Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Fined $2 Million in Brazil for Selling iPhones Without Chargers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ok honestly i have so many chargers i don't need more in my collection.
But what interests me to whom get al the money and did they sue Samsung as well 🤔🤔
But what interests me to whom get al the money and did they sue Samsung as well 🤔🤔
They sold roughly 200 million iPhones in 2020.
Clearly, they're doing 'the right thing' for consumers.
Should Apple have been fined for removing the floppy drive from the first imac, or not supporting flash on their iOS devices, or removing the headphone jack?
Apple will probably sooner remove the charging port altogether than change it to USB-C. I wonder what the EU will be able to state in their defence then.
It is insane to me. It’s like asking a consumer to buy a vehicle, but to drive it off the lot you will need to purchase a battery first. Or it comes with a battery under the hood, but no wheels, you’re gonna need to purchase 4 tires first. Lol, it’s absurd. Over $1,000 and then you may have to go purchase additional accessories on your own, not very customer unfriendly. What of people joining the Apple ecosystem for the first time? They have no charging brick, no headphones, no dongle attachment piece, lol. How many essential items are we going to ask them to purchase in addition to the $1000 phones? It’s crazy, and not OK IMO. Should be consumer laws against it, I would support that.
I see it as a problem because it’s essentially not supplying everything the consumer needs to run the main product they are buying. I think printers not coming with USB cables or any needed cables is also wrong, but at least it comes with a *power cable.* Imagine telling consumers to find their own power adapters for their printers, or their own rechargeable battery charging case for their cameras or anything else. It is stupid and greedy, knowing that at the point of purchase 90% of people are going to go with the Apple OEM pieces. It’s just a way to make extra money, why wouldn’t you want a government to protect the buying rights of the consumer?
These comparisons don’t really make sense, the items were still usable, even without a headphone jack you still have audio capability and playback.
Try using your phone when it has no charge and you’ve got nothing to charge it with.
The iPod touch doesn’t come with a charger either, come to think of it. Don’t recall anyone raising a stink over it.
Um....wouldn't that be something a customer should verify when purchasing a product? Both ATT and Apple Store have always opened the iPhone box and showed me the contents when purchasing. If you actively sold your charger, I would make sure the new product has it in the box before I walk out. Its a simple question to the sales person. Its never a good idea to assume anything.
So you would rather pay the consumer be forced to pay more for something the consumer does not need or want?
Why do you think that the only model for anything is bundling all the possible items and preventing consumer choice? Is that you believe that consumers are too stupid to be able to make informed decisions? Most DSLRs, mirrorless cameras and cinema cameras (including those that cost around the same price as the iPhone like the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K), come without lenses. That is pretty clearly something the consumer needs to run the main product. Sometimes these cameras have kit versions that include more accessories (usually low quality ones). Those versions are more expensive. Like everything, companies charge for things they include.
That is pretty common for cameras. Blackmagic Design does not include the IEC to wall cable for many of their products. It is not that they want to save the cost of the cable, but they do not want to stock many SKUs for each product. As long as the company does not lie about it, why is this an issue? Why do you keep insisting that everyone should be forced to pay for something they do not want or need? With an iPhone 12 Pro, would you feel that Apple had met its responsibility if they included a 5 watt charging brick and a 6” Lightning cable? That would mean that everyone who plans to use 30 watt chargers and mag safe connectors has to pay extra for something they do not want. It would also mean that anyone who wanted an 18 watt fast charger and a USB-C to Lightning would also be paying extra.
You say it is greedy, and I say it is exactly the opposite. By not bundling the power supply, Apple gives consumers to pick whatever one they want (or not purchase one at all). The greedy solution is bundling one and forcing people to pay for something they do not need or way. Do you think if they bundle it, they are not charging for it?
Can you support this with any published study that shows this? There is no accessory that Apple has a 90% attach rate. None. Some people will buy an Apple charger, some will buy one of the others that even Apple carries in their stores. However, as recently as 2017 3/4 of iPhones are still purchased in carrier stores (or big box stores), and they do not push the Apple accessories, but usually their own branded ones.
This makes it pretty clear that Apple is giving up revenue (the bundled adapter that they would charge to include) in exchange for giving consumer choice (most of which will not go to them).
No, it is a way of saving the consumer money. They do not have to pay for something they may not want.
You want the government to eliminate buying rights of the consumer, forcing them to pay for something they may not need. I want the government to stay out of this, because all they will do is raise costs, slow change and hurt consumers.
Last edited:
Try using your printer without paper, or your DSLR without a lens or media. You pick one thing that these devices need and ignore all the others. Should they be required to sell the device with a SIM card? I am pretty sure one cannot active an iPhone without one.
Your whole proposition is that people are too stupid to know what is best for them. This is simply insulting.
Nobody said they were incapable of it, but why should they reasonably have to? and at an extra charge? That’s the big rub here, the additional cost not the capability or the inconvenience. Would it be reasonable for a car manufacturer to remove the tyres from their car, still charge the same price, and just say “Well, you’ve got some at home or you know where to buy them!” … you would expect them to at least offer the option of some basic tyres included in the price for people who don’t already have some, or else they’re selling a vehicle you physically can’t drive - a vehicle you can’t drive is a faulty vehicle and doesn’t meet the product description. But, as inconvenient as it is, buying the tyres separately still isn’t inconvenient enough to stop you buying the car if that’s the car you really want, so (bringing it back to iPhone) Apple knows that and knows that they can get away with moves like this because the consumer is at their mercy to a certain extent … they can’t barter over the price, they’re still going to buy the iPhone anyway, so Apple can push the limits of what they can get away with to the detriment of the consumer without feeling any financial impact, the worst the consumer can do is complain, but Apple can just ignore complaints, so that’s where government consumer protection can do something the consumer alone can’t do - hit them where it hurts with a fine!
So Apple reduced the price to reflect the lack of charger? No, the price went up.
The suggestion that most people here are making is not that they should include it automatically in every order, but that there should be an option to get a free basic charger for those who don’t already have one.
This is true of pro-level cameras for people who are highly likely to already have a preferred lens to use that will already greatly exceed the basic lens that would’ve come with the camera … however, most consumer-level DSLRs do come with a basic lens included for the vast majority of people who don’t already own separate lenses. Also, a lens is a far more complex piece of kit than a simple charger. So in two ways, this is not a fair comparison with the iPhone charger situation.
See above! Nobody has said they should be forced on everybody, but they should be available as a free add-on for anyone who needs them. Especially when Apple chooses the year they start switching connectors to be the year they stop including them in the box. They haven’t dropped the price to reflect the lack of charger anyway, so they can more than afford to offer a free basic add-on for anyone that isn’t purchasing the higher grade … or even if they did increase the price, they could offer an equivalent discount against the higher grade products for anyone who would prefer those instead.
They haven’t lost any revenue because they haven’t reduced the price.
They shouldn’t have to pay any extra for it. Would you buy a car without tyres and be happy that you could buy them somewhere else at an extra charge? At least the option to receive a basic set should be included in the price. And a discount offered for upgrades.
The basic ability to power up the product you bought should already be included in the price but currently everyone is being forced to pay extra for it in one way or another, whether buying third party, Apple or through past purchases - even past purchases still cost you something at the time.
No, they just pocketed the extra cost saving. iPhone 12 price wasn't reduced, but instead, increased.
It could also mean that the price of the iphone didn’t increase by as much as it could have had the charger remained.
You’d rather no cable at all?
They include a cable for the people who do need a charger. Meaning they only buy one half.
This also means the person gets the latest standard of cable (android switches may already have a USB C brick).
It also means Apple can simplify their product line to. You buy a new phone, get the USB-C plug. I believe this is why they removed the power brick for all their iPhones. Not just the 12 models.
Base price 12 vs base 11 was the same (at least in US$). Given all the new tech in the iphone 12 vs the iphone 11 Apple kept the price leve.
The above won't happen. That will create a secondary ebay for chargers. Get one for free, sell it on ebay for $15.
Many DSLR sku do come without lenses. Those who purchase a DSLR can purchase an all-around type 18-55 mm similar. That's not difficult to understand. It seems, according to MR, most people are having a difficult time with the lack of charger.
Apple is not giving anything away for free. Those who need a charger, Apple, if mandated in Brazil, might provide a separate SKU and increase the price $20. Which SKU do you think people would buy, or would they all of a sudden become savvy and figure out they could buy a third party Mfi charger instead.
Not correct as explained above.
Not really the same thing as not many people actually have 4 spare tires home waiting for a new car. But many, I postulate have spare charging bricks and cables, or use the USB ports on their computers etc.
USB-A to lightning, with hundreds of millions, if not a billion devices, is a defacto standard. USB is a standard these days. You can charge an iphone with any charging brick, cable or wireless charger. If you are really stuck you can pick up a (mfi) cable and charger for little $$$ at monoprice.com. You just spend $1000 on a phone, one can navigate the complexities. People buy B/T accessories and for the most part, like my Bose QC II did not come with a charger. What were they (Bose) thinking and how did they think consumers would react?
There is a net positive trade off to the environment, whether it's carbon, waste or being green. However, I understand people have come to expect chargers in the box for smartphones. But if one buys a Samsung, Xiaomi and now Iphone there is no charger included. Buy the 20 watt and usb-c to lightning cable and be done with it for years to come.
Sorry, when the iPhone 11 Pro shipped it cost $999, the same price as the iPhone 12 Pro at launch. In addition, they added features, including 5g and camera improvements. Based on what we know, adding 5g added substantial costs to the phone. The iPhone 11 was reduced in price and no longer ships with a charger.
So those of us who have chargers should subsidize those who do not? Why? This is what I cannot understand, do you think that Apple will not charge for these items even if they are bundled? Do you think that they will not apportion that cost over all iPhones sold based on some model of how many people will ask for one? Do you not understand that if they offer it for free, almost everyone will ask for one to prevent leaving money on the table?
Your statement is simply false. As an example Canon’s Rebel T8i their current consumer grade DSLR is sold in kit form with a mediocre 18-55 zoom for $899 or body only for $749. How much do you think Canon would charge if they were required to sell the camera and given anyone who asked for it a lens? Do you think they would choose to add the 18-55 and charge everyone $899? Do you think they might lower the price a bit, based on some model as to how many people would ask for a lens and charge $879? Do you think they might include a bottom of the barrel 50mm lens and charge everyone $799?
It is completely fair. Those who argue that Apple should be required to include a charger do so on the basis that they phone cannot be used with out one. In the same way, a camera cannot be used without a lens. In both cases the point is the same.
So everyone should subsidize those who ask for one? Again, why? Do you not acknowledge that adding a charger adds cost? Do you not think that Apple will pass that cost on to their customers? Given that, do you not think that they amortize this cost over all phones sold based on some model as to how many people will ask for their “free charger”? Knowing that you were paying for it, would you not ask for one, even if you did not need it, so you had the option to sell it or gift it to someone with the phone?
Would you be happier if they included a USB-A to Lightning cable? They did not change the Lightning connector, they changed the other end. Anyone who had a previous Lightning cable and charger can still use it, the inclusion of the new cable is to allow the phones to be connected to MacBooks that Apple also sells and are USB C only. This will help people make the USB C transition. I personally would be happier if they included no cable in the box.
As I pointed out, they added expensive features and did not raise the price.
Why do you think they would lower their margin to bundle a charger? Are you incapable of understanding that nothing a company bundles is free? They will charge you for it of they will drop some other feature they planned to add to keep their cost the same. It just like people who fantasize about the “Employer contribution to Social Security”, as if employers figured out how much they were going to pay employees and without taking that into account.
What about those who do not want any one? Should they be offered a discount? Would that work better for you? Before Visa and MasterCard lost a lawsuit, their merchant agreements required merchants not to charge more for credit card purchases. They were allowed to offer cash discounts, with the difference to the consumer being only psychological.
You do understand that the iPhone 12 Pro is a different device than the iPhone 11 Pro, right? You do understand it has different features and that those features have different costs to Apple? What evidence do you have that Apple’s margin has increased on these devices? Apple’s margins have been amazingly consistent over the years.
They will be paying extra for it. They just will not see it.
If I lived somewhere that I needed snow tires on my car year around, and every car sold was sold with standard tires that I knew I was going to either have to store until I sold the car, or pay to dispose of, I would be happy if tires were unbundled and I could buy whatever tires I wanted with my car. Further, if a substantial number of people replaced their car frequently enough that their tires still had substantial use left on them, would you not prefer that people would pay less and have cars come without tires?
An actual example was car stereos, almost every car used to include a low end radio (depending on how far back, some were AM only even after FM was the norm). One could ask to have the radio “delete” and receive the cost back. Most people did not know this (even those who replaced their radios with aftermarket ones right away) and just paid extra for a “standard feature”.
What if I do not want to buy a charger from Apple? Their chargers tend to be more expensive than those from other reputable manufacturers. What if I have chargers built in to my wall outlets and I do not want one at all? Do you understand that the cost of maintaining this program would exceed any benefit to the consumer?
Fixed that for you. You acknowledge that there was a cost included for the previous chargers, but yet argue that new chargers have no cost? When Apple decides what features to include in their devices and what price to charge, they look at all the costs and determine what they can include in the product for the price they want to hit. Mandating one feature does not make it “free” it just means that something else does not get included for the same price, or that they have to charge more for it. Unless you believe that Apple do not pay for the chargers they include, you have to acknowledge that you are going to be paying for it, one way or another.
Last edited:
The iPhone 11 and iPhone 11 Pro cost the same at launch as the iPhone 12 and 12 Pro. They added 5G and other improvements that changed the costs. Given that their margins remained the same, they did not pocket any savings, they used it to offset increased costs of other components.
Yup. I would rather they cut the cable and unbundled the price. I buy high quality Mfi cables that last much longer than the ones that come with the phones. I would rather not pay for Apple’s low quality bundled cable nor have to deal with disposing of it when it breaks.
Actually, I think they include the USB-C to Lightning cable so that people who had older devices with USB-A based cables can easily charge with new USB-C only MacBook and MacBook Pro systems, and to encourage people to move as many devices as possible to USB-C. I think it also covers the EU USB-C mandate.
What percentage of car owners have a set of tires that have no meaningful wear at home that will fit their new car? If that is 90%, yup, I think that would be great.
If the product description is car without tires, it completely fits the product description. Car manufacturers include tires simply because it is better for them to do so. They can include them and charge enough more to make their standard margin. Be clear, you are not getting those tires for free.
This is just not true. Apple is in a competitive market (as all the people on here who still post despite pointing out that they switched to much better phones from Samsung, FairPhone, LG or whomever, make clear all the time). They cannot raise their prices beyond what consumers will pay. Every component in their phones has a cost, whether that is the 5G modem or the little pamphlet that includes all the disclosures. When any manufacturer sets the price of their product, that pick a set of features that they can deliver for the price they think they can convince the optimum number of customers to pay. They do not just pick a price and then hope they can make the device for less than that.
Really? What percentage of the mobile phone market does Apple control? 100%? 95%? 80%? Apple’s total market share is under 20%, so I would say that most people do not buy an iPhone anyway.
Are consumers forced to buy iPhones? Do you think there is no price point at which Apple’s iPhone sales would decrease?
No, the worst the consumer can do is not buy the product. Nothing forces them to do so. If they do not perceive it as being worth the price, they will not purchase it.
Who do you think pays that fine and who benefits from it? Do the people who bought iPhones get that money or does it go to general revenue, so it becomes a (actual) tax on iPhone users? Apple just includes it in their calculations for the cost of doing business in Brazil. They will raise their prices in the market, and if that makes them not competitive there, they will eventually pull out of the market. What they will not do is just give away things for free.
Apple‘s net margin is 21.4%. The manufacturing cost of the iPhone 12 is estimated to be about 21% more expensive than that of the iPhone 11. That means that not only did they not pocket the savings, they did not even cover their increased cost, so their net margin decreased.