I agree, I'd find it annoying. Assuming that not absolutely everything is liable to tax how would you work out what you have to pay?
I'd rather be able to work it out ahead of time.
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.
iPhone 13 Pro Costs Around $20 More to Build Compared to the iPhone 12 Pro, Despite Being the Same Price for the Customer
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd rather be able to work it out ahead of time.
The initial question I replied to was about how accurate these "estimates" are. I pointed out a number of reasons why they are problematic at best. It doesn't matter what Apples profit margins are or are not for that part of the question.
However it DOES matter when the people making these BS estimates make claims about how much money Apple is making per phone, but ignore part of the costs of making the phone when they make their claims. Further the degree to which R&D goes down based on sales depends on the total cost of R&D relative to overall sales, we have absolutely no idea what those numbers are (nor do we have any idea how much Apple actually spends on the parts compared to the guesses of the people making these "estimates"), its a double bad approach.
As for "overinflating" prices, yes I can believe they get those profits without "overinflating" the prices because the price is whatever people will pay. An iPhone is a luxury good. You do not need it to live. Even if you were to make the argument that smartphones are a necessary good, there are numerous lower cost devices that are capable of the basic necessary functions a person could need. Apple can charge whatever it wants for iPhones and its only "overinflated" if people stop buying them for that price. Apple is not a charity, they don't owe it to you or anyone to sell you the phone at a lower price. They can certainly choose to do so if they want, but that doesn't mean the phone price is "overinflated". Its either worth it to you or it isn't. If its not, no problem, you have many many other options. If it is, then you pay the price. Its that simple.
One huge flaw in your thinking is that overinflated means people won’t buy them.
It might suggest that people would but in a society where debt is almost normalised overinflated no longer means unattainable.
It's not merely state based either, taxes can be added on at the county and city level too (though usually in much smaller amounts). On most purchases that difference is trivial enough that people don't bother to search locally for the cheapest town to buy from. That $10 before tax HDMI cable is going to be either $10.95 (9.5% tax) or $10.90 (9.0% tax next town over), that 5 cents is not worth the drive to the other town. However, for large ticket items such as cars, boats, major appliances it can be worth it and dealerships and stores WILL advertise this as a benefit for those purposes.
Thus its far easier for companies to list the price without tax since that will be the price at all of its stores BEFORE tax, than to make up unique adverts and price tags for each individual store.
Societies take on debt is a separate issue than whether Apples prices are "overinflated". These are still luxury goods, they are optional. Consumers have choice, that they make bad choices is not relevant.
I highly doubt that the iPhone 13Pro costs $570 — think there are zillions of other costs baked into that.. like salaries of all iPhone design team, some labor cost associated with costs of apple stores (i.e. if an iPhone 13 sold every 3 min, then might use cost of 3 min of store operations), maybe transport into u.s. - then transport again to retail outlets.... I've ordered one, looking forward to it...... but think apple is tossing-in MUCH (like all other big corps do) to make seem overly profitable.
The iPhone 13 Pro costs Apple around $20 more to build compared to last year's iPhone 12 Pro, but despite the lower margin of revenue for the company, the iPhone 13 Pro still starts at the same $999 price point as last year's entry-level Pro iPhone.
TechInsights did a costs analysis breakdown of the new iPhone 13 Pro, finding that due to higher component costs related to the improved camera, A15 Bionic chip, ProMotion displays, and presumably the large battery, the newest iPhone costs $570 to build, while the iPhone 12 Pro cost merely $548. Compared to the Samsung Galaxy S21+, both iPhones are however significantly more expensive to build.
The increase in build costs from the iPhone 12 Pro to the iPhone 13 Pro is notable but not as pronounced as last year's increase from the iPhone 11. The iPhone 12 introduced 5G support, a new 5nm chip, and the return of flat edges. Those changes resulted in the iPhone 12 being 21% more expensive for Apple to build than the iPhone 11.
In the run-up to the launch of the iPhone 13 and iPhone 13 Pro last month, a report suggested that due to increased costs for chip production, Apple would increase the price of the iPhone 13 as a means of compensating. That did not occur, and Apple instead kept the same price points for the iPhone 13, on top of introducing more aggressive carrier subsidies. Another report suggested that Apple was looking at new ways to assemble the cameras in an iPhone to save costs.
Article Link: iPhone 13 Pro Costs Around $20 More to Build Compared to the iPhone 12 Pro, Despite Being the Same Price for the Customer
Societies take on debt is 100% relevant. It's why you can usually 'afford' to buy a house or multitude other things luxury or not.
Thankfully. I have so many of those sitting around, it's a complete waste. I give them away when I can.
No, Apple puts its prices up or down now and then, probably inflation and markets I’d imagine.
Yeah a leftist then government was scared to lay off a few thousands public sector workers who barely work and gain huge wages so they decided to increase vat by 10% in one night...