Don’t worry. It’s only because I’d done a little research into the SE recently otherwise my memory isn’t that good either.
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's iPhone 8 Plus Was the Top Selling iPhone in the U.S. During Q2 2018
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thing is when I signed up to Apples walled garden, I had the best phone on the market. Now I can afford an X but there is no way I am spending that amount on a phone. Now I don't have the best phone any more. And for me that leaves a negative experience.
How much does Apple have to raise its prices before you become unhappy?
The strong dollar does not help.
I don’t know, the 8 is fairly comparable when it comes to pure specs, and that’s what, $699? The same price as iPhones have been for years. The X was advanced tech, priced as such, similar to when the MacBook Air first arrived. Manfunfactiring costs will now come down and costs will be more in line. They are rumored to be cheaper this year.
It comes from any basic class in statistics. It’s called sampling. The math is literally centuries old. It works. Whether the underlying population is 10,000 people, a million people, or 150 million people actually makes very little difference.I honestly cannot believe that. If that wast the case then total sales numbers and other analytical companies would never need to go through the length of sourcing a LOT more data.
minimal data ... minimal accuracy.
500 users is NOT enough to presume the sales data for over 150 million people
I'm curious where this 95% with a 4.4% margin of error is coming from?
Not really, I remember having the iPhone 4 and that was $750 AUD my more recent phones went up to $1000 AUD and now even higher.
The iPhone X isn't any more advanced than Samsungs s9
Sure it is. Face ID and the curved screen alone make it more advanced. If you need cheaper, go for the S9 then, nothing wrong with that.
Prices went up since 2010.
Actually it is.
Try taking a 4K video @60fps with a Samsung Galaxy.
Not to mention Face ID, a11, flexible oled display that elimates the chin, battery that is closer to the s9+ than the similar sized s9, fast os updates.
Because of capitalism and competition. It’s nice to have choices. If I can’t afford one product, I get one that’s more in line within my means. I really like fancy ice cream, but it’s too expensive, so I get the cheaper one.
Yes, that is obvious, but why use the argument on these forums? I am expressing an opinion that Apple are getting more expensive for their top phone when everyone else is getting cheaper.
There is no reason for a phone to cost more than a laptop.
You’re proving my point. That’s why we should have different price points for different types of users. No one is forcing you to buy an X if you don’t find it’s tech very impressive. You get the 8 which is much more cost effective and not as advanced. I certainly don’t fault Apple for offering higher priced options. It is a business after all. They’ll offer what consumers will buy.
I think with a phone being so portable and powerful at the same time there is an argument to be made about why it can cost more than a laptop. We use our phones for so many things these days. Things we would traditionally have done on a laptop.
I see the phone as a computer in my handbag.
Apples range in prices for mobile phones are from $349 to $999. Samsung phones range in price from the J7@$200 to the Galaxy Note @$1,000. I'm not sure where apple is getting more expensive and everyone is getting cheaper. Unless you are discussing phones like the Oppo that have a top price point lower than apple or Samsung. Oppo, btw, is competition for Samsung, not apple. Edit: also pixel comes in at about $950. So I'm wondering where all of the "everyone else is cheaper" and what one gets for the money and what are the sales of these "cheaper" mobile phones?
The reason a phone costs more than a laptop(as @FFR noted, not every laptop) is the price of the phone is not strictly based on component price. Competition in the phone world does not equal lower prices, it equals more features.
Most days lol. Some days I recognize the benefits of renting that I never saw before haha.a house sounds like a better buy than a phone
Thank you. Looks like I need a big refresher in math education This is not a strong suit for me when I actually was in school so I thank you. Got something to look forward too.
Except if your sample is biased, which we don’t know. Anyway we get to hear apple’s version shortly.
People either pay the price or not. If Apple is too expensive then they go elsewhere.
Honestly this doesn't surprise me in the least, and we'll get more numbers tomorrow.
But it's the "prediction" i made when the iPhone 8 and X were announced, and there was a price increase on the 8 from previous versions.
it didn't make sense from a product point that the 8 cost more than the 7. overall when a device like that doesn't fundamentally change over a few years (the 7 and 8 are mostly the same), things generally get cheaper as economies of scale improve.
So to see a price increase implied to me that the flagship, higher priced device is not expected to be the #1 seller and to make up the revenue / profit difference of that halo product, the products that are expected to sell in greater volume get a bump in price as an offset.
So far, everything I've seen from the make me believe i was right. I'm expecting great numbers tomorrow, but mostly iPhone revenues will be "propped up" by the 8. not the X (even though the X has sold well).
But from last numbers we've seen. While the X was the "single best seller" the iphone 8 (both + and regular) outsold the X. And if you include all iPhones, including still for sale 6s, 7, 8 and X, overall last quarters iphone sales were still slightly lower in volume than when the 7 was released. So the stable revenues last quarter were from these increased prices, not increased volume.
listening to the radio this morning BNN/Bloomburg news mentioned briefly that the quarterly results are expected tomorrow, but investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the iPhone for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.
But it's the "prediction" i made when the iPhone 8 and X were announced, and there was a price increase on the 8 from previous versions.
it didn't make sense from a product point that the 8 cost more than the 7. overall when a device like that doesn't fundamentally change over a few years (the 7 and 8 are mostly the same), things generally get cheaper as economies of scale improve.
So to see a price increase implied to me that the flagship, higher priced device is not expected to be the #1 seller and to make up the revenue / profit difference of that halo product, the products that are expected to sell in greater volume get a bump in price as an offset.
So far, everything I've seen from the make me believe i was right. I'm expecting great numbers tomorrow, but mostly iPhone revenues will be "propped up" by the 8. not the X (even though the X has sold well).
But from last numbers we've seen. While the X was the "single best seller" the iphone 8 (both + and regular) outsold the X. And if you include all iPhones, including still for sale 6s, 7, 8 and X, overall last quarters iphone sales were still slightly lower in volume than when the 7 was released. So the stable revenues last quarter were from these increased prices, not increased volume.
listening to the radio this morning BNN/Bloomburg news mentioned briefly that the quarterly results are expected tomorrow, but investors are still worried about the over-reliance on the iPhone for profit/revenues in an overly increasing saturated market and a lack of noticeable innovation to the average user.
True, but even mediocre MR won't get the overall picture fundamentally wrong. And when it comes to product mix, Apple's pretty tight-lipped. I'd take most MR studies over trying to infer product mix from ASP. If Timmy doesn't declare the X to be the top-selling model, without MR everyone would be left completely speculating.
I think another poster said he believes the X was the top selling single model. But not combined 8 and 8+. Tomorrow should be interesting.
Your prediction really doesn’t hold any water.
It makes complete sense that the iPhone 8/8 Plus were priced higher, and it had nothing to do with how well Apple thought the X would sell. The series 8 are priced higher than the 7 because they cost more to make.
They’ve got 64GB of storage instead of 32GB, a more expensive A11 SoC vs the A10, a more expensive, higher-quality rear camera, wireless charging components and glass backs. The price increases of $30/50 for the 8/8 Plus are entirely due to increased cost of manufacture.
Also, two cheaper models combined outselling a single more expensive doesn’t seem particularly surprising. And if the 8 Plus became the best selling phone this quarter, I’d attribute that mainly to the fact that demand for the X was pretty much burned out by the end of the second quarter, since those who buy the flagship typically do so early in the cycle.
By the third and fourth quarter, demand for the X will have dropped markedly as buyers hold off in anticipation of the new models. The mix always shifts away from the flagship as the year progresses, as clearly evidenced by quarter-over-quarter declining ASP.
Your Q2 analysis is not quite right either. Units actually increased by about 1.5 million this year over last, from 50.76 million in Q2FY17 to 52.22 million in Q2FY18. And iPhone revenues were anything but stable—from 33.25 billion in Q2FY17 to 38.03 billion in Q2FY18.
Investors are always worried about future iPhone demand, we’ve heard this for years and it’s just so much concern trolling. But I agree with you that tomorrow’s results will be outstanding, setting new records for a third quarter, just as Q2 and Q1 before them were record breaking as well.