Apple Could Be Forced to Include a Charger with Every iPhone Sold in Brazil

[MacManTexas56]

Counting items in the box yes, counting value of the entire purchase, no. The consumer will now have to take an active time in determine how to charge their phone. I only hope those hand-wringing, clueless consumers, who probably have acquired consumer electronics in the past can deal with this. And yes, it’s now on them.

there's now value in not including a charger? lol

 

[obamtl]

The phones don’t cost more than elsewhere, it’s the import taxes for luxury items that drive the price up. Apple doesn’t get more money than for a US phone. So they’ll add $20, then Brazil adds whatever luxury import tax on it.

Economics 101. What the end customer cares about when deciding is the price they pay. At such a high price, marginal cost increases hurt sales further. Apple weighs the pros and cons when deciding whether to pass the full cost on or absorb it. Apple sets the retail price based on what they can get people to pay.

 

[tennisproha]

What you call disingenuous I call close to reality, as anecdotally evidenced by the response from my son after he purchased an iphone 12.

I'm sure some people have some extra usb-c chargers, but considering the 10 year history of the usb-a lightning cable, common sense would indicate that with hundreds of millions of iphones sold over this time period, there are a lot to be had on a global scale.

So no, Apple is not hiding behind anything. And Apple kept the price flat of the iphone 12, even though there is tons of new tech in the phone. Partially offset by not including the charger. <---this is an opinion as what the bolded is above is simply a critical opinion, not based on reality.

Actually it’s worse than you think because before at least there was typically just one model. Coincidentally with the start of the switch to USB-C they have fragmented the iPhone to 3-4 different model types. So no the iPhone 12 isn’t really a flat price. What you got is the SE version of the iPhone 12. The actual version, with all the iPhone 12 features is the 12 Pro Max, charger and taxes excluded.

The price of an iPhone went from roughly ~$800 total to now around ~$1400 total.

 

[tennisproha]

It's actually not odd. If you want more than is in the box, you buy it extra and pay extra. That's the normal run of things. Like with headphones, cases, additional cables, stands, all other accessories. I found it unfair from the beginning that I had to pay for headphones in the iPhone box that I never used. And make no mistake, we all paid for them, it wasn't something "free" that Apple added because they are so kind.

Are you’re saying the iPhone is now cheaper and you’re paying less without the “extras”? Please source this claim.

 

[I7guy]

Actually it’s worse than you think because before at least there was typically just one model. Coincidentally with the start of the switch to USB-C they have fragmented the iPhone to 3-4 different model types. So no the iPhone 12 isn’t really a flat price. What you got is the SE version of the iPhone 12. The actual version, with all the iPhone 12 features is the 12 Pro Max, charger and taxes excluded.

The price of an iPhone went from roughly ~$800 total to now around ~$1400 total.

Fragmentation isn’t a bad thing, as it provides more market opportunities. The price stayed flat at the low and higher ends. Those who need a charger will have to adjust the price accordingly.

 

[C DM]

It's actually not odd. If you want more than is in the box, you buy it extra and pay extra. That's the normal run of things. Like with headphones, cases, additional cables, stands, all other accessories. I found it unfair from the beginning that I had to pay for headphones in the iPhone box that I never used. And make no mistake, we all paid for them, it wasn't something "free" that Apple added because they are so kind.

And yet after they removed things they didn't decrease the price.

 

[C DM]

Economics 101. What the end customer cares about when deciding is the price they pay. At such a high price, marginal cost increases hurt sales further. Apple weighs the pros and cons when deciding whether to pass the full cost on or absorb it. Apple sets the retail price based on what they can get people to pay.

That's certainly part of it. But part of the problem with that is being too large, for lack of a better phrase, where they can do a whole lot of things that aren't good for the consumer and not only have that go through but even have others copy them so that the consumers end up meeting the same even if they try to go with the competition.

 

[I7guy]

And yet after they removed things they didn't decrease the price.

Apple also increased the tech in the phones. Assumptions could be made about the margin, but it's a fact that there is more tech in the phones compared to last year. It's also a fact new tech costs more then old tech (and maybe correspondingly more than in previous years) and we can assume Apple helped to mitigate the price increase via the removal of the charger.

 

[I7guy]

That's certainly part of it. But part of the problem with that is being too large, for lack of a better phrase, where they can do a whole lot of things that aren't good for the consumer and not only have that go through but even have others copy them so that the consumers end up meeting the same even if they try to go with the competition.

Similar to the fashion industry, car industry, tv industry...

 

[SchrodingersMartian]

Some of these posts make no sense and are written by people who know nothing about business and how it works.

These posts are a bit biased as no one has pointed out Samsung the same exact thing and I don’t care if Apple did it first but let’s stop blaming Apple for everything wrong in your lives and on the planet.

Your not getting your chargers back so there that. Most people have at least 2 lightning chargers. I have 4 since I get a new phone every year.

Also I don’t want any comments about that either because I have it like that to get one every year and don’t need a counterfeit suze orman giving me financial advise either.

Hopefully next year iPhone will be portless and this whole debate over chargers will be moot.

 

[C DM]

Apple also increased the tech in the phones. Assumptions could be made about the margin, but it's a fact that there is more tech in the phones compared to last year. It's also a fact new tech costs more then old tech (and maybe correspondingly more than in previous years) and we can assume Apple helped to mitigate the price increase via the removal of the charger.

Apple has improved tech in phones every year and didn't need to mitigate things by removing something. You can say things change, and sure they can. But that also puts that particular reasoning for change as something moot as "things change" then covers anything and everything essentially.

 

[C DM]

Some of these posts make no sense and are written by people who know nothing about business and how it works.

These posts are a bit biased as no one has pointed out Samsung the same exact thing and I don’t care if Apple did it first but let’s stop blaming Apple for everything wrong in your lives and on the planet.

People know how business works, it people are consumers and as such surely wouldn't like when they get less, just as business wouldn't like when they would get less, right?

As for Samsung and all that, regencies to that have been made, and ultimately it's not about who did it first or whatnot, it's about consumers getting less that before whoever they end up going with. In this case the discussion is focused more on Apple because, well, nor surprisingly it's about an article that relates to a change that Apple has made. A similar discussion would be there in relation to other manufactures.

 

[I7guy]

Apple has improved tech in phones every year and didn't need to mitigate things by removing something.

There also hasn’t been a world wide pandemic, associated economical issues, and all that has been discussed and reported on the effects of it etc since the iPhone 1. There also hasn’t been an outcry to reduce e-waste. So this year it could be guessed apple had to mitigate expenses and make a draconian internal decision.

You can say things change, and sure they can. But that also puts that particular reasoning for change as something moot as "things change" then covers anything and everything essentially.

Saying things change, as in the world changes is a basic straw-man. Things changed enough with and about apple that it was determined this was a decision that has to be made.

 

[SchrodingersMartian]

People know how business works, it people are consumers and as such surely wouldn't like when they get less, just as business wouldn't like when they would get less, right?

As for Samsung and all that, regencies to that have been made, and ultimately it's not about who did it first or whatnot, it's about consumers getting less that before whoever they end up going with. In this case the discussion is focused more on Apple because, well, nor surprisingly it's about an article that relates to a change that Apple has made. A similar discussion would be there in relation to other manufactures.

Why is there a need for constant placating from Apple? Most of us have paid the Apple tax which means we have pretty decent jobs and have chargers around from prior phones.

I do not see why this is such a huge issue is it because of the pandemic and we are all at home? Otherwise why is this such a problem.

 

[C DM]

Why is there a need for constant placating from Apple? Most of us have paid the Apple tax which means we have pretty decent jobs and have chargers around from prior phones.

I do not see why this is such a huge issue is it because of the pandemic and we are all at home? Otherwise why is this such a problem.

Why would consumers have some sort of feelings for getting less than what they always did as part of their purchase? Is that what the question is about?

 

[SchrodingersMartian]

Why would consumers have some sort of feelings for getting less than what they always did as part of their purchase? Is that what the question is about?

Oh feelings only from MacRumours or online communities because that is where the “than thou” attitude comes from as if they can think they speak for all iPhone users and Mac users.

 

[C DM]

Oh feelings only from MacRumours or online communities because that is where the “than thou” attitude comes from as if they can think they speak for all iPhone users and Mac users.

Why would consumers who aren't even users of online forums not have feelings about getting less than what they always got in their purchase?

 

[spazzcat]

You are saying that those who said they wouldn't want one in various posts are basically lying then?

Yes

 

[spazzcat]

Right. So the whole argument you keep making saying no big deal, we have tons of chargers lying around is pretty disingenuous then huh. Like people are rooting for Apple when Apple is screwing them over lol.

In addition to the new iPhones, I have iPad pros so I actually need the USB-C chargers.

Apple is simply hiding behind the environmental excuse so they can increase there profit margins for charging $50 for something that was previously included in the cost.

They didn't increase profits. I believe there is and will be an environmental impact, but I also believe this was a way to not raise the price of the phone to cover Trump's tariffs.

 

[I7guy]

Yes.

Of course I have USB ports on my iMac, but the iPhone charger is the only USB wall charger I have. Maybe I'm a minority. Just because you have multiple chargers, doesn't mean everyone has it.

Correct. This is not binary and it's not that out of the hundreds of millions of iphones and hundreds of millions of Apple customers, one or two posters in an online forum invalidates the hypothesis that probably (tens or hundreds of) millions of people have spare chargers and cables.

 

[SchrodingersMartian]

Why would consumers who aren't even users of online forums not have feelings about getting less than what they always got in their purchase?

Because most people don’t care about this. This forum has people who if there is even a tiny typo on a MacBook Box for example will complain about it.

The people who truly care about this are online users on this forum so far. I can hop over to Howardforums or other boards and don’t see people complaining and Macrumors is a vocal minority I understand people here act as if they are the only folks in the world who buy Apple products but your not get over and get over yourselves.

This entire message board is toxic and worse than Facebook and reddit. It has ruined the Mac experience for me because everyone wants to complain all the time because Apple got rid of floppy disks and they don’t have FireWire ports and don’t support power PC apps etc. People like you expect Apple to be in the past and continue to support old tech I don’t know and don’t care why that it.

Jesus pieces get it over it and over your self!!!

 

[MacCheetah3]

There is nothing requiring you to have USBC, I get it you want one, but you don't need it. But I have maybe 5 USBC charging bricks...

The argument here is that Apple includes a USB-C to Lightning cable rather than a USB A to Lightning cable. Even so...

When you buy a new item, no matter what it is, you consider and add all of the expenses. So, if a toy (e.g. $49.99) says, "No batteries included" on the package, you look for compatible batteries (e.g. $4.99), thus making the final cost consideration $49.98. Or, if I was considering an iPhone 12 Pro (base model), I'd add $999, $17 for an Anker Nano (because I don't happen to have a USB-C AC adapter), as well as $80 (estimated sales tax) and say, "An iPhone 12 Pro will cost me about $1,096." I wouldn't naively make the budget-related purchasing decision on just the $999 price, no one with financial sense does. There are plenty more examples, but my point should be clear enough.

 

[MacCheetah3]

And yet after they removed things they didn't decrease the price.

Are you’re saying the iPhone is now cheaper and you’re paying less without the “extras”? Please source this claim.

*** emphasis mine.

The fact is you probably can't substantiate your claim any more than the other side. So, everyone should stop using that as an argument point.

 

[Prince Akeem]

Apple also increased the tech in the phones. Assumptions could be made about the margin, but it's a fact that there is more tech in the phones compared to last year. It's also a fact new tech costs more then old tech (and maybe correspondingly more than in previous years) and we can assume Apple helped to mitigate the price increase via the removal of the charger.

I don't know why people keep repeating this argument, which has clearly been proven not to be the point there.

• Fact: the iPhone SE2 launch price was $399, which did include charger and earbuds. Right now it doesn't include these anymore, while price remained exactly $399.
• Apple did this across the whole range of iPhones. So again: this proves Apple mainly made this choice to increase profit margins.

Hopefully next year iPhone will be portless and this whole debate over chargers will be moot.

Why? A portless iPhone needs a power adapter and a charge cable (albeit being inductive instead of connector) just as much as an iPhone with a port.

 

[Jimmy James]

So, ban all sales of products without included batteries since you’re at it.

They specify batteries not included on the box. Plus, you can almost always buy better and/or cheaper batteries Than what they give you.