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

[I7guy]

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

There has been no argument that has been clearly proven. Only opinions, where the author has stated/believed an opinion is fact.

• 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.

Fact: the iphone 12 has more tech than the iphone 11. It could be inferred the 5g and lidar components were the most expensive. While you mentioned the iPhone SE2, I noticed you skipped right over the iPhone 12.

• Apple did this across the whole range of iPhones. So again: this proves Apple mainly made this choice to increase profit margins

Yes, Apple made a holistic decision to stop including the charger, which seems to fit these use cases:
1. kept the price flat on the iphone 12
2. reduced the amount of e-waste that can be attributed to Apple

What this proves, is that most of us plebians aren't privvy to Apple's internal workings and we are spit balling when it comes to the rational behind Apple's decisions. (unless Apple states those decisions, but people believe what they want anyway)

 

[MacManTexas56]

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!!!

they ruined it when they started allowing politics to be discussed. back in the day, topics would get closed and they would ban people if they talked about politics. Now it has it's own subsection and so does political news.

 

[tennisproha]

*** 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.

Actually I can, it’s publicly available data. You can run the numbers yourself to verify.

 

[C DM]

Because most people don’t care about this.

Most people don't care about getting less with their purchase than they alway got before (whatever the purchase that might be)? Doesn't quite seem to be the case in many situations, well beyond/outside of Apple.

 

[C DM]

Yes

Well, if people who are posting things are just plain lying, that makes anything and everything posted pretty much moot. Even the particular answer that they are lying is rather moot since it itself can by a lie.

 

[C DM]

Fact: the iphone 12 has more tech than the iphone 11. It could be inferred the 5g and lidar components were the most expensive. While you mentioned the iPhone SE2, I noticed you skipped right over the iPhone 12.

That seems to skip over what the changes to what's now included with SE and its price demonstrate in relation to all of this.

 

[I7guy]

That seems to skip over what the changes to what's now included with SE and its price demonstrate in relation to all of this.

It's possible the underlying reason is not related to price, but to environment. That would be contrary to the "pure motive" speculation as advanced by some as just as viable.

 

[C DM]

It's possible the underlying reason is not related to price, but to environment. That would be contrary to the "pure motive" speculation as advanced by some as just as viable.

Well, one pricing and new technology theory seems to be mostly moot with that, the whole environment part can be in play, with the burden of consequences of that change being on the consumer while Apple just comes out ahead making. So while it can all be part of the consideration, it's hard to say how much of a part it really is, or even if it was something that was the driving force behind it. Ultimately, that's certainly not a bad thing that the environment might be benefiting in some way, but there's still something to be said about how that is being done, as far as how the decision is made and who actually takes on the burden of making it happen.

 

[I7guy]

Well, one pricing and new technology theory seems to be mostly moot with that, the whole environment part can be in play, with the burden of consequences of that change being on the consumer while Apple just comes out ahead making. So while it can all be part of the consideration, it's hard to say how much of a part it really is, or even if it was something that was the driving force behind it. Ultimately, that's certainly not a bad thing that the environment might be benefiting in some way, but there's still something to be said about how that is being done, as far as how the decision is made and who actually takes on the burden of making it happen.

The rational behind this change certainly isn't a moot point, and while we can discuss opinions of why and how it was done, beyond what Apple has publicly shared will most likely not be known. Nor will we (probably not) know if Apple is "making out" from this arrangement...this year.

That the "burden of consequences" is on the consumer, seems to me a "motherhood and apple pie" type of statement. As a consumer, understanding the product and its' usage is mandatory and (for smartphones) the number of items in a box and if the price/value equation meets the expectations.

 

[C DM]

The rational behind this change certainly isn't a moot point

The rationale isn't moot, the part about technology updates being an important factor in it as it relates price is what is basically moot based on how it all applied to the SE.

That the "burden of consequences" is on the consumer, seems to me a "motherhood and apple pie" type of statement.

Since the discussion covers the reasons for it all and impact seems that pointing out that there are only upsides to Apple's decision that creates at best no upsides and often downsides to the consumer is fairly valid. If Apple really had just the environment in mind why not share in the impact of the decision?

 

[I7guy]

The rationale isn't moot, the part about technology updates being an important factor in it as it relates price is what is basically moot based on how it all applied to the SE.

While I would tend to agree, the rationale can't be dismissed without facts...other the rational is speculation, which we are all doing.

Since the discussion covers the reasons for it all and impact seems that pointing out that there are only upsides to Apple's decision that creates at best no upsides and often downsides to the consumer is fairly valid. If Apple really had just the environment in mind why not share in the impact of the decision?

The upside to the consumer, is no price increase. For those who would rather have a price increase and get the usb-c brick, they can spend the $19. While some may not like what Apple did, it doesn't mean this plan does not benefit both a price point and the environment, not either or; so with that aspect it seems the consumer and Apple shared in the impact. Seems like a win-win to me.

 

[C DM]

While I would tend to agree, the rationale can't be dismissed without facts...other the rational is speculation, which we are all doing.

The upside to the consumer, is no price increase. For those who would rather have a price increase and get the usb-c brick, they can spend the $19. While some may not like what Apple did, it doesn't mean this plan does not benefit both a price point and the environment, not either or; so with that aspect it seems the consumer and Apple shared in the impact. Seems like a win-win to me.

Seems like with the SE example it's been demonstrated that the whole pricing part of it doesn't fit in -- SE is being sold for the same price without what it used to normally include.

There is no burden on Apple with this decision, only the upsides, as has been demonstrated, so there's nothing for them to share in when it comes to the burden that is taken on just by the consumers.

 

[MacManTexas56]

While I would tend to agree, the rationale can't be dismissed without facts...other the rational is speculation, which we are all doing.

The upside to the consumer, is no price increase. For those who would rather have a price increase and get the usb-c brick, they can spend the $19. While some may not like what Apple did, it doesn't mean this plan does not benefit both a price point and the environment, not either or; so with that aspect it seems the consumer and Apple shared in the impact. Seems like a win-win to me.

the win is for their pocket book. old tech port with a new tech cable and a block majority don't have. makes zero sense. their argument would make sense if the phone had a usb c port on it and included a backwards compatible cable to be used on the old charging blocks.

 

[I7guy]

Seems like with the SE example it's been demonstrated that the whole pricing part of it doesn't fit in -- SE is being sold for the same price without what it used to normally include.

There is no burden on Apple with this decision, only the upsides, as has been demonstrated, so there's nothing for them to share in when it comes to the burden that is taken on just by the consumers.

It’s just supposition relating to the SE, as Apples internal decision making is unknown vs external communication. So there could have been a burden on the consumer in the form of a price had apple kept the current charger. Of course this will likely never be public information. And in kept g with the theme, a positive side effect is the environment.

And of course Apple is under no obligation to “give” anything to the consumer. Consumers must decide for themselves.

 

[I7guy]

the win is for their pocket book. old tech port with a new tech cable and a block majority don't have. makes zero sense. their argument would make sense if the phone had a usb c port on it and included a backwards compatible cable to be used on the old charging blocks.

Of course, this is a great assertion and a lousy fact.

 

[MacManTexas56]

Of course, this is a great assertion and a lousy fact.

how is it a lousy fact?

 

[Prince Akeem]

There has been no argument that has been clearly proven. Only opinions, where the author has stated/believed an opinion is fact.

Fact: the iphone 12 has more tech than the iphone 11. It could be inferred the 5g and lidar components were the most expensive. While you mentioned the iPhone SE2, I noticed you skipped right over the iPhone 12.

Yes, Apple made a holistic decision to stop including the charger, which seems to fit these use cases:
1. kept the price flat on the iphone 12
2. reduced the amount of e-waste that can be attributed to Apple

What this proves, is that most of us plebians aren't privvy to Apple's internal workings and we are spit balling when it comes to the rational behind Apple's decisions. (unless Apple states those decisions, but people believe what they want anyway)

Wow, you're going a long, long way defending Apple.....

You're looking looking down at 'normal' people and look up at Apple as if it's some holy religious movement. Come on, Apple is just a commercial company, their goal is making money, not saving the world. They have an excellent CFO on the position of CEO, which clearly reflects in apples recent history.

The SE2 is the clear example that demonstrates the whole point we're trying to make here. This is a 2020 phone which was here before and after Apples change. The price stayed the same. Who's financial win is this? How hard can it be to see this point, it won't get more transparent this.

To elaborate on your example about 5G: my European iPhone 12 doesn't even have 5G (or at least: it supports the new protocols but lacks the major hardware of the mmWave modem). The price I pay is slightly higher compared to the US price, after excluding tax and import fees. In other words: another case of paying for hardware that I didn't get. It was just a choice by Apple to keep things 'simple' and don't lower the price for the EU models (in their financial advantage of course).

So, the final consumer price for a new device like the iPhone 12 isn't lending that heavy on what new tech is included, like you're suggesting. It's also been a commercial decision by Apple (since the addition of 'pro' models) to sell a stripped-down entry device for the price what used to be greatest model. You now pay an additional margin to buy the models with all tech included, which was a brilliant financial choice too and people even embraced it. You also keep skipping over the argument that existing tech is getting cheaper at a faster rate.

I'm not saying the new iPhones are bad or anything, they're great and I love the 12 (apart from the %#%# OLED screen....), I really like iOS and hardware integration, and I make a living out of it's existence since the past 10 years. But you have to keep seeing things in perspective, and must know about the huge margin people pay for Apple products, compared to the same new tech in other brands.

 

[I7guy]

Wow, you're going a long, long way defending Apple.....

I guess if sides are being taken, opinions are being countered with other opinions.

You're looking looking down at 'normal' people and look up at Apple as if it's some holy religious movement. Come on, Apple is just a commercial company, their goal is making money, not saving the world. They have an excellent CFO on the position of CEO, which clearly reflects in apples recent history.

What's a 'normal' person?

The SE2 is the clear example that demonstrates the whole point we're trying to make here. This is a 2020 phone which was here before and after Apples change. The price stayed the same. Who's financial win is this? How hard can it be to see this point, it won't get more transparent this.

To elaborate on your example about 5G: my European iPhone 12 doesn't even have 5G (or at least: it supports the new protocols but lacks the major hardware of the mmWave modem). The price I pay is slightly higher compared to the US price, after excluding tax and import fees. In other words: another case of paying for hardware that I didn't get. It was just a choice by Apple to keep things 'simple' and don't lower the price for the EU models (in their financial advantage of course).

So, the final consumer price for a new device like the iPhone 12 isn't lending that heavy on what new tech is included, like you're suggesting. It's also been a commercial decision by Apple (since the addition of 'pro' models) to sell a stripped-down entry device for the price what used to be greatest model. You now pay an additional margin to buy the models with all tech included, which was a brilliant financial choice too and people even embraced it. You also keep skipping over the argument that existing tech is getting cheaper at a faster rate.

I'm not saying the new iPhones are bad or anything, they're great and I love the 12 (apart from the %#%# OLED screen....), I really like iOS and hardware integration, and I make a living out of it's existence since the past 10 years. But you have to keep seeing things in perspective, and must know about the huge margin people pay for Apple products, compared to the same new tech in other brands.

This entire argument is an opinion and it you would be in a more honest position, if you just accepted you don't know what Apples internal thinking is. You don't know if Apple would have raised the price of the SE2, if they didn't stop remove the brick. You are only assuming as such.

This entire point went whoosh. It's not about defending Apple, it's about the lack of knowledge on the internal decisions that were made and what conjectures that were made. Apple's margin is about 38%, do you know what the margins of competing brands are? And why it matters to you personally. If you don't think Apple products have that value to price ratio in the right spot, there are alternatives.

 

[C DM]

This entire argument is an opinion and it you would be in a more honest position, if you just accepted you don't know what Apples internal thinking is. You don't know if Apple would have raised the price of the SE2, if they didn't stop remove the brick. You are only assuming as such.

If what was mentioned is just an assumption (a rather logically reasonable and fairly rational one) then the potential price increase is theoretical speculation based on essentially just trying to come up with something that could simply be within the realm of potential possibility. So, sure, perhaps neither one can be completely known for sure, there's still a rather large difference between a reasonable practical conclusion and basically a straw man type of theoretical speculation scenario.

 

[I7guy]

If what was mentioned is just an assumption (a rather logically reasonable and fairly rational one) then the potential price increase is theoretical speculation based on essentially just trying to come up with something that could simply be within the realm of potential possibility. So, sure, perhaps neither one can be completely known for sure, there's still a rather large difference between a reasonable practical conclusion and basically a straw man type of theoretical speculation scenario.

The assumption can't be proved nor can it be disproved. Without facts, even though the assumption seems logical, that Apple would keep the price the same is speculation. Therefore any conjectures based on that speculation is just more conjecture.

But it will be interesting to see how this plays out in Brazil.

 

[C DM]

The assumption can't be proved nor can it be disproved. Without facts, even though the assumption seems logical, that Apple would keep the price the same is speculation. Therefore any conjectures based on that speculation is just more conjecture.

As I also alluded to, however, not all conjectures are equal.

 

[I7guy]

As I also alluded to, however, not all conjectures are equal.

It seems though a conjecture is a conjecture, a guess even an educated guess, is a guess.

 

[C DM]

It seems though a conjecture is a conjecture, a guess even an educated guess, is a guess.

Yes, but not all are the same nonetheless.

 

[MacCheetah3]

@I7guy You're wasting your time. It's futile to convince some people, they have a need to get acceptance/approval for their opinions.

It's like this... I can say, the audio quality of Bose is exceptional for the size of their products. However, I don't feel the price/cost is equal to or near enough to the quality difference of lesser priced items i.e. Bose is crazy overpriced (even more so than Apple). Therefore, I don't purchase any of their products despite the admiration. That's my conclusion and there's nothing wrong with expressing it. I could blast out tweets, write messages on forums, etc that claim anybody who buys a Bose product is an idiot because there's no possible justification for paying what they demand. That would be wrong as it's not a fact, it's my conclusion based on what I know and feel -- for lack of a better word. The people redundantly claiming Apple is taking away accessories when we pay for a device are doing the same, simply trying to substantiate their selfish rationale of "I don't want to pay as much."

Again, @I7guy, from my observation and attempts, you will never get them to admit that simple, innocent fact. Keep trying if you must though.

 

[MacManTexas56]

@I7guy You're wasting your time. It's futile to convince some people, they have a need to get acceptance/approval for their opinions.

It's like this... I can say, the audio quality of Bose is exceptional for the size of their products. However, I don't feel the price/cost is equal to or near enough to the quality difference of lesser priced items i.e. Bose is crazy overpriced (even more so than Apple). Therefore, I don't purchase any of their products despite the admiration. That's my conclusion and there's nothing wrong with expressing it. I could blast out tweets, write messages on forums, etc that claim anybody who buys a Bose product is an idiot because there's no possible justification for paying what they demand. That would be wrong as it's not a fact, it's my conclusion based on what I know and feel -- for lack of a better word. The people redundantly claiming Apple is taking away accessories when we pay for a device are doing the same, simply trying to substantiate their selfish rationale of "I don't want to pay as much."

Again, @I7guy, from my observation and attempts, you will never get them to admit that simple, innocent fact. Keep trying if you must though.

i7guy is doing the exact same thing lol. it's his opinion, it's my opinion, it's your opinion, and it's the next guys opinion. We all have opinions, but you guys don't want to hear anything anyone else has to say. i7guy has been fighting this topic forever and won't give it up. He's wanting "acceptance/approval" of his opinion and is apparently gonna keep fighting it until we say "you're right". So you're trying to convince all of us who are "wrong", but we can't share our opinions in the same way? lol that's ridiculous. People are sharing their opinion on what they think about the situation and all they continuously get back is "that's not factual". Plus, you're arguing this in a thread where Apple will be forced to include it. So your point is moot when that happens.