Rumor: Apple to launch cheaper iPhone with plastic casing, non-Retina display this summer

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Yet another analyst has thrown their hat into the ring, joining others who have heard from sources in Apple's supply chain that the company is gearing up to debut a low-cost iPhone in the coming months..

RBC


Amit Daryanani of RBC Capital Markets issued a note to investors on Friday in which he said he's received word that Apple plans to launch "multiple new phones" in the June-July timeframe this year. Specifically, he expects Apple to launch a next-generation flagship handset, a so-called "iPhone 5S," as well as a more affordable handset.

"The low-end iPhone will have the same 4-inch form factor as the iPhone 5, but will have a plastic casing and no Retina display," he said. "With a lower price point, AAPL will be able to target a growing and important part of the smartphone market (sub-$400 price band)."

Daryanani believes Apple's rumored low-end iPhone will carry lower gross margins than the iPhone 5 or an iPhone 5S. But he also expects that such a product would contribute another $22 billion in revenue and more than $5 in earnings per share in calendar year 2014, which he believes would add $50 of value to Apple's stock price.

RBC


In his projections, the low-end smartphone market has a total addressable size of about 500 million units in calendar 2014. He believes Apple could capture more than 15 percent of that market in the medium term, leading to what he said is a "conservative" estimate of 70 million units.

Daryanani also expects Apple to launch a new iPad mini and full-size iPad this year, while he said a full-fledged Apple television and so-called "iWatch" smart watch are "likely," but the timing of their debut is "unclear."

RBC Capital Markets has retained its "outperform" rating for AAPL stock with a price target of $600.
«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 140
    wurm5150wurm5150 Posts: 763member
    He lost me at "no retina display"..
  • Reply 2 of 140
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Please stop.

    It's going to be larger.
    It's going to be smaller.

    It's going to be plastic.
    It's going to be metal.

    It's going to be retina.
    It's not going to be retina.

    It's going to be $299.
    It's going to be $199.

    No one knows what the heck they're talking about, so why in the world would anyone take any of them seriously? Of course, with 20,000 random rumors covering every end of the spectrum, whatever Apple does will hit one of the rumors - and the person who made that wild-a$$ed guess will claim to be an expert.
  • Reply 3 of 140
    Cause that makes sense considering that they're going to require that all apps fill the screen and have retina display beginning May 1st.
  • Reply 4 of 140
    waybacmacwaybacmac Posts: 309member


    Has anyone kept a scorecard as to how many anal-ists and pundits have declared their belief in the "small, cheap iPhone"? image


     


    While I'm sure Apple didn't start this rumor, I wouldn't be surprised if they were using it to check for information leaks at the HQ.

  • Reply 5 of 140
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,102member
    In before someone says "the iPhone 4 is free, you cants get cheaper than free."

    Not in before someone wonders why there are rumors on a rumor site.

    We could post it in.
  • Reply 6 of 140
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,102member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post



    He lost me at "no retina display"..


    I have no idea on the validity of this rumor - however if the modern Apple is a company which listens to it's market then the success of the mini does tell us something about Retina. Maybe we are all myopic. Or - the other one.

  • Reply 7 of 140
    robogoborobogobo Posts: 378member
    Sorry, there is NO WAY they'll launch a non retina iPhone when the freaking iPod Touch is retina. NO WAY.
  • Reply 8 of 140


    Can we PLEASE stop this drivel already.

  • Reply 9 of 140

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post



    In before someone says "the iPhone 4 is free, you cants get cheaper than free."



    Not in before someone wonders why there are rumors on a rumor site.



    We could post it in.


    The "free" iPhone 4 is $449 to buy unlocked without a contract. 


     


    If Apple does do a cheaper (by price) iPhone model, it will have to come in much cheaper than that for the target markets. Think somewhere along the lines of $349. 


     


    If/when Apple does it for $349, I guess this comment will make me an anal-yst. 

  • Reply 10 of 140
    matt45matt45 Posts: 9member
    Plastic non-retina. Can't apple just refresh the iPhone 3GS?
  • Reply 11 of 140
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,102member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RedGeminiPA View Post


    The "free" iPhone 4 is $449 to buy unlocked without a contract. 


     



    Yeah, I know. I was pre-quoting someone else, but not agreeing. Maybe I needed a scare quote?

  • Reply 12 of 140
    "Daryanani also expects Apple to launch a new iPad mini and full-size iPad this year."

    Wow, this guy deserves a raise, what foresight!
  • Reply 13 of 140
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,102member


    If it is non-retina it will be way cheaper than $349 I imagine, given that last years retina iPod Touch is $199. My guess is - if they do this - it will be in certain markets only. A lot of people don't see retina. My sister replaced her iPad 1 with an iPad mini. She doesn't see any difference, maybe that is her, or the size of the screen, but she prefers the non-retina. Weights a big factor.

  • Reply 14 of 140

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post



    He lost me at "no retina display"..


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by THEMAC1NT0SH View Post



    Cause that makes sense considering that they're going to require that all apps fill the screen and have retina display beginning May 1st.


     


    BINGO!


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    I have no idea on the validity of this rumor - however if the modern Apple is a company which listens to it's market then the success of the mini does tell us something about Retina. Maybe we are all myopic. Or - the other one.



     


    I take the notice to developers to make sure their apps are Retina and support 16x9 as a sign that there will be no non-Retina class devices in the 2013 lineup. iPhone and iPod touch is already there. With the $399 iPad 4 and the $499 iPad 5, they will not move the non-Retina mini to $229 (though that would be an amazing move and kill the kindle fire market). iPad mini 2 will be Retina, I am guessing, with this news.

  • Reply 15 of 140
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 723member
    matt45 wrote: »
    Plastic non-retina. Can't apple just refresh the iPhone 3GS?
    I was thinking the same thing.
  • Reply 16 of 140
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 723member
    matt45 wrote: »
    Plastic non-retina. Can't apple just refresh the iPhone 3GS?
    Then many on this site will claim they copied Samsung's design. lol
  • Reply 17 of 140
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,873member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post



    He lost me at "no retina display"..


     


    Yeah, except that it would make a ton of sense to do a low cost iPhone without a retina display. 


     


    I know what I'm about to say is inconceivable to a vocal minority, but most people cannot perceive the difference between retina and non-retina displays unless they break out a magnifying glass. It's just silly for Apple to increase the cost of a product (both the cost for them to make it and the cost for people to buy it) over a feature that so few people are able to perceive. 


     


    I think it makes much more sense to use the retina display as a lever for price discrimination (in the economist use of the term). That is, offer retina and non-retina versions of all products and charge a nice premium for the retina versions. 

  • Reply 18 of 140
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


     


    Yeah, except that it would make a ton of sense to do a low cost iPhone without a retina display. 


     


    I know what I'm about to say is inconceivable to a vocal minority, but most people cannot perceive the difference between retina and non-retina displays unless they break out a magnifying glass. It's just silly for Apple to increase the cost of a product (both the cost for them to make it and the cost for people to buy it) over a feature that so few people are able to perceive. 


     


    I think it makes much more sense to use the retina display as a lever for price discrimination (in the economist use of the term). That is, offer retina and non-retina versions of all products and charge a nice premium for the retina versions. 



     


    Economies of scale.


     


    Apple has already used 100's of millions of retina displays, it would probably cost them more to bring in a new, separate line of lower resolution screens.


     


    Economics 101.


     


    Not going to happen.

  • Reply 19 of 140
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    waybacmac wrote: »
    Has anyone kept a scorecard as to how many anal-ists and pundits have declared their belief in the "small, cheap iPhone"? ;)

    All of them.
    The "free" iPhone 4 is $449 to buy unlocked without a contract. 

    If Apple does do a cheaper (by price) iPhone model, it will have to come in much cheaper than that for the target markets. Think somewhere along the lines of $349. 

    If/when Apple does it for $349, I guess this comment will make me an anal-yst. 

    $349 I can believe. I'm just getting fed up with the people pretending it's going to be $99 to compete with cheapo Android phones.

    blastdoor wrote: »
    Yeah, except that it would make a ton of sense to do a low cost iPhone without a retina display. 

    I know what I'm about to say is inconceivable to a vocal minority, but most people cannot perceive the difference between retina and non-retina displays unless they break out a magnifying glass. It's just silly for Apple to increase the cost of a product (both the cost for them to make it and the cost for people to buy it) over a feature that so few people are able to perceive. 

    I think it makes much more sense to use the retina display as a lever for price discrimination (in the economist use of the term). That is, offer retina and non-retina versions of all products and charge a nice premium for the retina versions. 

    I agree. The fact that Apple requires Retina support is a red herring. They also require apps to support older non-retina phones. So support for non-retina is there. And since we're talking about a hypothetical cheap phone, I think a non-retina would be fine.

    At the $299-349 price point, I think it's certainly possible. But if they do that, all the whiners will complain that it's not $99 or $149.
  • Reply 20 of 140
    chandra69chandra69 Posts: 638member


    Better release iPhone 3GS again!  This is too awkward.

Sign In or Register to comment.