After Meeting With Apple CFO, Analyst Believes Lower-Cost iPhone Makes Good Sense

[tekno]

It makes good sense for the shareholders and Apple's sales figures, but I think it will take Apple further away from their roots.

But they can't make niche/excellent products if they want to appeal to the masses.

[Radio]

Originally Posted by Shrink

Yes, outside the US. As as hard as it is to believe, there are humans outside the US. But, really, who gives a damn about them...WE"RE THE US!!





Always good to have someone provide us mortals with TRUTH.

Also, I'm very impressed with your ability to communicate with the dead and know what Jobs thinks about stuff. Probably a salable skill!

Any other bits of TRUTH to impart...especially from the dead??

Steve jobs never intended to have Siri solve the tv issue.

Idiots made that up.

Btw Steve said he doesn't do cheap

[OLDCODGER]

If Apple would decide to make an Apple quality phone that just ... er ... you know, made phone calls, then I might buy one.

[whoareyouanyway]

What? Apple wants to appeal to wider market? Apple wants to make money? no way man, no way.

[Shrink]

Originally Posted by OLDCODGER

If Apple would decide to make an Apple quality phone that just ... er ... you know, made phone calls, then I might buy one.

First, as an old codger myself, I love your user name.

I know this will come as a surprise, given the plethora of ca-ca that occupies most of the iPhone...but (I'm so embarrassed ), I actually make phone calls on the thing.

You know, actually speak, with my voice, to another human being, and have them speak back (I believe it's called conversing)...in real time!!!

(That "real time" usage was just to show how cool and in-the-know I, an old codger, am.)

[Krazy Bill]

Apple is working to develop new services to take advantage of the "stickiness" of the Apple ecosystem.

"Stickiness"?

LOL! Why to spread lipstick all over that thing Apple really calls, "My way or the High way".

[Liquorpuki]

It does make sense because the budget market is pretty much up for grabs right now. Right now it's owned by Android and Nokia, who's trying to hold on with their Asha line but is slowly getting pushed out by Android. Android taking over the budget market is why you hear about Android marketshare skyrocketing in places like China and India. Cheap Android handsets are basically becoming the new feature phones and dumbphones.

Google has no incentive to fight for budget marketshare because people that buy budget phones are typically too poor to afford a data plan or an internet connection. Google makes no money off them because they never use Google services. The budget market basically amounts to Google giving away their OS for free and getting little to nothing in return. They're not gonna fight Apple in this sector, there's no point. Budget Android OEM's might fight to retain marketshare but none of them have Apple's branding so it'll be a losing battle for them.

That whole budget sector along with its X millions of users = easy money for Apple if they want it

[newyorksole]

So someone riddle me this...

Why doesn't Apple make a low cost version of ALL their products?

Low cost Mac, low cost iPhone, iPad...

The least expensive iPhone is $450. What are they gonna do? Make 1 $200 unlocked?

Not buying it.

[Mr MM]

Well, I find interesting the analysis but enterily misread.

Emerging markets share a lower income, and despite that we still have subsidized phones that come out at basically the price of one unlocked in the US, and yes make them in brazil, so despite the tax cuts that they receive, they still charge 2x as much for a phone that is not subsidized in any way

Despite all this the ipad mini hasnt arrived in brazil yet, and the problem here is going to be the price, you can buy a samsung tablet for U$350 (and yes thats cheap for us), it needs to arrive here around that to the top most of U$400

For example an ipad 2 costs U$625

[OLDCODGER]

Originally Posted by Shrink

First, as an old codger myself, I love your user name.

I know this will come as a surprise, given the plethora of ca-ca that occupies most of the iPhone...but (I'm so embarrassed ), I actually make phone calls on the thing.

You know, actually speak, with my voice, to another human being, and have them speak back (I believe it's called conversing)...in real time!!!

(That "real time" usage was just to show how cool and in-the-know I, an old codger, am.)

Yeah, but at the current price of an iphone, I would want my conversations hand delivered! Give me a quality communication device - with no added extras, and at an appropriate cost, and I would consider it.

[Freyqq]

they already sell an iphone that is free with contract. I don't see how this would fit into their model in the US

[OLDCODGER]

Originally Posted by Freyqq

they already sell an iphone that is free with contract. I don't see how this would fit into their model in the US

First, we are talking about the supply of cheap phones to the many countries that make up the rest of the planet.

Second, contract. That's the stopper for the many people who prefer to PAYG.

[Joe Walker]

Well of course a CFO thinks a lower cost product is perfect for them!

[iMcLovin]

Originally Posted by Mattsasa

why lower cost? its already free with carrier subsidies.

where would this have its advantage? only outside USA?

I never understood americans view un subsidised phones?? It seems you think you are getting the phones for free, you even refer to the subsidised price when you talk about how much the phones cost. Do you know that you are actually paying more for the phone than they would cost paying full price right away? ...but the price is baked into the subscription...and the more money you pay to your carrier, the less you will have to pay for the phone.

We have these offers in Europe too, and most people use them, but at least we know it´s not a free phone.

[metzy25]

What do they mean lower cost? Lower cost to make or for the customer? From understanding that's what the 4 and 4s are doing?

[Tankmaze]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

And what does that do to the flagship iPhone? I'm sure Apple will think long and hard about bringing a lower cost iPhone to market and what it might do to the flagship device. I'd be curious to know how much the mini is cannabalizing the full size iPad or if they have any stats on new customers coming into the Apple ecosystem because of the mini (which might offset some of the cannabilzation).

Cook said this at goldman conference, "if we don’t cannibalize, someone else will". So you can tell that there is no negative impact to the iPhone flagship or the iPhone line, as long as people buy the iPhones.

iPhone is common nowadays and maybe just maybe, the flagship iPhone can become one of those "status symbol" icon when the lower price iPhone comes out. I personally don't care about that, but lots of people see iPhone as a luxury items and treat it as an economic status.

I remember Jobs said when he introduce the iPhone in 2007 that there are 100 million phones sold worldwide. and they only want to grab 10% market share which now they have surpassed. Apple could grab more market share in developing countries.

[Fatalbert]

A low-cost iPhone might hurt high-end iPhone sales and hurt Apple's good image. I don't want to see Apple selling half-***ed products.

[flux73]

Originally Posted by SeniorGato1

Lower cost iPhone? how about the 3GS

Not if they can produce a lower cost iPhone that has Retina Display and a faster processor.

[iGrip]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

I'd be curious to know ... if they have any stats on new customers coming into the Apple ecosystem because of the mini (which might offset some of the cannabilzation).

That was covered in the article.

----------

Originally Posted by tekno

But they can't make niche/excellent products if they want to appeal to the masses.

Ever since the iPod, Apple has been about nothing BUT appealing to the masses. You hadn't noticed?

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by MTL18

Not against a cheaper iPhone for nations with a large population and no carrier subsidization.

AKA keep this out of the US and Canada where your margins are huge and most people pay 199 for your phone!

Why?

[jimmirehman]

ill be the one to say it since no one else will... i could care less about the cost of the phone. I bought the first iphone that wasnt subsidized. What i do care about is the rising costs of data from the providers! i have 6 lines now, all with iphones... we blow through data.apple needs to lean into providers and bring back unlimited data. PERIOD!

[carlgo]

So you save a couple of hundred on a phone, but still pay thousands to ATT, etc. The carriers are what is expensive, at least in the US.

[Mactendo]

So Apple Is doing it specifically for Chinese... Who do not want to buy iPhone 4 because it's "too old", nor they can buy iPhone 5 because it's too expensive. They really want the new and cheap one altogether. Good psychology. "All or nothing". In Apple's place I would take the iPhone 4 internals, stuff then into a cheap enclosure and sell as "iPhone 5 mini" or whatever they name it. Anyway that's what's going to happen, the cheap iPhone will have weaker internals just on par with the previous model. Renaming, that's what they actually need to do

[carterja]

iphone 4 is the low cost iphone?
why make a new one, this one still sells like a beast.

[Michael CM1]

Originally Posted by MTL18

Not against a cheaper iPhone for nations with a large population and no carrier subsidization.

AKA keep this out of the US and Canada where your margins are huge and most people pay 199 for your phone!

It would make tons of sense for no-contract carries like Metro USA, Virgin Mobile, Boost, etc. Those phones are at full cost, meaning it's about $500 for an iPhone 4S right now. Drop a new model in there at $350 and you're competing with the Android-based phones sold by those companies.