iPhone 16e Sales Lag Behind SE Models Despite Bestseller Status

[spazzcat]

They sold 20% fewer 16e's than SE's in the same initial period, but the 16e is 40% more expensive per unit. So from Apple's perspective one could argue that they've succeeded.

I think it funny that people can't see how much money Apple is making of this phone.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Wouldn’t that be nice. The only thing missing that I want is MagSafe.

I have magsafe with SE by using a case. It's indistinguishable from my 16 Pro.

 

[contacos]

The majority of people I know don't care about specs and mainly shop price. When I start blathering on about the spec sheet, their eyes glaze over.

From my observation it seems "uncool" to have an iPhone that doesn't sport the 3 camera lens arrangement

 

[turbineseaplane]

Not really, the AVP is very much targeted at early adopters and developers, and that’s who’s buying it

We sure even they are buying it anymore?

 

[Ghengis LeMond]

Not by the numbers they have published. In 2024, their (entire) hardware revenue was $294.9 billion, and at 35% profit that's $103 billion.

Services, which includes subs was $96 billion. Subtract $20 billion from that for the Google Payola, and you're at $76 billion revenue with an unknown profit number.

Services revenue is recurring though. Additionally, the margin on services is substantially higher than hardware. Also, the ‘google payola’ generates signicant revenue for Apple in ad revenue and traffic management. That’s an opex cost to them with revenue on the backend.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

From my observation it seems "uncool" to have an iPhone that doesn't sport the 3 camera lens arrangement

That's not really a thing here (US), but I know it can be in some parts of the world.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Services revenue is recurring though. Additionally, the margin on services is substantially higher than hardware. Also, the ‘google payola’ generates signicant revenue for Apple in ad revenue and traffic management. That’s an opex cost to them with revenue on the backend.

I separated it out, because it's likely to be gone next year or the year after. Not a single court has agreed to listen to Apple's pleas for it to remain, and it's likely that Google will be prevented from participating in such deals in the future.

 

[Eriamjh1138@DAN]

A new battery is still cheaper than a new phone.

 

[IvyKing]

The SE had the home button. Believe it or not many people still find it useful to have a button to press and get them back to the home menu.

One of my wife's friends bought an SE a few months precisely because it was the only one with the home button.

 

[radutzan]

But hey, at least they got to pocket those MagSafe pennies!

 

[ghanwani]

It's not the higher price but the PWM that has prevented me from buying this. An old SE refresh would have been an automatic and immediate buy for me.

 

[culex]

Too expensive. Refurbished and older devices are simply the better deal for price-sensitive buyers. And many here in Europe don't buy expensive smartphones not because they can't afford them, but on principle. "Waste of money."

 

[Mousse]

Yup. Apple is asking people to pay too much for too little. The market has spoken.

See how the 16e is Apple's bestselling model, it says a lot about the iPhone's value proposition. The value isn't there anymore. Apple only considers Samsung a competitor, since Samsung asking a lot of money for little in return as well.

If you want the best bang for the buck, the mid-tier Chinese brand leads the way. The only knock on them is build quality isn't the greatest, but you get some wild features for bargain basement prices.

 

[victorvictoria]

Not sure, but do you think the 50% price increase might have something to do with it?

 

[klasma]

The 16e starts at €699 ($599) in Europe.

Uhm, 699 € is more like $799.

 

[xpxp2002]

Not surprised at all, a mini phone would have been a better option, I would rather buy the 15 or 16 rather than the 16e, other companies are providing better phones and a cheaper price than the 16e.

This right here. There are 4 other way-too-large iPhones that offer better specs than the 16e, and in most cases, can be had from any of the Big Three carriers for free with a 2-3 year commitment.

The market for the SE was also a reasonably-sized, albeit gimped iPhone at "an okay price." They took away the one thing that made it appealing, didn't discount the price, and put it up against objectively better products that can be had for the same price or less with carrier promotions.

 

[sdz]

iPhone in Europe is damn expensive!!! 16e needs to be like 299... Look at Nothing Phone for comparison.

The EU Commission needs to keep on fighting platform monopolists!!!

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Very shortsighted. Apple makes the real money on recurring subscriptions, not hardware. You can definitely argue that a shrinking device market share directly equates to a shrinking subscription services base which will upend their entire business model if it continues.

Additionally, you need to include the lost revenue from potential follow on peripheral purchases like watches, AirPods, etc. that will never happed with those 200,000 lost customers in your theoretical. The iPhone is the gateway into apple’s ecosystem - lose a phone customer, the whole business model takes a hit.

You have it backwards. By ensuring that only those with disposable income can afford the phone, they ensure that their subscription model remains intact. If the poor buy it, they will swing towards ad-supported apps, which will impact their app store revenue and brand valuation.

____________


On another note, did you know that people with smaller phones, spend less time on their phone and less money on the app store? It's not related to phone age or specs, it's related to screen size. One could argue that the app store is literally why we don't get cheap phones or small screen size phones anymore.

 

[Sir_Macs_A_Lot]

I bought my daughter an SE2 for $250 at Walmart (original $350 with a $100 discount). iPhone 16e is never gonna beat those prices.

 

[ElvenPrince995]

So what are worldwide numbers?

If it's too expensive for Europe, where else do you think it will sell well? Besides the 10 fanatics in the US that will overpay for this piece of overpriced crap that is.

 

[UpsetTheAppleCart]

Not surprising at all considering the price increase.

 

[q64ceo]

I bought my 16e for only $200 by switching to Boost Mobile. If I hadn't seen that deal, I wouldn't have bought it, instead waiting for the 17 to come out.

For me, it took a deal that made me upgrade. Just not worth the full $600.

 

[gumblecosby]

Good to see. Loved my SE1. This offered nothing useful to myself.

SE means what now anyway?

Steadily exacerbating?
Same exact?
Stupidly expensive?
Sorta Enfeebled?
Small edition?

 

[TechRunner]

From my observation it seems "uncool" to have an iPhone that doesn't sport the 3 camera lens arrangement

You mean I'm finally cool? YES! 🤣

 

[headlessmike]

Very shortsighted. Apple makes the real money on recurring subscriptions, not hardware. You can definitely argue that a shrinking device market share directly equates to a shrinking subscription services base which will upend their entire business model if it continues.

Additionally, you need to include the lost revenue from potential follow on peripheral purchases like watches, AirPods, etc. that will never happed with those 200,000 lost customers in your theoretical. The iPhone is the gateway into apple’s ecosystem - lose a phone customer, the whole business model takes a hit.

We don’t have enough data to make that conclusion though. If the potential buyers of the 16e bought a phone from another brand then yes, they lose out from additional revenue sources, but if they instead bought an iPhone 16 because it’s not that much more expensive than the 16, then Apple will be quite pleased. I’m sure both scenarios happen but the question is how much of each.