I already covered the short, so I'm out of the trade. Being too greedy is not wise. I've made that mistake before." src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I had the trading program open while I was watching the live blog of the event, and there were a couple of spots that were just too obvious, and I made a few safe trades, both long and short, just trying to follow the curve. And it may have dipped below 500 for the moment, but I think that it'll be above 500 again soon enough.
You should of held the shorts! Look at today premarket! It is $445!!! Huge gap down!
Man, was this disappointing or what? A year, they had a year and they come up with a fingerprint sensor that is good for nothing except unlocking you phone? This is all Apple is capable of? Really?
You mean the sensor no one else has been capable of launching on a phone, ever? The Atrix is the only phone that's ever had one and it was completely unintuitive, and was removed from the product 2 months after release because it was failing for everyone. The same goes for those fingerprint sensors on notebook computers: they fail, they break, they cease to work. That's not good consumer electronics. Things must be useful, and they must continue to work.
I'm being genuine here in saying if the single only new thing Apple brought out this year is a fingerprint sensor that's intuitive, that works well and doesn't give trouble over time it will be one of the most important years in Apple's company history. If they pull this off it will be a definitively—Apple move. And then in October 2014, when the sensor is proven in the market with a year under its belt, Apple will add it to all of their iDevices, and eventually, Macs. This is how Apple operates, and it works for them. And it works for users too. Users don't want 1,000,000 new features every year. They want 1 or 2 genuinely useful additional features that they will use regularly. We'll leave it to Samesong to add 10 new gimmicks every year, or try to cater to every single customer imaginable. Rather than make something they would actually love to use themselves.
Stock market agrees with me, getting pummeled as this non event gets absorbed. 12 months for this? Joke and a half and Cook is the court jester.
The stock dropped for one reason, and one reason only; the 5C is $549.
I don't see how anyone could have though it was possible to have it any cheaper, considering what it was expected to be, but there you have it, crazy expectations.
Yep!
Recent articles have suggested that the "sweet spot" was the equivalent of US $489 ($549 5C entry model) for the masses in BRIC countries.
They missed that by $60 or 12%.
Likely, Apple sells the $549 phone to resellers for $400-$450 (based on volume), net 30.
So, an agile, high-volume, high-turnover ( > 12 turns) reseller could hit the sweet spot and make a tidy profit -- no cash outlay and just ring up the sales.
In addition, Apple and some resellers have been experimenting with low or 0% financing -- which, in effect, could raise the sweet spot.
My first thought was that Apple missed the boat on the 5C pricing and will lower the price if/when it doesn't meet sales objectives (as they did with the original iPhone).
On reflection, I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing:
Apple will make sales and margin objectives
Resellers will set the "street price"
Consumers will get a top-quality iPhone at an acceptable "sweet spot" price
Taken together, the camera, the A7 and the fingerprint sensor are a bit thin to be called a (major) overhaul. But I sure do like the fingerprint sensor. Great add on!
Err... what about the 5S speed and graphics capability -- this alone could take over the mobile game market.
Recent articles have suggested that the "sweet spot" was the equivalent pf US $489 ($549 5C entry model) for the masses in BRIC countries.
They missed that by $60 or 12%.
Likely, Apple sells the $549 phone to resellers for $400-$450 (based on volume), net 30.
So, an agile, high-volume, high-turnover ( > 12 turns) reseller could hit the sweet spot and make a tidy profit -- no cash outlay and just ring up the sales.
In addition, Apple and some resellers have been experimenting with low or 0% financing -- which, in effect, could raise the sweet spot.
My first thought was that Apple missed the boat on the 5C pricing and will lower the price if/when it doesn't meet sales objectives (as they did with the original iPhone).
On reflection, I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing:
Apple will make sales and margin objectives
Resellers will set the "street price"
Consumers will get a top-quality iPhone at an acceptable "sweet spot" price
A 15% discount over the high end phone isnt nearly enough to attract a different group of buyers. Promise of China Mobile deal coming and the stock is still getting hammered because everyone realizes the 5c is going to fail as a lower priced entry. Bottom line will it drive revenue and EPS growth? Nope.
Taken together, the camera, the A7 and the fingerprint sensor are a bit thin to be called a (major) overhaul. But I sure do like the fingerprint sensor. Great add on!
Good thing they overhauled everything else, too, huh? Man, you really dodged a bullet there.
Guys & gals, the iPhone 5S is the first 64Bit phone. THAT alone is groundbreaking. Sure, they could have put R&D into making 25 bigger screen models.. but going 64Bit was no small feat. The had to 1. build the chip 2. re-write iOS to be 64Bit compatible 3. re-write all the native apps.. and guess why they did this?????.. Because this phone will be able to do amazing new things (like offline voice recognition) because this phone now kicks the **LIVING CRAP** out of anything else on the market in this size & weight class (which I think is a perfect size FOR A PHONE-- as I like to use my phone with 1 hand ALL THE TIME). No other phone comes close to the CPU, photogrpahy processing, video processing, audio processing you will get from the 5s.
Do I want bigger screens so AAPL will sell more? YES... do I want one for me? Maybe.. but I'll tell you what, I wouldn't trade the features of the 5s and the awesome apps & ecosystem of Apple for a crappy Android environment. All my Android friends have pretty crappy boring web-based apps and have to tweak their phones to save battery by shutting all their services off.
I am going to absolutely love this incredibly fast small little computing device (the iPhone 5s) that is **LIGHT YEARS** more powerful than ANYTHING ELSE on the market. I also appreciate all the nice improvements to the camera app-- in traditional form, they built features in intuitive ways that people like our moms and sisters will be able to use and WILL use. Do you know how many people FaceTime and send iMessages? Apple is RULING in the ways I want Apple to rule, as an investor. They are catering to people who want awesome devices that JUST WORK, and do not try to impress us with new features we will never use* and a million screen sizes. (*like that STUPID waving your hand over the Galaxy s4) How STUPID is that! At least Apple has more class than to make fun of those jokers. Go copy another product Samsung (see the Dyson lawsuit?).. Also the new 5s' motion chip is going to allow for awesome integrations with new apps.
You can EITHER scan your print OR enter a passcode.
The only thing unclear is whether you can require BOTH be entered in settings for double security.
The video said you can use your fingerprint to make iTunes purchases. The guy in the video also said fingerprints are stored only on the phone's CPU, not iCloud or anywhere else. If that is the case, how do the systems on the other end know the fingerprint is valid? For functions other than unlocking the phone, does a fingerprint serve as direct authentication, or does it simply work to unlock an existing password?
For functions other than unlocking the phone, does a fingerprint serve as direct authentication, or does it simply work to unlock an existing password?
It wouldn't be efficient to do the verification on the server because the scanner is only scanning a portion of the print and matching it to a profile. Having to do the matching for 500 million customers server-side would bog them down. Having the fingerprint act as a sort of keychain unlocker is much easier and they can verify the passwords directly. It also means no changes required to the server infrastructure.
If that is the case, how do the systems on the other end know the fingerprint is valid?
It doesn't know. It doesn't care. You don't create an iTunes account with the fingerprint. You make it with a password, and the money is tied to the account. Fingerprinting is tied to the account as a separate password.
For functions other than unlocking the phone, does a fingerprint serve as direct authentication, or does it simply work to unlock an existing password?
It wouldn't be efficient to do the verification on the server because the scanner is only scanning a portion of the print and matching it to a profile. Having to do the matching for 500 million customers server-side would bog them down. Having the fingerprint act as a sort of keychain unlocker is much easier and they can verify the passwords directly. It also means no changes required to the server infrastructure.
The way I understand it:
TouchID unlocks the device by verifying the scanned fingerprint against a fingerprint profile encrypted and stored in a secure area of the A7 (PRAM or SSD).
Apparently, if you use and pass the fingerprint scan the app requiring access to the iTunes Store retrieves your [securely] stored iTunes Password and sign you directly onto the store -- you don't see the iTunes sign on screen.
I see no reason why Apple couldn't allow 3rd-party sites to be aware that the user has passed the fingerprint scan and follow the same procedure to directly login to their site.
Another consideration would be to have above capability work with BLE or Point-to-Point WiFi so you could do things when the Internet is not available or not needed -- unlock your front door or car, pay for groceries, etc.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">If that is the case, how do the systems on the other end know the fingerprint is valid?</span>
It doesn't know. It doesn't care. You don't create an iTunes account with the fingerprint. You make it with a password, and the money is tied to the account. Fingerprinting is tied to the account as a separate password.
I don't believe that you need a separate password -- though, for audit trail, it might be a good idea. I assume that if you have lots of passwords stored, in some form, on your device -- that they all become accessible once you logon to the device -- whether by passcode or fp scan.
Come to think of it -- Apple could rework the keychain implementation into something like the Contacts app -- where each entry contains the login ID and password for an individual web site or function. It would be encrypted and stored locally -- with 3 levels of access.
no manual login or fp scan -- no access
manual passcode login -- tap the keychain entry, and it goes to the site, enters the login info and awaits you to override or tap enter.
fp scan -- tap the keychain entry, go to the site and login directly
For non-Internet activities, it would just perform the function.
I think this sensor will save the user a few seconds each time. In all it will save iPhone users hundreds of millions of seconds each day. This is what convenience is about.
That would be truly amazing since a day only has 86, 400 seconds.
I see no reason why Apple couldn't allow 3rd-party sites to be aware that the user has passed the fingerprint scan and follow the same procedure to directly login to their site.
Another consideration would be to have above capability work with BLE or Point-to-Point WiFi so you could do things when the Internet is not available or not needed -- unlock your front door or car, pay for groceries, etc.
Me neither, and I do expect this tech to extend to 3rd party apps, or an API.
What I want to know about the fingerprint censor is did they implement it as an either/or security feature or if it supports 2-factor security: thumbprint + code? If it is Either thumbprint OR Code, then it's a total "meh" cause then all I need to do is fall asleep around my friends and they're in my phone posting crap on my FB as if it were me. I mean I'm sure they have it setup to do print or code, but I will only be excited if I can set it up to be print AND code.
I see no reason why Apple couldn't allow 3rd-party sites to be aware that the user has passed the fingerprint scan and follow the same procedure to directly login to their site.
Another consideration would be to have above capability work with BLE or Point-to-Point WiFi so you could do things when the Internet is not available or not needed -- unlock your front door or car, pay for groceries, etc.
Yeah it would make it much easier for logging into password sites without having to remember the login details and type them. Not only that, passwords are getting weaker the more that technology improves and there's a recent report suggesting encryption isn't as strong as people thought:
I think there will be a push towards stronger privacy protection beyond simple passwords and there's an easy option to move beyond them. That option is to use very long encryption keys, already used for SSH:
It doesn't get round inherent flaws in protocols but it prevents some danger in someone accessing server-side keys because they are just public keys anyway. With Apple's setup, any switch to stronger encryption would be completely transparent to the user.
They can add fingerprint scanners to Macs and can sync private keys directly from one device to another. This is something that will be hard for others to replicate because they don't have a complete desktop and mobile eco-system with integrated software across both and Apple bought the company that makes the scanners so I'm not sure where else people will get similar hardware tech. It'll be interesting to see how long it takes competing device manufacturers to scramble around trying to find biometric scanner hardware that rivals what Apple has and they don't use physical home buttons so it'll never be as intuitive.
I think the more important reason is the missing large sized iPhone. AAPL did not drop when the 5C price is announced. It began dropping after the show is over. It seems the market was waiting for the one last thing.
I am convinced there are quite a few consumers that want bigger phone over better phone. Without a bigger phone Apple is giving up a growth opportunity. Cheaper phone actually will lower gross margin which is not good for the stock.
No. It was the price of the 5C. Everyone knew that Apple wasn't coming out with a bigger phone this year, so that was no surprise. Read the computer and financial sites, and you will see this.
But how people in the industry thought that Apple could come out with a phone for $300-400 is beyond me. And that's what I've been reading that they did expect.
I thought the whole point of the 5c was to hit a lower price point. If so, they failed.
The 5c unlocked sells for the same as the 5 does on Virgin Mobile at this point. If Samsung can make a profit selling Galaxy S IIIs for $300ish, I don't see why Apple can't make an iPhone for around the same price. A $550 phone is not going to significantly open any new markets for them. They are selling the iPhone 4 for around $300. Does the iPhone 4 really cost that much less to produce? No. Does the 5c really cost that much more to manufacture than an iPad mini? No. This is all about maximizing their profits.
Apple makes a killing on their phones. They have significantly higher profit margins than their competitors, and they get the carriers to subsidize a higher portion of the largess. This has a downside for them though. In developing markets where most people are on pre-paid plans and for people like me who would rather pay $35 instead of $100 a month for cellphone service, the iPhone looks overpriced. Apple doesn't want to lower their unlocked price because it would spoil their sweet deal with the carriers. However, this means in terms of market share, Android is going to keep kicking Apple's butt.
Why bother making a cheap phone, if it isn't cheap? For a $100 more, I'd rather get the 5s. The price differential between the two seems inadequate to make up for the difference in quality and features.
And whose whose point was this? Was it Apple's. or was it the numerous commentators who said that it was the whole point? Do these people actually know anything? No, they don't. But this phone is $100 cheaper from the beginning, and that's an important thing. Previously, Apple had to work with a phone that was more expensive, and bring the price down by $100 the second year as manufacturing became less expensive, while also accepting lower margins, because the cost didn't drop by that much. The 5 is discontinued, so the price is lower, but other than the aluminum back, the 5C is actually a better phone than the 5.
But now, they've got a brand new phone, and despite what some are saying, this is a brand new phone, that actually costs less to produce the first year. That means that next year, assuming Apple keeps this in the line, that Apple will be able to drop the price further, without losing margins, or, drop it even further than that with the same decreased margins as they have been doing.
Apple couldn't keep the 5 in the line this year and have the 5C, because the 5C likely costs as much as the 5 now costs to produce, and, most importantly, the 5 doesn't have the radio to work on China Mobile's 3 and 4g, which the 5C does have. I imagine that there would be no good way to keep the 5 around.
As to costs, the 5C has a new, better FaceTime camera, a new motherboard, a new multiband radio which has more bands than any other non Apple smartphone, and a larger battery. So, you see, this is an entirely new phone, despite using the same SoC. so manufacturing costs are higher than they would be with a recycled 5 interior in a cheaper case. And that cheaper case isn't THAT much cheaper.
Another thing you've said that isn't true is about subsidies. It's been shown that Samsung gets even higher subsidies for their top line Galaxy S series.
Recent articles have suggested that the "sweet spot" was the equivalent of US $489 ($549 5C entry model) for the masses in BRIC countries.
They missed that by $60 or 12%.
Likely, Apple sells the $549 phone to resellers for $400-$450 (based on volume), net 30.
So, an agile, high-volume, high-turnover ( > 12 turns) reseller could hit the sweet spot and make a tidy profit -- no cash outlay and just ring up the sales.
In addition, Apple and some resellers have been experimenting with low or 0% financing -- which, in effect, could raise the sweet spot.
My first thought was that Apple missed the boat on the 5C pricing and will lower the price if/when it doesn't meet sales objectives (as they did with the original iPhone).
On reflection, I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing:
Apple will make sales and margin objectives
Resellers will set the "street price"
Consumers will get a top-quality iPhone at an acceptable "sweet spot" price
Most people don't understand manufacturing. I kept questioning the logic behind the numbers I've been reading about, which were all the way from $300-499. Much of that was just a matter of ignorance about what can be done. They look at cheap Android phones, and say that apple can do that too. Well, yes, they can do that too. But to what point? I would have loved to see an iPhone for $350 contract free. Imagine how many they would sell?
But it can't be done. While no one seriously expects those cheap Android phones to work well, or to support many of the features the high end phones support. Apple doesn't have the luxury of going that route. All of their new phones must, almost by definition, support ALL of the features of new software, and hardware. They must. And that means that while a three year old 4 is still a viable phone, going by the numbers sold, a newly introduced model can't have the excuse of being old hardware. The A6 is still pretty fast, though not equal to the newest top line competitors. But Apple couldn't put the hardware from the 4, or even the 4S into a new phone.
But the 5C is an entirely new phone, and that needs to be understood. Pretty much the only thing that's been recycled is the A6 SoC, and the front glass and rear camera. New FaceTime camera, new motherboard, new radio, larger battery. That's a new phone, with R&D costs as well. $549 seems about right.
I can't figure out how they could have made it cheaper, without actually making it cheap, And a stainless steel reinforcing plate doubling as an antenna bonded to a hard coated polycarbonate back isn't cheap. The abs plastic backs many other phones use are cheaper, and some phones use even cheaper materials.
And then, one last thing that is very important in the Apple world—support. As everyone should know by now, Android models are very poorly supported. Even Nexus models are not getting all the software upgrades anymore. But Apple seems committed to give software upgrades for three years. If they used older hardware than they did, they couldn't do that. They almost assuredly calculated that into what they needed to do. So we should see updates long after the current 5c is discontinued, as we've seen with all other iPhones.
Comments
Apple really hit the ball with this one.
I already covered the short, so I'm out of the trade. Being too greedy is not wise. I've made that mistake before.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I had the trading program open while I was watching the live blog of the event, and there were a couple of spots that were just too obvious, and I made a few safe trades, both long and short, just trying to follow the curve. And it may have dipped below 500 for the moment, but I think that it'll be above 500 again soon enough.
You should of held the shorts! Look at today premarket! It is $445!!! Huge gap down!
Oye! Oye! Well said!
Yep!
Recent articles have suggested that the "sweet spot" was the equivalent of US $489 ($549 5C entry model) for the masses in BRIC countries.
They missed that by $60 or 12%.
Likely, Apple sells the $549 phone to resellers for $400-$450 (based on volume), net 30.
So, an agile, high-volume, high-turnover ( > 12 turns) reseller could hit the sweet spot and make a tidy profit -- no cash outlay and just ring up the sales.
In addition, Apple and some resellers have been experimenting with low or 0% financing -- which, in effect, could raise the sweet spot.
My first thought was that Apple missed the boat on the 5C pricing and will lower the price if/when it doesn't meet sales objectives (as they did with the original iPhone).
On reflection, I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing:
Err... what about the 5S speed and graphics capability -- this alone could take over the mobile game market.
Yep!
Recent articles have suggested that the "sweet spot" was the equivalent pf US $489 ($549 5C entry model) for the masses in BRIC countries.
They missed that by $60 or 12%.
Likely, Apple sells the $549 phone to resellers for $400-$450 (based on volume), net 30.
So, an agile, high-volume, high-turnover ( > 12 turns) reseller could hit the sweet spot and make a tidy profit -- no cash outlay and just ring up the sales.
In addition, Apple and some resellers have been experimenting with low or 0% financing -- which, in effect, could raise the sweet spot.
My first thought was that Apple missed the boat on the 5C pricing and will lower the price if/when it doesn't meet sales objectives (as they did with the original iPhone).
On reflection, I think Apple knows exactly what they are doing:
A 15% discount over the high end phone isnt nearly enough to attract a different group of buyers. Promise of China Mobile deal coming and the stock is still getting hammered because everyone realizes the 5c is going to fail as a lower priced entry. Bottom line will it drive revenue and EPS growth? Nope.
Good thing they overhauled everything else, too, huh? Man, you really dodged a bullet there.
No other phone comes close to the CPU, photogrpahy processing, video processing, audio processing you will get from the 5s.
Do I want bigger screens so AAPL will sell more? YES... do I want one for me? Maybe.. but I'll tell you what, I wouldn't trade the features of the 5s and the awesome apps & ecosystem of Apple for a crappy Android environment. All my Android friends have pretty crappy boring web-based apps and have to tweak their phones to save battery by shutting all their services off.
I am going to absolutely love this incredibly fast small little computing device (the iPhone 5s) that is **LIGHT YEARS** more powerful than ANYTHING ELSE on the market. I also appreciate all the nice improvements to the camera app-- in traditional form, they built features in intuitive ways that people like our moms and sisters will be able to use and WILL use. Do you know how many people FaceTime and send iMessages? Apple is RULING in the ways I want Apple to rule, as an investor. They are catering to people who want awesome devices that JUST WORK, and do not try to impress us with new features we will never use* and a million screen sizes. (*like that STUPID waving your hand over the Galaxy s4) How STUPID is that! At least Apple has more class than to make fun of those jokers. Go copy another product Samsung (see the Dyson lawsuit?).. Also the new 5s' motion chip is going to allow for awesome integrations with new apps.
What are you confused about?
You can EITHER scan your print OR enter a passcode.
The only thing unclear is whether you can require BOTH be entered in settings for double security.
The video said you can use your fingerprint to make iTunes purchases. The guy in the video also said fingerprints are stored only on the phone's CPU, not iCloud or anywhere else. If that is the case, how do the systems on the other end know the fingerprint is valid? For functions other than unlocking the phone, does a fingerprint serve as direct authentication, or does it simply work to unlock an existing password?
It wouldn't be efficient to do the verification on the server because the scanner is only scanning a portion of the print and matching it to a profile. Having to do the matching for 500 million customers server-side would bog them down. Having the fingerprint act as a sort of keychain unlocker is much easier and they can verify the passwords directly. It also means no changes required to the server infrastructure.
If that is the case, how do the systems on the other end know the fingerprint is valid?
It doesn't know. It doesn't care. You don't create an iTunes account with the fingerprint. You make it with a password, and the money is tied to the account. Fingerprinting is tied to the account as a separate password.
The way I understand it:
I see no reason why Apple couldn't allow 3rd-party sites to be aware that the user has passed the fingerprint scan and follow the same procedure to directly login to their site.
Another consideration would be to have above capability work with BLE or Point-to-Point WiFi so you could do things when the Internet is not available or not needed -- unlock your front door or car, pay for groceries, etc.
I don't believe that you need a separate password -- though, for audit trail, it might be a good idea. I assume that if you have lots of passwords stored, in some form, on your device -- that they all become accessible once you logon to the device -- whether by passcode or fp scan.
Come to think of it -- Apple could rework the keychain implementation into something like the Contacts app -- where each entry contains the login ID and password for an individual web site or function. It would be encrypted and stored locally -- with 3 levels of access.
For non-Internet activities, it would just perform the function.
Note plural: 'users'
Me neither, and I do expect this tech to extend to 3rd party apps, or an API.
I missed that little tidbit, thanks.
Yeah it would make it much easier for logging into password sites without having to remember the login details and type them. Not only that, passwords are getting weaker the more that technology improves and there's a recent report suggesting encryption isn't as strong as people thought:
http://www.zdnet.com/has-the-nsa-broken-ssl-tls-aes-7000020312/
I think there will be a push towards stronger privacy protection beyond simple passwords and there's an easy option to move beyond them. That option is to use very long encryption keys, already used for SSH:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SSH_Keys
It doesn't get round inherent flaws in protocols but it prevents some danger in someone accessing server-side keys because they are just public keys anyway. With Apple's setup, any switch to stronger encryption would be completely transparent to the user.
They can add fingerprint scanners to Macs and can sync private keys directly from one device to another. This is something that will be hard for others to replicate because they don't have a complete desktop and mobile eco-system with integrated software across both and Apple bought the company that makes the scanners so I'm not sure where else people will get similar hardware tech. It'll be interesting to see how long it takes competing device manufacturers to scramble around trying to find biometric scanner hardware that rivals what Apple has and they don't use physical home buttons so it'll never be as intuitive.
No. It was the price of the 5C. Everyone knew that Apple wasn't coming out with a bigger phone this year, so that was no surprise. Read the computer and financial sites, and you will see this.
But how people in the industry thought that Apple could come out with a phone for $300-400 is beyond me. And that's what I've been reading that they did expect.
And whose whose point was this? Was it Apple's. or was it the numerous commentators who said that it was the whole point? Do these people actually know anything? No, they don't. But this phone is $100 cheaper from the beginning, and that's an important thing. Previously, Apple had to work with a phone that was more expensive, and bring the price down by $100 the second year as manufacturing became less expensive, while also accepting lower margins, because the cost didn't drop by that much. The 5 is discontinued, so the price is lower, but other than the aluminum back, the 5C is actually a better phone than the 5.
But now, they've got a brand new phone, and despite what some are saying, this is a brand new phone, that actually costs less to produce the first year. That means that next year, assuming Apple keeps this in the line, that Apple will be able to drop the price further, without losing margins, or, drop it even further than that with the same decreased margins as they have been doing.
Apple couldn't keep the 5 in the line this year and have the 5C, because the 5C likely costs as much as the 5 now costs to produce, and, most importantly, the 5 doesn't have the radio to work on China Mobile's 3 and 4g, which the 5C does have. I imagine that there would be no good way to keep the 5 around.
As to costs, the 5C has a new, better FaceTime camera, a new motherboard, a new multiband radio which has more bands than any other non Apple smartphone, and a larger battery. So, you see, this is an entirely new phone, despite using the same SoC. so manufacturing costs are higher than they would be with a recycled 5 interior in a cheaper case. And that cheaper case isn't THAT much cheaper.
Another thing you've said that isn't true is about subsidies. It's been shown that Samsung gets even higher subsidies for their top line Galaxy S series.
Most people don't understand manufacturing. I kept questioning the logic behind the numbers I've been reading about, which were all the way from $300-499. Much of that was just a matter of ignorance about what can be done. They look at cheap Android phones, and say that apple can do that too. Well, yes, they can do that too. But to what point? I would have loved to see an iPhone for $350 contract free. Imagine how many they would sell?
But it can't be done. While no one seriously expects those cheap Android phones to work well, or to support many of the features the high end phones support. Apple doesn't have the luxury of going that route. All of their new phones must, almost by definition, support ALL of the features of new software, and hardware. They must. And that means that while a three year old 4 is still a viable phone, going by the numbers sold, a newly introduced model can't have the excuse of being old hardware. The A6 is still pretty fast, though not equal to the newest top line competitors. But Apple couldn't put the hardware from the 4, or even the 4S into a new phone.
But the 5C is an entirely new phone, and that needs to be understood. Pretty much the only thing that's been recycled is the A6 SoC, and the front glass and rear camera. New FaceTime camera, new motherboard, new radio, larger battery. That's a new phone, with R&D costs as well. $549 seems about right.
I can't figure out how they could have made it cheaper, without actually making it cheap, And a stainless steel reinforcing plate doubling as an antenna bonded to a hard coated polycarbonate back isn't cheap. The abs plastic backs many other phones use are cheaper, and some phones use even cheaper materials.
And then, one last thing that is very important in the Apple world—support. As everyone should know by now, Android models are very poorly supported. Even Nexus models are not getting all the software upgrades anymore. But Apple seems committed to give software upgrades for three years. If they used older hardware than they did, they couldn't do that. They almost assuredly calculated that into what they needed to do. So we should see updates long after the current 5c is discontinued, as we've seen with all other iPhones.