Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Reportedly Negotiating with Carriers for $100 Price Increase on iPhone 6

At this point, arguing that Android phones are cheap plasticky crap with tons of viruses is like arguing that iDevices are cheap, white plasticky crap made solely for hipster doofuses. It serves to show you are ignorant.

The Galaxy S5 and the HTC One M8 are just as strong as the iPhone and even more so depending on what you use it for. I got last years HTC One M7 because it's metal, has a 1080p LCD screen, has FM radio, and can even be used as a remote for tvs!
 
mccldwll said:
Sounds like you drive a Hyundai or Kia.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with Hyundai or Kia, they make great affordable vehicles that fit a wide range of needs and desires.

if we're doing the car comparison. iPhones to me are more like.. Camry's. Great vehicles. Dependable. reliable. Mass marketed to appeal to as many as possible without rocking the boat with anything that really stands out as tremendous or better, but you are getting something that will last a while, be comfortable and just there.

Where, Androdi would be.. everyone else. From top end, to bottom end.
 
LordVic said:
There is nothing wrong with Hyundai or Kia, they make great affordable vehicles that fit a wide range of needs and desires.

if we're doing the car comparison. iPhones to me are more like.. Camry's. Great vehicles. Dependable. reliable. Mass marketed to appeal to as many as possible without rocking the boat with anything that really stands out as tremendous or better, but you are getting something that will last a while, be comfortable and just there.

Where, Androdi would be.. everyone else. From top end, to bottom end.
Click to expand...

Camry is a fair analogy. They cost a bit more than others in the class but hold their value well and are reliable. However, I can't agree that there is nothing wrong with Hyundai/Kia. They copy the styles of other successful models, then execute not that well with cheaper materials, which turns them into rattle traps after a few years. They use advertising to sell to people who can't afford the real thing (whatever Toyota, Nissan, Honda model is being copied). And, like Samsung, have no problem lying if it helps.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/case/hyundai-false-advertising-miles-gallon-mpg
 
mccldwll said:
Camry is a fair analogy. They cost a bit more than others in the class but hold their value well and are reliable. However, I can't agree that there is nothing wrong with Hyundai/Kia. They copy the styles of other successful models, then execute not that well with cheaper materials, which turns them into rattle traps after a few years. They use advertising to sell to people who can't afford the real thing (whatever Toyota, Nissan, Honda model is being copied). And, like Samsung, have no problem lying if it helps.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/case/hyundai-false-advertising-miles-gallon-mpg
Click to expand...

again, nothing inherently wrong. Since they are targetting that market. I do agree with what you say thougha bout them.

They've come miles from where they were. But still have miles to go.

UI have a 2012 Camry, my mom has a sonata... I'm glad I chose the Camry. Kia's and Sonatas are good cars for what they are, people just need to have proper expectations and not expect them to be something they're not.

if you'reexpecting to buy a Hyundai and get Audi quality, you're going to have a bad time. But if you're on a very limited budget, need a car that will be just ok, with a reasonable size (larger midsize), than Sonata's aren't bad.... I say not bad really, but i wouldn't say great.

The test drive alone though was enough to convince me to go Toyota over Hyundai since I did have the budget for a little 'more'

But now i'm confused, this is the $100 thread.. not the Hyundai thread... how did we cross chat... I'm so confused
 
LordVic said:
again, nothing inherently wrong. Since they are targetting that market. I do agree with what you say thougha bout them.

They've come miles from where they were. But still have miles to go.

UI have a 2012 Camry, my mom has a sonata... I'm glad I chose the Camry. Kia's and Sonatas are good cars for what they are, people just need to have proper expectations and not expect them to be something they're not.

if you'reexpecting to buy a Hyundai and get Audi quality, you're going to have a bad time. But if you're on a very limited budget, need a car that will be just ok, with a reasonable size (larger midsize), than Sonata's aren't bad.... I say not bad really, but i wouldn't say great.

The test drive alone though was enough to convince me to go Toyota over Hyundai since I did have the budget for a little 'more'

But now i'm confused, this is the $100 thread.. not the Hyundai thread... how did we cross chat... I'm so confused
Click to expand...


Right now, it's a "you get what you pay for" discussion. As you yourself noted, you were willing to pay more for the better product. Same with the iPhone.
It's a dumb thread to start with since it was started by the slimy Peter Misek and accepted a truth. It's probably not; however, if there is a $100 jump, it will make sense if/when announced. There will be bang for the bucks. Further, not only is $100 not much over the contract/useful life, but easily made up by the way iPhones hold their value compared to Andrrhoids. As with Toyotas, over the long haul, actually less expensive for the better experience.
 
mccldwll said:
Right now, it's a "you get what you pay for" discussion. As you yourself noted, you were willing to pay more for the better product. Same with the iPhone.
It's a dumb thread to start with since it was started by the slimy Peter Misek and accepted a truth. It's probably not; however, if there is a $100 jump, it will make sense if/when announced. There will be bang for the bucks. Further, not only is $100 not much over the contract/useful life, but easily made up by the way iPhones hold their value compared to Andrrhoids. As with Toyotas, over the long haul, actually less expensive for the better experience.
Click to expand...

yeah, again it's rumour, willd epend on what that $100 gets you.

if it's just the current iphone, but bigger screen (4.7") people will have hard time justifying that extra price (IMHO).

if we're takling about though a significant upgrade in everything, larger device, Added featureset (more like the 3g to 4 change, than 4s to 5), plus larger, then yeah, you get value for the money.

But right now, just moving to a larger screen, in line with the competitiion doesn't really speak for 'better value'

again. All my IMHO based of a lot of meritless rumours.. only cause we're a chat forum and we need something to chat and analyse
 
mccldwll said:
Further, not only is $100 not much over the contract/useful life, but easily made up by the way iPhones hold their value compared to Andrrhoids. As with Toyotas, over the long haul, actually less expensive for the better experience.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean.

For instance, residual cash value matters most to those who cannot afford to get a new phone without selling their old one.

Such people are probably not the ones with an extra $100 in their pocket to spend up front.
 
Good thing I'm not interested anyways. Just wish I waited for the 5s to update my 4. Then I'd have the last iphone with a decent sized screen rather than the 2nd to last (basically getting the most new tech I can before I'd have to sacrifice screen size).
 
The only thing that would make this price jump make any since if there is a micro-sd card slot that supports up to 128gb.I don't see spending $300 for a 16gb iphone on a 2 year contract reasonable.
 
tjl3 said:
I think Apple could figure out an outlet for iPhone sales w/o Verizon and AT&T. As someone pointed out, they are probably not best suited to do this through their Apple Store, right now, but that can still change.

Can you imagine the backlash for carriers that stopped offering the iPhone? Day of launch: "Hi, I'd like to sign a new contract and buy a new iPhone..." "Um, we no longer offer it." Lost opportunity while they go and find a carrier that does sell it or go to the Apple Store where they can sign up for the most cost effective plan.
Click to expand...

TallManNY said:
Well first of all, the carriers already pay Apple a lot for the phones and Apple makes a huge margin. So yes they have to accept some of Apple's pricing. Now does Apple have the ability to force them to choke on another $100? I don't know. They can't all decide not to sell iPhones. Customers would revolt and they would be hit with anti-trust collusion charges. If one decides to not sell iPhones, while the other big three buckle down and sell iPhones, the hold out will lose millions of customers. And they will be the customers with big data plans and possibly multiple lines and tablets.

The carriers already lose money every time they sell an iPhone. They sell the iPhone to a customer for $200, but they hand over the $200 and another $450 at the time of sale. That is the subsidy. This is where Apple may say they want to get $550. The carrier makes up for this over the two year contract where they collect over $2,000. So the customer makes them a nice profit. It just takes awhile.

Maybe the carriers will raise the upfront payment to customers. But we don't know for sure. That $199 price point has been pretty solid for a long time.
Click to expand...


Well Apple doesn't have it's own mobile phone network so it needs the support of the carriers that do. And I still can't see them saying yes to Apple if this rumour is true, certainly not without making the consumer pay.
I also said ALL carriers, if all the carriers told Apple no we are not charging more, then tough, Apple can't do anything about it as they sell the iPhone through the store already, they can't complain about competition for something sold in another route already.

Now, as for contracts, sure they make some profit but it's not a nice one. They make big numbers due to big numbers of subscribers, they have to pay the staff and the infrastructure, I imagine the overheads are utterly ridiculous to run a large mobile phone network.

For instance, here in the UK the government at the time auctioned off 3G licenses to the carriers, they literally just wanted to pocket the money, the carriers each ended up spending 'billions sterling' to get one license, and they admitted after it would take them years to make the money back. And that's just a license, no hardware or development or installation costs, just a license.
So I can only see them passing the cost of the iPhone onto the consumer, who reading this forum, would be more than willing to pay it.
 
sixrom said:
I agree, Apple didn't become the ultra rich company by offering value. Steve Jobs worked long and hard programming people to believe the hype and pay premium prices for their vanity purchases. That Apple logo comes at a price.
Click to expand...


The value here is in the form of a user experience unique to the Apple platform, not Nexus-style prices. Or in other words, cost =/= value.
 
AlabamaSlammer said:
The only thing that would make this price jump make any since if there is a micro-sd card slot that supports up to 128gb.I don't see spending $300 for a 16gb iphone on a 2 year contract reasonable.
Click to expand...

microSD card slot never gonna happen with Apple.
 
Abazigal said:
The value here is in the form of a user experience unique to the Apple platform, not Nexus-style prices. Or in other words, cost =/= value.
Click to expand...

Apple has always provided an excellent user experience. Now, any Android ver 4.1.x or higher top tier Android phone also offers a very nice experience.

The primary factor is that the user must take personal responsibility to learn Android, not expect it to be the same as iOS. Much like one who's been using a Windows computer must learn a Mac when switching.

Those who give Android a chance will find it's an excellent Smartphone. That's why I use both, it's fun, I stay current on both platforms and they each have their advantages.
 
Really Bad And Greedy Idea

I have been an iPhone user since the first iPhone. I think this is an extremely bad idea. If they raise the price by $100 they will be pushing a lot of customers away. If they raise the price at the carrier they will raise the price across the board. In short. ITS A REALLY REAALY BAD IDEA!!!!!!!! Greed seems to be an on going movement lately across the technology world.
 
mantan said:
In the US Apple has zero incentive to move away from the common model. There is NO way the iPhone would have become as popular as it is without subsidies. Americans weren't going to pay $700-$800 for a phone...no matter how great it was.

Apple required the carriers to buy a certain amount of subisdized units..which basically guaranteed sales. (Remember the deal Sprint had to sign to get access to the iPhone.)

Though this is changing with AT&T pushing people to their new family plans that don't include subsidized phones. They are making it a bit more palatable by asking for no money down and stretching the payments out over 18 or 26 months.

Do you think Apple is interested in that model? He77 now. They'll want 100% of their cash up front - just like they always have.

Raising the price by $100 for the 'innovation' of the same screen size that other phones have is typical Apple hubris under Tim Cook. At least under Steve Jobs felt like there was something special about Apple products.
Click to expand...

First of all, yes, I believe Americans would continue to pay $700-800 dollars for a smartphone. I'm not sure if you are trying to argue that they will be less willing to pay for an iPhone, but more willing to pay for a similarly priced GS5 or M8. Or if they would just turn to cheaper solutions (this I may agree with, but I think Apple's built its brand up enough).

The other issue is the carrier cost. It isn't just that Apple requires carriers to carry X amount of iPhones, it is also that their cost, that is higher than normal, which results in their lower margins. But they'll have to weigh the benefits of margins vs revenue, b/c without iPhone, their revenue would drop.

I still don't understand it perfectly, what the difference, IN CARRIER COST, is for AT&T subsidizing an iPhone versus T-Mobile financing an iPhone. Apple obviously billed both stores for their inventory before the sale.

TallManNY said:
Last night I saw an ad for GS5 with Sprint contract for $0 and a free Galaxy Tab. What do you think that means? Is it just Sprint being desperate for customers?

Also there are GS5 two for one promotions out there. So while the price you quote is a price out there, I wonder how many folks are paying that.
Click to expand...

With Sprint it is $0 down, but payments for 24 months. And with Verizon you get locked into 2 2-year contracts. In both instances, it is the carrier that is doing the promo, not Samsung, so the cost is eaten up by the carrier and the money is made back on the contract.

Anyway you slice it, carriers need iPhone and Apple needs the carriers, but I don't think iPhone would become irrelevant. Just look across the board at US carriers, and their best selling phones are almost always iPhone. The carriers would face more attrition by letting their customers potentially walk away. But I'm sure in the unlikely event that there is a split, some financial institution will step in to finance Apple's phones.
 
c0ppo said:
It's funny how you americans find 100$ increase a bummer. As you should. But here in Europe, we pay way more. Even on contracts. I've paid mine iPhone 5s about 400€ with 2 year contract. Almost the price for your unlocked version :D

And I also think I'm gonna switch from Apple if they stick with 1GB ram memory. But not to Samsung, used their phones in the past, don't want that experience anymore. I'm gonna go for Xiaomi, friend has one and it's great.

1GB is simply not enough anymore. But Apple be Apple, too greedy.

----------



Sony Z1 Compact. A fantastic phone.
And Xiaomi mi2s, even tough it's a little bit older, but still a great phone for a silly price.
Click to expand...

You are confused about how phone prices work in the U.S.

Here in the U.S if you get a Phone discounted with contract you have to pay the difference in higher monthly fees.

If you get a $650 phone for $199, then you will likely have to pay around $20 more a month , than if you just paid $650 for the phone outright. Also most carriers are moving away from subsidized pricing. If I were to get a iPhone 6, it looks like it would cost me $750 with the $100 price increase.

----------

I thought about the iPhone 6, but at $750, no way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back