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.
KGI: Apple to Discontinue iPhone X Rather Than Sell at Lower Price When Second-Generation Model Launches
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm going to be a bit cynical here.
What I'm reading here is that the second generation is going to be so similar to the first that it doesn't make sense to differentiate.
It's like if a car maker introduces a brand new car model in 2017...and nothing really changes the following year except slapping the "2018" model year designation on it. lol
What I'm reading here is that the second generation is going to be so similar to the first that it doesn't make sense to differentiate.
It's like if a car maker introduces a brand new car model in 2017...and nothing really changes the following year except slapping the "2018" model year designation on it. lol
Apart from 1 and 2, the others are just the previous models that they keep selling, each one in two sizes.
I seriously don't get how that is convoluted. The 2018 lineup will be X, X Plus, LCD phone. The 2017 lineup was iPhone 8, 8 Plus and X.
Plus, all models before the X have a number attached that makes kind of clear what came before.
[doublepost=1516640496][/doublepost]
I get the same impression. Not selling an iPhone X 1st gen at a lower price means that they think that, given a choice, customers would buy it instead of the iPhone X 2nd gen. If they expect so, it's because they don't think the 2nd gen will have enough selling points over the 1st gen.
This is all you can learn and it's right there in the note "iPhone X would hurt product brand value & lineup of 2H18 new models if it continues to sell at a lower price after 2H18 new models launch".
I don't see how some people can see any hint of an "iPhone X failure" in this rumor...
The people have spoken. They don't like 1k phones and a bad design.
I am a long time iPhone and Mac user. I had the original iPhone and then pretty much every iPhone starting from the 4 to the 6s (not pluses). However, for now I have stopped at my iPhone 6s. I don't want to lose my ability of easily plugging my headphones and power at the same time. I mean easily, as without dongles. The iPhone X goes even further down on my purchasability index because of that hideous notch and lack of fingerprint sensor. I doubt that the audio socket will ever come back, but I hope Apple produces an iPhone with fingerprint, fully rectangular screen and OLED screen. Anyway, I don't think I am planning on buying an iPhone X any time soon, and I'll most likely skip another generation of iPhone, even as my 6s is getting a bit long on the tooth.
And you get this from a rumor saying that they will sell the second generation of the same bad design at 1k plus a bigger version of the same bad design at >>1k, and so much convinced that they will sell it to not provide the option of buying the previous generation of the bad design at <1k?
Makes sense. Really no difference to any X buyers in the long run. Looking forward to the second generation already.
If anything I think the X sold better than they thought. As John Gruber pointed out on Daring Fireball, the X is positioned to be a lesser-selling premium phone with new, premium tech that’s not necessarily physically available across 200 million new phones. It is supposed to allow Apple to have a niche model that allows them to leverage leading edge tech to stay competitive with lower-selling Android models that steal a lot of headlines with their advanced tech features that the supply chain simply couldn’t provide for the iPhone’s massive numbers. Without a more niche model like the X, the iPhone would be doomed to only use tech that is 2-5 years old because of the demands on the supply chain.
My guess is the fact that the X sold as well as the 8 was a bit of a surprise to them, and that if the new iPhone Xs models in late 2018 begin to actually outsell the new 6.1” iPhone 9 they will of course be happy with the revenue, but will unfortunately be in the same conundrum they were in before, where the gigantic quantities of their top selling phones prevent them from including bleeding edge tech that lesser manufacturers will ironically be able to insert in their phones.
This is exactly what will result. You will always pay the top end price for the latest and greatest features. With that said I think Kuo’s rep took a hit this past year as it would appear his estimates on iPhone X sales was off.
This decision seems quite logical to me. First, Apple couldn’t source enough OLED panels to equip both their mid and high-end phones with. Even if supply was there, they’d pay dearly and hurt margins. Selling a high-volume $700ish LCD phone will keep margins up because they have much greater bargaining power over LCD suppliers. A reduced priced X would hurt that strategy.
They really thought poo emoji was enough to make people buy an ultra expensive phone with an ugly notch. SJ must be spinning
Sorry to those who paid $1,000 to beta test!
I'm afraid the notch isn't going away for a while. People see the notch as either one of two things: a bezel-less screen with a section cut out of it, or a screen with a noticeable top bezel with "ears" added to make it less noticeable. The ears do provide functionality at least, albeit minimal; they're absolutely not needed. The safe area on the screen is considerable - it's on 3 sides of the screen - but it sure looks nice anyway.
In any case, it was a clever choice by Apple, and I think they're going to lean on it until they have to do something else. Then the cheaper phones will get the notches.
We see this type of thing happen just before every one of Apple's quarterly reports. Some "analysts" will play the system, by creating a false negative report about Apple's business (in this case, that the iPhone X isn't selling [eyes rolling]) and/or magnifying the effect of a minor issue (in this case, "battery-gate").
It is easy to understand why those certain "analysts" do this, and the timing of their concocted reports.
Many investors and fund managers don't really follow Apple's business, and they rely on analysts to advise them on the company's status. Some analysts will take advantage of this, and produce negative reports about Apple's business, a week or two before Apple's upcoming quarterly report.
With Apple's stock price downgraded just before the quarterly report, those analysts have an opportunity to buy up discounted stock at bargain prices (even the reduction of a few points is worth their while). Then, following Apple's quarterly report (which invalidates the analysts' previous negative reports) the analysts are then in a position to sell their Apple stock at a higher price, making a very lucrative short-term profit.
This same scenario happens just before every Apple quarterly report, yet some investors never learn from the earlier times that this has happened. Those investors end up losing money as they panic and sell-off their short-term holdings in Apple stock, at a loss... And at the expense of those "analysts" profiting from the influence they wield.
It is easy to understand why those certain "analysts" do this, and the timing of their concocted reports.
Many investors and fund managers don't really follow Apple's business, and they rely on analysts to advise them on the company's status. Some analysts will take advantage of this, and produce negative reports about Apple's business, a week or two before Apple's upcoming quarterly report.
With Apple's stock price downgraded just before the quarterly report, those analysts have an opportunity to buy up discounted stock at bargain prices (even the reduction of a few points is worth their while). Then, following Apple's quarterly report (which invalidates the analysts' previous negative reports) the analysts are then in a position to sell their Apple stock at a higher price, making a very lucrative short-term profit.
This same scenario happens just before every Apple quarterly report, yet some investors never learn from the earlier times that this has happened. Those investors end up losing money as they panic and sell-off their short-term holdings in Apple stock, at a loss... And at the expense of those "analysts" profiting from the influence they wield.
Too many iPhone models, there should just be the SE entry, previous generation (iPhone 8) and the latest; that’s how Steve would’ve had it IMHO
but they Honda will still run ads for the clearance 17 during the 18 year release... So with that in mind would apple have a clearance sale on the X by then? (said in jest)
Edit - either I missed the reference to the 8/8 Plus or it was added after my original post. In any case, please disregard.
Last edited:
Cool. So instead of spending ~$750 to replace my iPhone 7, I'll just drop $29 to give it a new battery. Thanks Apple!
History will not be kind to people who mock, misunderstand, or reject the iPhone X. A buttonless, full-screen interface with FaceID is the future of all mobile tech. Those who cling to the home button and TouchID will be the next generation of floppy disk lovers and DVD drive die-hards to join the Luddite army.
Last edited:
I had an X for five weeks. Honestly, I really didn't notice much difference between my 7 and the X. The X is a little bigger and a little heavier, but at least to me the emphasis would be on "a little."
Cry me a river. What a bunch of complainers. I have had every iPhone since the original launch and the X is as good or better than any previous model. It took me about one day to get used to the facial recognition and I haven't even noticed the notch once. With the facial ID, everything is so much faster, especially Apple Pay and much improved over touch-ID. If you like you 6s or your 7 or 8 out whatever, that's perfectly fine but stop complaining about the X, or Tim Cook, etc. Geeesh
I am very happy to take a bet (for charity) on Tim still being there in 5 years....