What is really crazy is: if they were to sell the ipone 5c for $399, after selling millions and reports reduced profits we would be right back to $400... I'm sorry this is screwed up! They can't win for losing.
Munster was expecting Apple to sell 50 million $300 iPhones in 2014, growing to 100 million in 2015, with 15 percent gross margin.
Oh its so rich! Instead, Apple will:
Sell 40 million $550 iPhones, growing to 90 million in 2015, with a 40% percent gross margin.
AKA, Apple makes a crap load more money than the idiot's prediction, and sells almost as many phones.
Munster is a moron, plain and simple. Had the phone been priced at $300 it would surely have moved more units than 50 million in the span of 2014. They sell twice that many with the uber high prices they charge, surely a lower cost of entry would increase, not decrease, volume. Why is that guy still employed. And suddenly Apple was going to drop their profit margin from 40% to 15% just to sell half as many phones? Wow! Just wow!
Tallest Skill and the other frothing cultists have declared yesterday the single most important moment in all humanity - the greatest innovation of all collective human experience and knowledge was rolled out in a plastic phone...
No surprise there. Apple's doing great--but we can't expect "analysts" to understand why! The rumors of Apple's low-end phone being rock-bottom junk were never that plausible. Apple's low-end is anyone else's midrange. Same with computers. Nothing new there. Is the market they leave on the table that valuable? Can they in fact snap up SOME of that low-end market by upselling them to a midrange smartphone? Is this their last chance to try a rock-bottom device if it truly is warranted? None of these answers alarm me.
These analysts are not in it for the long-term. They want great numbers one quarter at a time. Cheaper android phones are just that, cheaper! You get what you pay for. Selling the phone is just a starting point, Apple want their users to buy digital content...no point in attracting cheap users that don't buy digital content.
and the iPhone 6 with a 4.5 inch screen becomes $649 upward.
Really a beautiful move.
- 5C = reworked from the iPhone 5 because of the iPhone 5's scratch problems and I think they wanted to change internals (China Mobile band?)
- 5S = Needed to keep the same form factor because of accessories and equipment that make these phones. Lots of innovation otherwise. Fingerprint sensor will be awesome.
- China Mobile = will come; they will ease into it
Only one thing lacking in iPhone innovation, the screen-size. That's it. Otherwise they did a fantastic job. None of this is easy.
With all due reapect. It is just stupid to see screen size as innovation. Let just STOP with it already.
Apple shares always seem to drop after an introduction of new products, but its really severe this time, understandable I suppose, even I was surprised at the the high off-contract price of the 5C, was expecting a maximum of $449 not $549. Still I suppose Apple know what they're doing.
I am sooooo tired of hauling this out but here it is:
Apple II 1977
Mac 1984
PowerBook 1991
Newton 1993
iPod 2001
iPhone 2007
iPad 2010
Average interval between major new product introductions: 5.5 years. My advice is, if you only started paying attention when iPhone first came out, then be patient. A 3 year gap is at the low end of the range. Even if we limit the numbers to the Steve Jobs era.
Not to mention: the stock under Cook has been WAY higher than under Jobs. Not lower, higher.
I'm not one to agree with analysts, as most of them are clueless douchebags, IMO, but I too believe that Apple made a strategic error.
I've always been against Apple releasing cheaper products, but after many months of rumors of the plastic iPhone were all but confirmed, I had accepted that it was coming and believed that Apple was going to make a play for greater marketshare.
But with the pricing of the 5c, that is not going to happen, so I'm not even sure why the 5c exists. Sure, it looks decent, I don't have any problems with the design or the features, but Apple could have just released the 5s and dropped the 5c in my opinion. I'd love to be proved wrong, and I hope that Apple sells a shitload of both models, but their current strategy just strikes me as strange.
<h1 style="margin-bottom:15px;margin-top:0px;">[SIZE=14px]These analysts are not in it for the long-term. They want great numbers one quarter at a time. Cheaper android phones are just that, cheaper! You get what you pay for. Selling the phone is just a starting point, Apple want their users to buy digital content...no point in attracting cheap users that don't buy digital content.[/SIZE]</h1>
The analysts have a great scam going. They dream up some ridiculous rumor (did anyone possibly believe that Apple would introduce a $200 phone like some analysts predicted?) and then generate all sorts of hype with their own company getting lots of publicity.
Then, when Apple fails to deliver what the analyst promised, APPLE is the one who suffers, not the analyst.
Apple shares always seem to drop after an introduction of new products, but its really severe this time, understandable I suppose, even I was surprised at the the high off-contract price of the 5C, was expecting a maximum of $449 not $549. Still I suppose Apple know what they're doing.
Yeah I was thinking the same.
The big "surprise" from the event for everyone wasnt any particular product but instead the price of the 5C.
But honestly investors would still have been disappointed in the price even if it was $450. Anything over $300 would have been deemed too expensive for emerging markets.
But still $550? Really Apple? No matter. They'll make massive profits.
My disappointment with the iPhone 5C is that the case is not user-replaceable. I grow tired of having to feel I need to protect my phone with an expensive third-party outer case to keep it pristine. It would be nice if the case was easily user-replaceable, or even can buy a third-party designer case in a store to swap on. Outer cases just add bulk.
If Apple was controlled by analysts it would have been sold off in pieces for its patents way back in the 1980s. Thank all that's holy those idiots don't run Apple's board!
Apple only puts out a handful of products a year and, barring a few failures, those products are wildly successful. Apple knows what people want and how to make those on the fence want what they were unsure of.
I can't believe I'm saying this but even I want want of those plastic iPhones, despite knowing full well it's just an iPhone 5 in a plastic shell. And I'm typing this comment from my iPhone 5! That either means I'm bat shit insane or Apple got it right. "Here's to the crazy ones!" Of course, I'll be getting the 5S, not the 5C, cause first and foremost I'm a technology nut.
Funny thing about iPhone tech: the pundits always claim the iPhone is a generation behind on hardware, yet that couldn't be farther from the truth. The DPI war was ignited by Apple. Before the Retina Display, almost all Android devices sported 480x800 displays. Apple was the first to market with an ARM A15 based SoC (A6) and now again they are first to market with ARM's new v8 architecture. Pundits will point out that biometrics aren't new to mobile devices, but I can all but guarantee you their ubiquity will come only now and only as a direct response to the 5S.
My disappointment with the iPhone 5C is that the case is not user-replaceable. I grow tired of having to feel I need to protect my phone with an expensive third-party outer case to keep it pristine. It would be nice if the case was easily user-replaceable, or even can buy a third-party designer case in a store to swap on. Outer cases just add bulk.
And what phone ever had an easily replaceable case? Besides, there are third parties who will pop up and fill that "void".
The stock is still currently higher than it ever was under Jobs.
"still' being the operative word.
... but not "way" higher.
[I love how people pull out this old chestnut as if it means something. Like AAPL would never have reached $700 under Steve. All I see is a stock that is running out of steam... and, in my opinion, Steve's steam. If the analysts are right this time then expect a drubbing on AAPL in the new year. ]
5C is a respectable IPhone however wouldn't most people that are buying this iPhone rather spend another $100 and get the 5S?? Pricing is too high for the China market where Apple wants to be big in
I wonder how much time the competition while take to follow Apple 64bit steps. While I do think an 64 bits mobile processor is a kind of waste for a phone right now, eventually every mobile device will go with a 64 bit processor. Apple as play this card very well and the transition will be transparent for the users and gives pressure to the competition with no OS ready for 64bits yet.
Apple shares always seem to drop after an introduction of new products, but its really severe this time, understandable I suppose, even I was surprised at the the high off-contract price of the 5C, was expecting a maximum of $449 not $549. Still I suppose Apple know what they're doing.
The chart I posted on the previous page shows that the stock drop after iPhone 4 was announced was just as bad percentage wise.
Comments
What is really crazy is: if they were to sell the ipone 5c for $399, after selling millions and reports reduced profits we would be right back to $400... I'm sorry this is screwed up! They can't win for losing.
Munster is a moron, plain and simple. Had the phone been priced at $300 it would surely have moved more units than 50 million in the span of 2014. They sell twice that many with the uber high prices they charge, surely a lower cost of entry would increase, not decrease, volume. Why is that guy still employed. And suddenly Apple was going to drop their profit margin from 40% to 15% just to sell half as many phones? Wow! Just wow!
Guess Apple should build a netbook too...
These analysts are not in it for the long-term. They want great numbers one quarter at a time. Cheaper android phones are just that, cheaper! You get what you pay for. Selling the phone is just a starting point, Apple want their users to buy digital content...no point in attracting cheap users that don't buy digital content.
The end.
They set themselves up perfectly for next year.
Next year the iPhone 5C becomes $449.
The iPhone 5S becomes $549 and $649
and the iPhone 6 with a 4.5 inch screen becomes $649 upward.
Really a beautiful move.
- 5C = reworked from the iPhone 5 because of the iPhone 5's scratch problems and I think they wanted to change internals (China Mobile band?)
- 5S = Needed to keep the same form factor because of accessories and equipment that make these phones. Lots of innovation otherwise. Fingerprint sensor will be awesome.
- China Mobile = will come; they will ease into it
Only one thing lacking in iPhone innovation, the screen-size. That's it. Otherwise they did a fantastic job. None of this is easy.
With all due reapect.
It is just stupid to see screen size as innovation.
Let just STOP with it already.
I am sooooo tired of hauling this out but here it is:
Apple II 1977
Mac 1984
PowerBook 1991
Newton 1993
iPod 2001
iPhone 2007
iPad 2010
Average interval between major new product introductions: 5.5 years. My advice is, if you only started paying attention when iPhone first came out, then be patient. A 3 year gap is at the low end of the range. Even if we limit the numbers to the Steve Jobs era.
Not to mention: the stock under Cook has been WAY higher than under Jobs. Not lower, higher.
Not to mention: the stock under Cook has been WAY higher than under Jobs. Not lower, higher.
"has been" being the operative words.
I'm not one to agree with analysts, as most of them are clueless douchebags, IMO, but I too believe that Apple made a strategic error.
I've always been against Apple releasing cheaper products, but after many months of rumors of the plastic iPhone were all but confirmed, I had accepted that it was coming and believed that Apple was going to make a play for greater marketshare.
But with the pricing of the 5c, that is not going to happen, so I'm not even sure why the 5c exists. Sure, it looks decent, I don't have any problems with the design or the features, but Apple could have just released the 5s and dropped the 5c in my opinion. I'd love to be proved wrong, and I hope that Apple sells a shitload of both models, but their current strategy just strikes me as strange.
The analysts have a great scam going. They dream up some ridiculous rumor (did anyone possibly believe that Apple would introduce a $200 phone like some analysts predicted?) and then generate all sorts of hype with their own company getting lots of publicity.
Then, when Apple fails to deliver what the analyst promised, APPLE is the one who suffers, not the analyst.
no, 'is'. Even at today's low price, the stock is higher than it was at any time during Jobs' leadership.
Yeah I was thinking the same.
The big "surprise" from the event for everyone wasnt any particular product but instead the price of the 5C.
But honestly investors would still have been disappointed in the price even if it was $450. Anything over $300 would have been deemed too expensive for emerging markets.
But still $550? Really Apple? No matter. They'll make massive profits.
My disappointment with the iPhone 5C is that the case is not user-replaceable. I grow tired of having to feel I need to protect my phone with an expensive third-party outer case to keep it pristine. It would be nice if the case was easily user-replaceable, or even can buy a third-party designer case in a store to swap on. Outer cases just add bulk.
Apple only puts out a handful of products a year and, barring a few failures, those products are wildly successful. Apple knows what people want and how to make those on the fence want what they were unsure of.
I can't believe I'm saying this but even I want want of those plastic iPhones, despite knowing full well it's just an iPhone 5 in a plastic shell. And I'm typing this comment from my iPhone 5! That either means I'm bat shit insane or Apple got it right. "Here's to the crazy ones!" Of course, I'll be getting the 5S, not the 5C, cause first and foremost I'm a technology nut.
Funny thing about iPhone tech: the pundits always claim the iPhone is a generation behind on hardware, yet that couldn't be farther from the truth. The DPI war was ignited by Apple. Before the Retina Display, almost all Android devices sported 480x800 displays. Apple was the first to market with an ARM A15 based SoC (A6) and now again they are first to market with ARM's new v8 architecture. Pundits will point out that biometrics aren't new to mobile devices, but I can all but guarantee you their ubiquity will come only now and only as a direct response to the 5S.
And what phone ever had an easily replaceable case? Besides, there are third parties who will pop up and fill that "void".
The stock is still currently higher than it ever was under Jobs.
"still' being the operative word.
... but not "way" higher.
[I love how people pull out this old chestnut as if it means something. Like AAPL would never have reached $700 under Steve. All I see is a stock that is running out of steam... and, in my opinion, Steve's steam. If the analysts are right this time then expect a drubbing on AAPL in the new year. ]
Pricing is too high for the China market where Apple wants to be big in
I wonder how much time the competition while take to follow Apple 64bit steps. While I do think an 64 bits mobile processor is a kind of waste for a phone right now, eventually every mobile device will go with a 64 bit processor. Apple as play this card very well and the transition will be transparent for the users and gives pressure to the competition with no OS ready for 64bits yet.