We can only hope they aren't stupid and try and push the envelope on making people upgrade. Apple became popular because their stuff lasts. The way my old Apple products worked and lasted is why I wanted to buy more and ended up in the ecosystem.
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 Lowers Revenue Guidance for Q1 2019 Citing 'Fewer iPhone Upgrades' Than Anticipated
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
We can only hope they aren't stupid and try and push the envelope on making people upgrade. Apple became popular because their stuff lasts. The way my old Apple products worked and lasted is why I wanted to buy more and ended up in the ecosystem.
Can you actually read what I wrote ?? I know you have the comprehension skills to work it out, I'm stating I never owned an Android !
You are really coming across as one of the worst serial offenders when it comes to labelling individuals .
Again , please read what I wrote . Your reply makes no sense , adds nothing to the discussion. So please stop with this nonsense .
I've already seen it with some of my friends and family who have moved to Android phones because it has got too expensive to upgrade their iPhones.
That wasn’t really the point I was making though. Of course the price is relevant to consumers as it’s what the product costs. My point was as a consumer the profit Apple ‘wish’ to make is irrelevant to me from an acceptance point of view. I am free to agree or disagree with it as I have done and voted with my wallet. That then becomes just as relevant to Apple as they have lost money by the consumer wishing to look at alternatives.Ergo . Relevant to consumers
I've already seen it with some of my friends and family who have moved to Android phones because it has got too expensive to upgrade their iPhones.
I have a lot of friends and family who are doing the same or keeping their old iPhones until they break. There’s not enough incentive to pay £1k+ for an iPhone that has the same interface as an old model that is already paid off for many people.
I’ll be keeping my iPhone 8 Plus for at least 3 years but I’ve no idea what I’ll do when it does become time to upgrade.
I certainly won’t be paying over a £1000 for a new phone and the prospect of paying around £500 for a two year old design doesn’t really interest me either so I may have to look elsewhere if Apple keep raising their prices.
Apple can charge whatever they want to. That is not the problem. The problem is for the price, it is not competitive and to expensive for typical consumer devices. Phone is consumer devices, it is not something only rich can buy.
My point is not the price, it is the competitiveness of iPhone XR, XS and XS Max. Yes, people from iPhone 6S Plus could be delighted by iPhone XR, they also loss higher resolution screen as well. Or people from iPhone 6S Plus could be delighted by competitive offering as well. It is not like XR is the best device in town. For much lower price, they can get much better screen, faster processor, under display fingerprint sensor, dual camera instead of single camera. It is much of upgrade from iPhone 6S Plus.
My point is, Apple is unable to show people why XR, XS, XS Max is good investment for them. People simply don’t see the value of 1000+ devices to them.
[doublepost=1546605722][/doublepost]
So even less people will buy from you. Smart, you should be top CEO for troubled company.
How is it not competitive?
Let's start with the stainless steel frame.
What other competitive phones offer steel frame?
None!
So we can already end here, Xs has no competitor with comparable characteristics.
For me, steel frame already justifies 200 more than for any other phone, so Xs justifies its price difference very easily.
I'm strongly hoping Apple will keep the prices at the current level and keep using only the best materials.
I don't want 200 cheaper phone with standard Alu frame...
Let's start with the stainless steel frame.
What other competitive phones offer steel frame?
None!
So we can already end here, Xs has no competitor with comparable characteristics.
For me, steel frame already justifies 200 more than for any other phone, so Xs justifies its price difference very easily.
I'm strongly hoping Apple will keep the prices at the current level and keep using only the best materials.
I don't want 200 cheaper phone with standard Alu frame...
Please stop. My point still stands about android, regardless of the deflection of the arguing about the use of a possessive.
Remember - market share is the means, profit is the end.
Think about it. The high-end smartphone market is saturated. Lowering prices is not going to increase sales by any meaningful amount because there aren't many more people to sell them to. Instead, you just end up losing money because the reality is that the majority of your user base is perfectly willing to buy your products whatever the price (up to a certain point, of course).
While you might lose a few sales by raising prices, I am confident that up to a certain point, the higher prices more than offset any revenue lost to a reduction in sales, especially for a company like Apple whose customers will only buy the best.
And I am willing to bet that there is still a bit of room for iPhone prices to be pushed even higher.
Apple is following the classic business rulebook. Higher prices (because you know your user base is capable of affording it), more devices (notice how all the latest products, from iPad to HomePod to Apple TV to Apple Watch and AirPods, are either iPhone accessories or complement it), and services (iCloud, Apple Music, apps). Meanwhile, every product is designed to further lock its user in the Apple ecosystem, which then paves the way to sell them even more hardware and services down the road.
Steve Jobs did what was best for Apple then, just as Tim Cook is doing what is best for Apple now. Apple remains strategically sound, and now is probably as good a time as any to accelerate their pivot into wearables (contrary to popular opinion here, the Mac does not represent the future at Apple) and move beyond the iPhone.
The purchase price is relevant. what makes up that purchase price is not.
Does it matter to us as consumers if Apple makes $1 or $500 profit on a $999 phone? No. we just know that it costs US $999. And it's up to us at that point to judge whether there's sufficient value at $999 or not.
Those of us who pay attention to these numbers are an exception to the rule. your average person just cares about how much money they will have to part with at the end of the day.
What message, the $84B message? I would hate to explain to the board how my company only made $84B in one quarter.
What’s throttlegate?
I’ve cited multiple times android shutting down. Please provide sime citations of a generic, endemic problem with the max.
Android won’t get sued their phones just shut off.
Sure, I put this opinion in exactly the same place I put other opinions found on the internet.
However I upgraded and enough people upgraded or bought new to have an $84 billion quarter. Apple has to face the music, the days of decimating other companies in terms of revenue are over.
Planned obsolescence was never started.
These aren’t my figure, I’m citing someone else who appears to know the subject matter being discussed
You should follow your own advice.
And I see you fail to provide any real proof to support your claims.
What you did is something like this:
As opposed to your iphone just “dying”.
Link with proof: https://tribune.com.pk/story/1817345/8-iphone-xs-xs-max-devices-facing-charging-problems/
You should follow the advice you just gave and post an article from late December. There was no doubt some software issues that got ironed out, especially in the latest beta. But the internet is full of links that detail android phones just rolling over. How many do you want me list?
Well you posted an article from January 2018. So who are you to talk?
No the internet is not full of links that show similar problem with the ones Apple has with their iphone 6s, 7 etc. This is the point made by the other users.
At least a relevant one. The one you posted is not relevant at all and it absolutely doesn't prove that "android phones are just dying" like you claimed. The Note 8 is not just dying because of battery problems.
Also the problem that caused throttlegate is created by apple's design choices so basically it's a design issue which means every single iphone 6, 6s, 7 and SE apple sold will eventually need to be throttled.
So people are asking if you can give examples of Android phones that exhibit exactly the same issues. The Note 8 is clearly a very wrong example.
Your just deflecting. It’s well known that apple takes a few point releases to straighten out various things that come up. Power management addresses the issue that faces android when the phones batteries are going south. What’s android solutions.
The misinterpretation of the post is on you. iOS deals with battery issues, android phones shutdown.
This entire paragraph ignores a basic android issue. That is android just shuts down and has no power management.
While you do have a valid point in that it is not really my business as a consumer how profitable the iphone is, it does also strike me as an extremely short-sighted one. What do you think are the odds of Apple continuing to meaningfully support a device that earns them only $1 in profit? Heck, why even bother releasing a device that is not going to earn Apple much money, if at all?
Have you never wondered why the iOS App Store seems to be so much more successful than the google play store? How it continues to attract the best apps first despite having the smaller market share? Might it be precisely because customers are willing to pay more for quality apps, which in turn draws developers to the platform, and the promise of a greater payday motivates developers to create better-quality apps for iOS relative to Android?
Refuse to pay, or turn to piracy, and see what happens. Apps for android come late or not at all, and they are sometimes of worse quality than their iOS counterparts. In the end, the ones to lose out are the consumers themselves.
Just curious did your circle upgrade to the expensive phones like a note 9 or other android phones that cost over $1,000 or go Oneplus or huawei?I've already seen it with some of my friends and family who have moved to Android phones because it has got too expensive to upgrade their iPhones.
I think this is the epitome of short sightedness.
Not every product line needs to make a direct profit in the short term. The users are far more important for growth than simply profit. If you get people to buy a certain product even at a loss, that gives you data points which in turn helps you develop more products & services which in turn can generate more money in the long run than simply focusing on short term goals.
Please think growth and not profits.
Well unlike you am not making stuff up so the only one here that is deflecting is you.
What issue does android phones face? And Android OS has had a very solid Power management system for quite some time. Apple created a similar power management solution only after the release of iphone 8. And no I'm not talking about their OS updates that secretly lower the performance of the SOC.
Actually iOS deals with battery issues that lead to phone shutdowns.
I don't know Android phones that generally have this exact problem so again where is the proof to support your claims?
LoL Android has no power management? That's one of the most ignorant things I've read.
https://khoshgozaran.com/android-power-and-battery-management-a-look-underneath-the-hood/
Last edited:
I highly recommend taking some marketing/economics courses that outline the basic's of supply demand and price elasticity.
This is an interesting question and brings us around back to long term health of a company and diversification of business, which tends to be what the market and investors are concerned with right now.
There are many industries and devices in the world that don't make money, yet have long term support. Money is made elsewhere in order to support that product.
And example, during the PS3 and XBOX360 era, for nearly the first 3-5 years of those devices lifespan, the hardware was sold at a loss. This was done because both Microsoft and Sony recognized that there's a ceiling they can set the price of the hardware before driving away sales. They sold each console at a small loss, but made up their profit from software, licensing, and accessories. Both of these devices went on to have 10 year lifespans and fully supported by their respective comapnies.
Overall, the need for a corporation to be profitable is important and at no point I hope does my comment sond like I thin companies shouldn't be. But sometimes you have to accept, for longer term growth and stability, slightly smaller numbers today.
So when we, as consumers go to buy a device, whether that device is a $10 loss, or a $100 profit is irrelevant to us the consumer. The only thing that matters is the companies overall health and promise of future support for that product. Individual profit calculation on each device is completely irrelevant in this regard.
This is where I question Tim Cook's direction on pricing and devices. iPhone's don't exist in a vacume. they exist within the smartphone market, which is massive and slowing down. It's a mature market where the largest differentiation factor right now is pricing. The gap between quality, services and functionality is pretty small. Differences in each version of devices from almost everyone is tiny. In these types of markets, Pricing tends to become the bigger motivator of sales. By driving prices up, beyond the curve of the competition, Apple is purposely saying Profit margins are more important than ensuring that the devices are in more peoples hands.
I personally believe this is not a winning combination, as basic economics 101 taught us that if you set a price floor that is too high for market conditions, it grossly affects the equilibrium of supply and demand, resulting in lower demand and an excess of supply. Tim Cook seems to be making a very long bet that the pricing they've currently got is not a price floor, but market conditions. Something we're not seeing overall happen.(yet)
I just don't get the direction. He's raising prices, lowering demand, while at the same time claiming that services will be their next biggest growth. Right now, unless there's a major shift, Apple's service industry relies extremely heavily on iOS user base. Very few of their services are cross platform, or work well on other platforms. This means that lowering Demand of the iPhone and possibly affecting market share penetration, Apple runs the risk of lowering their service market base.
his current strategy is just at odds with itself.