Apple Reportedly Cutting iPhone SE Production Just Weeks After Launch Due to 'Weaker-Than-Expected' Demand

[usagora]

Instead of raising the price from $399, they should've just put an A14 in. What an odd choice to raise the price to such an uneven number.

They're also fast approaching the point where 2014's iPhone 6 design just isn't going to cut it.

Both $399 and $429 are uneven numbers. And I seriously doubt a $30 price increase is what's causing the lack of demand. I'm not so sure it's the design either, as I see people on this forum all the time talk about liking older iPhones (and Macs) and "why fix what ain't broke" type mentality when it comes to design.

 

[Marlor]

I'm not so sure it's the design either, as I see people on this forum all the time talk about liking older iPhones (and Macs) and "why fix what ain't broke" type mentality when it comes to design.

Honestly, many of us went straight from an iPhone 5S to an iPhone SE 2016... and we're still sitting on that option waiting to see where to go next.

So, the "iPhone 8" style design is brand new to us, and it can be a bit polarizing.

Personally, I dislike the larger form-factor and rounded edges. The Mini (with its more classic squared-off design) is much more appealing, but it commands a price premium.

I'll probably hold on to my iPhone SE 2016 for a bit longer. It's still working just fine (after its second battery replacement), so I'm in no hurry. But I'll probably wait for a sale on the Mini, rather than going to the new iPhone SE, just because the Mini, overall, has a more familiar and comfortable form-factor.

 

[turbineseaplane]

the SE2 and SE3 just feel too big, unwieldy, and I can't stand the rounded-off shape.

That's my biggest gripe with them also

Flat sides are so much better for handling/usability

 

[Virinprew]

Tens of millions of people have been buying the SE iPhones, as they will with the SE3. They sure understand the point, which you still fail to get.

There are two types of people, those who push and those who drag.

 

[chucker23n1]

Both $399 and $429 are uneven numbers.

$400 is a lot more even than $430.

And I seriously doubt a $30 price increase is what's causing the lack of demand. I'm not so sure it's the design either, as I see people on this forum all the time talk about liking older iPhones (and Macs) and "why fix what ain't broke" type mentality when it comes to design.

I mean… instead of dunking on someone’s hypothesis, feel free to supply your own?

 

[wanha]

Even still… It’s time for something different than the eight year old design

My belief is that the old design is totally on purpose, because Apple is very worried of cannibalizing flagship iPhone sales.

Thus, in order to not threaten higher margin flagship iPhone sales, the iPhone SE *MUST* remain old and unsexy looking.

The SE is for people looking for value, not status or excitement.

And I totally get why that frustrates some people, but I get Apple's approach, too.

 

[usagora]

$400 is a lot more even than $430.

I believe the term you're looking for is "rounded" But in any case, I'm honestly not sure why you think it matters. Products are priced at uneven and/or unrounded numbers all the time, even to the penny ($19.99, etc.). Most consumers will just round to the nearest dollar or ten dollar when citing such prices.

I mean… instead of dunking on someone’s hypothesis, feel free to supply your own?

Or you can feel free to defend your hypothesis instead of getting testy about it being disagreed with. I don't know of a forum rule here that states we're not allowed to disagree with someone's hypothesis without giving our own. It's completely reasonable for one to not be sure of the real reason why something is the case, but also confident that a particular thing is NOT the reason.

 

[chucker23n1]

I believe the term you're looking for is "rounded" But in any case, I'm honestly not sure why you think it matters. Products are priced at uneven and/or unrounded numbers all the time, even to the penny ($19.99, etc.). Most consumers will just round to the nearest dollar or ten dollar when citing such prices.

Maybe you misunderstood my original point. $399, in pricing psychology, feels lower than $429, because it's just below the $400 barrier. IMHO, it was a misstep to raise the price. A different interpretation would be that it was a deliberate choice to make the iPhone SE not feel too cheap.

Or you can feel free to defend your hypothesis instead of getting testy about it being disagreed with.

Nah, I'm good.

 

[mkoesel]

My belief is that the old design is totally on purpose, because Apple is very worried of cannibalizing flagship iPhone sales.

Thus, in order to not threaten higher margin flagship iPhone sales, the iPhone SE *MUST* remain old and unsexy looking.

I think there is a degree of truth to what you say. However, I also think that this concern is mostly mitigated by the fact that, to keep costs low, the SE must be based around old hardware either way.

The next iPhone SE might adopt a form factor from the post-iPhone-8 era which would mean it loses the home button and 16:9 screen that gives the current model it's legacy look. We've heard rumors to this effect for years, although I acknowledge that those rumors have yet to converge and stabilize, so don't know what this device will look like and when it might arrive. Still, if we assume for a moment that such a device is genuinely coming in the next couple years, and if we furthermore trust the collective crystal ball regarding the flagship iPhone range, then the next SE will look considerably more like the flagship phones than it has in its first three generations.

Prevailing rumor suggests that the iPhone 14 Pro will lose the notch in exchange for the pill, and that the iPhone 15 non-pro will do so the year after. The non-pro model is also reported to get a ProMotion 120Hz display by that time as well (currently expected this year). To keep distance, the SE could retain the notch and a 60Hz screen. It could also use an LCD screen, particularly if it is based on the XR/11 form factor. But at any rate, it will at least look like a phone from this decade. Whether or not this will allow it to avoid the "old and unsexy" looking label remains to be seen. But I suggest that it will at the very least appease much of the "this thing looks ancient!" crowd.

 

[usagora]

Maybe you misunderstood my original point. $399, in pricing psychology, feels lower than $429, because it's just below the $400 barrier.

Which is why they made it $429, not $430. It sounds to me like your real gripe isn't actually the specific dollar amount they chose but rather that they increased the price at all.

 

[chucker23n1]

It sounds to me like your real gripe isn't actually the specific dollar amount they chose but rather that they increased the price at all.

???

Yes. It is. Did you even read the original post? You're arguing against a point nobody made.

 

[usagora]

???

Yes. It is. Did you even read the original post? You're arguing against a point nobody made.

I did read it, sir, and you did make this point. Did you read your own post? LOL! You made an issue about the specific amount they raised it to, and that's what I was responding to (emphasis added):

What an odd choice to raise the price to such an uneven number.

It's not odd at all. It's precisely the same psychology that you explained. Instead of $400, it was $399. Now, instead of $430, it's $429.

 

[chucker23n1]

I did read it, sir, and you did make this point. Did you read your own post? LOL! You made an issue about the specific amount they raised it to, and that's what I was responding to (emphasis added):



It's not odd at all. It's precisely the same psychology that you explained. Instead of $400, it was $399. Now, instead of $430, it's $429.

What I meant by "uneven" is not "indivisible by 2". I meant that $430 is a rather specific number. They thought $450 was too much, yet $400 too little.

 

[usagora]

What I meant by "uneven" is not "indivisible by 2". I meant that $430 is a rather specific number. They thought $450 was too much, yet $400 too little.

I just don't see it that way. I don't see anything unusual about increasing prices in less than $50 increments. Now, if it were $429.16, for example, THAT would seem oddly specific, but not simply $429.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The SE is for people looking for value, not status or excitement.

Well they have definitely nailed that part.. lol

 

[merrygoround]

shouldn't have been greedy and raised the price.. They could have made it $399 with 128gb or $329 for 64 but no, they must grab every single penny with ****** progress even after saving themselves miliions by not giving bricks and making the cord they give you not fit most bricks people already have. I think the home button is fine, its a reason why people buy it or hold on to their Iphone 6-8 in 2022, but not a better camera or much better battery or screen and then have the nerve raise the price?

 

[merrygoround]

This is why the notion of this phone being an entry point into iPhone ecosystem seems silly to me.
I think the only audience for SE are hardcore Touch ID fans.

aka people like me, older people, people with accessibility issues.. that's the only reason i give this phone a chance

 

[44267547]

hence why it is not selling very well.

This article is speculative. There’s no definitive proof that it’s ‘not selling well’, Apple hasn’t released numbers and the SE3 has only been available for two weeks, which isn’t even close to being a relative timeline to know one way or the other if the SE isn’t selling well. So if you’re buying into this rumor, then that means you must believe there’s factual evidence, which isn’t supported.

 

[fedeARTPOP]

Still good numbers....15-20m for a cheap phone is Ok Apple.

 

[fedeARTPOP]

Talking about small phones...I remember the 6 was so thin and lightweight, imagine the iPhone Air?

 

[sdfox7]

Try iPhone 6 design. The guts might be different but aesthetically it's a 6.

To split hairs, the SE more resembles the iPhone 8 with its wireless charging and lack of a 3.5" headphone jack.

 

[Mega ST]

How do we already know that the SE3 is doing bad? Low preorders by bulk customers? Let higher energy prices and inflation hit the average consumer first and see what they will buy for christmas? Fancy pros or SEs?

Having said that it seems all those small phones apple has released recently are not doing that well? Like the minis. What happened to the -rumoured for a while- bigger sized SE? Maybe this would reach more people and make sense with increasing mobile TV use and 5G?

 

[HalfFullmoon]

How do we already know that the SE3 is doing bad? Low preorders by bulk customers? Let higher energy prices and inflation hit the average consumer first and see what they will buy for christmas? Fancy pros or SEs?

Having said that it seems all those small phones apple has released recently are not doing that well? Like the minis. What happened to the -rumoured for a while- bigger sized SE? Maybe this would reach more people and make sense with increasing mobile TV use and 5G?

Bigger SE will cut into main iPhone sales. You think everyone cares about having three cameras in the back? I don’t.

 

[Mega ST]

I don't.
I have got the SE3.

 

[MacGekko]

Bigger SE will cut into main iPhone sales. You think everyone cares about having three camera in the back? I don’t.

Exactly, nobody knows Apple's strategy, I suspect they want a cheaper option for the world market, but not cheap enough to damage the brand. If the Mini gets killed off, it looks like they made a choice to make the SE the affordable and simple Iphone with the home button.