Is not that much expensive then what the competition is offering.
And $749? Are you for real? I mean, I am a consumer and I would rather have stuff for free but at least try to stick to reality.
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 X Responsible for 35% of Total Worldwide Phone Profits in Q4 2017
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is not that much expensive then what the competition is offering.
And $749? Are you for real? I mean, I am a consumer and I would rather have stuff for free but at least try to stick to reality.
Sir I selling so much of these phones I think I should lower my prices because I want to work harder and make less profit.
[doublepost=1524030394][/doublepost]I need to lower my price because demand is way too high
I swear I saw Tim Cook recently say that they couldn't cut the cost of iPhones because they wouldn't make a profit?
Uh, no. It's not overpriced if it is selling well. On the other than, I'm not sure other phones are underpriced either. The market decided Android phones do not deserve a fat margin, that's all.
Citation needed.
[doublepost=1524033465][/doublepost]
You'd also need to consider that a lower price for the X will mean that many people will not sell an iPhone 8/8s but an X, so iPhone X sales might increase but that doesn't help Apple if iPhone 8 sales drop as a result. Apple will set its prices to maximise _overall_ profit, not the profit for one particular phone.
This says nothing about the number of units sold and the market share, and this has nothing to do with the sterile iOS vs Android debate either.
You are looking at a piece of statistic blown out of proportions by would-be analysts to effortlessly drive confidence in Apple stocks. If this were a political topic, it would be called fake news nowadays.
That is of course nonsense. It's an amazing attitude: "Apple has all these fanatic users, they would buy a turd and eat it as long as it has an apple logo". It's so absurd. Do you think Apple puts drugs in the water that make people buy Apple products? Apple is selling well because they built up a reputation, and they built up a reputation by making quality products, again and again an again.
The London "base" for this "company" is a "virtual office London address from £7.70 /month, your very own prestigious City Road EC1 mail forwarding service" so I wouldn't be overly impressed by Counterpoint Research. I have just walked past it close to Moorefields Eye Hospital in Shoreditch and there is no Kent House, no office sign, nothing just scotch mist.
You fan-boys should check stuff out.
You fan-boys should check stuff out.
There's no such thing as too much profit in a kapitalist market. If customers are willing to pay that much, Apple is 100% correct in charging those prices. if they go overboard, people will respond by not buying anymore.
But don't worry: their price points are no gamble; they know exactly what they're doing. For years they have carefully crafted their brand and get away with 1000+ for a mobile phone. That's genius.
The initial price of the S9 is $720, adding the cost for the X’s FaceID tech and some premium for the brand, I think $799 is a realistic price that Apple could have gone with - which is still $150 above the entry level price of every new ‘flagship’ iPhone over the last years!
But recycling the iPhone 6 design for jet another year while also raising its price was a clever move to make it look like the extra they charge for the X is somewhat reasonable.
Well I guess it got a bit of bad press initialy due to the rather hefty price tag (10990 NOK or about 1400 USD) here in Norway. I think that was the first phone on sale here that topped 10K NOKso quite a few people had a reaction someat like «A10k+ phone, wrh is apple thinking no way I will get that», One important thing to note: when you buy a phone on contract here in norway the seller must present ypu with the full cost of the contract you dign up for (that is the total cost for the year you ate on contract) si the large cost js not hidden in mntly bulls that seem survivable
Looking at the iPhone SE numbers, it becomes clear why Apple isn't putting too much effort into this product. It's low profit numbers mean they have a very small profit margin or very low sales (or a combination of both).
And in regard to releasing a 4.7" iPhone with an edge-to-edge display that is close to the overall size of the SE, that is probably unlikely while they still sell 4.7" iPhones with a large bezel (6s, 7, 8).
And in regard to releasing a 4.7" iPhone with an edge-to-edge display that is close to the overall size of the SE, that is probably unlikely while they still sell 4.7" iPhones with a large bezel (6s, 7, 8).
Dollar went down, so ?
Nothing prevents you from still paying the Apple Premium - even if prices would become reasonable, ever
Last edited:
Why $749? And how do you justify those other ridiculous numbers?
Speaking of the 8: Although I didn’t like that Apple iterated the iPhone 6 design for a fourth year, the usual $649 would have been reasonable for an old design with a new SoC and some other minor tweaks - but as I mentioned before the price increase probably had strategic reasons.
Extortionate pricing + a market starved for a redesign = profit. Duh. Like what happened with the usb-c handicapped MBP and its trash emojibar.
I wonder if those of you who defend Apple's pricing on the X are walking around plugged with IV bags of koolaid.
In Germany the 256GB version (you know, the sensible option for 2018 and onward) costs €1319 (about $1630), on par with an entry iMac or a fully fledged iPad Pro. That's insulting for mobile handset, and it's no wonder Apple is massively profiting by commanding such a markup on a device jampacked with yesterday's tech.
I don't blame Apple as much as the consumer. So much for voting with our wallets.
I wonder if those of you who defend Apple's pricing on the X are walking around plugged with IV bags of koolaid.
In Germany the 256GB version (you know, the sensible option for 2018 and onward) costs €1319 (about $1630), on par with an entry iMac or a fully fledged iPad Pro. That's insulting for mobile handset, and it's no wonder Apple is massively profiting by commanding such a markup on a device jampacked with yesterday's tech.
I don't blame Apple as much as the consumer. So much for voting with our wallets.
Last edited:
Build and sell a fraction of the phones of your next competitor, but make many times the profit. That's the kind of business I'd like to own.
Fraction overall: yes, if you count all Samsung models. Probably not true on the two S8 models listed. At least not on both the "build" and "sell" sides of your sentence -- that is, Samsung may build more S8's than some iPhone models, but they certainly don't sell more of the S8 models than Apple sells of any of its iPhones, including the SE.
Apple is building a huge number of its half dozen models. Samsung would build dozens and dozens of models, but seems that hardly any are profitable at all.
Apple is selling out of its phones month in, month out. And continue to make each model for a couple of years. Somehow that is supposed to make Apple phones over priced? Apple might make an iPhone (such as 4S) for longer: that increases the margin over time -- simply because all the fixed costs are paid for early on.
That doesn't say something about the consumer -- it says something about the competing phones, that millions of people found value in an iPhone like the 4S for a long time despite newer models from OEMs. Who wants last year's Samsung, when hardly anyone wants this year's S8!
Apple's strategy is therefore to build a solid phone, take care of the fixed costs as soon as possible, but stand behind that phone and support it for 2 - 4 years. That builds confidence in Apple's products. Then people repeat their purchase, even if 4 years between purchases. It's a win-win, a virtuous circle.
Margin is therefore partly a function of getting a product right!
Contrast that with others who throw the latest gimmick at the wall in umpteen models every six months, none of which make any money, so the OEMs can't afford to support a phone, give it software updates, etc. The owner is stuck with it, or soon replaces it; and no-one wants it handed down to them. it's a commodity, not a tool.
When you purchase a tool, you purchase the best you can to do the jobs you care about and do every day. You purchase one that the manufacturer cares about; not one that the OEM throws out there because they spun the feature slot machine to figure out what to do next.
Last edited:
Yes, but.
If you have Phone A that cost 10 bucks to make and you sell it for 20 and you sell 100 you make 1000
If you have phone B that cost 100 bucks to make and you sell it for 200 and you sell 10 you make 1000
Fo even if you sold less phones with phone B you still made the same ammount, itis all about the margin, sales figures only tell you part of it.
Longterm Apple shareholders are doing fine.
As for taxes from countries where revenue is earned -- Apple pays all the taxes asked of it. The Ireland thing is not a gimmick, not a PO Box or something. Apple has a huge physical facility in Ireland that employs thousands of locals. From there it distributes to Apple Stores and resellers throughout Europe, Africa and MidEast as the wholesaler.
Furthermore, online Apple Store for that large region is based there, and where online sales are dispatched from (I order online in "Dutch" Apple Online Store, but my order comes to me from Ireland). For a long time, hardware was shipped back there for servicing.
Thus, most revenue for those regions are legitimately booked in Ireland. Of course Apple is going to find a location that wants to compete for an Apple presence like that.
Im not the one who said thatWhy $749? And how do you justify those other ridiculous numbers?
Speaking of the 8: Although I didn’t like that Apple iterated the iPhone 6 design for a fourth year, the usual $649 would have been reasonable for an old design with a new SoC and some other minor tweaks - but as I mentioned before the price increase probably had strategic reasons.
"
realeric said: ↑
Too much profit = greedy. iPhone X could have been $749."
Not completely. It's about fixed costs as well, and continued manufacture and sales over time. Thus having a solid, "timeless" product that continues to sell well (like the 4S did) makes a huge difference. Margin fluctuates and changes with the performance of each product and the time line.
Once the fixed costs associated with that model are paid down (tool dies, assembly line, etc.) the margin goes up. That Apple can continue to manufacture and sell fewer models far longer than competitors' flavors of the month that last six months, is a testament to its focus and "getting a product right", and then standing behind it with better support for longer, so that consumers feel more confident in a year old iPhone than the latest gimmick from Samsung or other OEMs. The fixed costs of every Apple product are taken care of relatively quickly (and what do you know, there is still demand for each one after that -- because Apple put as much as it could into each product).
OEMs simply never get over the fixed costs of the dozens and dozens of half-baked models they throw at the wall every six months.