Not really. He explained, taking the iPod as an example, when and why it would be a good idea to have different models.
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.
Pegatron to Assemble Low Cost iPhone as Apple Works to Balance Supply Chain
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not really. He explained, taking the iPod as an example, when and why it would be a good idea to have different models.
... for now....
a year from now is forever in the mobile phone game.
all that said... I can't see Apple spending money _this_ year ramping up for a cheaper phone next year. I see pegatron taking over the 5 line, and the 4 line retired, reducing foxconn's footprint.
The only thing would be is if Apple did retire both the 4 and 4s, and introduced a 5s and a 5'x' where the 'x' was a 5 form factor, but with 4s components... speed retirement of the old retina form factor to allow for introduction of a newer formfactor(s) (larger 5" ish, smaller - iWatch). Then the pegatron line would be doing a 5x phone for the 0.99 pricing. It's a stretch, but again, Apple is in the position to do things for the long game.
A low cost iPhone would replace old iPhones that are still expensive to produce, increasing Apple's margins by using cheaper materials and processes. Even as components age, premium materials still cost a premium...
Why would we, it would still be made in a foreign country.
It's not like buying something like a US made Fender guitar when you are paying a lot more money but getting a higher quality product than the cheaper versions made in Mexico or China. The iPhone is already made to very high standards so all that would be different is the name printed on the back of the case.
Why would Apple want to open up the iPhone to people who can't afford it? Part of the appeal of the iPhone is because its a status symbol. I feel like this is a big mistake.
Because like crack, giving them a cheap taste, and you got them hooked for ever;-).
Apple's model will evolve to more like Amazon's, in that iTMS song, media, and app purchases, in app purchases, subscriptions, and icloud services will be more than $99 a year. Locking people into the ecosystem early, and letting them buy 'a' phone that commits them to iTunes/icloud (and the stickiness that entails to stay within the ecosystem) is the long play. Couple with that the long term upsell to an iPad or an AppleTV or a premium iPhone.
It's a mistake to sell a crappy experience.... if apple can deliver an experience that exceeds the perceived cost (ie the phone has 'value') to the consumer, and can differentiate it (the shuffle is not an iPod Touch, but your music plays on both... so... buy both for different use cases), it's a good plan.
A $250 unlocked phone that entices you to join the iCloud/iTMS world in China or India, where that is the norm price for phones... and then for every movie you download, Apple gets 40 cents profit, and they download 6 movies a year, that's 2.40 cents... not much... but if you sell 100Million a year (at $100 profit), that a 10.25billion in profits you didn't have last year, and the likelihood they buy a iPhone 7 (because they got the movies already) when they can afford it.
Apple, Amazon, and Samsung are both thinking long game.
"with incidents such as changing component sourcing without notifying Apple"
Wow, it's unreal that Foxconn would try that sort of thing with Apple. That's something right out of "Poorly Made in China." Imagine, the components as specced had a lifespan of 6 years, but Foxconn subs cheaper ones that last for 2.5, or right after whatever Foxconn's liability period ends. Ouch!
Wow, it's unreal that Foxconn would try that sort of thing with Apple. That's something right out of "Poorly Made in China." Imagine, the components as specced had a lifespan of 6 years, but Foxconn subs cheaper ones that last for 2.5, or right after whatever Foxconn's liability period ends. Ouch!
I wonder if Apple could make a low cost iPhone, but make it in America, and sell it for around the same price as a normal phone, cause labor and all.
Low cost?
At $350-$400, how can it be defined a low cost iPhone?
Also, the iPod touch starts at $299 and it's a jewel, so don't tell me that pricing an iPhone at $350-$400 would be a disaster in terms of hardware quality.
$350-$400 seems low just because it's compared to $649, which is a really high price for such a device.
At $350-$400, how can it be defined a low cost iPhone?
Also, the iPod touch starts at $299 and it's a jewel, so don't tell me that pricing an iPhone at $350-$400 would be a disaster in terms of hardware quality.
$350-$400 seems low just because it's compared to $649, which is a really high price for such a device.
How can you "think" anything if you don't have information as to how much it costs Apple to produce an iPhone 4S in 2013 vs a specific low cost model engineers with low cost parts?
Right now an unlocked brand new iPhone 4S is $450. The low cost iPhone is said to go for $50-150 less. Apple's not going to "eat" that cost. It has to come in the form of less expensive parts, easier manufacturing (improved assembly efficiency), and/or smaller margins for the manufacturer. Also if the target is "emerging" markets then repair has to be simpler than it is for the current iPhones because the warranty costs are going to be greater with a not yet up to Western standards infrastructure in these countries.
As for "poorer countries," that isn't the target. The article states "emerging" markets. Those are countries with a rapidly rising middle class, but the infrastructure to support its needs has yet to be built up yet. They are not "poor" countries.
Why would Apple want to open up the iPhone to people who can't afford it? Part of the appeal of the iPhone is because its a status symbol. I feel like this is a big mistake.
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to find it in Walmart, CostCo or BestBuy at a discount.
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to get it at $99 with contract.
Literally anyone could afford one, turn left or right, some random people has it too, what's so symbolic about it?
Even third ranked, underdog carrier as T-Mobile can have one now. It's a commodity.
iPhone is a status symbol? Only in Raftysworld
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to find it in Walmart, CostCo or BestBuy at a discount.
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to get it at $99 with contract.
Literally anyone could afford one, turn left or right, some random people has it too, what's so symbolic about it?
Even third ranked, underdog carrier as T-Mobile can have one now. It's a commodity.
iPhone is a status symbol? Only in Raftysworld
I would also say the iPhone can be construed as a status symbol. In many places in the US, a car is nearly a requirement. I drive a pretty modest Honda Civic. To guys driving sports coupes and big pickup trucks, my car is a joke to them. To people with rusted out Corsicas with manual windows and no A/C, I might appear to be showing off in my car. We all do a certain amount of "keep up with the Joneses" whether we want to admit it or not. Some people get smart phones because it's a useful tool and it saves time with it's many features. Some people get them to fit in and only ever play Angry Birds and take pictures of their lunch for Facebook, but they'll happily pay $75+/mo to fit in. And hey, I would like one too, but right now I can't justify it and I make more than a lot of young folks where I work that spend a whole lot more on their phones than I do.
However, to Raftys original comment, I think Apple would happily sell a low cost iPhone to anyone that would buy it. So much of the benefit is getting people into that ecosystem and buying their first app. Once they buy one, they'll buy another.
Why would Apple want to open up the iPhone to people who can't afford it? Part of the appeal of the iPhone is because its a status symbol. I feel like this is a big mistake.
This is opening up an apple 'quality' item to a lower price group. It's by far not the bottom end though.
It's an interesting proposition though, but I'm concerned that the cut down version will have restrictions in place which will question it's viability. For example the iPod Nano has a touch screen, plenty of memory and great form factor but you can't add any apps. Imho it would have been good as a kiddie games machine for much less than the iPT.
Why would Apple want to open up the iPhone to people who can't afford it? Part of the appeal of the iPhone is because its a status symbol. I feel like this is a big mistake.
Are you serious? A status symbol? Should only rich and elite people have it?
A crap load of people on welfare own the damn phone!
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to find it in Walmart, CostCo or BestBuy at a discount.
If it's a status symbol, you wouldn't be able to get it at $99 with contract.
Literally anyone could afford one, turn left or right, some random people has it too, what's so symbolic about it?
Even third ranked, underdog carrier as T-Mobile can have one now. It's a commodity.
iPhone is a status symbol? Only in Raftysworld
Yeah, Apple is just trying to finish what it started when Verizon got it, making the iPhone available to everyone. Finishing means releasing a cheaper (relatively-speaking) iPhone that will make people in places like China, India, Spain, Brazil and non-gentrified areas of NYC think twice about getting an Android phone instead of an iPhone.
The true reasons usually come to light later. However diversification is always good; the last thing you want, is to depend on one single parts supplier/manufacturing partner. Businesses sometimes have fallings-out, and there are also disasters such as floods, earthquakes, and nuclear disasters: all three have happened in the recent past. I'd say a good move on APPLE's part.
If true, a dirty business tactic by FOXCONN; good APPLE caught it.
How many people here in the US are willing to work for Chinese wages? Assembling it here would be great, but would also absolutely increase the price of the units made here.
For them it's more than likely a status symbol. For people down on their luck, walking around with a fairly expensive item, is one way to feel a little less poor, even if it means having less food.
For everyone else, not so much.
Exactly shows the ineptness of the government when it comes to handouts. Smartphone and its accompanying expensive data plans is not a necessity in life. This "people down on their luck" wasting my hard earned money.
Sorry, end of rant..