The iPod International Currency Index

Snad writes "The BBC is reporting that an Australian bank has adopted the price of Apple's iPod as a means of tracking international currency values. Similar to The Economist's Big Mac index, this 'iPod index' tracks the price of a 2-GB iPod Nano around the globe and uses purchasing power parity to determine relative currency value. A sample quote: '"The index suggests that the US dollar has potential to appreciate against a range of major currencies, with the Australian dollar about 15% overvalued against the greenback," said Craig James, Commonwealth Securities' head economist.' The cheapest place to buy an iPod is Canada — $144 (but Hong Kong and Japan are almost as cheap); the most expensive is Brazil — $327."

Comments

The iPod is useless as a scale

[ElGanzoLoco]

This is not very useful: the market value and intended targets of the iPod change from country to country.

You can safely assume the shiny gadget is a consumer good in the US, most of Europe, Japan, and other similarly rich countries. But in much of the developing world, it is a luxury item that local distributor(s) can afford to overprice (compared to its value in other markets) because they are only going after the 0,1 percent of wealthy people that can afford the item regardless if it costs 250 or 450USD. For this to make any sense, of course, you need to keep in mind that in many developing countries, there is no such thing as a large middle-class.

The Economist's Big Mac index is flawed for another, similar reason: going to Mc Donald's is considered cheap and unfashionable in Paris, France, while it the most hype thing to do in Cairo, Egypt, or Guangzhou, China. So despite the fact that you are talking about the exact same BigMac & fries, you are not considering the same product, because its perceived value changes considerably from place to place. I think I remember reading an Economist article that aknowledged this.

Stupid idea

[sfogel]

The Big Mac index is so good because the price of the Big Mac involves a little bit of everything: tradable products (meat, bread, etc), labor, services, rental, etc. It is cheap, and usually not subject to any special taxes. The iPod is an imported luxury good, and thus its price is subject to arbitrary decisions by dealers and governments. No good.

An iPod index makes no economic sense

[patiwat]

The reasoning behind the Big Mac index is that for the most part, McDonalds tries to produce the burgers using the cheapest available inputs. Thus, the Big Mac index is representative of the cost of a bundle of food-related inputs. Much of the time, this means locally produced inputs. A country with low cost beef and wheat will have relatively cheaper Big Macs, whereas countries with expensive beef and wheat (or high input tariffs) will have relatively more expensive Big Macs. In the long run, a country with cheap inputs will tend to export to countries with expensive inputs, thus weakening the currency of the importing nation and strengthening the currency of the exporting nation.

The idea of an iPod index makes no economic sense. The reason that an iPod is expensive in Brazil, India, and Thailand isn't because labor, LCDs, and Flash Memory are expensive in those countries. An iPod costs the same to produce no matter where it is sold. The only main difference is in import duties and sales taxes. Import duties and sales taxes have nothing to do with the long-term direction of a country's currency. This index is a waste of time.

Not That Simple

[jonadab]

You really can't calculate a meaninful exchange rate based on the price of a single product, unless the economies of the two nations are inherently similar. Yes, MKs in Africa figure exchange rates based on the price of Coca-Cola, but that's between countries with more-or-less the same economy, and it's inherently an informal calculation anyhow. You can't meaninfully compare the currencies of the US and Australia that way, much less the US and Brasil.

The problem is that different kinds of goods and services are more or less expensive in different economies. You can get VERY different ideas about the exchange rate, depending on which product you look at. In one country, technology is cheap but labor is expensive. In another, technology is unaffordable but labor is cheap. In another, both technology and labor are expensive but food is cheap. If you compare currencies based on one product, you can get yourself quite seriously confused.

Exchange rates are also driven by trade balances, and just because one US dollar can be exchanged for eight billion Ubledubgongian Frankls does not mean that a product worth one dollar in the US will cost F8 billion in Ubledubgong. It may only cost 250 Frankls. Going the other direction, just because exchanging one US dollar only gets you 50p in England does not necessarily mean that 50p has the same purchasing power as $1 would have in the US. People who don't understand economics tend to assume it works that way, but it doesn't.

iPod vs. Big Mac Index

[NoSuchGuy]

The Big Mac Index is more suitable because it is a local index.

Because for a Big Mac you look at the local costs and industries.
(packaging, local labour cost, local agriculture (salad, meat...))

For an iPod you only measure the chinise output (packaging, chinese labout cost, chinise raw materials ...) and the local reseller cost and worldwide shipping cost.

This is Slashtap

[shigelojoe]

This site goes to 11.

Re:Won't work

[vhogemann]

As such, taxing imports is a good way to help local economy.

I'm sorry to disagree with you.

How overtaxing things that will never be produced at Brazil, and that have NO local competition help the economy? Last time I checked, every single DAP out there comes from somewhere at Asia.

The government is just making it harder for brazilians to have access to technology...

And yes, I'm from Brazil. And it suck to be forced to pay double the price for every piece of IT equipment, sometimes MORE.

Re:*Yawn*, Slow newsday?

[shplorb]

Did you know that ipods only support 2 video formats (both of them MAC formats)

Last time I checked, the formats were MPEG4 and MPEG4-AVC/H.264 - hardly "MAC-only" formats!