“If they are 6 or 7 years old”. Am l the only one to be shocked by this comment? Are there really that many adults buying the latest iPhone for a 6 year old? Do any kids of that age need a phone, let alone a smart phone?
Yes, and it’s a big problem. Ask any elementary school teacher about the havoc phones cause in the classroom. Many schools outright ban cellphones in the classroom and many parents fight those bans tooth and nail. It’s all about a false sense of security a cellphone allegedly provides.
"If it's someone who's leaning into something else, what do they need?"
Can someone translate this into normal English?
Customer: I'm interested in buying an iPhone. Apple salesperson: Who are you buying the iPhone for? Customer: I'm buying it for someone who's leaning into something else. Apple salesperson: [slight pause as they remember AA's guidance] What do they need?
"If it's someone who's leaning towards something else, what do they need?"
Does that make more sense to you now? Seemed pretty simple to understand to me the original way.
Apple doesn't need a clerk to upsell the iPhone X, the ridiculously minute 64GB will do that for them.
Not long ago people like you bitched 16gb wasn’t enough for an entry level user. now 64gb isn’t either?! good lord.
I agreed that 16 was skimpy, and that the price to increase that capacity was egregious, but 64 seems plenty capable to me. I gotta figure either @bloggerblog was making a sarcastic point we missed, or is a misguided teenager whose opinions are driven more by impulse than reason. (S)he hasn't followed up to elaborate though, so I'm reserving judgement.
Apple Store employees will have a new augmented reality app. They hold it up and the screen will display the customer 's income and credit score over customers' heads. No need to waste time on the poor.
Good! The Poor™ should be rounded up and used to make McDonald's hamburger meat. It's the circle of life.
Now that Angela is soo empathic with us, ordinary people, may I do an empathic suggestion towards her ?
Angela: Time for a steep iPhone X price increase !!
It will facilitate your latest intentions, by diversifying the product line.
It will better address your premium customers' needs: their esteem and natural desire to distance themselves from the mass, it will be better to redress ehh, balance demand with disappointing yields.
It will enable Apple to still meet financial forecasts with abysmal product yield and stock level (saving some VP's faces) and re-ignite disappointing iPhone 8 demand that you want to address.
It would underline the luxury/fashion momentum which is your premier mission.
And please, remain genuine and close to yourself (note: this goes beyond the mere selfish intentions that might be misinterpreted as egoist): it certainly would benefit your social corporate status if people see you around with your upleveled iPhone X - as that will further elevate diversity at Apple and feminism in general...
And foremost: it is Just How Apple Works - especially after you came in...Tim will love it and be soo excited.
I can only see positives !
(and, to make other products look more affordable, it should be done anyway...)
Apple doesn't need a clerk to upsell the iPhone X, the ridiculously minute 64GB will do that for them.
Not long ago people like you bitched 16gb wasn’t enough for an entry level user. now 64gb isn’t either?! good lord.
Exactly. With cameras and video getting better and especially 4K it’s easy to use up a lot of storage. Of course Apple doesn’t offer what most people would want because then it can’t upsell. Phil Schiller’s whole mission is to see how many customers he can get to spend $100 more. Neil Cybart, who runs the Apple analysis site Above Avalon, once did an analysis of Apple leaving iPhone base storage at 16GB. He said doing so generated $3B extra revenue for Apple as people upgraded to the mid tier 64GB option. And once Apple had enough customers in the mid tier (who likely would fill up their phone more and thus not downgrade) then they would upgrade the bottom tier to 32GB.
[...] Of course Apple doesn’t offer what most people would want because then it can’t upsell.
I'm not defending Apple or arguing for or against its actions, but I would like to speak to that sentiment and the logic behind it.
If we eliminate the 16GB model and make 32GB the entry level, how does that benefit the consumer? The people who need or want 32GB were going to buy that version anyway. Removal of the 16GB option doesn't benefit them. Those who either didn't perceive any need for the extra storage or were willing to make the required compromises to save money are now looking at paying $100 more. Instead of being able to get a less capable device at a lower price their only option would be the more expensive version.
Obviously Apple would prefer that people choose higher-priced devices, but there's nothing coercive or deceptive about offering a lower-priced alternative to the "preferred" configuration. If anything, it opens up the market to include people who may not be willing or able to pay what a 32GB version costs but might be prepared to put up with some inconvenience if it means getting a more affordable phone.
Eliminating the 16GB model won't magically make the 32GB version any less expensive, so I don't understand the reasoning behind the idea that Apple is pulling some kind of bait-and-switch.
Apple Store employees will have a new augmented reality app. They hold it up and the screen will display the customer 's income and credit score over customers' heads. No need to waste time on the poor.
Good! The Poor™ should be rounded up and used to make McDonald's hamburger meat. It's the circle of life.
[...] Of course Apple doesn’t offer what most people would want because then it can’t upsell.
I'm not defending Apple or arguing for or against its actions, but I would like to speak to that sentiment and the logic behind it.
If we eliminate the 16GB model and make 32GB the entry level, how does that benefit the consumer? The people who need or want 32GB were going to buy that version anyway. Removal of the 16GB option doesn't benefit them. Those who either didn't perceive any need for the extra storage or were willing to make the required compromises to save money are now looking at paying $100 more. Instead of being able to get a less capable device at a lower price their only option would be the more expensive version.
Obviously Apple would prefer that people choose higher-priced devices, but there's nothing coercive or deceptive about offering a lower-priced alternative to the "preferred" configuration. If anything, it opens up the market to include people who may not be willing or able to pay what a 32GB version costs but might be prepared to put up with some inconvenience if it means getting a more affordable phone.
Eliminating the 16GB model won't magically make the 32GB version any less expensive, so I don't understand the reasoning behind the idea that Apple is pulling some kind of bait-and-switch.
But the 32GB option wasn’t available. It went from 16 > 64. The point of that being with Apple not offering the ‘sweet spot’ at the entry level more people would spend the extra $100 and once they went 64GB would most likely never downgrade. Like I said analyst Neil Cybart estimated this to be about $3B more in revenue for Apple. And once Apple had upsold enough people then they could raise the entry level. Look at the X. Storage options are 64 and 256. There is no sweet spot offering of 128. Everyone who currently has a 128 7/7 Plus and is looking to get an X are any of them going to downgrade to 64? Highly unlikely. No doubt Apple knows the majority of X sales will be 256. Higher ASPs probably mean bigger bonuses for Schiller & Co. And FYI, I’ve had plenty of people elsewhere tell me this is just marketing 101. Fine but then let’s not deny this is what Apple does. No they don’t need to upsell people in the stores because product marketing has already done so with the choices they put up for sale.
Apple doesn't need a clerk to upsell the iPhone X, the ridiculously minute 64GB will do that for them.
Not long ago people like you bitched 16gb wasn’t enough for an entry level user. now 64gb isn’t either?! good lord.
16GB wasn't enough. Keeping it pegged at 16GB for so long was evil. Eliminating the sweet spot on capacity at any given time for any given model is also evil. They were legitimate complaints. Not bitching.
Now, 64GB is ok for me, today, as a minimum but I have seen reviewers pointing out that if you are into photography and 4K, you should be aware that 64GB just isn't enough as you will quickly run out of space and enter a world of pain trying to manage your files.
Apple doesn't need a clerk to upsell the iPhone X, the ridiculously minute 64GB will do that for them.
Not long ago people like you bitched 16gb wasn’t enough for an entry level user. now 64gb isn’t either?! good lord.
16GB wasn't enough. Keeping it pegged at 16GB for so long was evil. Eliminating the sweet spot on capacity at any given time for any given model is also evil. They were legitimate complaints. Not bitching.
Now, 64GB is ok for me, today, as a minimum but I have seen reviewers pointing out that if you are into photography and 4K, you should be aware that 64GB just isn't enough as you will quickly run out of space and enter a world of pain trying to manage your files.
I have two reactions:
1. Which is a better entry-level configuration (using arbitrary numbers): 64GB for $700 or 128GB for $800? The extra storage isn't free, so bumping up the minimum capacity offered also bumps up the starting price. Is it better to force the people who are willing to trade capacity for savings to pay more instead? Or is it better to have an inexpensive offering in the line with the option to add more storage for those who want it?
One could argue that the steps between capacity offerings are too large, even skipping over the "sweet spot," but since the price of the upgrade hasn't changed it doesn't matter. The *value* has actually increased. It used to be $100 to add 16GB (upgrade from 16 to 32), then that same $100 got us 48GB more, and now it's 192GB. Sure, there's no 128GB option, but so what? We're now getting twice as much storage for the same price.
2. 64GB is ample storage for the vast majority of users. Very few people will require more. 64GB will store approximately one shit-ton of photos and videos. There is less need than ever before for an "upsell." If the desire is for the entry-level model to hit the sweet spot, I think this nails it (or is at the very least the closest to that ideal we've ever seen).
Those that DO require more can still buy it, and get more storage per dollar than ever before. Win-win.
Apple doesn't need a clerk to upsell the iPhone X, the ridiculously minute 64GB will do that for them.
Not long ago people like you bitched 16gb wasn’t enough for an entry level user. now 64gb isn’t either?! good lord.
16GB wasn't enough. Keeping it pegged at 16GB for so long was evil. Eliminating the sweet spot on capacity at any given time for any given model is also evil. They were legitimate complaints. Not bitching.
Now, 64GB is ok for me, today, as a minimum but I have seen reviewers pointing out that if you are into photography and 4K, you should be aware that 64GB just isn't enough as you will quickly run out of space and enter a world of pain trying to manage your files.
I have two reactions:
1. Which is a better entry-level configuration (using arbitrary numbers): 64GB for $700 or 128GB for $800? The extra storage isn't free, so bumping up the minimum capacity offered also bumps up the starting price. Is it better to force the people who are willing to trade capacity for savings to pay more instead? Or is it better to have an inexpensive offering in the line with the option to add more storage for those who want it?
One could argue that the steps between capacity offerings are too large, even skipping over the "sweet spot," but since the price of the upgrade hasn't changed it doesn't matter. The *value* has actually increased. It used to be $100 to add 16GB (upgrade from 16 to 32), then that same $100 got us 48GB more, and now it's 192GB. Sure, there's no 128GB option, but so what? We're now getting twice as much storage for the same price.
2. 64GB is ample storage for the vast majority of users. Very few people will require more. 64GB will store approximately one shit-ton of photos and videos. There is less need than ever before for an "upsell." If the desire is for the entry-level model to hit the sweet spot, I think this nails it (or is at the very least the closest to that ideal we've ever seen).
Those that DO require more can still buy it, and get more storage per dollar than ever before. Win-win.
Pricing is always relative to budget. If you stretched or overstretched yourself to reach the entry level, any jump from there is tough, not matter how much 'value' it offers.
If you are not stretched at the entry level (64GB for iPhone 8 today) but aren't given the option of the next step up (128GB) and the only other option is 255GB, that may overstretch you.
Most non-US sales will also be subject to sales taxes and exchange rates that add an element of financial stress to any personal purchase decision.
It doesn't always matter if you are given double or triple the storage capacity for just 100 dollars or whatever the price difference may be. It might seem like a lot for little but that 100 dollars (often with currency exchange and sales tax on top) turns into a very difficult to reach objective.
Here are the Spanish prices:
iPhone 8 64GB - 809€ iPhone 8 256GB - 979€
That's a real world difference of 170€ and the difference of possibly being hampered by the option of opting for the 64GB version or financially stressed by the 256GB version.
Explaining to someone in that position how much 'value' they are getting with reference to the 256GB model really offers little consolation when those extra 170€ are playing on them and they had trouble reaching the 64GB model in the first place. The missing 128GB option (which could probably be offered for a little more than the cost of the 64GB option) would not only double the storage (offering a capacity that many would consider the sweet spot for most people) but cost far less (per GB) than the 256GB option. We also need to contrast the 'value' with the notion the user might never even use that extra capacity in the lifetime of the device.
Now, it's important to put things into perspective. Times have changed somewhat at Apple with the release of these 8 series phones. We now have a completely new model/price spread and far shorter leaps in what is on offer with the new phones in terms of technology. Going to the 8 isn't necessary if you are budget constrained and what you get on the 7 series is more than enough for a large swathe of existing Apple users and possibly an attraction to new potential purchasers.
It wasn't like that in the past when 16GB was infamously insufficient and the model/price spread wasn't as wide as it is now.
Comments
Does that make more sense to you now? Seemed pretty simple to understand to me the original way.
So I do their job for them: I upsell to my self and get the highest end model every time I buy an iPhone. I’m getting tired of doing their job!
EDIT: Never mind, I now get what you were saying -- that the next logical starting point would be 128.
If we eliminate the 16GB model and make 32GB the entry level, how does that benefit the consumer? The people who need or want 32GB were going to buy that version anyway. Removal of the 16GB option doesn't benefit them. Those who either didn't perceive any need for the extra storage or were willing to make the required compromises to save money are now looking at paying $100 more. Instead of being able to get a less capable device at a lower price their only option would be the more expensive version.
Obviously Apple would prefer that people choose higher-priced devices, but there's nothing coercive or deceptive about offering a lower-priced alternative to the "preferred" configuration. If anything, it opens up the market to include people who may not be willing or able to pay what a 32GB version costs but might be prepared to put up with some inconvenience if it means getting a more affordable phone.
Eliminating the 16GB model won't magically make the 32GB version any less expensive, so I don't understand the reasoning behind the idea that Apple is pulling some kind of bait-and-switch.
Manbugers! Or (Wo)manburgers for the feminists.
Now, 64GB is ok for me, today, as a minimum but I have seen reviewers pointing out that if you are into photography and 4K, you should be aware that 64GB just isn't enough as you will quickly run out of space and enter a world of pain trying to manage your files.
1. Which is a better entry-level configuration (using arbitrary numbers): 64GB for $700 or 128GB for $800? The extra storage isn't free, so bumping up the minimum capacity offered also bumps up the starting price. Is it better to force the people who are willing to trade capacity for savings to pay more instead? Or is it better to have an inexpensive offering in the line with the option to add more storage for those who want it?
One could argue that the steps between capacity offerings are too large, even skipping over the "sweet spot," but since the price of the upgrade hasn't changed it doesn't matter. The *value* has actually increased. It used to be $100 to add 16GB (upgrade from 16 to 32), then that same $100 got us 48GB more, and now it's 192GB. Sure, there's no 128GB option, but so what? We're now getting twice as much storage for the same price.
2. 64GB is ample storage for the vast majority of users. Very few people will require more. 64GB will store approximately one shit-ton of photos and videos. There is less need than ever before for an "upsell." If the desire is for the entry-level model to hit the sweet spot, I think this nails it (or is at the very least the closest to that ideal we've ever seen).
Those that DO require more can still buy it, and get more storage per dollar than ever before. Win-win.
If you are not stretched at the entry level (64GB for iPhone 8 today) but aren't given the option of the next step up (128GB) and the only other option is 255GB, that may overstretch you.
Most non-US sales will also be subject to sales taxes and exchange rates that add an element of financial stress to any personal purchase decision.
It doesn't always matter if you are given double or triple the storage capacity for just 100 dollars or whatever the price difference may be. It might seem like a lot for little but that 100 dollars (often with currency exchange and sales tax on top) turns into a very difficult to reach objective.
Here are the Spanish prices:
iPhone 8 64GB - 809€
iPhone 8 256GB - 979€
That's a real world difference of 170€ and the difference of possibly being hampered by the option of opting for the 64GB version or financially stressed by the 256GB version.
Explaining to someone in that position how much 'value' they are getting with reference to the 256GB model really offers little consolation when those extra 170€ are playing on them and they had trouble reaching the 64GB model in the first place. The missing 128GB option (which could probably be offered for a little more than the cost of the 64GB option) would not only double the storage (offering a capacity that many would consider the sweet spot for most people) but cost far less (per GB) than the 256GB option. We also need to contrast the 'value' with the notion the user might never even use that extra capacity in the lifetime of the device.
Now, it's important to put things into perspective. Times have changed somewhat at Apple with the release of these 8 series phones. We now have a completely new model/price spread and far shorter leaps in what is on offer with the new phones in terms of technology. Going to the 8 isn't necessary if you are budget constrained and what you get on the 7 series is more than enough for a large swathe of existing Apple users and possibly an attraction to new potential purchasers.
It wasn't like that in the past when 16GB was infamously insufficient and the model/price spread wasn't as wide as it is now.