I friend of mine asked me what he should do about upgrading from his iPhone 6S to another iPhone
He wouldn’t want to spend iPhone X prices so it got me having a look at what Apple offers and I can’t see any justification for upgrading to anything but the X. And even then a sensible person would wait until October now.
Didn’t buy X because it’s screen is physically narrower than my 7Plus screen. Although I did buy the SE last year, this was the first year I didn’t upgrade my top of the line model with the next year’s top of the line model. Buying X Plus Sim Free in October-November.
The size of the X screen, NOT THE PRICE, is what held back a lot of us big screen fanboys from buying it. Hope the top will also include 512GB storage option, 4GB System Ram. I think there will be massive demand for the X Plus models ongoing after launch. Your friend should definitely wait for the 7nm A12 even if he wants just the X.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Almost certainly not.; just carrier discounts to pick up a few switchers.
Betcha that Android OS device makers are quite likely to provide carrier incentives to drive share acquisition.
Neither of us know do we? You're guessing and I'd be doing the same.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
1) Who said that the same product for less money wouldn't create higher demand? What does that have to do with the article?
2) And while lower prices almost always increases demand, if the number of units you can see are finite and you're already selling as many units as you can make then selling each unit for less money will not result in more revenue. It's arguable that Apple already sells their flagship iPhones before the equilibrium price, but that's a topic for another discussion.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
One could say that much about any product. Porsches could be as numerous as Toyotas if they were cheaper in price.
And like the iPhone, nobody wants a cheap Porsche because they would be less like a real a Porsche. But, alas, the concept of “sell a lot for a little” has been around for millennia as well as the “good enough” meme.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
The size of the X screen, NOT THE PRICE, is what held back a lot of us big screen fanboys from buying it.
Yup, that's what prevented me from buying it. $1000 is actually not that much for a device you will keep for several years. But these days my phone is my primary book reading device so I need a "plus" model.
The iPhone X is not completely selling out of all production. basic economics indicates that the product would sell more if it were cheaper. People do not buy it as a status item, it's not expensive enough. Hence, there is price sensitivity in this space.
An anecdotal example is myself. I didn't buy an X while I am very much financially capable of it. I simply could not justify a thousand dollars for what the X offers. Apple lost a sale entirely due to price in this anecdotal example. I look forward to a potential price drop this fall when I may be more open to entertaining a purchase (Unless they blow the doors off with new features that justifies a thousand dollars for a product I'm going to toss out after a couple years).
Breaking my rule responding to someone who just shows up to say the opposite of reality.
People buy at all sort of price points, and you would never buy a phone at the x price point even if it was made of gold. You were not a lost sale for Apple for the X, you were never a customer of the X in the first place. You most likely bought the phone at a cost you wanted to pay nothing Apple did would convince you to spend more.
One thing Apple is really good at better than any company, they know exactly what a customer is willing to pay for something, they do not need to convince them to spend money like up selling. This is why Apple make the most profits, since they know X number of people will buy a phone that cost Y and they then figure out how to make Y cost phone at Y x 60% so they can make their healthy margins. The competitor do it the other way, the make a phone, realize the cost, then realize they can not sell it for a price which makes a profit for them.
This is a straight up baseless reply. You show no understanding of economics in your foolish commentary nor any insight into my anecdotal thought process.
"you would never buy a phone at the x price point even if it was made of gold." <--- This is probably the most asinine drivel I've seen posted anywhere all week.
"You most likely bought the phone at a cost you wanted to pay nothing Apple did would convince you to spend more." <--- You didn't even read my entire comment.
This is simply a blatant attack on someone by an individual who shouldn't be commenting on this thread in the first place. Absolutely, Apple needs to convince me "to spend money like up selling" and I don't see what you could possibly say to convince me otherwise as I have a personal 15 year track record of buying Apple products and I've often considered the value versus cost of the items they sell. Practically everyone does.
The size of the X screen, NOT THE PRICE, is what held back a lot of us big screen fanboys from buying it.
Yup, that's what prevented me from buying it. $1000 is actually not that much for a device you will keep for several years. But these days my phone is my primary book reading device so I need a "plus" model.
I still hear/read people saying the iPhone X has a bigger display than the iPhone Plus models. Unfortunately, very few seem to realize their error when you try to explain it.
I'm certainly in the same boat as you and multimedia, but even then I'm not sure I'll be getting a new iPhone this year (which will mean I'll be using my iPhone 7 Plus for an unprecedented 3 years) since my Apple Watch is helping to offload a lot of what I need my iPhone to do (with my Mac also helping as I use it most of all, including sending and receiving phone calls from it on a regular basis).
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
"Huawei has created two incredibly compelling packages in the P20 and P20 Pro, both of which offer very similar experiences at very different price points. The P20 is a slightly smaller package but still just as capable in almost every regard when compared to the P20 Pro, delivering fantastic cameras, lightning fast speeds, tons of awesome features and a gorgeous design with some truly unique colors. An extra €150 brings about a slightly larger screen, consistently higher quality photos, extra zoom levels for the camera, an IR blaster and actual water and dust resistance that you can count on, as well as a larger battery too. While it’s certainly worth the upgrade for the Pro, €899 is a price-point that’s well out of many folk’s reach, and ultimately make this one of the most expensive devices on the market. This is Huawei’s best devices yet, no doubt, but ultimately don’t check every single box, and while they offer a better camera in most regards than Samsung’s best, don’t deliver quite as compelling feature-sets as Samsung’s Galaxy S8 or Galaxy S9 in other areas. If you need the best smartphone camera ever, these are your phones, otherwise there are still other phones out there that offer more features for less money."
Seems like "not so widespread an opinion after all", and more to the point, the link looked just like a copy of a spec.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Does it matter if it were subsidised or not, or by whom? The premise of the article is to rubbish preference for lower priced iPhones pointing to a single press release as evidence, viz: "analyst chatter about smartphone users really wanting cheaper devices is totally delusional."
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
FWIW ATT already did an iPhone X BOGO months ago, as has Sprint. TMo did a buy one and get $700 off another. TMo also had equivalent deals for some of the latest LG's and Samsungs. Deals on even new flagships aren't at all uncommon, including Apple's top of the line.
Were those Apple subsidized discounts and BOGO's?
Does it matter if it were subsidised or not, or by whom? The premise of the article is to rubbish preference for lower priced iPhones pointing to a single press release as evidence, viz: "analyst chatter about smartphone users really wanting cheaper devices is totally delusional."
The evidence against Apple subsidizing carrier incentives is the high ASP's that Apple has vs Samsung, et al.
Doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, just that there isn't evidence of that.
As for the "cheaper devices", sure, everybody wants them that way, but Apple users actually buy the more expensive models, based on ASP. It's voting with your pocketbook in the truest sense. That would be confirmed by the sky high satisfaction rates that the X has with users.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
With all due respect, this a common misconception most businesses have, i.e., following the ‘Walmart’ model. Selling a lot of crap product for a small price with a small margin as do Samsung and all other Korean companies. And for that matter most successful American companies, also.
Everyone knows that consumers make up 75% of the American GDP. What Apple realizes is the top 10% of consumers make up 50% of GDP. These are the people that are buying well-designed Apple products. Of course, there are a large number of people making what are commonly termed ‘aspirational’ purchases who are not members of the top 10%.
McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, GM, HP, Dell, Chrysler, etc., etc., have made a lot of money and been very successful selling a lot of crap products for a low margin.
Price isn't my prime factor when buying. To me it is quite simple. "How does the device fit my use case?" To me that means my iPhone 7 may well have to be replaced by an 8 and that's it for me with Apple. I wear protective headgear a lot. This is either a motorcycle crash helmet or one similar to a tree surgeon would wear. TouchId (remember that?) allows me to open the phone with a fingerprint. Using FaceID means that I'd have to remove the headgear. This takes time and if a lot lower down the 'Ease of use' list when compared to the older phones. Removing a glove is an order of magnitude easier than removing the helmet. Yes I could enter the passcode but that defeats the whole object of TouchID and FaceID. Sorry Apple, you have lost the plot here as well in many other areas especially wrt the Mac line-up.
Or you just set up the Alternate Look while wearing your helmet in iOS 12.
Where is Counterpoint Research getting their data from and why should we trust it? The only data I trust is what Apple provides on its earnings calls.
If the point of this editorial was that the iPhoneX was the selling great didn't we know that because of the Q1 results,
If the point of the editorial was that the selling lower priced models was a failure I don't really think that this is borne out by CounterPoint's publishing. the April report (which is available as a link at the end of the May report) shows the iphone 6 and iphone 7 in the top ten at 1.4%. March's report has the 7 at 1.6% and 6 at 1.2%. I would not be surprised if Apple has more phone in the top 20.
I'm actually surprised that Apple doesn't have 6 or 7 models in the top then. Seems like they used to always. Maybe Samsung and the Chinese manufacturers are reducing their SKUs to try to get something that looks like they are competitive with Apple.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
A. The boys did a story of the camera and said Pixel2 was best for photography and iPhone for Video. Not WaaWaa.
B. Who the heck are the "European Hardware Association" - I don't think there are any significant phone manufacturers now based in Europe.
C. I bet you Apple makes great margins on their older lower priced models - even the SE. Remember they are not having to do new R&D to develop them the way Android Manufacturers come out with new SnapDragon 6xx series and SnapDragon 8xx series chip based phones each year. Not that that I have any proof of that.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
Well, sure, price is always an issue. But, if you're already buying a premium product because of what it is/does, then you spend what you need to spend.
I just hate that when I buy an iPhone SE, it gets interpreted (by some) as a vote for 'low priced' instead of 'correct form factor.' And, I wish Apple had an iPhone SE product with iPhone X specs so I could spend as much as an iPhone X to show Apple I want the SE form factor, not a 'low priced' choice.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
If you're going to participate in comments, don't just show up and throw out a shovel of ignorant, shallow garbage.
Apple set up a range of prices and the most popular weren't oriented to price, they were targeted at new styling and features. Surely you can piece that together.
Android offers tons of cheaper options, but those maker aren't earning any profits and will eventually go out of business just like Nokia, Motorola, HTC, HP, and all the other low end Android makers in China that have already failed.
It's not clear Apple could build phones much faster than it currently is. If it lowered prices to boost demand, how would it build more at a lower price? Right now, Apple can afford to spend on advanced equipment and tooling and shipping to get products to market. How does it lower prices? Why should it? It's already neck and neck with the volume leader. Production has natural limits.
But again, when you offer ideas, make sure they have some value beside cynical snark. And point to some company that's doing better. Google priced its phones very low and couldn't sell them. It then tried to sell phones like Apple, and couldn't sell them. It's not easy.
His comment didn't need to go any deeper.
The 8 and X series were released late last year. There are only two quarters of official results to go by and Apple doesn't break numbers down so no one knows what is really happening. That's where analysts jump in with their numbers (estimates).
Not long ago, analysts were claiming that the low end made up a sizeable chunk of Apple unit sales. More than 20%. That's for old hardware. Not shabby at all and while they may not be the 'most' popular, they seem to be popular nevertheless. Obviously price is a factor.
Apple's sales remain flat. They have been for a long while. That doesn't look like its changing.
People talk about Android discounting but I keep reading about Apple promotions for 2x1 8 series phones. I haven't seen one myself, though. I haven't seen a 2x1 flagship promo for Android flagships.
People talk about small Android handset makers going out of business. That's consolidation. It happens in every mature market. What people don't see so clearly is that there are an unthinkably large amount of those handset makers still in business!
So where are the sales of failed business going? To other handset makers. Android handset makers!
Last year Huawei moved into second spot in unit sales, overtaking Apple. Apple clawed that position back with its peak quarters on its annual release cycle. Last year Huawei shipped 153,000,000 units. This year, their own goal is 200,000,000 units. That is massive growth and will put them into second spot again if they realise that growth.
Widespread opinion places the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018 at several hundred dollars cheaper than an iPhone X.
You say that Android handset makers aren't making any money but Huawei is selling millions of phones, making billions and producing high quality innovative products.
Rumours point to Apple reducing prices this year. If that happens you'll have to ask yourself why.
You make me laugh, yet again, with your avowed love of all things Huawei.
"Widespread Opinion place the P20 Pro as the best handset of 2018"
That's just fantasy.
Apple low end devices may be 20% of unit sales overall, but likely at about half the ASP, so as a contribution to revenues, about 10%,
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
One could say that much about any product. Porsches could be as numerous as Toyotas if they were cheaper in price.
I think you were being intentionally dense, but obviously it’s more complex than that, which I think is what you were getting at.
But what I was going to post was, it’s almost as if apple products work the opposite of the auto industry; where buyers come in looking for the cheapest option but wind up buying the most expensive model.
It is pretty delusional to believe that pricing isn't an issue. It is pretty easy to argue that Apple could have sold a lot more iphones if they didn't price the things so high.
One could say that much about any product. Porsches could be as numerous as Toyotas if they were cheaper in price.
I think you were being intentionally dense, but obviously it’s more complex than that, which I think is what you were getting at.
But what I was going to post was, it’s almost as if apple products work the opposite of the auto industry; where buyers come in looking for the cheapest option but wind up buying the most expensive model.
I think his point is salient. It's dense when people make superficial claims that you can sell more units if you sell them at lower prices. Wizard's comment failed to take into consideration supply and demand. How many more iPhone X units could Apple on opening weekend had they priced it, say, $500 lower than their MSRP? I think the answer is around zero because it looks like they sold every single unit that they shipped.
So how does Apple benefit from selling a product for less money if they're already selling them as fast as they can make them? This is why I think Apple's equilibrium price is lower than what it would be if other smartphone vendors were selling the iPhone X. So why doesn't maximize profits at launch if they could sell them for more money and still sell every unit they make? I think it's because Apple does look at day-to-day, week-to-week, and quarter-to-quarter numbers like other companies. I think they look at the longterm sales which is why they hold their price points for the entire year, except for when it comes to how to sell soon to be outdated stock to 3rd-party vendors. This may seem obvious, but it's not something CE companies typically practice because most are beholden to quarterly earnings which is another reason Wall Street hates Apple.
Comments
The size of the X screen, NOT THE PRICE, is what held back a lot of us big screen fanboys from buying it. Hope the top will also include 512GB storage option, 4GB System Ram. I think there will be massive demand for the X Plus models ongoing after launch. Your friend should definitely wait for the 7nm A12 even if he wants just the X.
2) And while lower prices almost always increases demand, if the number of units you can see are finite and you're already selling as many units as you can make then selling each unit for less money will not result in more revenue. It's arguable that Apple already sells their flagship iPhones before the equilibrium price, but that's a topic for another discussion.
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2018/06/huawei-p20-pro-wins-best-smartphone-of-2018-award-by-eha.html
Now, that's just from 100 tech writers.
If you need more Google is your friend.
"you would never buy a phone at the x price point even if it was made of gold." <--- This is probably the most asinine drivel I've seen posted anywhere all week.
"You most likely bought the phone at a cost you wanted to pay nothing Apple did would convince you to spend more." <--- You didn't even read my entire comment.
This is simply a blatant attack on someone by an individual who shouldn't be commenting on this thread in the first place. Absolutely, Apple needs to convince me "to spend money like up selling" and I don't see what you could possibly say to convince me otherwise as I have a personal 15 year track record of buying Apple products and I've often considered the value versus cost of the items they sell. Practically everyone does.
I'm certainly in the same boat as you and multimedia, but even then I'm not sure I'll be getting a new iPhone this year (which will mean I'll be using my iPhone 7 Plus for an unprecedented 3 years) since my Apple Watch is helping to offload a lot of what I need my iPhone to do (with my Mac also helping as I use it most of all, including sending and receiving phone calls from it on a regular basis).
From inside your link, androidheadlines review;
"Huawei has created two incredibly compelling packages in the P20 and P20 Pro, both of which offer very similar experiences at very different price points. The P20 is a slightly smaller package but still just as capable in almost every regard when compared to the P20 Pro, delivering fantastic cameras, lightning fast speeds, tons of awesome features and a gorgeous design with some truly unique colors. An extra €150 brings about a slightly larger screen, consistently higher quality photos, extra zoom levels for the camera, an IR blaster and actual water and dust resistance that you can count on, as well as a larger battery too. While it’s certainly worth the upgrade for the Pro, €899 is a price-point that’s well out of many folk’s reach, and ultimately make this one of the most expensive devices on the market. This is Huawei’s best devices yet, no doubt, but ultimately don’t check every single box, and while they offer a better camera in most regards than Samsung’s best, don’t deliver quite as compelling feature-sets as Samsung’s Galaxy S8 or Galaxy S9 in other areas. If you need the best smartphone camera ever, these are your phones, otherwise there are still other phones out there that offer more features for less money."
Seems like "not so widespread an opinion after all", and more to the point, the link looked just like a copy of a spec.
Nah.
Doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, just that there isn't evidence of that.
As for the "cheaper devices", sure, everybody wants them that way, but Apple users actually buy the more expensive models, based on ASP. It's voting with your pocketbook in the truest sense. That would be confirmed by the sky high satisfaction rates that the X has with users.
Everyone knows that consumers make up 75% of the American GDP. What Apple realizes is the top 10% of consumers make up 50% of GDP. These are the people that are buying well-designed Apple products. Of course, there are a large number of people making what are commonly termed ‘aspirational’ purchases who are not members of the top 10%.
McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, GM, HP, Dell, Chrysler, etc., etc., have made a lot of money and been very successful selling a lot of crap products for a low margin.
Best
If the point of the editorial was that the selling lower priced models was a failure I don't really think that this is borne out by CounterPoint's publishing.
the April report (which is available as a link at the end of the May report) shows the iphone 6 and iphone 7 in the top ten at 1.4%.
March's report has the 7 at 1.6% and 6 at 1.2%. I would not be surprised if Apple has more phone in the top 20.
I'm actually surprised that Apple doesn't have 6 or 7 models in the top then. Seems like they used to always. Maybe Samsung and the Chinese manufacturers are reducing their SKUs to try to get something that looks like they are competitive with Apple.
B. Who the heck are the "European Hardware Association" - I don't think there are any significant phone manufacturers now based in Europe.
C. I bet you Apple makes great margins on their older lower priced models - even the SE. Remember they are not having to do new R&D to develop them the way Android Manufacturers come out with new SnapDragon 6xx series and SnapDragon 8xx series chip based phones each year. Not that that I have any proof of that.
I just hate that when I buy an iPhone SE, it gets interpreted (by some) as a vote for 'low priced' instead of 'correct form factor.' And, I wish Apple had an iPhone SE product with iPhone X specs so I could spend as much as an iPhone X to show Apple I want the SE form factor, not a 'low priced' choice.
We don’t approve of that sort of thing in this forum.
But what I was going to post was, it’s almost as if apple products work the opposite of the auto industry; where buyers come in looking for the cheapest option but wind up buying the most expensive model.
So how does Apple benefit from selling a product for less money if they're already selling them as fast as they can make them? This is why I think Apple's equilibrium price is lower than what it would be if other smartphone vendors were selling the iPhone X. So why doesn't maximize profits at launch if they could sell them for more money and still sell every unit they make? I think it's because Apple does look at day-to-day, week-to-week, and quarter-to-quarter numbers like other companies. I think they look at the longterm sales which is why they hold their price points for the entire year, except for when it comes to how to sell soon to be outdated stock to 3rd-party vendors. This may seem obvious, but it's not something CE companies typically practice because most are beholden to quarterly earnings which is another reason Wall Street hates Apple.