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.
To 5C critis - what should have Apple released?
- Thread starter Adelphos33
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's all relative - of course they'll sell well, but they're just not cheap enough to take buyers away from the mid-range Android market.
The marginal difference between a 16GB 5c and a 5s over a 2-year $2,000+ contract is less than 5% - I wouldn't categorize that as "extremely affordable". Some of the pre-release speculation was that this phone was targeted at the emerging markets where carrier subsidies were not the norm - and the announced price point is nowhere near what was predicted was a good entry level for those markets.
It seems like people are saying Apple should not have bothered with a "mid range phone" at all. Based purely on specs, this isn't a budget device. The specs are competitive now with top end phones.
The 5C is priced more in line with a high end phone, at best it could be categorized a higher end "mid range" phone starting at $550, no subsidy.
$399 retail, $0 contract for 16GB
$499 retail, $99 contract for 32GB
That would make sense to me, but Apple of course wants the highest profit margin possible.
$499 retail, $99 contract for 32GB
That would make sense to me, but Apple of course wants the highest profit margin possible.
But what would the perception be of releasing a "new" phone that was free? Usually when something is free its because its not that great. The problem is the subsidy Apple gets from AT&T and Verizon. The subsidy for a 16GB 5C is $450. That essentially sets a floor on the unlocked price. And if Apple doesn't think it's a good idea brand/marketing wise to sell a "new" phone free on contract well that just bumps up the unlocked price $100. I wish the phone was $100 less. And maybe charge $50 less up front. $450 might even be too much off contract but we don't know how much initially Apple is saving by going to the plastic back.
It may be pure genius if this marketing trick works. If it doesn't than someone will get fired and get fired very soon.
Frankly on a bigger scale. Apple knows what it's doing. Steve Jobs probably left some type of "road map" for the next 5 years. iPhone 5S was already in the map before he died. iPhone 5C maybe or maybe not.
We all know iPhone 2014 will bring about a bigger screen. It's pretty much a given. So 2013 is really a take a deep breath step back for Apple and also for Samsung.
The S4 and Note 3 aren't "huge" changes compared to the already solid S3 and Note 2. Sure 1080p is great but 720p was still excellent. Maybe Note 3 will benefit the most since its a bigger screen. (Note 3 will be my next phone).
But smartphones have reached a maturation point. The biggest growth was from 2009-2011.
Only HTC gave is a "wow" design with their ONE phone in 2013. But unfortunately for HTC, consumers are still flocking to Apple and Samsung.
The difference is greater at purchase time so your point is only valid if you do prepaid. Otherwise, it's $100 cheaper.
In regards to your other point , that's what you get for listening to a bunch of know-nothing analysts who knew nothing. You probably expected an iWatch or iTV as well.
You should consider the total cost over expected lifetime of service. Otherwise, you would be a marketer's dream come true - you would believe every transient pricing (introductory offer) as the final cost of your purchase.
I just had a different opinion when it came to the 5C being characterized as "extremely affordable" when compared to the iPhone 5S.
The speculation was that this phone was going to be the entry level phone in emerging markets - its pricing does not seem to indicate that it is meant to be so. But, Apple has proven everybody wrong before..
People don't seem to understand that an "entry level phone" would have to have inferior components relative to the iPhone 5 and probably even the 4S in order to maintain respectable profitablity levels (Apple has never sold products at cut rate margins ina ny of its segments). This phone would have been a non-starter in US when the iPhone 4S is free on contract. Given people wanted this phone to be released globally, there is essentially a quality floor on the product. Maybe people expect Apple to release an emerging markets only phone.
With AT&T, my monthly costs do not decrease if I pay full price for the iPhone, so I might as well take advantage of the subsidy. Therefore the 5C would cost me $100 less at time of purchase. I fully understand that the discount, amortized over the life of the contract is a lot lower. But I don't pay for my phone with monthly payments, I pay for it at purchase time.
Apple never said it would be a cheap phone, the internet did. If you expected that you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet. At least the smartwatch the internet promised will cost less than the 5C.
Last edited:
True.. where I differed from your opinion was in that being characterized as "extremely affordable". $100 is still $100... but its a modest discount when put in perspective of a 2 year contract.
Maybe.. who knows?
Maybe.. who knows?
Its not maybe. Apple never said cheap iPhone. The internet did. The people who are upset were the people who believed the internet.
The phone has a 300-400% profit margin. The decision to price it at $99 was pure greed.
By that logic the iPhone 4S is currently priced as a "top end" phone, and was priced as a top end phone last year. The iPhone 4S last year was not considered the "worst top end phone available" on the market, it was preferred by many to the best offered by many Android developers.
The only "complaint," feedback rather that I have is off contract pricing is not great.
The 4S design was more unique and desirable than the 5, although more brittle.
The 5c is just a medium-range plastic phone that works well, too expensive.
The issue isn't the build but the price. The ANALysts got it in their heads that Apple needs to release a $199 off contract phone. Despite history, despite Schiller saying that Apple doesn't do cheap.
So no matter what Apple creates if it's not dirt cheap pricing it's a fail and apple is doomed.
----------
From what I can see Apple doesn't give a flip about getting sales by being cheaper. They want folks using Apple stuff because they want to use Apple, the software and ecosystem. So they aren't going to price under just to win a cost war.
I need to replace my iPhone 4 which is currently on life support following an impromptu swim last summer .... and I had initially been planning to replace it with a 5C.
Two points changed my mind about that. First, as many others have noted, there aren't any grown-up colours in the 5C's palette. And second, it's only C$120 less than the 5S -- and that $120 will get me a WAYYYY better phone.
For me, it wasn't so much the price of the 5C. It was the fact that the difference between the specs of the 5S vs the 5C was substantial - and the difference between their price tags was not. A significant difference in the specs, compared to a negligible difference in the price tags, basically killed the 5C as an option for me.
And if that means I need to spend an extra month saving up for this, so be it .... I didn't want to stand in line on launch day anyway
Two points changed my mind about that. First, as many others have noted, there aren't any grown-up colours in the 5C's palette. And second, it's only C$120 less than the 5S -- and that $120 will get me a WAYYYY better phone.
For me, it wasn't so much the price of the 5C. It was the fact that the difference between the specs of the 5S vs the 5C was substantial - and the difference between their price tags was not. A significant difference in the specs, compared to a negligible difference in the price tags, basically killed the 5C as an option for me.
And if that means I need to spend an extra month saving up for this, so be it .... I didn't want to stand in line on launch day anyway