You're comparing apples and oranges, (no pun intended,) in order for there to be any validity to your point, a Ferrari would have to use fuel provided BY Ferrari, and be included in the price for the life of the car, or at least, for a few good years. An iPhone has almost no moving parts, (not counting electronics, and MAYBE the optical image stabilization system,) and almost all of its functionality, (aside from being a paperweight, or a really ineffective doorstop,) comes from software, which must be maintained, background services that must be provided in order for SOME functions to work, (like iCloud,) storage, etc. Then there's security updates requiring constant vigilance against hacking, looking out for vulnerabilities, etc. etc. etc.
Customer loyalty is a good thing up to a point, I'll grant you, though I am (it may surprise you to learn,) NO fan of Apple as a company; I like some of their products, and some of their software, while at the same time, I am pretty critical of their antics as a corporation, even while acknowledging that it's not all their fault--some things one simply can't help, they're a byproduct of the nature of the game, and the system(s) in-place. The fake concern about the environment they tout, how they prominently claim their products are designed in California, as if that mattered, (when most people are more worried about where they're made,) soak their customers for all they're worth, then dodge taxes at every conceivable opportunity, steal other people's ideas, often giving no credit or acknowledgement, pretend they're artists... the list does go on and on, this is just of the top of my head.
That all said, still, the implication that the guesstimate of the cost of the HARDWARE inside an iPhone is that the price-tag of the finished product is exorbitant, which is really pretty unfair, given that more goes into it than the sum of its PHYSICAL parts, the cost of the machines needed to fabricate them and assemble them, etc.
Just to contrast, while they're running stories touting how little the hardware inside the product costs, let me point out that the hardware cost of a downloaded piece of software is zero. SO, why not run a story about how they tore-down a new copy of Microsoft Windows, and found that the cost of the hardware inside a copy of that is $0.00? Because that would be absurd, much like the original story about how little the hardware allegedly costs Apple to obtain.
