Apple quietly cuts price of iPhone SE to $349 for 32GB, $449 for 128GB
While introducing its most expensive iPhone ever, the $999-and-up iPhone X, Apple also cut the price of its smallest and most affordable handset, making it cheaper than ever to purchase a new model.
The iPhone SE can now be purchased for $349 for a 32-gigabyte model directly from Apple. The high-capacity 128-gigabyte version is available for $449.
The iPhone SE lineup was given a capacity adjustment in March of this year, doubling the storage from the models launched a year prior. At the time, the 32-gigabyte model cost $399, while the 128-gigabyte variant was $499.
Other than storage, the iPhone SE has remained unchanged since the hardware launched in 2016, with the same A9 processor, 4-inch Retina display, 12-megapixel camera, and absence of pressure sensing 3D Touch.
The price cut for the iPhone SE comes the same day that Apple unveiled the premium iPhone X, a top-tier model with a starting price of $999, which is the company's highest cost of entry ever. With the $349 cost of the iPhone SE, Apple simultaneously also made it the company's most affordable new iPhone ever.
It's a similar approach that Apple employed earlier this year in revamping the iPad lineup: The iPad Pro became more expensive with a $649 10.5-inch entry-level model, just a few months after the company introduced a capable 9.7-inch version that carries a budget price of just $329.
There have been rumors that the iPhone SE could get a refresh in early 2018, about two years after the handset was introduced. It is believed that the update would remain a budget-priced model focused on allowing Apple to capture new sales in emerging markets like India.
The iPhone SE can now be purchased for $349 for a 32-gigabyte model directly from Apple. The high-capacity 128-gigabyte version is available for $449.
The iPhone SE lineup was given a capacity adjustment in March of this year, doubling the storage from the models launched a year prior. At the time, the 32-gigabyte model cost $399, while the 128-gigabyte variant was $499.
Other than storage, the iPhone SE has remained unchanged since the hardware launched in 2016, with the same A9 processor, 4-inch Retina display, 12-megapixel camera, and absence of pressure sensing 3D Touch.
The price cut for the iPhone SE comes the same day that Apple unveiled the premium iPhone X, a top-tier model with a starting price of $999, which is the company's highest cost of entry ever. With the $349 cost of the iPhone SE, Apple simultaneously also made it the company's most affordable new iPhone ever.
It's a similar approach that Apple employed earlier this year in revamping the iPad lineup: The iPad Pro became more expensive with a $649 10.5-inch entry-level model, just a few months after the company introduced a capable 9.7-inch version that carries a budget price of just $329.
There have been rumors that the iPhone SE could get a refresh in early 2018, about two years after the handset was introduced. It is believed that the update would remain a budget-priced model focused on allowing Apple to capture new sales in emerging markets like India.
Comments
i don’t see iPhone 8 pricing rising. But for next year, what will we see? From what we read, Samsung is sucking Apple for about double the price for the OLED screens, at about $120-$130 each, where numbers normally run about $70-$80 for Galaxy S8 size parts. I don’t know who is paying for that cutout, which is responsible for a 40% reject rate, or who is eating that reject rate. But, it’s likely responsible for the higher cost of the phone, mostly. So what about next year? Will there even be three phones again? John Gruber thinks that there will be three, but I’m not so sure. It could simply be that Apple knew there wouldn’t be any way to supply 75 -100 million of these in a year, this year, but maybe next year they will. So maybe that high price is a one time thing.
That's a hell of a lot of improvement in one screen. The two last part Samsung can't decently reproduce because of Android limitations.
Better IMO to have a redesigned SE next year that keeps interest and maintains within 1-2 years the specs, at this new price level.
In fact, despite being cheaper than the (still available at the time) iPhone 6, the SE was better in basically every way, including Retina Flash.
Why did Apple do this? So it didn’t have to make any changes to the SE for two years. If it wants to keep the phone relevant for 2 years with a fresh update next year, the A11 is absolutely on the table, because the same thing already happened in 2016.
Pretty much anyone who wants an iPhone can get one and has more options to choose from.
Apple can continue to make the most of 'past' technology and has options for price adjustments over the course of the year.
Of course, the risk of canibalism is real but I think the move was inevitable.
The only hard data I have is from Q117 but the top end premium market contracted. I speculated that if that figure turned into a trend, Apple would have a problem on the horizon (supercycle excepted).
What truly compounded that situation was 49% growth in the 300-399 bracket for the same period.
The industry was booming in an area where Apple had no presence and contracting in another where it had a lot of its eggs.
This new lineup spreads the eggs out over many baskets.
The question for me is whether the Q1 data was a blip or if it had continued in the following quarters. Perhaps it was the latter.
At the same time Android phones (the so called 'knock-offs') were literally pummmelling Apple in product offerings and giving users far more quality options for half the price of an iPhone while actually making money on them into the bargain. Something that was already eating into Apple's share of smartphone profits.
It doesn't matter how much you love Apple or the iPhone, until yesterday, Apple had just one dual camera phone. Huawei alone had not only released that concept before Apple and followed through with a string of high quality dual camera, Leica branded phones over the last twelve months, but offered wholly different external designs to choose from and at different sizes and price points.
With just one option and an expensive price tag you can see why the competion might be a temptation if dual cameras was important for you. When you add in other factors like, better batteries, fast charging, dual SIM, micro SD, varied designs etc, leaving the walled garden doesn't sound so bad and if you simply can't afford the iPhone you want, what are you to do?
Some here think you should just 'save more' which only shows a disconnection with the real world IMO.
This new lineup provides a partial solution to many of these issues in exchange for accepting last year's tech (or older) as the price of entry. That might be an issue for some but at least there are many more options open to you.
Will there be canibalisation as a result? Definitely, but the solution was to shelter in the high premium segment and possibly see it contract around you.
Some people here said Apple was only a premium priced brand and basically that if you couldn't pay the entry fee you weren't in Apple's target group and should move on.
That's how they lost me and I probably won't be back in their phone bubble.
The story doesn't end with prices and more hardware offerings though.
The much touted services revenues and the accessory (Homekit, AirPods, charging mats etc) scream for user base.
A contracting high premium segment would do little to help.
Then there are the developing markets and China.
To a large degree, Apple is about brand physocolgy. Even when it is far from the best on many levels, you think it is the best.
If you plunk the almost retired iPhone 6 on developing markets they smell a rat. If you extend the same model to developed nations you have some smart marketing going on because one of the other reasons the premium market was contracting was because of sales taxes and currency issues.
What counts is the end price of a product, not the price Apple puts on its slides during the presentation.
Many people cannot escape sales taxes and when they are 25%, it can have a dissuasory effect when all that great competion has cheaper prices when everything is tallied up and your product spread is limited.
If this current product matrix persists, Apple will get my vote. It would be a hugely significant change in strategy but necessary IMO.
I have no problem with eye wateringly high priced phones as long as there are alternatives. Right now that is the case.
I am now considering a lower priced alternative for my wife, something that was doubtful before yesterday.
And hey! They dumped black!
No metallic mustard but seeing black put in the cupboard for a while was nice.
It goes without saying that if Apple has only left the older models to eliminate stock, I take it all back :-)
I guess you're referring to iPhone SE, and not 5s. That being said, the SE has been capable of filming at 4K resolution since its launch during the spring of 2016. It has always had a 12 MP camera, the same as on the 6s.