Apple Developing Hardware Subscription Service for iPhones and Other Devices

[vipergts2207]

Hmm, not necessarily. Investing the funds could give you greater returns.

Again, this requires someone to have the ability to afford financed pricing in the first place. This is generally not the case. And even then, $500/month with a typical 6% annual market return comes to $19.6k after 3 years, still falling short of financing.

 

[rui no onna]

You're missing some of the rest of the story. The guy who leased now has to pay sales tax on another 3 year lease. The guy who financed pays no additional tax if they simply keep the car for another 3 years. Or if they want a new car, generally the value of the trade-in is deducted from the sales price tax figures. If I by a new car for $40k and trade in one for $25k, I only pay tax on $15k, not $40k.

Sadly, not in California. Have to pay the sales tax on the full $40K.

 

[Steve121178]

So what’s next? Maybe someday you’ll need a subscription to use some of the features on the iPhone. You want ProMotion, 8K video recording, iCloud syncing, etc.? You’ll need a subscription. I really hope I’m joking.

I can see it now.

"full camera functionality available to subscribers only"
"adverts in iOS removed with subscription"
"ad-free iMessage available to subscribers only"
"$199 to unlock under-display Touch ID for existing subscribers"

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

So Apple is becoming Rent-A-Center? ?

 

[LeadingHeat]

I could see this being a hit for businesses, but for consumers it just feels like it would be too expensive. If it comes in at an attractive pricepoint, I could maybe get on board. But we’ll see I guess

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

Tim Cook is the new Steve Ballmer but saying "SERVICES, SERVICES, SERVICES...". The boy is thirsty.

 

[Scallywaggr]

This looks an sounds like the Apple Upgrade program. Where for a fraction of the overall cost per month you get the phone and in two years it’s paid off; but at the year mark you have the option to turn that device in for the next iteration and continue with the same payment structure and it includes AppleCare+. Honestly this is a brilliant move I’ve been a proponent of for awhile. All the hassle of trying to sell my watch to afford the next one is a pain. I’m happy to spend a little every month to use the latest and greatest and then turn it back in at the year mark for the next iteration or continue to use it until paid in full.

 

[Scallywaggr]

I'm surprised they didn't mention this in the article, because the upgrade program is pretty much an iPhone subscription.

I guess the differentiating factor would be that with a true subscription you'd have to give the iPhone back if you cancel, and I guess it would also be cheaper?

The iphone is tied to a line of credit.

 

[Le0M]

We should move towards a world where we buy less, recycled and recyclable things; instead, Apple decides to lure people into getting hardware subscription: this is in strong contrast with the recycling measures Apple has recently taken.

 

[PressureDrop]

Unfortunately, that doesn't sound very sustainable, because innovations always require new raw materials. Recycling is expensive. An experiment was conducted in Germany: Nike offers a recycling program for shoes. Journalists equipped new shoes with transmitters and then tracked them. The result was that brand new shoes were being shredded instead of being recycled. This will be similar with new devices. I wonder if we really need something like this in the world...

A company that adorns itself with the title "sustainable" can't keep throwing new phones onto the market just to make investors cheer.

I like the iPhone, but I don't need an upgrade every year, but subscription programs like this aim to do just that.

 

[scrapesleon]

You will own nothing and be happy

 

[JippaLippa]

I wonder if this would get me around the iPhone Upgrade Program carrier requirements. I'd love to ditch AT&T, but I'm stuck if I want to continue participating in the iPUP each year.

As a European thing, I never understood this american thing of having to purchase a phone via a carrier.
I always bough my iPhones directly from the store at their retail price, without having to be linked to a specific carrier

It may not be liked, but among professionals, it’s just part of doing business.

One the CC dropped I eas surprised and I felt it was a terrible idea, however it was also a time when I didn't earn much money to pay the progras back.
Now that I have a somewhat stable freelance activity, I see the creative cloud as an invaluable tool.
In the past you had to pay quite a lot for the Master Collection (as it was called), however you were locked out of a free upgrade to the next release.
Nowadays updating the programs to the next version has become mandatory and the subscription price is much easier to handle with an even low steady income.
Not to mention the CC grew to become so much more than a collection of programs.
Now you have the syncing, the cloud storage, the library, the fonts, and so much more.

 

[Macative]

Why do people keep saying “this sounds like the iPhone upgrade program”.

No. It doesn’t. It literally does not.

iPhone upgrade program = financing a purchase.

This subscription is purely a rental. And the fee would be much lower than iUP.

 

[Macative]

We should move towards a world where we buy less, recycled and recyclable things; instead, Apple decides to lure people into getting hardware subscription: this is in strong contrast with the recycling measures Apple has recently taken.

Nonsense. When the rental goes back to Apple, it’s either refurbished and resold to someone else, or it’s recycled and made into more iPhones.

 

[robertcoogan]

I find it hard to believe that this would go across the range of iPhones. If it did, it would kill it for me. I just am so tired of subscriptions. I would probably make the jump to Android at that point.

 

[randian]

You're missing some of the rest of the story. The guy who leased now has to pay sales tax on another 3 year lease. The guy who financed pays no additional tax if they simply keep the car for another 3 years. Or if they want a new car, generally the value of the trade-in is deducted from the sales price tax figures.

I'm used to California's tax rules, where a trade-in is treated as cash and doesn't reduce sales tax. I didn't know other states were more generous, though it should not surprise me when they are.

 

[anson42]

This looks an sounds like the Apple Upgrade program. Where for a fraction of the overall cost per month you get the phone and in two years it’s paid off; but at the year mark you have the option to turn that device in for the next iteration and continue with the same payment structure and it includes AppleCare+.

Actually, this rumored program is not like IUP. In the IUP after two years you do own the phone and can do whatever you want with it after paying it off. With a rental program you NEVER own the phone nor do you ever actually pay it off. The enticement is that the monthly payment would be significantly lower than the IUP monthly program and thus if you did stay with the same phone for two years you would have paid much less than the phone's retail cost, but similarly you don't own it. If this program offers a new phone very year, then it would not be a good idea to keep a phone for two years; just take the new one every year.

I use the IUP as a way to get a new phone every year without ever worrying about availability or having to get rid of it if I buy a new phone. A rental program that is effectively the same thing at a lower price would be attractive for my use case. But it would not be if actually want to own the phone outright. Turns out I don't actually NEED to own my phone anyways given how I use the IUP. At the end of the day I would get the same behavior at a lower cost, and it has to be a lower cost or why would I switch from IUP, right?

 

[donth8]

Apple already does this for small businesses with a bank called CIT and you can upgrade after 90 days. If they keep the same 3% of the purchase price per month it might actually be something to give serious thought.

https://landing.cit.com/mac-upgrade.html?t=SMB_MAC-FINANCNING_202111

 

[canadianreader]

View attachment 1980035

They're using the word "You", this is the super rich talking to us they surely don't include themselves in this otherwise they'd have used "We"
I guess they'll get to keep their planes mansions etc but not the everyday people.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

People who don't have the funds to buy this device in the first place should not subscribe to that kind of services. There's no way the would be cheaper on the long run, and you can't resell the device afterwards

It would be a hit though. Not for me, but I can see a lot of people signing up for this.

 

[Shirasaki]

As I always feared, hardware subscription, and there’s a very high chance purchasing outright would be removed by Apple at some point.

“Both hardware and software are Apple’s property, and you don’t own anything”. See what we have now. Frankly, the entire human life is owned by mega corps nowadays. What you left behind for kids are a pile of bills they have to keep paying.

Details does matter, but I have no Hope Apple will allow users to own the device by the end of payment period. What’s worse, if you manage to damage the device, you’d have to pay the full price upfront and STILL doesn’t own the damaged device.

I still remember someone saying “why Apple owns those outdated hardware”, and here we are. Wonder how companies own food despite people needing to eat them.

 

[rui no onna]

As I always feared, hardware subscription, and there’s a very high chance purchasing outright would be removed by Apple at some point.

I don’t think that will happen. However, it might be the case that prices get so expensive without a subscription that only the rich could afford buying outright.

I’m an early adopter to Netflix streaming and it was only what, $6-8 per month back then?

 

[ian87w]

Apple should provide something like this in markets where their prices have ballooned up into the stratosphere. With severely high inflation looming, it will make iPhone prices into new ridiculous level. But interestingly Apple would only offer programs like this in developed markets where the consumers can afford iPhones already.

 

[Shirasaki]

Apple claims to have strong recycling programs running. If so, trickling down old device recycling isn’t going to be a huge stress to the system. Also, it means Apple would only need to support new devices since users aren’t supposed to keep old devices forever.

Plus, Apple keeps bragging about their devices being so environmentally friendly. So in theory, it is totally possible for them to purchase minimum amount of raw materials while continuing to produce new hardware if outright ownership is removed from available purchase options. Remember each year Apple sells millions of iPhone? Imagine all of those are Apple property and users have to send them back when payment stops.

 

[Shirasaki]

I don’t think that will happen. However, it might be the case that prices get so expensive without a subscription that only the rich could afford buying outright.

I’m an early adopter to Netflix streaming and it was only what, $6-8 per month back then?

Basically, practically “subscription only” since you otherwise can’t use an iPhone iPad or whatever because you can’t afford $5000 base model iPhone otherwise.