Apple Must Compensate Brazilian Customer Over $1,000 for Selling iPhone Without a Charger, Judge Rules

[visualseed]

Read what I wrote about iPhone SE 2020 where Apple was selling it for the same exact price... whether it came with power adapter and EarPods or not. Side by side, same price.

The iPhone 12 was the first completely new iPhone model to stop including the power adapter and EarPods. It was produced and released in 2020... way before supply chain problems started.

If Apple had supply chain problems in 2020 and first half of 2021, then how was Apple able to have a record setting fiscal 2021 and record iPhone 12 sales?

Apple Reports 4Q 2021 Results: $20.6B Profit on $83.4B Revenue

Apple today announced financial results for the fourth fiscal quarter of 2021, which corresponds to the third calendar quarter of the year. For the...

www.macrumors.com

Apple's iPhone 12 led to largest revenue and profit in company history

The tech giant says its fiscal first-quarter iPhone sales grew by more than 17% from the previous year, marking a strong start for the iPhone 12.

www.cnet.com

The iPhone 12’s strong momentum helps Apple to another huge quarter

Apple’s first 5G phones are still selling well in what’s usually a slow season.

www.theverge.com

Selling it for the same exact price didn't mean it cost the same to manufacture. Apple could literally be making less profit on the same model produced without a charger in 2021 as they did on ones produced in late 2019 / early 2020 with a charger. The cost of nearly everything in the supply chain including wages went up over that time period. Unsold inventory from previous manufacturing runs would have a lower production cost and have a better margin despite containing a charger. Does a consumer paying the same price and getting a charger get a better deal? Yes. But that does not translate to Apple making more money if they sell one without.

For the record supply chain problems due to COVID started in late Spring 2020. The 2020 iPhone 12 launch was delayed a month in the Fall and even the Pro Max was delayed a month longer than that due to them. A late in the year produced SE could certainly be more costly than an early in the year (or even late 2019 when they were most likely made) produced SE.

From Apple's annual reports:

• Apple annual cost of goods sold for 2021 was $212.981B, a 25.61% increase from 2020.
• Apple annual cost of goods sold for 2020 was $169.559B, a 4.81% increase from 2019.

 

[I7guy]

Except it is not really more environmentally friendly, you need packaging and shipping for the charger separately, then in a country like brazil they will probably go on the cheap side and get a junk 3rd party charger. If the Junk charger does not break the phone, they will then have to buy buy an expensive OEM or a reputable third party charger, more shipping and even more packaging.

Sure I have many 1 watt USB A Apple chargers, but it is always good to have an extra one as they break, get lost or get stolen. Now that companies no longer provide chargers, I'm just buying more of them and avoid the cheap Chinese ones

Sure. I’m guessing apple looked at the numbers. I don’t remember off hand but it seems logical that most iPhone customers are repeat buyers.

Sure there are some first time buyers that may be annoyed and some others who sell their chargers, but that is life.

 

[Bandaman]

What the? You're not even trying to understand the point here. We're talking about people demanding that something be included with a product.

They're not demanding anything. Chargers have always been included with electronics. Apple has set a weird trend for themselves for the sole purpose of profit without passing those savings onto the consumer. There's now less packaging and less in the box, and their products still cost the same. The consumer receives no benefit from this move, so defending it is ridiculous. People wanting things to be how they've always been since home electronics first came into existence isn't unreasonable, demanding, or missing the point. However, defending something that doesn't benefit you ... and in fact does the very opposite ... is disturbing.

 

[JMStearnsX2]

At one point, it seemed plausible that Brazil would have forced Apple to include a charger in the box for every ‌iPhone‌ sold in the country. Procon-SP said that the charger is an "essential part" of the smartphone experience.

Really?!?! Rubbish!!!!

Dang! Does this mean that I can sue an auto manufacturer for not supplying me with gas for the life of my car? After all, gas is an essential part of the car experience.

This would be more akin to car makers/dealers selling you a car with an empty tank of gas, then charging you $25/gallon to drive it off the lot...

 

[4jasontv]

Selling it for the same exact price didn't mean it cost the same to manufacture. Apple could literally be making less profit on the same model produced without a charger in 2021 as they did on ones produced in late 2019 / early 2020 with a charger. The cost of nearly everything in the supply chain including wages went up over that time period. Unsold inventory from previous manufacturing runs would have a lower production cost and have a better margin despite containing a charger. Does a consumer paying the same price and getting a charger get a better deal? Yes. But that does not translate to Apple making more money if they sell one without.

Apple devices have historically cost less to manufacture, generation over generation. So even in the face of unexpected changes in material availability, the cost likely went down. Historical evidence backs this up, and I can't find any details to suggest that iPhone design changes and sales volume were different this time around.

 

[usagora]

Translation: I don't like this particular consumer protection law so it is government overreach /s

If we're going to play this game, then I can just turn that right back at you and say "Translation: I like this particular consumer protection law, so it's not government overreach".

Logic is on my side here. The government is NOT "protecting" consumers here. Apple makes very clear what is included in the box and that there's no charger. Maybe the government should isntead spend its resources on consumer education classes starting with how to read product descriptions before you make purchases instead of feeding the destructive entitlement mentality that looks to the government as a solution for all their petty complaints.

 

[siddavis]

It’s not that hard. You just hire some specialist in that country.

How many countries are there?

 

[I7guy]

Or the already overpriced phone could have just included one. We can do this all day. You're never going to be right about it, and neither will Apple. It was wrong to do, and it was doubly wrong to do without passing the $6.5 billion they saved onto customers.

And neither will you be right. Because it is what it is, even if you don’t like it. Apple was under no obligation to pass savings to the customers, especially since the price of the new tech was held at last years level for entry level phones. Apple could have easily raised the price $10/20/100 dollars.

 

[deeddawg]

iPhone 12 Pro ships with a USB-C to Lightening cable... USB-A charger is worthless.

... and in all your time with Apple devices you had zero USBA to Lightning cables sitting around.

I find that highly improbable.

Yet in the rare case in which that was actually true, a stop at the nearest convenience store would easily and cheaply remedy the situation, allowing use of your "ton of USB-A chargers".

I note though that had Apple included a USBA to Lightning cable you'd have had no trouble, and so perhaps real issue for you was the USBC to Lightning cable...

 

[usagora]

They're not demanding anything. Chargers have always been included with electronics.

Yes, they are. And how convenient that you ignore the first part of my post where I prove you were incorrect saying that all electronics include chargers. Many devices only include a charging cable.

 

[4jasontv]

And neither will you be right. Because it is what it is, even if you don’t like it. Apple was under no obligation to pass savings to the customers, especially since the price of the new tech was held at last years level for entry level phones. Apple could have easily raised the price $10/20/100 dollars.

It's supposed to be held level because each new generation costs less to manufacture. If the iPhone was 100% cutting-edge technology then your point would make some sense. But it's not, and it doesn't.

 

[I7guy]

They're not demanding anything. Chargers have always been included with electronics. Apple has set a weird trend for themselves for the sole purpose of profit without passing those savings onto the consumer. There's now less packaging and less in the box, and their products still cost the same. The consumer receives no benefit from this move, so defending it is ridiculous. People wanting things to be how they've always been since home electronics first came into existence isn't unreasonable, demanding, or missing the point. However, defending something that doesn't benefit you ... and in fact does the very opposite ... is disturbing.

The move was and is good for the environment. What’s disturbing is that few seem to see the bigger picture.

 

[bcortens]

If we're going to play this game, then I can just turn that right back at you and say "Translation: I like this particular consumer protection law, so it's not government overreach".

Logic is on my side here. The government is NOT "protecting" consumers here. Apple makes very clear what is included in the box and that there's no charger. Maybe the government should isntead spend its resources on consumer education classes starting with how to read product descriptions before you make purchases instead of feeding the destructive entitlement mentality that looks to the government as a solution for all their petty complaints.

If a product requires a secondary purchase to function that is consumer hostile. Sure many people have compatible chargers already but not everyone does. In the case of Apple in particular, old USB-A->lightning cables are poorly made and often break and need replacing so you might not have a cable or charger compatible with your new phone (that comes with USB-C -> lightning. Not requiring consumers to make a separate purchase is an example of consumer protection.

 

[I7guy]

It's supposed to be held level because each new generation costs less to manufacture.

New tech always costs more. Old tech costs less to manufacture over time.

If the iPhone was 100% cutting-edge technology then your point would make some sense. But it's not, and it doesn't.

No, just enough has to new for apple to bump the price. But they held the line.

 

[Macative]

I'm not saying it is about e-waste, but if we are concerned about it (as people) then it would be nice to have the option to opt out if we don't need a charger.

I was thinking about the new EU law requiring USB-C chargers, I think the spirit of the idea makes good sense but the implementation is flawed. The law should require all phone manufacturers to come together every 3-5 years and agree on a common charging port (perhaps voted on by all phone manufacturers and a super 66% super majority chooses the new standard?). This would allow rapid adoption of new charging standards while simultaneously reducing e-waste in the EU.

Fine, if you want to virtue signal about e-waste and check a box that says "Don't send me a charger", and also simultaneously get a $20 discount on your purchase, that would have been a fine solution.

But that's not where we are, or what happened.

 

[4jasontv]

Yes, they are. And how convenient that you ignore the first part of my post where I prove you were incorrect saying that all electronics include chargers. Many devices only include a charging cable.

Most devices need less power than a USB port provides. There is a huge difference between a device that uses less than 2W and the iPhone Pro 13 Max which uses 27W at peak charging.

 

[bcortens]

The move was and is good for the environment. What’s disturbing is that few seem to see the bigger picture.

By this logic a common (USB-C) charging standard is good for the environment, all laptops and phones should only charge with USB-C and all chargers should be sold separately. Taking it further, people should be prevented (by the benevolent Apple of course) from purchasing a new phone more frequently than every 2 years and new computers every 3 years. You can take the environmental argument as far as you want and it will make sense every step of the way.

 

[4jasontv]

New tech always costs more. Old tech costs less to manufacture over time.

No. New tech often costs less because designs are more efficient.

No, just enough has to new for apple to bump the price. But they held the line.

Giberish.

 

[bingeciren]

They shouldn’t include the box anymore or plastic either. Since it’s been shrinking and it’s also waste. Just hand out the phones, no box no cable no charger. ?? The logic here is so weird lately! Lol.

Hey, don't give any ideas to Timmy.

 

[usagora]

If a product requires a secondary purchase to function that is consumer hostile. Sure many people have compatible chargers already but not everyone does. In the case of Apple in particular, old USB-A->lightning cables are poorly made and often break and need replacing so you might not have a cable or charger compatible with your new phone (that comes with USB-C -> lightning. Not requiring consumers to make a separate purchase is an example of consumer protection.

No, it's called consumer coddling. Apple tells you there's no charger, so if someone buys an iPhone and then complains there's no charger, that's on them for not doing their due diligence.

To me, this would be no different than someone buying a Mac Mini and complaining there's no keyboard or mouse/trackpad included. Are those accessories not necessary to use the device? Should they be awarded thousands of dollars by the government too? SMH

 

[iGeneo]

I am 100% with the judge's decision here, I wish more countries did this. It's ridiculous that you have to buy separate accessories for your brand new ultra expensive device to work. What's more ridiculous and downright laughable is Apple's excuse for their decision to exclude the charger.

Yeah.. My Carrera S didn't come with the Sport Chronograph.. how dare Porsche not include such a basic feature, pretty much a required feature. I think I will sue..

 

[BootsWalking]

Did you even read the thread title to understand where the $1000 came from? Or understand that apple has a legal budget of 1 billion. If you wouldn’t spew endless criticisms of apple I probably wouldn’t challenge with an alternative point of view.

If apple allowed some local legal staff to formulate policy without review and that bad judgement cost them $$$, my guess is things will change.

Carry on.

Yes I read the thread title. But I also read the article, which apparently you didn't, which is how you missed the additional $2M this issue has cost Apple which you claimed it was cheaper for Apple to pay the $1,000 than hire someone to manage regional regulation differences.

If open discussions where critical views of Apple are shared is a trigger for you then perhaps you need to take a break from the forums. Or maybe just ignore the criticisms?

 

[siddavis]

Apple devices have historically cost less to manufacture, generation over generation. So even in the face of unexpected changes in material availability, the cost likely went down. Historical evidence backs this up, and I can't find any details to suggest that iPhone design changes and sales volume were different this time around.

Report: iPhone 12 is 21% More Expensive to Make Than iPhone 11

Apple's iPhone 12 is around a fifth more costly to make than an equivalent iPhone 11, based on an analysis of the blended materials by...

www.macrumors.com

So in THE phone generation where this was introduced, cost went UP, and you state that historical evidence backs up your claim. History according to whom?

 

[visualseed]

Simply incorrect. I've purchased many rechargeable devices that only include a charging cable. For example, a voice recorder or Bluetooth remote. If people want to whine and complain about it, then I'll roll my eyes and move on, but the government sticking it's nose in this and forcing companies to include a charger or pay the entitled masses thousands of dollars IS insane. This is not what the government should be doing with its time and resources.

My recent purchase of Sony wireless headphones included a usb cable but no charger.

 

[usagora]

Most devices need less power than a USB port provides. There is a huge difference between a device that uses less than 2W and the iPhone Pro 13 Max which uses 27W at peak charging.

I can charge my iPhone just fine with the USB-C/thunderbolt port on my Mac. And the issue here wasn't the charging speed but the ability to charge at all.