Apple Reportedly Reassigned Some Marketing Staff to Work on Bolstering Sales of iPhone XS and iPhone XR

[john123]

The market (and reviews) also agree with my sentiment about the overpriced Xs max and better value of the Xr.

Interesting assumption though, as the s9 is priced a few hundred less and the onePlus 6T costs a good $500 less. They also have the better Qualcomm wireless chipset for data transmission.

The build costs for an phone xs max 256 that sells for $1249 is $453. Labor is not much more considering that the liberal apple is exploiting quasi-slave labor in China.

Even apple is smart enough to not BS and claim it's because of component cost.

The teardowns and accompanying cost estimates have been done by third parties. The quarterly gross margins are a matter of public record. Do the math. I have. It’s pretty straightforward, even if you don’t have any background in accounting.

The point isn’t that Apple doesn’t mark up its stuff a lot. The point IS that their markup relative to component costs hasn’t changed one iota in over a decade. (What other companies do is actually quite irrelevant.) To call Apple greedy now is to call Apple greedy in the Steve Jobs era. And that would be fine. But you can’t have it both ways. Because facts.
[doublepost=1544114092][/doublepost]

I agree and that is what I said, overpriced is in the eye of the beholder.
[doublepost=1544104151][/doublepost]
calm down mate...

Yes I read what you typed and it doesn't matter what you put, it is a subjective term and there are people out there that thing Apple gear is overpriced and what ever you think doesn't come in to it.

So basically you want to complain and when presented with facts you want to metaphorically stick your fingers in your ears and shout “la la la la la.”

Got it. Carry on with the whining then!

 

[appelei]

I went from the original iPhone to the 4, 4s, 5 and then the SE. After reading all the reviews and social media buzz I was really excited and bought the iPhone XS MAX 256gb at launch. The first week I thought it was a huge step forward, but the second week I decided to return the product. Although Face ID is really nice for Animoji, I didn't like it as much as Touch ID because Face ID was slower and not working fast enough all the time. The second week I also realized the screen was not aligned properly and there was a gap between the steel band and the display. To make it even worse I experienced some signal drops when I was traveling by train. All of this made me kinda sad, especially when I was thinking about how much money I gave to Apple for this iPhone (1400 euro). But my ultimate decision to return the product was I really missed the one handed usage of my SE and beforehand I didn't realized how important that was too me. Now I have given my SE a new life with a fresh battery, replaced at the Apple Store!

Some more thoughts: Just like you guys on the forum I think Tim Cook is a great CEO but certainly not a product visionary. I guess Steve created some sort of roadmap for Apple before his death with some good ideas for upcoming products/software changes. Combined with the effectiveness and efficiency of Tim Apple stock went up. Today it feels like the roadmap isn't there anymore, and Tim is busy with everything else (politics, privacy which good, hate speech?, new headquarter) except the core of Apple: products. Software is great, but hardware?
If Apple wants to expand territory by entering all these new categories like original video content or other subscription based services, it is really important for them to have good working products at every price range, especially because Apple remains a closed ecosystem. I don't understand for example, why there isn't an entry level macbook for lets say 700 dollar for education usage.

Thanks for reading and hopefully Timmy changed his mind

 

[I7guy]

I went from the original iPhone to the 4, 4s, 5 and then the SE. After reading all the reviews and social media buzz I was really excited and bought the iPhone XS MAX 256gb at launch. The first week I thought it was a huge step forward, but the second week I decided to return the product. Although Face ID is really nice for Animoji, I didn't like it as much as Touch ID because Face ID was slower and not working fast enough all the time. The second week I also realized the screen was not aligned properly and there was a gap between the steel band and the display. To make it even worse I experienced some signal drops when I was traveling by train. All of this made me kinda sad, especially when I was thinking about how much money I gave to Apple for this iPhone (1400 euro). But my ultimate decision to return the product was I really missed the one handed usage of my SE and beforehand I didn't realized how important that was too me. Now I have given my SE a new life with a fresh battery, replaced at the Apple Store!

Some more thoughts: Just like you guys on the forum I think Tim Cook is a great CEO but certainly not a product visionary. I guess Steve created some sort of roadmap for Apple before his death with some good ideas for upcoming products/software changes. Combined with the effectiveness and efficiency of Tim Apple stock went up. Today it feels like the roadmap isn't there anymore, and Tim is busy with everything else (politics, privacy which good, hate speech?, new headquarter) except the core of Apple: products. Software is great, but hardware?
If Apple wants to expand territory by entering all these new categories like original video content or other subscription based services, it is really important for them to have good working products at every price range, especially because Apple remains a closed ecosystem. I don't understand for example, why there isn't an entry level macbook for lets say 700 dollar for education usage.

Thanks for reading and hopefully Timmy changed his mind

Why isn’t there a entry level iPhone for $100? How low should Apple actually go?

 

[9081094]

Desktops. Laptops. Mobiles. Digital tablets.

That was the prior decade. In the current decade they're doing the same stuff. Apple got into the smartphone biz at the right time. Jobs' marketing convinced people the PDA style phone wasn't dorky or overpriced. It was the "it" item. And he was right.

Amazon and just about any similar company makes various smaller bets, not small, but smaller. Diversifying your interests never meant to water down your offerings. Even with Apple's close web of product lines, they still manage to disappoint or come short. The question is whether or not Apple should place so much emphasis on their mobile phones rather than all their products. Yes, they've gotten recent updates, but letting products stale for years before updating them isn't wise.

And at some point, Apple will have to introduce new, unique and usable features in their phones instead of gimmicks.

Apple needs to hit a homerun with their upcoming Mac Pro. There are many professionals out there waiting to see if Apple learned their lesson and whether they deserve $5-30K of someone's income to continue producing the work they make.

No matter how great the new Mac Pro will be, I’ve learned my lesson in the past and present. Apple has been untrustworthy the last 8 ears in hardware. They’ve milked for too long. I will never invest 10.000 again in a MacPro because of no roadmaps to the future and at present day you can have so much better for the price of today’s MacPro. It’s shameful they haven’t lowered the price or adjust it to today’s standards.

Same for iPhone. It’s a great phone but you could buy the same for a thirt of the price from other vendors.

iPad Pro has nice hardware... but who want it at those steep prices with just a phone os.

Macbooks and MacBook pro’s are shameful priced.

HomePod would be nice if Siri wouldn’t be that dumb.

Hard- and software needs a yearly overhaul if you want to stay competitive in a cutthroat technology market.

Apple has proven these last 8+ years it wants the max from customers by delivering less.

Giving “less is more” a complete new meaning.

 

[ldandp0]

Why isn’t there a entry level iPhone for $100? How low should Apple actually go?

A good start would be low enough where it isn't readily obvious to everyone that they are gouging their customers.

 

[9081094]

Why isn’t there a entry level iPhone for $100? How low should Apple actually go?

The XR should be priced competitive with the new midrange androids who offer the same with oled displays and more memory. The XR is more expensive over here than the Galaxy S9 and I don’t even mention the Huawei’s or various other brands. Any newcomer willing to buy a mobile phone would be very dumb to buy the iPhone unless you are trapped in apple’s expensive ecotrap.

 

[I7guy]

The XR should be priced competitive with the new midrange androids who offer the same with oled displays and more memory. The XR is more expensive over here than the Galaxy S9 and I don’t even mention the Huawei’s or various other brands. Any newcomer willing to buy a mobile phone would be very dumb to buy the iPhone unless you are trapped in apple’s expensive ecotrap.

there seem to be hundreds of millions of dumb customers and who knows how many of them are dumb newbies.
[doublepost=1544119837][/doublepost]

A good start would be low enough where it isn't readily obvious to everyone that they are gouging their customers.

And what price would that be? Gouging and overpriced are value judgments and are subjective. Nobody is forcing anybody to buy Apple products.

 

[Kiorr]

 

[ldandp0]

there seem to be hundreds of millions of dumb customers and who knows how many of them are dumb newbies.
[doublepost=1544119837][/doublepost]
And what price would that be? Gouging and overpriced are value judgments and are subjective. Nobody is forcing anybody to buy Apple products.

A textbook definition of gouging: increasing prices as sales go down to keep revenues increasing.

 

[I7guy]

A textbook definition of gouging: increasing prices as sales go down to keep revenues increasing.

And how does that work when there is competition galore? When one can buy an equivalent mobile phone from a functionality point of view for half-price? How do you price gouge a customer who has purchase options galore? The answer is you can't. The text book definition may apply to monopolistic services.

 

[ldandp0]

And how does that work when there is competition galore? When one can buy an equivalent mobile phone from a functionality point of view for half-price? How do you price gouge a customer who has purchase options galore? The answer is you can't. The text book definition may apply to monopolistic services.

The difference is they can, they just likely won't get away with it for a long period of time. They have people trapped into the ecosystem that do not want to face the reality of having to switch everything, especially if they've grown attached to the brand. It'll eventually happen, but until then - it is gouging.

 

[I7guy]

The difference is they can, they just likely won't get away with it for a long period of time. They have people trapped into the ecosystem that do not want to face the reality of having to switch everything, especially if they've grown attached to the brand. It'll eventually happen, but until then - it is gouging.

Gouge, like overpriced, is a subjective word as you have used it here. In the classic sense, gouging may apply, for example to gas stations when they raise their price when gas is limited and a natural disaster is impending. But this is a misuse of term meant to convey distrust to a company who keeps getting one for record books, quarter after quarter.

Not to mention, iphone sales aren't going down, by the available metrics. Next quarter one won't know what iphone unit sales are, but that won't stop the rumors anyway.

People are never "trapped" and of course, anything could eventually happen. Apple could hit $2T.

 

[Yojimbo007]

Actually I'm a huge fan of behavioral psychology. I took a ton of classes on it. Kahneman and Tversky are my spirit animals. And if you know that field and know that I think those guys are/were awesome, then you also know what aspect of behavioral psychology I love the most: cognitive biases.

To call Apple greedy today is to always call them greedy. And that's really the same as calling them a "corporation." Nothing else is consistent with the facts.

When people say call Apple "greedy," what they're really saying is, "I'm unable to, unwilling to, or simply don't really want to pay that much for a phone." And that's absolutely fair. But while it may feel good to blame Apple (and to brand them as a big bad evil greedy corporation), for that cost that would be disingenuous. That's just corporate life. And it was the exact same corporate life under Steve Jobs. Arguing otherwise flies in the face of basic math.

Lots of things have many shades of gray. This isn't really one of them.

I Enjoy reading your posts..
Smart and well articulated..

Cheers and

 

[MultiMan]

And how does that work when there is competition galore? When one can buy an equivalent mobile phone from a functionality point of view for half-price? How do you price gouge a customer who has purchase options galore? The answer is you can't. The text book definition may apply to monopolistic services.

But there aren't any competition for iOS devices, that's the thing. For very many people it's iOS or nothing at all. That attitude and brand loyalty has created a kind of monopoly. Apple has been acting lately just like a company with a monopoly, that's why the great interviews Steve Jobs did, which have been posted here many times, are very relevant today.

So yes, Apple is gouging. They know people have no where to go for iOS and thus they know the sky is the limit price wise for a lot of people. Just reading these forums show that clearly. It's not sustainable in the long rung, but at the moment all that seems to matter is short term profits.

 

[Yojimbo007]

It's amazing how many are still in denial about what a flop the new phones are. People are sending a message with their power to purchase, or not to purchase. Apple needs to get off the Greed Wagon and release a simplified iPhone that runs iOS well for a $599 starting point. Boot the Face ID crap and go to Touch ID under glass.

The simplified iphone ( relative to to x series ) you asked for is in Apples lineup already( - underglass touch id ) for way less.

Iphone 7 Sarts at 449$
Iphone 7+ Starts at 569$
IPhone 8 Starts at 599$


Plus how do you substantiate your claim that new x phones are flops......?
Is it so because you like to think so?

 

[dilbert99]

So basically you want to complain and when presented with facts you want to metaphorically stick your fingers in your ears and shout “la la la la la.”

Got it. Carry on with the whining then!

Facts have nothing to do with it. You can show me facts and I will accept facts.
In this case this is not one of those things.
Its similar to me thinking redheads look nice and you thinking brunettes look nice - beauty is in the eye of the beholder just as much as something is overpriced or not.
[doublepost=1544181190][/doublepost]

And there are people who think you get what you pay for. A discussion based so much on perceived values will never go anywhere. Having one person declare an iPhone overpriced doesn’t mean it is.

And just because one person doesn't think it is not overpriced doesn't mean it isn't.

 

[I7guy]

And just because one person doesn't think it is not overpriced doesn't mean it isn't.

Right. And that’s why discussions around subjective criteria go around and around.

 

[Phone Junky]

Facts have nothing to do with it. You can show me facts and I will accept facts.
In this case this is not one of those things.
Its similar to me thinking redheads look nice and you thinking brunettes look nice - beauty is in the eye of the beholder just as much as something is overpriced or not.
[doublepost=1544181190][/doublepost]
And just because one person doesn't think it is not overpriced doesn't mean it isn't.

Ya got a double negative in there. Gotta get rid of one to make your point correct.

 

[Pstein15]

Apple moved some of its marketing staff off other projects to focus on bolstering sales of the latest iPhone lineup in late October, around the time the iPhone XR launched, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.

The report cites an unnamed person familiar with the situation who described the move as a "fire drill" and "a possible admission that the devices may have been selling below some expectations," a concern shared by some analysts and investors. Apple's stock price has plunged nearly 17 percent since November 1.

Apple is certainly marketing the latest iPhones more aggressively than in previous years. A banner at the top of its website advertises the iPhone XR "from $449," but with an asterisk, as that price requires trading in an iPhone 7 Plus for a $300 credit as part of a limited time promotion rarely seen from Apple.

​

These concerns are nothing new following iPhone launch season, with the doom and gloom often fueled by weakening forecasts from iPhone suppliers.

Cirrus Logic, a supplier of audio-related components for iPhones, expects its revenue for the current holiday season quarter to be around 16 percent lower than it originally forecasted due to "recent weaknesses in the smartphone market." While not named, Apple accounts for around 80 percent of Cirrus Logic's business.

Making matters worse, The Wall Street Journal reported that Apple recently slashed production orders for the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR due in part to "lower-than-expected demand."

Apple CEO Tim Cook has dismissed those supply chain reports in the past. During an earnings call in January 2013, he noted that the company's supply chain is very complex and that conclusions shouldn't be drawn from singular data points:It certainly doesn't help that Apple recently announced that it will no longer disclose iPhone unit sales in its quarterly earnings results, leading some to believe that iPhone sales have peaked and Apple has something to hide.

Apple's financial chief Luca Maestri said unit sales are "not particularly relevant for our company at this point," as they are "not necessarily representative of the underlying strength of our business." He did note that Apple may provide qualitative commentary if the info is valuable to investors.

While there were similar concerns about the iPhone X, that device ultimately sold well, so time will tell whether these headlines are baseless again. However, analysts will now have to rely exclusively on iPhone revenue to gauge sales, so the situation will no longer be as transparent going forward.

Apple has yet to announce a date for its next quarterly earnings report, but it will likely be released at the end of January. Apple expects revenue of between $89 billion and $93 billion, which would be an all-time company record.

Article Link: Apple Reportedly Reassigned Some Marketing Staff to Work on Bolstering Sales of iPhone XS and iPhone XR

 

[dilbert99]

Ya got a double negative in there. Gotta get rid of one to make your point correct.

nice spotting...

 

[Pstein15]

Poor marketing ploy to claim that paying consumers under market value for their existing IPhones is somehow a great price cut. If that’s the best they can do, obvious failure.

We used to upgrade every two years. Didn’t everyone?

The choice now is to upgrade to a very expensive phone or settle for the poor man’s XR. As long as I’ll be looked down on for buying the XR, we will stay with the 7 Plus.

To put it another way. Wheels turning. IPhone XSMax or MacBook Pro? Iphone XS Max or MacBook Pro? Hmm.
[doublepost=1544187459][/doublepost]

Apple moved some of its marketing staff off other projects to focus on bolstering sales of the latest iPhone lineup in late October, around the time the iPhone XR launched, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.

The report cites an unnamed person familiar with the situation who described the move as a "fire drill" and "a possible admission that the devices may have been selling below some expectations," a concern shared by some analysts and investors. Apple's stock price has plunged nearly 17 percent since November 1.

Apple is certainly marketing the latest iPhones more aggressively than in previous years. A banner at the top of its website advertises the iPhone XR "from $449," but with an asterisk, as that price requires trading in an iPhone 7 Plus for a $300 credit as part of a limited time promotion rarely seen from Apple.

​

These concerns are nothing new following iPhone launch season, with the doom and gloom often fueled by weakening forecasts from iPhone suppliers.

Cirrus Logic, a supplier of audio-related components for iPhones, expects its revenue for the current holiday season quarter to be around 16 percent lower than it originally forecasted due to "recent weaknesses in the smartphone market." While not named, Apple accounts for around 80 percent of Cirrus Logic's business.

Making matters worse, The Wall Street Journal reported that Apple recently slashed production orders for the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR due in part to "lower-than-expected demand."

Apple CEO Tim Cook has dismissed those supply chain reports in the past. During an earnings call in January 2013, he noted that the company's supply chain is very complex and that conclusions shouldn't be drawn from singular data points:It certainly doesn't help that Apple recently announced that it will no longer disclose iPhone unit sales in its quarterly earnings results, leading some to believe that iPhone sales have peaked and Apple has something to hide.

Apple's financial chief Luca Maestri said unit sales are "not particularly relevant for our company at this point," as they are "not necessarily representative of the underlying strength of our business." He did note that Apple may provide qualitative commentary if the info is valuable to investors.

While there were similar concerns about the iPhone X, that device ultimately sold well, so time will tell whether these headlines are baseless again. However, analysts will now have to rely exclusively on iPhone revenue to gauge sales, so the situation will no longer be as transparent going forward.

Apple has yet to announce a date for its next quarterly earnings report, but it will likely be released at the end of January. Apple expects revenue of between $89 billion and $93 billion, which would be an all-time company record.

Article Link: Apple Reportedly Reassigned Some Marketing Staff to Work on Bolstering Sales of iPhone XS and iPhone XR

Apple is reducing prices less on year old phones than previously. iPhone X price cut from $ 999 to $ 899.
When new IPhones were half the price, they still got a $ 100 price cut. Price cuts were close to 20% on the year old models. Now down to 10%. Apple banking on consumers being math deficient. They have really lost their way.

 

[john123]

Facts have nothing to do with it. You can show me facts and I will accept facts.
In this case this is not one of those things.
Its similar to me thinking redheads look nice and you thinking brunettes look nice - beauty is in the eye of the beholder just as much as something is overpriced or not.

Except it isn’t. Words have meanings. They also have denotations and connotations. I demonstrated that with both of your definitions your own usage doesn’t work.

“Expensive” is a great subjective word to use here. “Too expensive for me” is even better.

To price these new iPhones lower would be something of a corporate nightmare. If you think the stock slide lately is bad, that ain’t nothing compared to what would happen.

When you go on a tangent about irrelevant stuff, and when you and other forum posters say “overpriced” and then go on to make nonsense BS arguments about how Tim Cook is greedy and you pine for Steve Jobs, that’s when I have a problem.

Everyone is entitled to opinions. They are not entitled to alternative facts.
[doublepost=1544188174][/doublepost]

Apple banking on consumers being math deficient. They have really lost their way.

Wrong. Debunked by me and others so, so many times.
[doublepost=1544188307][/doublepost]

Right. And that’s why discussions around subjective criteria go around and around.

Except here we aren’t talking about 1v1. We have millions of data points that are and will get aggregated together to paint a rather clear picture. Q1 guidance already tells us more or less what it will look like.

 

[9081094]

Actually I'm a huge fan of behavioral psychology. I took a ton of classes on it. Kahneman and Tversky are my spirit animals. And if you know that field and now know that I think those guys are/were awesome, then you also know what aspect of behavioral psychology I love the most: cognitive biases.

To call Apple greedy today is to always call them greedy. And that's really the same as calling them a "corporation." Nothing else is consistent with the facts.

When people call Apple "greedy” over iPhone pricing, what they're really saying is, "I'm unable to, unwilling to, or simply don't really want to pay that much for a phone." And that's absolutely fair. But while it may feel good to blame Apple (and to brand them as a big bad evil greedy corporation) for that cost, doing so would be disingenuous. Markups and profit margins are just corporate life (and indeed publicly traded corporations have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder profits). And it was the exact same corporate life (i.e., same gross profit margins) under Steve Jobs. Arguing otherwise flies in the face of basic math and facts.

Lots of things have many shades of gray. This isn't really one of them.

For me greed means charging excessive for something you’re forced to do. For example:

Charging excessive for ram and ssd’s while you’re not able to upgrade later.

Charging excessive for repairs and threatening that you’re out of warranty when you do it somewhere else.

Charging excessive for hardware reckoning on the fact you’ve made big investments on the software for that platform.

Charging excessive for four years old hardware (Mac Pro) where we all know that the hardware you bought last year is costing half the amount this year.

Upping prices while there is no excuse when you compare the cost of the parts.

Forcing customers to buy dongles to be able to use your equipment.

For me these are signs of greed without having great regards for your customers.

Sure every company needs profits for investments in R&D. Apple of all the technology companies is investing % wise the lest in R&D from all comparable companies.

Bragging about their profits and seeing the poor state of their hard- and software is something, I as a customer, don’t understand.

Maybe when you’re a shareholder you’ll push Saint Cook to up the prices. But it’s all short term. Apple has become a me too company with excessive prices. For me, nothing compelling or to be proud of.

 

[Phone Junky]

Here's an interesting little tidbit.

Up until today, whenever you went to 'Compare iPhone Models' on Apple's website, the 3 newest models would be the default ones that would be onscreen initially.

They were the Xs, XS Max, and XR.

Today they are showing the XR, 7, and 6.

They are trying their darnedest to get those with the older iPhones to upgrade to the XR.

Is it because they are concerned with these old iPhone owners user experience? I doubt it.

Seems that the XR isn't selling as expected and Apple is doing everything they can, short of lowering the price, to try and boost sales.

 

[john123]

For me greed means charging excessive for something you’re forced to do. For example:

Charging excessive for ram and ssd’s while you’re not able to upgrade later.

Charging excessive for repairs and threatening that you’re out of warranty when you do it somewhere else.

Charging excessive for hardware reckoning on the fact you’ve made big investments on the software for that platform.

Charging excessive for four years old hardware (Mac Pro) where we all know that the hardware you bought last year is costing half the amount this year.

Upping prices while there is no excuse when you compare the cost of the parts.

Forcing customers to buy dongles to be able to use your equipment.

For me these are signs of greed without having great regards for your customers.

Sure every company needs profits for investments in R&D. Apple of all the technology companies is investing % wise the lest in R&D from all comparable companies.

Bragging about their profits and seeing the poor state of their hard- and software is something, I as a customer, don’t understand.

Maybe when you’re a shareholder you’ll push Saint Cook to up the prices. But it’s all short term. Apple has become a me too company with excessive prices. For me, nothing compelling or to be proud of.

You're conflating very different concepts: greed and the value proposition of the products.

But more important, you made a factually incorrect statement:

>> Upping prices while there is no excuse when you compare the cost of the parts.​

This is the heart of the discussion. With respect to iPhones pricing, this has not happened. To repeat myself yet again, when you compare the teardown costs over the past few years, MSRP is shockingly aligned with exactly what the parts cost. And Apple's gross margins are shockingly consistent from quarter to quarter.

It's a false narrative that something has changed lately. Everyone has their own opinions about whether these new components and the "features" they bring with them are worthwhile. That's fine. (I've been a vocal critic on these forums of many of the same things you're talking about—so much so that I've been labeled an "Apple hater" which is really funny—but like I said, that's a very different topic than the one we are covering here.)

Again repeating myself, if you want to call Apple "greedy" under Steve Jobs, that's fine too. But let's stop pretending that something has happened, or that Apple's business culture has somehow changed. That's a nice story, but it's not one supported by the facts.