Apple Reportedly Plans to Cut Price of iPhone XR in Japan Due to Poor Sales and Restart iPhone X Production

[Rum_Becker]

The reality distortion field is in overdrive in this thread.

Has anybody compared the price of an iPhone XS to the original Apple 2 yet?

Per flop they are giving it away!!

 

[Khedron]

Even when plugged in? And new battery?

Yes. It's Apple's default settings. You can recalibrate the screen manually but at the cost of battery life.

 

[macfacts]

But last year at this time when the WSJ trotted out the same basic argument to as a reason for alleged production cuts, iPhone X was still the top selling phone worldwide for the next 6 months.

That's why people who have been following these stories for years don't give them any credence.

Apple puts pressure on its suppliers all the time and shifts orders. Tim Cook was a supply chain guy at Apple going back to the iPod era.

Here is Tim Cook commenting on this 5 years ago:

"I would suggest it's good to question the accuracy of any kind of rumor about build plans and also stress that even if a particular data point were factual, it would be impossible to accurately interpret the data point as to what it meant for our overall business because the supply chain is very complex. And we obviously have multiple sources for things, yields might vary, supplier performance can vary, the beginning inventory positions can vary. I mean, there's just an inordinate long list of things that would make any single data point not a great proxy for what's going on."

The stories about production cuts aren't based on one source. Apple only has a handful of iPhone manufacturers and when they ALL say they are cutting iPhone production lines, that is something.

 

[Khedron]

The infamous News flash! iPhone XR costs less than What’s yout point? The note 9 plus others is just as expensive, some more so?

They have better screens, better cameras, more RAM, more storage, bigger batteries, include the quick charging adapter as standard, plus other accessories...

 

[I7guy]

They have better screens, better cameras, more RAM, more storage, bigger batteries, include the quick charging adapter as standard, plus other accessories...

Actually, they don't have better screens and better cameras. They need more ram because of how inefficient android is and they don't get the level of support that iphones get.

 

[Rob_2811]

This article and the people in this thread who seem delight in it are a repeat of last year as well, and they are wrong again.
[doublepost=1543083550][/doublepost]
The total sales for Apple 2 were probably less than the opening weekend of IPhone X sales, or a year of Pixel sales, so it’s not really relevant.

You seem to feel the need make some snarky comment about one of Apples competitors in every post. I don't know if you think this is bothering me, makes absolutely no difference to me what you say about them, seems a bit fan boyish but if it makes you feel better.

I use an iPhone and a Mac, I just don't worship Apple like they're a religion, because they would be odd. Look here's a picture of me posting a reply from my MacBook Pro.

 

[I7guy]

And in 2002, I paid $2000 for a desktop, $3000 for a laptop and $1000 for a Tv, guess what? All those products have gone way down. Adjusted for inflation my 2002 Dell laptop should be 5k yet Dell is selling laptops for under 300$.

I paid about $750 for a laptop in 2011. I paid $1500 for one in 2017. So what does that say. We have our anecdotal evidence of what we bought and what we paid to try and make a case in point for the argument.
[doublepost=1543084655][/doublepost]

Yes. It's Apple's default settings. You can recalibrate the screen manually but at the cost of battery life.

Yes. You adjust the settings on many phones and they have an impact on battery life.

 

[Baymowe335]

And in 2002, I paid $2000 for a desktop, $3000 for a laptop and $1000 for a Tv, guess what? All those products have gone way down. Adjusted for inflation my 2002 Dell laptop should be 5k yet Dell is selling laptops for under 300$.

Dell sells a commodity that runs Windows.

Like it or not, Apple just proved to you they have pricing power. Whether it’s because of iOS, support, service, style, design, software updates, hardware features like FaceID, best in class silicon, name recognition, or something else, Apple HAS pricing power.

Any manufacturer would like to raise prices (and they have) but no company can command pricing like Apple.

2017 iPhone unit sales were 217M for $141B in revenue.
2018 iPhone unit sales were 218M for $166B in revenue.

That’s an 18% revenue increase on almost identical units, but they actually sold 1M more units with the increased prices.

They gave up nothing in units and charged more. That’s pricing power.

Dell wishes they could charge more, but they wouldn’t be competitive if they did. They don’t have pricing power because their products are interchangeable.

Welcome to business. Disney has done the same thing the last 10 years at their parks. No competition for their assets.

 

[Rum_Becker]

I paid about $750 for a laptop in 2011. I paid $1500 for one in 2017. So what does that say. We have our anecdotal evidence of what we bought and what we paid to try and make a case in point for the argument.

Nope, I'm comparing apples to apples unlike you.

Cheapest TV's in 2002 where 500 to 1000 for a name brand. Today you can get a base name brand for $300. Same goes for my laptop that I got from Dell it was a mddle of the line laptop in 2002, and today a middle of the line Dell laptop is much less.

As for anecdotes, I agree completely, but you brought them up, and then you reject the the following post!!
[doublepost=1543085196][/doublepost]

Dell sells a commodity that runs Windows.

Like it or not, Apple just proved to you they have pricing power. Whether it’s because of iOS, support, service, style, design, software updates, hardware features like FaceID, best in class silicon, name recognition, or something else, Apple HAS pricing power.

Any manufacturer would like to raise prices (and they have) but no company can command pricing like Apple.

2017 iPhone unit sales were 217M for $141B in revenue.
2018 iPhone unit sales were 218M for $166B in revenue.

That’s an 18% revenue increase on almost identical units, but they actually sold 1M more units with the increased prices.

They gave up nothing in units and charged more. That’s pricing power.

Dell wishes they could charge more, but they wouldn’t be competitive if they did. They don’t have pricing power because their products are interchangeable.

Welcome to business. Disney has done the same thing the last 10 years at their parks. No competition for their assets.

I completely agree!!!!

But all good things come to and end, this thread is discussing if Apple went a bit too far.

If Apple could sell iPhones for 3k each without a decline in sales, I would 100% support that decision!!! It would be neglecence if they did not.

 

[catportal]

The reason prices are going up is because its far too easy to get a loan. Same reason college prices sky rocketed. Every credit card will give you X months 0% interest with 5K+ even with little to no credit history. Apple themselves have the monthly payment plans, all the carriers have some sort of payment plan. The "regular price" is purposely high to discourage you from buying it out right. They probably don't even care about the principle cost. They want interest over time and to keep you in debt in perpetuity. (Same thing with cars too btw, they will offer to "buy back" your car and lump your existing loan into a new purchase)

 

[Rob_2811]

Dell sells a commodity that runs Windows.

Like it or not, Apple just proved to you they have pricing power. Whether it’s because of iOS, support, service, style, design, software updates, hardware features like FaceID, best in class silicon, name recognition, or something else, Apple HAS pricing power.

Any manufacturer would like to raise prices (and they have) but no company can command pricing like Apple.

2017 iPhone unit sales were 217M for $141B in revenue.
2018 iPhone unit sales were 218M for $166B in revenue.

That’s an 18% revenue increase on almost identical units, but they actually sold 1M more units with the increased prices.

They gave up nothing in units and charged more. That’s pricing power.

Dell wishes they could charge more, but they wouldn’t be competitive if they did. They don’t have pricing power because their products are interchangeable.

They've proved that there are people in the user base that will pay whatever. Everybody knew that beforehand.

There are people in Apples user base who would've paid $1500 for the iPhone X, there are people who would pay way north of 2k for the Xs max. There are people who worship Apple that much.

Apples problem is there just aren't enough of them.

It's when they've got to get the regular people , the ones who don't just buy anything Apple churns out, to upgrade and their choices are flagships at $1000-1500, two year old models or watered down versions of the flagship. They might just decide there's more value elsewhere.

You can't say for sure after one year, the next two or three years will be telling.

 

[Baymowe335]

Nope, I'm comparing apples to apples unlike you.

Cheapest TV's in 2002 where 500 to 1000 for a name brand. Today you can get a base name brand for $300. Same goes for my laptop that I got from Dell it was a mddle of the line laptop in 2002, and today a middle of the line Dell laptop is much less.

As for anecdotes, I agree completely, but you brought them up, and then you reject the the following post!!
[doublepost=1543085196][/doublepost]

I completely agree!!!!

But all good things come to and end, this thread is discussing if Apple went a bit too far.

Prices can be adjusted quickly. I don’t see any real data from Apple quarterly reports that indicates this is over.

All this fake news is just speculation we see every year. I wait for Apple to post poor numbers...not for “sources” to try to predict poor numbers only to be proven wrong.

 

[I7guy]

Nope, I'm comparing apples to apples unlike you.

Cheapest TV's in 2002 where 500 to 1000 for a name brand. Today you can get a base name brand for $300. Same goes for my laptop that I got from Dell it was a mddle of the line laptop in 2002, and today a middle of the line Dell laptop is much less.

As for anecdotes, I agree completely, but you brought them up, and then you reject the the following post!!

I only brought them up because you're moving the goal posts, so let's stick with the original point about price, which someone else brought up.

In 2012 a 64 GB iphone 5 cost $849, 16 gb cost $649.

In 2018 the base XR cost $749. The cheapest iphone in the apple store is $449 and the most expensive is $1,449. So there is parity and one is actually paying less for more tech to your point. So while the top-top tier has increased dramatically the 2018 entry level tier has actually gone down. People who are still sporting a 5s, 6 or 6s can upgrade for a very reasonable price.

 

[Baymowe335]

They've proved that these are people in the user base that will pay whatever. Everybody knew that beforehand.

There are people in Apples user base who would've paid $1500 for the iPhone X, there are people who would pay way north of 2k for the Xs max. There are people who worship Apple that much.

Apples problem is there just aren't enough of them, its when they've got to get the regular people , the ones who don't buy anything Apple churns out to upgrade and their choices are flagships at $1000-1500, two year old models or watered down versions of the flagship. They might just decide there's more value elsewhere.

You can't say for sure after one year, the next two or three years will be telling.

They dialed in pricing very well. Just because a few people would pay $2500, doesn’t mean 218M would. They executed the strategy to the tune of 18% revenue growth, which means they nailed it.

You should charge what you can get, period. This is business.

Show me numbers that Apple has a “problem.” Otherwise, you’re just talking and speculating. I post numbers all the time. There is no problem in the real data.

Articles like these are NOT data, btw.

 

[Rum_Becker]

Prices can be adjusted quickly. I don’t see any real data from Apple quarterly reports that indicates this is over.

All this fake news is just speculation we see every year. I wait for Apple to post poor numbers...not for “sources” to try to predict poor numbers only to be proven wrong.

Agree again except that they will no longer give unit sales!!!! That's a big one. And that's not a rumour!!

 

[I7guy]

Prices can be adjusted quickly. I don’t see any real data from Apple quarterly reports that indicates this is over.

All this fake news is just speculation we see every year. I wait for Apple to post poor numbers...not for “sources” to try to predict poor numbers only to be proven wrong.

Apple hits the nail on the head with price. They might not be 100% on every square inch of every country they sell a phone in, but they are not a stupid company despite some of the posts here to the contrary. According to the meaning behind some of these posts, apple just throws it against the wall to see what sticks. Nothing could be further from the truth. If that's one thing that TC learned from SJ, "measure twice and cut once".

 

[Baymowe335]

Agree again except that they will no longer give unit sales!!!! That's a big one. And that's not a rumour!!

As they shouldn’t. It’s been a stupid data point for years as Apple keeps bearing revenue and eps net analysts cry about them “missing” a number Apple never promised.

Analysts model fake iPhone expectations and when Apple doesn’t hit their number, they say Apple is doomed.

Investors should be focused on revenue and profit...which Apple is growing high double digits.

Losing unit sales, but Apple will be giving more detail around the services business, which is the future of Apple.

 

[Rob_2811]

They dialed in pricing very well. Just because a few people would pay $2500, doesn’t mean 218M would. They executed the strategy to the tune of 18% revenue growth, which means they nailed it.

You should charge what you can get, period. This is business.

Show me numbers that Apple has a “problem.” Otherwise, you’re just talking and speculating. I post numbers all the time. There is no problem in the real data.

Articles like these are NOT data, btw.

Yep exactly no way 218 million pay $1-1.5k for a phone. So they best hope that the old models/watered down models stay attractive or in the case of the Xr become attractive.

Your right it is business and that doesn't end in the here and now, its great at the moment as per the original post the next two three years will be telling.

 

[Baymowe335]

Yep exactly no way 218 million pay $1-1.5k for a phone. So they best hope that the old models/watered down models stay attractive or in the case of the Xr become attractive.

Your right it is business and that doesn't end in the here and now, its great at the moment as per the original post the next two three years will be telling.

Yeah, 218M paid an average of $110 more PER iPhone. Brilliantly done. Pricing power. Business.

 

[Rob_2811]

Yeah, 218M paid an average of $110 more PER iPhone. Brilliantly done. Pricing power. Business.

[doublepost=1543086243][/doublepost]

Agree again except that they will no longer give unit sales!!!! That's a big one. And that's not a rumour!!

As they shouldn’t. It’s been a stupid data point for years as Apple keeps bearing revenue and eps net analysts cry about them “missing” a number Apple never promised.

Analysts model fake iPhone expectations and when Apple doesn’t hit their number, they say Apple is doomed.

Investors should be focused on revenue and profit...which Apple is growing high double digits.

Losing unit sales, but Apple will be giving more detail around the services business, which is the future of Apple

.

Let me guess, just the years that they've been flat. Good luck with those services.

 

[Baymowe335]

[doublepost=1543086243][/doublepost]



Let me guess, just the years that they've been flat. Good luck with those services.

Smart investors are not in denial thst iPhone unit volume has slowed and even plateaued. When businesses evolve, the focus evolves. Apple being a services business is far better than a widget maker. They are trying to get investors to focus on the whole package, which is huge. Services are going to be a $50B business next year and command much higher multiples than hardware.

 

[Rum_Becker]

I only brought them up because you're moving the goal posts, so let's stick with the original point about price, which someone else brought up.

In 2012 a 64 GB iphone 5 cost $849, 16 gb cost $649

No goal post shifting that is you.

Cheapest 2012 flagship phone was 649, in 2018 it is 999. The rest is agree with you 100%. Apple has more affordable products with way more choice. Heck I just bought an iPhone 7 from my cellphone phone provider the other day. It was $210, plus upgrade fee of $35, after everything was said and done it cost me 2.50$ for the phone because they gave me a 300$ beat buy gift card.

I fully acknowledge that it is possible to get a good deal on a kick ass non flagship apple phone.

 

[Rob_2811]

Smart investors are not in denial thst iPhone unit volume has slowed and even plateaued. When businesses evolve, the focus evolves. Apple being a services business is far better than a widget maker. They are trying to get investors to focus on the whole package, which is huge. Services are going to be a $50B business next year and command much higher multiples than hardware.

Up from $9.5 billion this year. Can't wait to see it.

 

[Rum_Becker]

As they shouldn’t. It’s been a stupid data point for years as Apple keeps bearing revenue and eps net analysts cry about them “missing” a number Apple never promised.

Analysts model fake iPhone expectations and when Apple doesn’t hit their number, they say Apple is doomed.

Investors should be focused on revenue and profit...which Apple is growing high double digits.

Losing unit sales, but Apple will be giving more detail around the services business, which is the future of Apple.

I think many professional anyalysts disagree with that. Stock has lost almost 1/3 of a trillion dollars since they announced that, but you know more, lol

 

[Rob_2811]

I think many professional anyalysts disagree with that. Stock has lost almost 1/3 of a trillion dollars since they announced that, but you know more, lol

There have been some bizarre posts in this thread, seems to be some panicked stock holders in full damage limitation mode.