KGI: Apple to Discontinue iPhone X Rather Than Sell at Lower Price When Second-Generation Model Launches

[JediZenMaster]

you mean i proved you wrong by posting a Samsung phone with dual cameras from 2007....

You didn’t prove me wrong You said Samsung had it first. You should have clarified that you were not referring to smartphone cameras. Anyway I’m not trying to argue. So as opposed to arguing back and forth I am going to use an option to end this for good.

 

[apolloa]

1. "Apart from the dual lens camera." So, you claim they have the "exact same features" and then immediately have to backtrack to say, "Ugh, you can't include the dual-lens camera." OK, fine. First of all, Face ID is so entirely different, more sophisticated, and implemented via more powerful and nuanced tech that I certainly consider it both different and better than Samsung's facial recognition, thus I would consider it a separate feature, but I'll let that slide here. There's still 3D Touch--a major hardware implementation that Samsung does not feature on the S8 or anywhere on its line. And correct me if I'm wrong, but they don't have a TrueTone equivalent either, right (something like Night Shift doesn't count)? That's just quickly off the top of my head.

2. Dude, stop trying to rewrite history. Here is your exact, original quote: "Hmm well this basically means 1000 set price for the standard iPhone, the model that will have the same features as the a galaxy series which will cost half the price!" Half of 1000 is exactly 500. Ergo, you said the S8 costs $499. Unless you were talking about the Note 8, which would be even more disingenuous of you? I'm attaching a screenshot of your post.

3. "The Note 8 already has it [dual lens camera]." I'm aware, and I'm also aware that's completely irrelevant. You said the S8 line (which encapsulates the regular S8, not just the Note)--which costs "half the price!!!!!"--has all the same features, then in another post you mention them adding a dual-lens camera in the future. Hence, you outed yourself as being full of sh** on that original comment--they don't have the same features. Further, switching solely to a Note 8 vs X comparison after the crux of your argument was that Samsung "sells it at half the price!" would be even more of a lie. No, you made it a point to claim that Samsung was offering the same features currently in phones priced exactly half as much as the iPhone X.

Own up to your BS.

1: I stated this:

They do have the same features, the only one lying is you to yourself if you can’t realise that
I bet the S9 adds dual lens camera and stereo speakers. And still cost the same.

Why would I state the S9 would add dual cameras if we didn't assume you would understand I realise that the S8 doesn't have that, I haven't back tracked on anything, more like you putting words in my mouth to be honest.

2: Actually I stated this:

Samsung offered the S8 at launch at just over half the cost of the X.... retail price! And it has the same features.
[doublepost=1516657678][/doublepost]

And This:

It can die messaging and video calling and continuity as well. They aren’t exclusive Apple features, and video calling and messaging certainly weren’t invented by Apple!
If I remember it was around 600 in the UK, the X is 1000.

Go and check, post unedited.

Proof:

http://www.johnlewis.com/samsung-ga...-8-4g-lte-sim-free-64gb/p3196600?colour=Black

http://www.johnlewis.com/apple-iphone-x-ios-11-5-8-4g-lte-sim-free-64gb/p3298404?colour=Space Grey

3: So I have proved you wrong, you seem an angry person, I presume a teenager judging by your manor? You can carry on being angry about nothing if you want, I'll probably just ignore you.

 

[PickUrPoison]

If the parts are on hand, that’s the big if. OLED screen supply is not where it needs to be for Apple to use them on multiple phones this year. They’ll reserve it for the premium models 2018 X/X+ until more vendors can supply the screens and at more competitive pricing. Only then will you see OLED on a $700-$800 iPhone.

I won’t try to verify or dispute your claim that Apple keeps less than one week of inventory on hand, but you most certainly are not considering the units outside of the factory already in retail inventory at Verizon, Best Buy, Apple’s own retail locations, etc.

The OLED display will likely be the same for the current and 2018 X. Anyway I think Kuo’s observation that the 2017 X will not be sold alongside the newer model is valid. I think there will be a price cut to the new model, so why have the older model price chase below that?

In other words, if the new model is $899 or $949, what do you do with the older model? $799? $849? Now it’s running into that rumored 6.1” FaceID phone in the $700-800 range.

Especially considering there may be very little difference between the old and new X, maybe just A11—>A12 and FaceID 2.

There’s just really doesn’t seem to be any real reason to keep the 2017 X in the lineup, with the 2018 model becoming the cheaper X that Apple (and consumers) want.

Re: inventory turns, the metric would include inventory at Apple stores, but not other retail channels as those are considered sold already. There’s an interesting article that poster @Synchro3 linked to a little while ago, “Inventory is Evil”

http://cmuscm.blogspot.ch/2014/09/inventory-is-evil-well-done-tim-apple.html

At that time inventory was turning every 5 days, as of the Sept 2017 financials I think it was about 8.

 

[sidewinder3000]

I'm sorry. Didn't realize that the immutable LAWS OF PHYSICS dictated aesthetic design choices. I thought that Apple could have made a slightly larger camera bump to accommodate the slightly larger optically stabilized camera module in the 6/6s plus vs the 6/6s. Or made similar compromises in the 7/8 series, since, as you point out, a smaller form factor can support a dual camera module. Now I know that figuring out how to make a minor change to a phone's casing would be on par with inventing teleportation.

I thought that Apple was trying to confer value-based pricing along with its product differentiation, but it turns out that it was the only decision they could make without DESTROYING THE FABRIC OF OUR REALITY.

Perhaps it’s the fabric of your reality is what has been destroyed? Not sure why it’s so hard for you to accept that dual cameras don’t fit in small phones. When you eliminate paranoia and conspiracy thinking, it’s a pretty easy concept to grasp.

And to be clear, I never wrote that “smaller form factor can support a dual camera”. I said the opposite. And used Samsung as additional example of small phones that don’t have dual cameras. The iPhone X’s larger size footprint is what allows it to have a dual camera.

 

[apolloa]

Perhaps it’s the fabric of your reality is what has been destroyed? Not sure why it’s so hard for you to accept that dual cameras don’t fit in small phones. When you eliminate paranoia and conspiracy thinking, it’s a pretty easy concept to grasp.

And to be clear, I never wrote that “smaller form factor can support a dual camera”. I said the opposite. And used Samsung as additional example of small phones that don’t have dual cameras. The iPhone X’s larger size footprint is what allows it to have a dual camera.

The X isn't much bigger though is it? I consider it to be an average size but going by todays standards some would consider it to be small.

 

[sidewinder3000]

It's not sabotaging, sure, but it's disappointing to say the least, to see competition proudly advertising that they don't discriminate features between sizes (Pixel2) and pull off better photos with just one camera for that matter...then yeah, I get why people get upset and call it that.

Do you know why the Pixel is able to offer the same photo capabilities on both sizes of their phones? It’s because it’s not hardware based, so it’s doesnt require the real estate of a large phone for dual cameras. Google does much of their photo processing via software and AI, in their cloud. It’s impressive tech, but it also means your photos aren’t as private or secure as they are on an iPhone. Apple operates differently and tries to make the phone itself house the advanced tech, and keep all the processing on device. Also, the physical “telephoto” lens on larger iPhones has its advantages, and cannot be duplicated by the Pixel’s software.

People can bitch about not having dual cameras on small phones, or fall for whatever advertising competitors put out there, but the truth is more nuanced. Both camera/photo setups have their advantages and disadvantages.
[doublepost=1516744426][/doublepost]

The X isn't much bigger though is it? I consider it to be an average size but going by todays standards some would consider it to be small.

It’s definitey bigger. And it doesn’t have a TouchID module so there’s even more room inside.

No one considers the iPhone X “small” except for people in online forums attempting to bend reality so they can save face after making bad arguments.

 

[soanis]

There's phones out there with similar dimensions as iPhone 8 that sport dual lens setups.

https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=8514&idPhone2=8573

 

[sidewinder3000]

Under your skin.

The fact that you think that would be something to be proud of is pretty damning.

 

[6803390]

The fact that you think that would be something to be proud of is pretty damning.

Assumption, again.

 

[sidewinder3000]

Totally agree on the future direction. Got on the bus this year, decided I'll wait for the next bus that comes by, but am still confident that the direction and destination are ultimately correct.

Hope the next bus is on time, and gets you were you wanna go!
[doublepost=1516747154][/doublepost]

It's also fine that you can't follow a post correctly! But I understand that the school system must have failed you. I never made a car analogy. THAT was another poster. I posted on your reply to that post. Please follow along, I know it must be hard.

You’re right, I mistook you for the person who wrote the original analogy. That’s my bad.

It doesn’t change the fact that the “information” you originally posted wasn’t relevant, helpful or germane in any way to the discussion.
[doublepost=1516747218][/doublepost]

Camera.

A dual camera module is bigger than a single camera module and therefore it is size-related.

Bitter Much?

The people who bitch and whine when technology changes are bitter. I love when stuff moves forward.

 

[617660]

A dual camera module is bigger than a single camera module and therefore it is size-related.

The module may be bigger, but the reason they didn't fit dual camera in regular sized iPhone is due to product differentiation not size.

 

[- rob -]

So I don’t really count the users on MacRumors myself included as any type of Majority.

So to make it sound as if this is a widespread issue is not accurate. I see folks every day using the iPhone X with Face ID not having these issues.

If this was widespread than the Genius Bar would be filled with appointments regarding this.

Blogs would be covering it as would the media. I really wish we could stop acting like a tiny thread is the center of the Apple universe and that the feature must be a failure overall because of it.

Well first, critique in that thread is not universal. A lot of folks in there say it is just fine. But if you look outside macrumors the critique is the same, it just doesn’t have amplification.

The reason Apple slowed down processors on old batteries was because they had data that showed many phones were shutting down unnecessarily. Not because of blog posts.

If you search twitter for “Face ID sucks” you get a pretty regular tweet every few days from some random person who is unhappy with it. Here is a great example tweet: https://mobile.twitter.com/judylynnedilla/status/952881836249640960

This person says, “face id sucks ass at unlocking your phone sometimes.. its a cool feature & all but i find myself entering my passcode a lot”

This is actually a very balanced comment excepting the choice of language for the critique of Face ID.

I think you’re wrong about this being something you could gauge by watching the Genius Bar. Actually, I think it would be unlikely that you could discern trends by watching Apple employees anyway. Otherwise, more research reports would be based on in store data gathering, which Apple would never allow.

But I think Face ID’s ultimate satisfaction and value can only be read by looking at data. Apple should be able to look at two users with similar sleep / wake schedules using the X and the 8 and see exactly the average time it takes to unlock, use Apple Pay etc anything related to auth.

And I don’t have this data, but I have my own experience and my gut and it tells me Face ID is underperforming Touch ID.

https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=Face ID sucks&src=typed_query.

 

[EssModelsRule]

The OLED display will likely be the same for the current and 2018 X. Anyway I think Kuo’s observation that the 2017 X will not be sold alongside the newer model is valid. I think there will be a price cut to the new model, so why have the older model price chase below that?

In other words, if the new model is $899 or $949, what do you do with the older model? $799? $849? Now it’s running into that rumored 6.1” FaceID phone in the $700-800 range.

Especially considering there may be very little difference between the old and new X, maybe just A11—>A12 and FaceID 2.

There’s just really doesn’t seem to be any real reason to keep the 2017 X in the lineup, with the 2018 model becoming the cheaper X that Apple (and consumers) want.

Re: inventory turns, the metric would include inventory at Apple stores, but not other retail channels as those are considered sold already. There’s an interesting article that poster @Synchro3 linked to a little while ago, “Inventory is Evil”

http://cmuscm.blogspot.ch/2014/09/inventory-is-evil-well-done-tim-apple.html

At that time inventory was turning every 5 days, as of the Sept 2017 financials I think it was about 8.

If OLED screen supply was as abundant and cheap as LCD, then Apple would continue selling the 2017 X alongside the 2018 X at a reduced price as they’ve always done with prior models. As you said, the screens themselves will likely be the same, so given the limited supply of this premium screen Apple literally cannot waste any on a then-old discounted 2017 X model. The 2018 LCD model will instead fill that lower price tier, leaving all those precious OLED screens for the $1000 2018 iPhone X that will not see a price reduction.

 

[PickUrPoison]

If OLED screen supply was as abundant and cheap as LCD, then Apple would continue selling the 2017 X alongside the 2018 X at a reduced price as they’ve always done with prior models. As you said, the screens themselves will likely be the same, so given the limited supply of this premium screen Apple literally cannot waste any on a then-old discounted 2017 X model. The 2018 LCD model will instead fill that lower price tier, leaving all those precious OLED screens for the $1000 2018 iPhone X that will not see a price reduction.

I’m not sure what part of my post you’re disagreeing with, if any. I never said OLED was as abundant and cheap as LCD, which seems to be the premise of your post.

However, I don’t think OLEDs are going to be anywhere near as supply-constrained this year as last. I can’t imagine Samsung would be so incompetent that they can’t ramp production of Apple’s OLED from this year’s 60-70 million to next year's 120-ish million with a year head start. And that presumes Apple doesn’t second source from LG this year.

Of course, OLED are more expensive, so there is good reason for an LCD display in the rumored non-flagship 6.1” model. But there will be as many available as Apple wants to buy, and they’ll be less expensive as soon as Samsung no longer has a monopoly on production.

 

[EssModelsRule]

I’m not sure what part of my post you’re disagreeing with, if any. I never said OLED was as abundant and cheap as LCD, which seems to be the premise of your post.

However, I don’t think OLEDs are going to be anywhere near as supply-constrained this year as last. I can’t imagine Samsung would be so incompetent that they can’t ramp production of Apple’s OLED from this year’s 60-70 million to next year's 120-ish million with a year head start. And that presumes Apple doesn’t second source from LG this year.

Of course, OLED are more expensive, so there is good reason for an LCD display in the rumored non-flagship 6.1” model. But there will be as many available as Apple wants to buy, and they’ll be less expensive as soon as Samsung no longer has a monopoly on production.

You’re saying they are discontinuing the 2017 X because they’re reducing the price of the 2018 X. I disagree. You’re also suggesting they could source enough OLED panels (contracts already signed most likely) to continue selling both the 2017 X at a reduced price and the 2018 X/X+. I again disagree, but even if I’m wrong, I know for a fact that the cost per OLED panel would wreck Apple’s margin and they will never go that route. So again, the decision to not offer the 2017 X once the 2018 X comes out is all about OLED supply which dictates pricing and thus Apple’s profit margin. Your conclusion is the same but I disagree with the reasoning.

 

[PickUrPoison]

You’re saying they are discontinuing the 2017 X because they’re reducing the price of the 2018 X. I disagree. You’re also suggesting they could source enough OLED panels (contracts already signed most likely) to continue selling both the 2017 X at a reduced price and the 2018 X/X+. I again disagree, but even if I’m wrong, I know for a fact that the cost per OLED panel would wreck Apple’s margin and they will never go that route. So again, the decision to not offer the 2017 X once the 2018 X comes out is all about OLED supply which dictates pricing and thus Apple’s profit margin. Your conclusion is the same but I disagree with the reasoning.

Yes, I’m saying the 2018 X will come down in price, you don’t think so. We’ll have to agree to disagree until this Sept when one of us will be proven right.

But you say I think they could source enough OLED to continue selling both the 2017 X at a reduced price and the 2018 X/X+. I never said that. But now that you’ve said it, I wouldn’t disagree.

My only point about the 2017 X was that they would keep manufacturing it into September, and not stop production in June. iirc, you thought they’d stop in June because they would need to put all the 5.8” OLED panels they could muster into the new 2018 model. My thought was that there plenty of panels for both models to be manufactured simultaneously... the 2017 X would continue to be manufactured in June, July, August and September to meet ongoing demand, while at the same time Apple would be building inventory for the launch of the 2018 X.

You say the decision not to offer 2017 X alongside 2018 X is all about supply. In fact, OLED supply has nothing at all to do with that decision. Even if they kept the old model available, they would still sell the same quantity of X overall, sales would just be split between two different models. So instead of selling 70 million 2018 X, they might sell 25 million 2017 and 45 million 2018. Any given X customer would buy one or the other, not both. Just having two models to choose from isn’t going to change the quantity of X demanded by customers.

What will change demand is adding the X Plus. So like I said earlier, instead of needing 60-70 million OLEDs this year, they’ll need more like 120+ million to cover the X and X Plus. I think Samsung could meet the demand if Apple wants to buy them all from Samsung, but if LG is online with supply, Apple will split its orders between them. Samsung won’t be able to demand as high a price if there’s competition, Apple loves having multiple suppliers bidding the price down.

 

[Manatlt]

So the iPhone X will become a collectors item

Every iPhone that goes out of sale is a collectors item.

 

[PG(Austin)]

"Ten-ning out the Ten"? I don't get it

I was about to say the same thing.
[doublepost=1516799583][/doublepost]

You are one of the handful of people that refer to it as the ten and not 'ex'. Understandable.

Yeah, there are a few of us out there....

 

[EssModelsRule]

Yes, I’m saying the 2018 X will come down in price, you don’t think so. We’ll have to agree to disagree until this Sept when one of us will be proven right.

But you say I think they could source enough OLED to continue selling both the 2017 X at a reduced price and the 2018 X/X+. I never said that. But now that you’ve said it, I wouldn’t disagree.

My only point about the 2017 X was that they would keep manufacturing it into September, and not stop production in June. iirc, you thought they’d stop in June because they would need to put all the 5.8” OLED panels they could muster into the new 2018 model. My thought was that there plenty of panels for both models to be manufactured simultaneously... the 2017 X would continue to be manufactured in June, July, August and September to meet ongoing demand, while at the same time Apple would be building inventory for the launch of the 2018 X.

You say the decision not to offer 2017 X alongside 2018 X is all about supply. In fact, OLED supply has nothing at all to do with that decision. Even if they kept the old model available, they would still sell the same quantity of X overall, sales would just be split between two different models. So instead of selling 70 million 2018 X, they might sell 25 million 2017 and 45 million 2018. Any given X customer would buy one or the other, not both. Just having two models to choose from isn’t going to change the quantity of X demanded by customers.

What will change demand is adding the X Plus. So like I said earlier, instead of needing 60-70 million OLEDs this year, they’ll need more like 120+ million to cover the X and X Plus. I think Samsung could meet the demand if Apple wants to buy them all from Samsung, but if LG is online with supply, Apple will split its orders between them. Samsung won’t be able to demand as high a price if there’s competition, Apple loves having multiple suppliers bidding the price down.

For what it’s worth, I sincerely hope you’ve called it and they drop the price of the 2018 X. Will be nice if I don’t already have a SE2 sitting comfortably in my pocket.

Regarding the production timeline, somebody commented earlier in the thread about this EOL rumor being about sales, literally asking why Apple would stop selling the 2017 X months before the 18 came out. I think we can both agree that won’t happen, so at some point before launch of the 18 X they’ll shift production over to it. I don’t claim to know exactly when.

With component costs being roughly the same (assuming no crazy new expensive feature) between 17 and 18 X, why would Apple want to sell a single 17 at a discounted price? They’d much rather sell 70M 2018s. A discounted 17 would also increase overall X sales because a cheaper option will appeal to more buyers causing greater demand. To think otherwise is ludicrous. Again, bad for profit margins when they could instead shift buyers in this price range to the 6.1 LCD model.

Ok, sure, suppliers could increase OLED output by 50M a year or more to meet Apple's needs. There are other smartphone makers vying for those screens, so the price won’t go down much if any for Apple. So yeah, supply and demand are major factors that affect pricing which is what Apple is working around by staying with LCD on their high volume $700-$800 phones. They could not sell an OLED model in this price range at the same profit margin they now have, so the 2017 X has to go. It’ll be 2019 or 2020 before OLED supply AND pricing gets to a point that Apple can offer the technology at lower price points.

 

[sidewinder3000]

The fact that you think that would be something to be proud of is pretty damning.

You posted it. If you’re not proud of what you post, that’s something to consider.

Bye.
[doublepost=1516825081][/doublepost]

The module may be bigger, but the reason they didn't fit dual camera in regular sized iPhone is due to product differentiation not size.

That is 100% speculation. And it doesn’t make good business sense.

The size of a Plus phone is all the differentiation it needs. Why would Apple add extra features to a large phone when all the data shows that size is the #1 driver for phone choice? Meaning people who want big phones would buy it regardless and people who like smaller phones won’t be wooed?

No need to assign hidden, sneaky, paranoid motivation to the lack of dual cameras in smaller phones. The answer is self-evident.

 

[El Cabong]

No need to assign hidden, sneaky, paranoid motivation to the lack of dual cameras in smaller phones. The answer is self-evident.

The dual camera module in the iPhone 8 Plus is smaller than that of the X. Oh wait, no, that's impossible because the 8 Plus is a bigger phone, so the laws of physics dictate that it can't have a smaller camera. Never mind.

 

[sidewinder3000]

The dual camera module in the iPhone 8 Plus is smaller than that of the X. Oh wait, no, that's impossible because the 8 Plus is a bigger phone, so the laws of physics dictate that it can't have a smaller camera. Never mind.

And...?

In what way is it smaller? Vertically, horizontally, depth? Smaller is a relative term, and doesn’t inherently mean anything. Just because it’s “smaller” doesn’t mean that it’s “small enough” to fit in an iPhone 8.

Besides, the iPhone X is a reasonably sized phone for anyone who wants dual cameras without getting a phablet. Not sure why there’s so much hand wringing about this.

 

[617660]

You posted it. If you’re not proud of what you post, that’s something to consider.

Bye.
[doublepost=1516825081][/doublepost]
That is 100% speculation. And it doesn’t make good business sense.

The size of a Plus phone is all the differentiation it needs. Why would Apple add extra features to a large phone when all the data shows that size is the #1 driver for phone choice? Meaning people who want big phones would buy it regardless and people who like smaller phones won’t be wooed?

No need to assign hidden, sneaky, paranoid motivation to the lack of dual cameras in smaller phones. The answer is self-evident.

What are you talking about? Production differentiation makes perfect business sense.

Why oh why would Apple do such thing....errr, profit? Ever thought that might be a reason?

You do realize your assertion that regular-sized iPhone don't feature dual camera is due to size is 100% speculation also, right?

 

[El Cabong]

Not sure why there’s so much hand wringing about this.

...says the guy who can't admit he's wrong.

 

[sidewinder3000]

What are you talking about? Production differentiation makes perfect business sense.

Why oh why would Apple do such thing....errr, profit? Ever thought that might be a reason?

You do realize your assertion that regular-sized iPhone don't feature dual camera is due to size is 100% speculation also, right?

Not speculation. It’s based on what they’ve said publicly.