Slashdot Mirror


Bloomberg: Steve Jobs Behind NYC Crime Wave

theodp writes "Rudy Giuliani had John Gotti to worry about; Mike Bloomberg has Steve Jobs. Despite all-time lows for the city in homicides and shootings, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg said overall crime in New York City was up 3.3% in 2012 due to iPhone, iPad and other Apple device thefts, which have increased by 3,890 this year. 'If you just took away the jump in Apple, we'd be down for the year,' explained Marc La Vorgna, the mayor's press secretary. 'The proliferation of people carrying expensive devices around is so great,' La Vorgna added. 'It's something that's never had to be dealt with before.' Bloomberg also took to the radio, urging New Yorkers who didn't want to become a crime statistic to keep their iDevices in an interior, hard-to-reach pocket: 'Put it in a pocket in sort of a more body-fitting, tighter clothes, that you can feel if it was — if somebody put their hand in your pocket, not just an outside coat pocket.' But it seems the best way to fight the iCrime Wave might be to slash the $699 price of an iPhone (unactivated), which costs an estimated $207 to make. The U.S. phone subsidy model reportedly adds $400+ to the price of an iPhone. So, is offering unlocked alternatives at much more reasonable prices than an iPhone — like the $299 Nexus 4, for starters — the real key to taking a bite out of cellphone crime? After all, didn't dramatic price cuts pretty much kill car stereo theft?"

19 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. The real issue by cunniff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not the *cost* of the iPhone. It's the *black market resale value* that drives theft.

    It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.

    As always - back up your data, and don't store important personal information on your easily-stolen device...

    1. Re:The real issue by BradleyUffner · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not the *cost* of the iPhone. It's the *black market resale value* that drives theft.

      It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.

      As always - back up your data, and don't store important personal information on your easily-stolen device...

      The cost of the iPhone is what drives the black market price up to begin with. If the price from a retailer wasn't so high the amount of money paid for stolen phones wouldn't be nearly as high either (except during shortages) and the incentive to steal them would go down as well.

    2. Re:The real issue by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cause of theft: people carry items worth stealing!
      The cause of rape: ?

      Please follow the same logic and see how idiotic it is.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    3. Re:The real issue by Roblimo · · Score: 5, Funny

      In fact, for the cost of an unlocked iPhone I could buy an HTC Android phone and a .22 pistol and get a Florida CCW and still have enough money for a whole lot of whiskey to drink at home so I don't have to go out and expose my precious smarty phone to criminals in the first place.

      Yeah!

    4. Re:The real issue by DarkTempes · · Score: 5, Funny

      I hope you step on a lego.

    5. Re:The real issue by Ironhandx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing protecting the S3 is obscurity. Its harder to identify amongst a host of other cheaper products, On the other hand if they steal an apple phone they know the price is high and that theres a resale market for it and its ridiculously easy to identify.

    6. Re:The real issue by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Plus the majority of smartphones in America are iPhones and the majority of tablets are iPads. Even if thieves were blind, and stealing randomly, they'd steal more iDevices than all the other brands added together.

    7. Re:The real issue by tnk1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think that Apple charges that price not to support subsidies, but rather, because they know they can charge what they want and subsidies will make it affordable for end users. It's like health care or education. If the government makes it so you can get grants or low interest loans, then that means you can make your undergrad programs 25-30K a year, and most people will still be able to pay it. Apple counts on the cell phone companies for spreading the very high cost out so that it doesn't look like it is as much as it is.

      Of course, there is certainly a level of symbiosis involved, but I think Apple looked at existing situations with subsidies and saw a pricing scheme that would allow them to break into a market with their high markup items and have it not sting as much for the end user. Apple can not, and to their credit, will not compete in situations where there they will be unable to secure a high unit price for their product. The wireless market was a slam dunk for them, in that regard.

    8. Re:The real issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The variable being ignored is brand recognition.

      If thieves can tell them apart how come Apple's lawyers think there is brand confusion?

  2. Worst headline ever by kthreadd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Interesting statistics, but seriously Steve Jobs died in 2011. And even if he was still alive he personally would not be responsible or connected to any form of crime wave in New York.

    1. Re:Worst headline ever by doku_hebi_ryu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not just the headline. The whole thing is google fanboy trash.

    2. Re:Worst headline ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There isn't even an article here. It's just a troll summary with a bunch of unrelated links pimping Android devices. At least if they would have compared the SIII to the iPhone, it would be so blatant. The Nexus 4 has no storage or even LTE... It's right inline with the free phones.

      How the hell does he equate "Crime Is Up and Bloomberg Blames iPhone Thieves" to "Bloomberg: Steve Jobs Behind NYC Crime Wave"? That is libelous, since using the "Bloomberg:" prefix implies that it is a Bloomberg quote, which it isn't.

  3. So by the logic of this article... by CajunArson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So they are saying that it is "unfair" that iWhatevers cost a bunch so making them cheap means nobody will steal them.

    So using this jumping-the-tracks train of logic, we should make guns free so no criminal will ever want to steal one. BINGO!

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  4. This is borderline ridiculous by itsphilip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The way this is written is so absurdly biased; if you want to promote Android devices, just come out and say it. Don't use some arbitrary statistic to promote your agenda. That's like blaming the former CEO of Lexus for making a desirable vehicle that is prone to theft as a result of its desirability or popularity.

    1. Re:This is borderline ridiculous by Krishnoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      a desirable vehicle that is prone to theft as a result of its desirability or popularity.

      Offtopic, but Lexus doesn't even figure in the top ten. I think the Honda Accord and Civic have topped that list for years -- earlier-model ones, for that matter.

  5. Bloomberg is too busy... by dfenstrate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...Being a lecturing nanny to actually see that the normal functions of a city government are performed.
    Note his wars on large sodas and restuarant menus, while bedbugs run rampant.
    He wags his finger at Apple because crooks are loose in his city. And he has his PIs make straw purchases of firearms in far-away states, violating federal law for masterbatory political posturing.
    Why do New Yorkers elect this clown?

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  6. Blame Visa Debit Cards and Electronic Payments by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I imagine that most people (such as myself) don't carry any significant quantity of cash on them anymore since most every Retailer and Restaurant will take a Visa Debit card issued from your bank.

    So it only makes sense to go after iPhones and iPads since going after someone's wallet will typically net you $60 or less, while you can offload that shiny iGadget for a couple hundred.

    If it weren't iDevices, it'd be something else.
    The real culprit here is a profound culture shift from cash based shopping to electronic payments.

    1. Re:Blame Visa Debit Cards and Electronic Payments by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Informative

      What I'm saying is that money is falling out of use, maybe not for you, but for me and many others.

      Why pay ATM fees to grab $20 or even $60, when you could just pay with a debit card and have the retailer pay for the transaction fee (aside from certain a-holes like ARCO and some corner stores that pass on the fee to the consumer)

      About a decade ago, I would typically keep about $100 in the house just because. Now days it's rare if I have $15 around at any given time. Mostly I keep a roll of quarters in the car to pay for meters, and even those are starting to go the electronic payment route.

      And if you don't like ATM fees, use the grocery store checkout as your ATM.
      Yes, you have to buy something, but a pack of Altoids is a lot less than most ATM fees, and much more invigorating ;)

  7. Most ridiculous Slashdot Fandroid story ever by schnell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if thieves were blind, and stealing randomly, they'd steal more iDevices than all the other brands added together.

    Precisely. BTW I'm pretty accustomed to Slashdot's ever-declining state of "quality" over the last several years, but this story takes the cake - it's 1/2 article and 1/2 ludicrous Fandroid rant that somehow the real cause of the problem of increased theft of small, highly valuable electronic devices in NYC is that Apple charges too much for the 64 GB iPhone and that somehow Google's pricing for the 8 GB Nexus 4 is the solution? Are you shitting me? Can you possibly be serious?

    Slashdot, who do do you have at the wheel these days approving stories? Is it someone that actually cares, or are they just looking for the biggest flamebait submissions they can find? Through all the ups and downs, Slashdot have been my homepage for more than a decade. Please don't make this latest acquisition the one that drives me away for good.

    --
    "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin