iPhone 16e Has Apparently 'Failed' Just Like iPhone Air

[Rogifan]

So people prefer Apple's more expensive iPhones over their cheaper models?

Seems like a happy problem to have.

This phone exists just so Apple can say iPhone starts at $600.

As others have mentioned, the problem is its price. When you compare its price to the Android competitors it looses badly. There is something wrong when a "budget device" starts at $599.

I really like my Air and glad I bought one as I really wanted a light and thin phone, but I admit it shouldn't have been priced as high as it is.

I think both the 16e and Air should have been priced $100 less.

It seems these days Apple designs things based on filling a price point or using as an upsell. Price the Air at $999 you’ll upsell people into the Pro for just $100 more. Sell it at $899 and customers will view the 17 as good enough (or better) for $100 less.

 

[Happy_John]

"Failed" is an overly dramatic and hazy term here.

As other comments have pointed put, the iphone 16e serves a few purposes in the lineup 1) A 'no frills" company-issued phone and 2) a "loss leader"/motivation to upsell to the next level of iPhone.

The only reasonable question to ask to judge if it has "failed or not" is if the profit share of the revenue of the device is higher or lower than the costs of designing, producing and marketing the device. I very much doubt it had made Apple a loss, as the R&D and design costs of the phone would have been much lower than for a "new" iphone, given it's recycling old research, development and design. The production lines would also have already been set up.

When it's said in the headline that it "fails", I think they mean "it's not cool", but that's not the same thing.

Did it turn a profit? That's the only real question.

 

[kerr]

It’s almost like Apple’s pricing strategy ensures that almost everyone will buy the Pro Max. I don’t know why Apple bothers selling any other models, they are doing their best to force everyone away from other models.

 

[uiop.]

A random Weibo commenter is an authoritative source for determining "failure"?

What's the definition of failure being used? Is the 16e losing Apple money?

People are too quick to judge products without any information about Apple's goals for products and profitability of products.

This is my thought reading this headline as well. What authority are they to determine if it's a failure? Because it's not as popular as *they* thought it would be?

 

[eRaz0r84]

The 5c was perfect, especially price wise. if only the poly carbonate casing wouldn't have been the issue, which made it look extremely cheap and fragile. but same price range, with aluminium frame - done.

cheap phone dont have to be look cheap.

 

[Graphate]

[…]

The Weibo user known as "Fixed Focus Digital" said that the iPhone 16e is not selling well and the attempt at delivering a popular, low-cost iPhone has "failed." That being said, both models are expected to see successors. The iPhone 17e is expected to debut in the spring of 2026, while the iPhone Air 2 is likely to arrive at a later date owing to a delay. Meanwhile, demand for the iPhone 17 lineup continues to surge, with production orders increasing.

[…]

So people prefer Apple's more expensive iPhones over their cheaper models?

Seems like a happy problem to have.

I wonder— if these devices have failed to sell, but there will be successors (and Apple has fairly regularly maintained a pool of lower cost devices)… is this like an investment?
(a) to prevent people from saying Apple only offers overly expensive products,
(b) to slowly trickle in younger buyers who will grow accustomed and as they accumulate wealth buy more expensive, devices from Apple, and/or
(c) to create a decoy, less attractive, product so there is a “middle” option, leading people to buy the middle (or even the expensive pro decoy)?

 

[thelion7]

Honestly not surprised.

The SE models were perfect, although the price bump on the last SE seemed risky but obviously paid off in the end.

No Budget Phone should cost more than £500, the SE prices of £359 and £419 base worked because that's still cheap.

I appreciate customers wanted to move on from the iPhone 7 design language and of course that can be more expensive but the iPhone 12 core design language has been around for 5 years now and face ID has been out for 7 years.

I'm struggling to imagine that these parts are just as expensive as they were upon first release.

I personally think Apple are either being greedy and pushing prices up because they just kept on getting away with it.

Or the 16e was never meant to sell well and maybe it's a price anchoring method?

Customer's mind

"Why pay £599 for overpriced hardware when I can get infinitely better and the latest hardware for an extra £200."

My guess is if the 16e was priced like the SE's it would cannibalise the regular 17 models.

 

[the future]

„Failure“ doesn‘t mean „sells less than iPhone Pro“ (or iPhone regular). „Failure“ means „sells less than Apple expected“. No-one knows this right now, least of all a random Weibo user. Same for the Air, by the way. We will only know if these model lines „failed“ when they are discontinued (like the Mini and the Plus).

 

[Marty80]

the next phone to fold will be the iphone fold

 

[macintologist]

They should hire me for their marketing department because the reason for this is dead simple: they are giving it a special name. This is the exact reason why the iPhone mini failed. If they had simply just called the iPhone mini the iPhone, and then the iPhone like the iPhone plus or something then people would’ve bought the iPhone because it wasn’t called. It wouldn’t be called the mini. It is the exact same issue here. This is being named some kind of special iPhone with a letter after it and people don’t want that.

 

[widestload]

A budget phone priced too high failed?!

Exactly this. At $600 its not cheap and anyone with that money will likely pay the couple of hundred more for the standard phone. Entry level needs to be in the $200 region!

 

[digimc]

I will say in my opinion one of the biggest issues with the 16e is when it’s released. Releasing it in February or March like they did this past year after the regular lineup has already come out is pointless

People that want to upgrade or are interested in the new iPhone lineup are going to pick a phone they like and can afford in September when the new lineup is released. They aren’t waiting till 4 or 5 months later for a budget phone.

Most people have made their iPhone purchase decisions by Christmas and after that there is very limited demand outside of businesses buying them for their employees. Even people who do have an off schedule upgrade pattern are not enough to go for a phone like this

 

[Rogifan]

Not surprising at all. With the same storage, it’s $100 more for the 17. That's a no brainer.

Which is the point. Imagine how much $$$ Apple makes from the ‘for $100 more…’ crowd.

 

[mr_matalino]

It will keep failing, they are not getting, one of the most important feature for any phone is display size. Instead of larger screen in Air they put smaller one. though, its not small by a mile, but its smaller. that enough to prove that theres something bigger and better. what a let down. Smaller display phones are done, its distant past, its history. so much you do on the phone, that even small increment in display is a big feature.

Yeah I don’t think the Air failed because it had a slightly smaller screen size.

 

[kirk.vino]

Some of these articles are literally clickbait at this point. The 16e is actually a big seller in the enterprise/corporate sector. At least, in the US. So, of course, compared to the Pro models, it would not show the same numbers, but it has never meant to. For its intended category it’s doing just fine.

 

[JSDK]

I love my 16e - super stable, and an absolute battery monster. Easily lasts two days, even if I only charge to 80%. My regular 16 couldn't, and neither could my 15 Pro before it. - and no Camera Control, and with a Caudabe case on, it lies completely flat on the table. The 16e is hands down the iPhone I've been happiest with. I paid $460 for it. I think it's a good price.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Because no one wants a junk phone.

Because that’s the truth. They screwed over a dedicated user base by squeezing the budget phone closer to the base phone.

A mini phone would have been more popular than the Air at this point.

I personally went to the other extreme (SE3 to Pro Max) for battery life. But there’s no excuse anymore not to be able to produce a new smaller body at a lower cost.

Yet they made the stupid thing and no one bought it. What don't you people get about that? THEY MADE A SMALL PHONE AND NO ONE BOUGHT IT. That's why it is no longer made.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

But since the predominant theory in MR comments blames too few mini buyers, a mini e iPhone would also fail, but thanks everyone for keeping us in the conversation. Better to be talked about than forgotten.

“The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about.”

 

[Falco McGregor]

It’s been said here before, but these are enterprise phones. Our firm’s IT department just bought 100 of the 16e models for deployment to replace phones that are more than five years old. It’s $100 less than the normal 16 and $200 less than the 17 base model. That’s a $10K or $20K savings, which makes sense because they don’t care if the user has one camera instead of two, the Dynamic Island or ProMotion. They’re buying the latest chip to guarantee five or so years of software support on a phone many of the employees will likely beat up for the next half-decade. Apple will likely pull the same move on its upcoming “low-cost MacBook” for enterprise and education.

 

[JerryIII]

The problem for the air and the e is that the 17 is so good.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

They will do anything but make another Mini.

'course they won't. People buying the mini don't use it to consume media on, or play games on. They don't participate in the 30% app store profit treadmill that Apple created, so are therefore worse than worthless consumers for Apple, as they probably cost Apple money compared to the same person buying a regular sized iPhone.

 

[freedogshampoo]

The 16e is priced well but not cool enough. The Air is pretty cool but priced too high. Can they merge ideas?

 

[Kayakphotos]

It's just the price. I picked up a mint 16e for $399 from another photographer on a forum. For that price, it's been great. I'm not a power user by any means though.

 

[Tunster]

Because no one wants a junk phone.



Yet they made the stupid thing and no one bought it. What don't you people get about that? THEY MADE A SMALL PHONE AND NO ONE BOUGHT IT. That's why it is no longer made.

SE3 existed for 3 years. Many bought it because there was no other option for a smaller iPhone and iPhone 13 mini had a shorter shelf life.

We have a complex landscape with too many variants (everything anti-Jobs) that are too close and overlap too much because Cook is obsessed with manufacturing scale.

Lots of people like to ignore the small screen demand because they think it’s old school/fashioned. The market is asking for a smaller phone and laptop. Apple have very good chips, why not make them?

 

[NMBob]

It's the notch.