was $550. Dropping that to $300 made the purchase a lot more desirable.
Good point. Android also has a much higher profile today and compares a lot better side by side with iOS then it did in Jan 10 when the N1 launched with Eclair.
The exact same issues happened with the Nexus 7 launch, and Google pointed fingers for that one too. It just goes to show that they haven't improved their process. It's quite embarrassing to have such a loyal group of consumers begging to give you their money and not be prepared for it on the nth product launch.
> There's nothing wrong with the hardware, mind you...
I'm a little bit curious if this is actually the case. I've seen reports from a few sources that the glass back cracks more easily than one would anticipate. I've wondered if the slim supplies are because that's something Google/LG are working to fix.
Yeah, it's nonsense -- there were problems. I'm getting a replacement because the earpiece emits static interference. The Google customer support rep I talked to last night said there were numerous issues including overheating phones, yellowing screens and a few others. He said they've fixed them all in the latest production runs, but the first batches weren't without problems.
Aside from my minor problem, the phone itself was fantastic. I can't wait to get the new one.
I have a first batch phone without any problems. I think they were just churning them out so quickly that QC was a bit lax. 'Fixing' the problems probably just involves more stringent checks.
Did you have to call LG directly to get your replacement, or was the person at Google able to do it for you? I've called Google a couple times and they've just redirected me to LG, who has said I'd have to pay for a replacement.
I called Google, they issued me an RMA. You basically go back onto the play store and place another order. Rather then being fully charged, it's just authorized. At some point down the road (it's been over a week for me) they ship you a replacement device. You're supposed to return the original device within 21 days of getting the RMA (not receiving the phone).
Google Play support handled it. They sent me a prepaid UPS tag to ship it back. The only downside was they send you a link to reorder another phone, so I have to wait in the queue again :(
Yes. Fortunately I had kept my iPhone so I just swapped SIM cards. Google Play support sent me a prepaid UPS tag and the only downside was they also send you a link to reorder another phone, so I have to wait in the queue again :(
That's disappointing. It appears that they enforce a 15 day limit after delivery for returns- hopefully I can register my intent to return the device but wait a little while before doing so. It seems like there is little point trying to reorder right now.
You have 21 days from when you request an RMA to ship them back your original phone. I requested one on the 10th and my new phone arrived two days later.
I propose that one factor exacerbating the negative feelings around this particular product launch is that Google has failed to create a good customer experience during purchase (particularly order confirmation).
People don't like to wait[1]. In a world where Amazon gets orders to a person the next day, a checkout flow that doesn't set extremely clear expectations for the timing of order processing, fulfillment, and shipping will make people angry. Google forced consumers to work particularly hard to find this information. Here's the confirmation email I received: http://i.imgur.com/CbMSu.png
I'd argue that the design of this email is particularly poor, in that the ONLY thing I care about at this point is: when will the thing I bought arrive at my house. Every single piece of information other than: what was purchased, when it will arrive, and the delivery address should be moved much lower in the information hierarchy.
Embarrassingly enough, I sent Google customer support frustrated complaint that I hadn't received a notice about an expected ship date, only to have them (rather mechanically) direct me back to this original email.
Apple still does a great job at this experience. When a brand new iPhone is taking a couple weeks to arrive, the folks I've witnessed are usually not angry - they're excited.
Could this be purposeful on LG's part? Amazon Wireless sells the LG Optimus G (with essentially the same parts) at $599 unlocked. The Nexus 4 doesn't come in a 32gb model, but the 16gb phone sells for only $349. Unless LG is getting one hell of a kickback from Google, why would they want to cannibalize their existing sales with a much lower margin product?
In a sense, it's not that relevant. People are not in the market for an lg and decide to get one of these. People are in the market for a €300+ phone and pick one. I doubt this will cannibalise LG any more than it does any other high end android/phone manufacturers.
That said, if these were being pushed in stores today, I imagine they would be picking up a nice amount of the Christmas trade. Especially since an unlocked phone makes a nicer gift.
Well, yes, but if LG is at production capacity (unknown, but it's possible) it's pretty easy to see which channel it will fill first. The question isn't which one will sell more overall, it's given an existing quantity of product which orders will you fill first.
To elaborate on this point, wholesale price is often ~40% less than MSRP, so LG may get $349 from a Nexus 4 and $360 from an Optimus G — not that different.
I ordered mine on Dec. 1 through Amazon, and it shipped Dec. 12. I'm in Canada, so I drove across the border to pick it up from the depot I use on Dec. 14.
2 weeks isn't too bad, especially this time of year.
Why would they put in the chip if it didn't have an antenna?
I think T-Mobile is selling their HSPA+ as "4G", even though it's not using LTE yet. So it's not that no GSM carriers would advertise the phone as "4G".
Perhaps they designed and/or manufactured the circuit boards before they had the frequencies all sorted out. Perhaps they need the chip in there for patent licensing reasons.
The real reason is that they went with the Qualcomm S4 SoC, which has an LTE modem on-die. It's likely that it would be too expensive to have Qualcomm manufacturer an LTE-less chip for one device.
According to http://www.qualcomm.com/chipsets/snapdragon the Qualcomm Snapdragon APQ8064 has LTE "on select processors". But it's still a separate chip from from the WTR1605L LTE chip.
So the Nexus 4 may actually have two unused LTE implementations ?!
Now this boggles the mind. This could be explained by the Nexus 4 sharing the internals of the Optimus G, but why opt for the off-die LTE modem in the first place?
