Except gasoline (petroleum) is a commodity item that itself trades on the markets and is much more volatile than the others. Based on OPEC whims, which includes Alaska.
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 Products Could See 'Noticeable' Price Rises Amid Increased Chip Costs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Originally so was Apple. in 1992 I bought a used Macintosh IICX for $3995.00. A new one at the time was $5395.00 in 1989
That's true. But I was talking a hypothetical. We don't know how much faster an M1X will be. Maybe it'll be 10% faster with Rosetta and 50% faster for native apps. Or maybe it will be 10% slower with Rosetta but 2x faster with native apps. Regardless, my example was a person who is considering a current 16" MBP vs a hypothetical 16" M1x. If the chip price increases mean that the M1X MBP was 10-15% more expensive than the current Intel model, I would expect that a lot of people would choose the M1X over the Intel because it would have a better cost/benefit ratio. Of course, if the M1X MBP only had two USB-C ports, and was only 10% faster even with native apps and only had marginally better battery life, then that would be a different story.
They've been saying that the M1 chips are less expensive than the Intel chips because Apple (IIRC) outright bought the ARM tech that it based the Apple Silicon chips on. So they aren't paying a licensing fee to anyone. They're just paying the manufacturing fee to TSMC.
I’ve had an iPhone SE for over a year now. I don’t see anything limited about it other than it was under $500. I don’t even understand why one would want to pay 3 times that for an iPhone. And I love TouchID.
Same reason why Apple deals with Foxconn instead of owning it. The ultimate goal of every executive is to move the stock price for shareholders. That's why exec incentives are structured they way they are. Why invest in something with low margin, high risk, or long time to money when you have the best option available - share buybacks. Instead of taking a long time and risk to potentially increase EPS just buy your own stock directly and embrace financial engineering. With capital return shareholders can invest how they please.
While we are on this topic the $2.6T AAPL market cap is supporting countless public and private pensions funds and retirement accounts. It will likely include you as AAPL is one of the largest components of index funds that you are probably exposed to. AAPL is also a barometer of the entire stock market. People suggesting that Apple should just absorb the cost and take a margin hit realize that this will tank the stock and likely the stock market with it. This will likely impact your wallet significantly more than any iPhone price increase.
I don't know why people post stuff like this.
- A base Quadra 610 cost $2,500 in 1993, the equivalent of roughly $4,500 today.
- A base 24" iMac will run you $1,299.
Last edited:
I appear to be wrong! I remember reading that somewhere, but I now, looking I can't seem to find that to be the case. but Venezuela is.
I am perfectly happy to shell out 1k for good home appliance or good vacation. But for me, when I can be easily satisfied with iPhone 7, spending 1k for a phone is hardly justifiable.
For most people, most recent iPhone is nice to have but not must to have. I can guarantee you, most people don’t need newest iPhone.
Let us see how much Apple can increase price before people stop buying. Demand for iPhone isn’t in-elastic.
Oh please. It isn’t like first time Apple’s stock has dipped. You are acting like this is end of Apple.
That is a good point. I think a $1,000.00 for a phone is starting to approach the maximum price that most consumers are willing to spend on a cellular device even with zero interest device financing.
Actually, no I'm not. Stocks all go up and down all of the time....The point is it's a balancing act between giving consumers what they want and shareholders wha they want all the same time...and they are usually the opposite. From day one Apple was always a luxury brand and expensive af! in 1991 a new MacIntosh IICX was $5395.00! I will say they are actually cheaper now.
Most people don't need the latest of anything, but if we're saying the iPhone 7 is good enough for most: that's a pretty strong guarantee. The cameras get an improvement every year and the camera is a major feature for most people. I also recall a lot of people saying the 7MP pixel camera in the iPhone 7 wasn't good enough.
Personally, I'm still using an iPhone X but I think it's being replaced with an iPhone 12 or 13 before the 14 (or whatever they call it) comes out. And the camera will be the main reason (though on device Siri is also something I'm looking forward to).
Last edited:
Isn’t that why Apple has multiple models at multiple price points? You can get the SE for as little as $399, the XR for $499, the 12 mini for $699, the 12 for $799 or the 12 Pro starting at $999. The SE is the same price as the original base model iPhone from 2007 without even adjusting for inflation.
another shortage?
Wonder how long this will last
It trickles down anyway.. if everyone is suffering the same shortage, it doesn't matter anymore which models consumers by if they get chips from the same,. makers. If their used in phones,, we're stuck.
However, it might push people more to by the base models instead.. being cheaper due not not as as much tech..
Then again.. price doesn't seem to matter that much anyway with Apple people..so,....
Wonder how long this will last
It trickles down anyway.. if everyone is suffering the same shortage, it doesn't matter anymore which models consumers by if they get chips from the same,. makers. If their used in phones,, we're stuck.
However, it might push people more to by the base models instead.. being cheaper due not not as as much tech..
Then again.. price doesn't seem to matter that much anyway with Apple people..so,....
Last edited:
I think we are forgetting a couple of factors here.
For one, not everybody ends up paying the full price of an iPhone when they buy one. There are carrier deals, Apple has its own trade-in programme, and Apple could have some form of "Buy now, pay later" instalment plans which make the price of an iPhone appear more palatable upfront.
Second, the reality is that people are holding on to their phones longer. I don't think it's unreasonable to spend more on a very personal device like a smartphone that you will using all day, every day, for years to come. The logic is similar to why I went all-in with the Apple ecosystem in the first place. While I spend more upfront, this more than pays for itself in the form of better productivity and fewer problems overall.
Third, and while I will probably get flamed for saying this, the reality is that Apple's ecosystem is designed around people that easily spend money. It's a common trope around here that Apple gear is overpriced (which I disagree with) but given that, and their financials which are unlike any other comparable company, you can only conclude that Apple buyers spend money - a lot of it.
I'm end-to-end Apple gear. I don't want to spend any more time than I have to cobbling some system together, deal with any more accounts than I already have (200+ passwords in my 1Password - welcome to adulthood), or deal with security issues. I work hard, make a decent living, and at this point in my life, I want things to be easy more than I want them to be cheap.
So yes, I am Apple's target market. Is Apple Music lower quality or more expensive than the alternatives? I literally don't care. I just want to be able to pull up a song on my watch and stream it to my airpods no matter where I am. That's it. I'll pay more for it. I don't have to install an app. I don't need to enter my l/p. I can airplay it to damn near everything.
This is what Apple does. They rarely beat competitors on the bullet list, but they play the system integration game better than anyone else, and if it costs a few bucks more, I'm happy to pay it.
Bold prediction!
Now let us observe whether there is a worldwide collapse in iPhone sales numbers, to support your claim.
The same thing could be said about just about every purchase anyone makes.
There are, right this second, millions of people spending money on things that I wouldn’t buy. Things that I could easily find an almost unlimited number of “better things to spend the money on”.
Perhaps I could take the time to tell them all that they should be buying something else that they don’t actually want, but I do. However, I think I’ll stick to just understanding that they probably have different tastes, personal circumstances, disposable income etc to me and therefore it’s probably best for them to actually just buy the thing that they decided upon with those factors taken into account.
I imagine iphone 13 prices will be disappointing to expectations:-
1-CSAM
2-COVID economy
3-marginal improvements
4-high prices
I have a feeling if a company out there would be making a flagship $400-500 they will take a huge bite out of the market.
1-CSAM
2-COVID economy
3-marginal improvements
4-high prices
I have a feeling if a company out there would be making a flagship $400-500 they will take a huge bite out of the market.
1) Delayed (and may never see the light of day)
2) People said the same thing with the iPhone 12 last year. Suffice to say, not everyone has been impacted equally by Covid, many are still gainfully employed and can afford to upgrade.
3) Compared to? It should be a meaningful upgrade for people using an iPhone 11 or earlier.
4) Since when has high prices impacted sales of Apple products?
The companies doing so (like Oneplus) can’t sustain this indefinitely. Flagship phones cost more for the simple reason that they cost more to design, make and support.
There’s no conspiracy here. You get what you pay for at the end of the day.
I was referring to the MacBook Pro. I've purchased at least a few MBP at the $2,400 mark across a few years without upgrades.