I wonder how many iPhones 5 are still on the market today, last week when I've got my 5s, many resellers was offering better deals on the remaining iPhones 5 than the new 5c.
So rumor has it that AAPL is cutting back on the phone that is cheaper w/ less profit margin and is instead dramatically increasing the production of the far more profitable 5S.
Isn't this actually pretty darn good news overall?
How many times did Tim Cook, the world class supply chain guy, warned all those bozos on Wall Street and media folks on not to read or analyze any rumors that you read about it because it takes a lot more then the pea brains of analyst and media to understand it. Wasn't it not long ago they misunderstood the lines in China ? There is no difference between the ability of our congress and the analysts on Wall Street - both are useless!
I'm not even sure Apple has made the latest iPhones available to all the countries it intends to, and beside rumors that Apple was cutting back production started before it had opened the 100 countries it intended to. So, these "cutbacks" don't make much sense to me — EXCEPT to garner site hits before Apple explodes all their prognostications in a few days.
Was there ever a time when news was not silver spoon sped? Inventing percentages without actual numbers can have many a meaning. It is just as bad as counting 5c's stuck on mall shelves as actual sales.
"The analysts note two factors are accountable for the poor showing: a miscalculated China launch and consumer expectation that the phone would be "cheap.""
They have data on China already? What consumer expectation? Basically they are guessing. Consumers had no expectation of a 5C.
They did, of course - everyone did. It's just Apple that flopped miserably when estimating demand for its cheapo yet expensive phone. Just more FACTS to prove how much of a failure the 5C is.
Until we have actual unit build numbers we'll be bombed with speculation and outright guesses. I don't know why any of this is necessary. Apple will sell whatever number of iPhones it can and it will be reported on earnings call. There won't be any official breakdown of numbers for the latest iPhone models if Apple follows its usual procedure. Why don't these people spend more time trying to find out how many Kindle Fire HDXs are sold because Jeff Bezos never reveals those numbers and Amazon investors don't give a damn about them.
No one knows if Apple had this planned or not... "Make as many 5c's as we can until we can ramp up production of the 5s. Then stop producing so many 5c's." Makes perfect business sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
I don't think Tim Cook is the type of guy that likes to have too much excess stock sitting on the shelves.
... or maybe I read your statement wrong.
There's a scenario where you can both be mostly right. Leaving aside whether or not the 5c was the optimal solution for further penetration of developing markets, Apple knew with 95%+ probability they wouldn't be able to meet initial demand for the 5s in their existing largest markets (and the speed of the rollout schedule to many counties on exacerbates the backlog).
E.g., a big factor constraining supply may be that ramping up Touch ID production takes time - and therefore, also knowing that people were hungry for new iPhones, they might have hoped that as delivery dates for the 5s stretched out, more than have to date would opt for the old wine in a new bottle 5c, because they would still have, if not the gold 5s they were lusting for, "a new iPhone" to buy - if only new in being identifiably a "this year's model" by the new skin.
They also would have considered the possibility that the wait for a 5s could cause some people to start thinking about the HTC One or Lumia 1020, i.e., a scenario where no "new" Apple phones were readily available, where they could either lose existing customers or leave new ones to be had with nothing to buy without a long wait.
Finally, unlike most companies, they don't have to go to the credit markets to temporarily be ready for any plausible level of demand with an inventory they have a full year to fine tune as it finds its level.
So, however it played out, never a real risk nor a bad strategy also knowing they'd sell at least as well relatively as the 4s did a year ago as the next tier down to the 5. So no worries if they overshot the runway a bit, as still a guaranteed big seller compared to most other phones on the world market i.e., not the remotests chance of ending with an inventory disaster (a la, say, HP's foray into tablets).
And while not the whole story, at least to some degree, that makes perfect business sense to me....
But those sites were quoted enough in mainstream media sources such that many average consumers knew Apple was releasing a "plastic" iPhone and an iPhone with a fingerprint scanner before the official rollout.
I'm not surprised the 5c wasn't a $350 phone. I was somewhat surprised it wasn't a $450-$500 phone to start with, displacing both the 5 and the 4s in developed markets. Discounters here in the US have marked it down to $49 on contract (essentially $500).
Sure they do. After all, the most recent survey on brand value rated Cisco #13. More valuable than Disney or Gillette. And the only way to even know who Cisco is, is to read tech sites. /s.
The weight difference is that the 5c is 0.70 of an ounce or 20 grams heavier than the 5s. To a world class runner that might make a huge difference but for normal people not so much.
You're being generous. I doubt even a world class runner would be concerned about the weight of four teaspoons of water, except during a competitive event.
But what do I know? I'm not even a world class walker.
"Most people" don't follow rumor sites and therefor wouldn't even know of the supposed plastic iPhone before it was released. Furthermore, why would anyone think a plastic phone from Apple would be cheap? Both the iPhone 3G and 3Gs were plastic, but not cheap and the 5c is by far a much higher build quality than either of those.
The 3G and 3Gs were plastic but they were also around at a time when every phone was plastic so there was no reason to think a plastic phone was cheap.
At the time the 3G may not have been cheap, but oddly enough I found the recipt for mine the other day and it was £350 for pay as you go. A 5c looks like its going to cost about £500 for pay as go, now there has been inflation since it came out but not 42%!
But those sites were quoted enough in mainstream media sources such that many average consumers knew Apple was releasing a "plastic" iPhone and an iPhone with a fingerprint scanner before the official rollout.
I'm sure that most people have read those tech articles in the local newspaper that are cringe worthy. Written by the same person, I'm sure, that wrote the baby notices last week.
Newsweek, Time, USA Today and bunches of other weekly magazines splash Apple stories onto their pages whenever they think it is important (and it usually is not).
"Citing channel checks, NPD Display Search "can confirm" a slowdown in iPhone 5c production, which supposedly comes along with a hefty increase in 5s orders."
Once again this is presented as a fact rather than a wild guess by an analyst. This is presented decontextualized as it doesn't show that Cook clearly explained that the channel is incredibly complex and merely making a few checks will not give an accurate picture.
Your repetition of an analysts' guess (analyst=carnival fortune teller, just not as accurate or as entertaining) without such context makes you a part of spreading false rumors about Apple with a clear intent to depress the stock price. Was that your conscious intent? Probably not. But were I Apple I'd have both you and NPD in court for spreading lies in order to depress the stock price.
I'm not saying you shouldn't report the wild guesses of someone--assuming that you consider such to be "journalism"%u2014only that you contextualize it.
Say, if that's the kind of journalism you do, there are a bunch of people wandering Hollywood Blvd. wearing tin foil hats you can quote, too.
Not necessarily. Most people probably know Cisco because its the brand of phone they use at work. And where I work its our instant messaging and video conferencing system too.
Comments
I wonder how many iPhones 5 are still on the market today, last week when I've got my 5s, many resellers was offering better deals on the remaining iPhones 5 than the new 5c.
Isn't this actually pretty darn good news overall?
A sub 500$ 5C with 3,5" screen would sell like hot cakes.
A smaller screen is a big differentiator. It is cuter and more pocketable.
Inventing percentages without actual numbers can have many a meaning. It is just as bad as counting 5c's stuck on mall shelves as actual sales.
What channels does NPD Display search check? Screen orders?
As the 5c and 5s share the same screen how can they distinguish those two phones?
"The analysts note two factors are accountable for the poor showing: a miscalculated China launch and consumer expectation that the phone would be "cheap.""
They have data on China already? What consumer expectation? Basically they are guessing. Consumers had no expectation of a 5C.
They did, of course - everyone did. It's just Apple that flopped miserably when estimating demand for its cheapo yet expensive phone. Just more FACTS to prove how much of a failure the 5C is.
No one knows if Apple had this planned or not... "Make as many 5c's as we can until we can ramp up production of the 5s. Then stop producing so many 5c's." Makes perfect business sense.
I don't think Tim Cook is the type of guy that likes to have too much excess stock sitting on the shelves.
... or maybe I read your statement wrong.
There's a scenario where you can both be mostly right. Leaving aside whether or not the 5c was the optimal solution for further penetration of developing markets, Apple knew with 95%+ probability they wouldn't be able to meet initial demand for the 5s in their existing largest markets (and the speed of the rollout schedule to many counties on exacerbates the backlog).
E.g., a big factor constraining supply may be that ramping up Touch ID production takes time - and therefore, also knowing that people were hungry for new iPhones, they might have hoped that as delivery dates for the 5s stretched out, more than have to date would opt for the old wine in a new bottle 5c, because they would still have, if not the gold 5s they were lusting for, "a new iPhone" to buy - if only new in being identifiably a "this year's model" by the new skin.
They also would have considered the possibility that the wait for a 5s could cause some people to start thinking about the HTC One or Lumia 1020, i.e., a scenario where no "new" Apple phones were readily available, where they could either lose existing customers or leave new ones to be had with nothing to buy without a long wait.
Finally, unlike most companies, they don't have to go to the credit markets to temporarily be ready for any plausible level of demand with an inventory they have a full year to fine tune as it finds its level.
So, however it played out, never a real risk nor a bad strategy also knowing they'd sell at least as well relatively as the 4s did a year ago as the next tier down to the 5. So no worries if they overshot the runway a bit, as still a guaranteed big seller compared to most other phones on the world market i.e., not the remotests chance of ending with an inventory disaster (a la, say, HP's foray into tablets).
And while not the whole story, at least to some degree, that makes perfect business sense to me....
http://store.apple.com/uk/buy-iphone/iphone4s
Can Apple make a £350 phone out of quality materials?
YES!
In some ways I prefer the glass and steel design more. It exudes quality and solidity. I have the '5' design. It's light and classy, sure.
The 5C was a chance to hit the £350 mark here in the UK and give students and children the next 'must have' Christmas present.
Nearly £500 for 'last year' phone? No. No. And no again.
I guess when they bring out iPhone + we 'may'...
have...
- 5c at £350.
- 6 + £540.
Two models?
Maybe the 4S may be driven down to even cheaper? Say, £250-295?
The 4S is still a very quality phone.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Normal consumers don't read tech sites.
But those sites were quoted enough in mainstream media sources such that many average consumers knew Apple was releasing a "plastic" iPhone and an iPhone with a fingerprint scanner before the official rollout.
I'm not surprised the 5c wasn't a $350 phone. I was somewhat surprised it wasn't a $450-$500 phone to start with, displacing both the 5 and the 4s in developed markets. Discounters here in the US have marked it down to $49 on contract (essentially $500).
Normal consumers don't read tech sites.
Sure they do. After all, the most recent survey on brand value rated Cisco #13. More valuable than Disney or Gillette. And the only way to even know who Cisco is, is to read tech sites. /s.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/09/30/apple-ends-coca-colas-13-year-reign-as-worlds-most-valuable-brand
The weight difference is that the 5c is 0.70 of an ounce or 20 grams heavier than the 5s. To a world class runner that might make a huge difference but for normal people not so much.
You're being generous. I doubt even a world class runner would be concerned about the weight of four teaspoons of water, except during a competitive event.
But what do I know? I'm not even a world class walker.
At the time the 3G may not have been cheap, but oddly enough I found the recipt for mine the other day and it was £350 for pay as you go. A 5c looks like its going to cost about £500 for pay as go, now there has been inflation since it came out but not 42%!
But those sites were quoted enough in mainstream media sources such that many average consumers knew Apple was releasing a "plastic" iPhone and an iPhone with a fingerprint scanner before the official rollout.
I'm sure that most people have read those tech articles in the local newspaper that are cringe worthy. Written by the same person, I'm sure, that wrote the baby notices last week.
Newsweek, Time, USA Today and bunches of other weekly magazines splash Apple stories onto their pages whenever they think it is important (and it usually is not).
Once again this is presented as a fact rather than a wild guess by an analyst. This is presented decontextualized as it doesn't show that Cook clearly explained that the channel is incredibly complex and merely making a few checks will not give an accurate picture.
Your repetition of an analysts' guess (analyst=carnival fortune teller, just not as accurate or as entertaining) without such context makes you a part of spreading false rumors about Apple with a clear intent to depress the stock price. Was that your conscious intent? Probably not. But were I Apple I'd have both you and NPD in court for spreading lies in order to depress the stock price.
I'm not saying you shouldn't report the wild guesses of someone--assuming that you consider such to be "journalism"%u2014only that you contextualize it.
Say, if that's the kind of journalism you do, there are a bunch of people wandering Hollywood Blvd. wearing tin foil hats you can quote, too.