It's all over the Internet in professional reporting. Check out Forbes and WSJ if you must. Given that even a relatively conventional Samsung flip phone sells for $299 direct, it's patently obvious that the iPhone is subsidized. For comparison, HTC, the major manufacturer of Windows devices, sells most of their models in the $500-800 range.
Carrier locking and subsidies are the only reasons that prices that low can be achieved under current market and technology conditions.
If you're looking for "proof" in the form of an original invoice specifying the amount of the subsidy, good luck. I'm not aware of that information being published for any handset from any manufacturer.
There is no chance, none whatsoever, that $199/299 is an unsubsidized price.
It meshes fine. He said it would be $199 worldwide with a two year carrier agreement. The particular and complex details of pricing arrangements, total cost of ownership, optional features and their impact on pricing, and plan details do not make for a good presentation. Presentations for the public are all elevator pitches and 10-word answers.
You have to draw the line somewhere. You don't list TCO on a pricetag. You say, look, we're taking $199 plus tax from your wallet now. Last week, we were taking $399 plus tax from your wallet. It's AT&T's job to cover the plan prices and terms. It's the power company's job to explain their rates to you about how much it'll cost to charge the device. It's the bank or treasury's job to explain what's going on with the dollar and why index costs are increasing and purchasing power is decreasing, leading to a double-hit against your bottom line. All of that is separate.
Apple's involvement stops at the four corners of the device. It can't reasonably be expected to work any other way.
