Apple should hire me as a consultant or at least for a focus group. I warned from the start that the 5c would bomb with everyone except perhaps young teen girls of the Hello Kitty sort. It simply wasn't that appealing.
I doubt its failure had much to do with TouchID. Most people I know leave their phone unlocked. For those for whom appearance matters, the 5c was ho-hum, no different from dozens of other smartphones. For those who want power and features, the 5s was twice the phone for only about $100 more. Over a two-year lifespan, the difference in cost was mere pennies a day.
[... and a bunch of other stuff.]
--Michael W. Perry, Inkling Books, Auburn, AL
Let's set this straight. The 5c was not a failure. The 5c just did not live up to Apple's expectations. By any other standards, the 5c sold better than every other phone on the planet except the 5s... but, 5c sales did not fill the gap that Apple was hoping it would fill. (I'm sure Apple was hoping for another 7-10 million sales)
How does one define "artificial looking" color? What makes the 5C colors artificial?
I mean not occurring in nature. Or looking like they're man made.
Obviously red and green and such occur in nature, but neon colours look man made. I'm sure with enough Googling you could find some obscure parrot or undersea creature that looks neon, but most people won't have seen it, so to most people those colours will suggest "man made" which is the plastic being truthful to the viewer about it's origins.
"the iPhone 5s was the choice of 59% of surveyed customers, 9% higher than that of the iPhone 5 a year previously.
The colourful iPhone 5c accounted for 27% of all sales, 5% less than the iPhone 4S recorded in 2012, when it was the mid-choice for iPhone buyers. This has led CIRP analysts conclude that if Apple had decided to keep the iPhone 5, it would have been more popular than the iPhone 5c."
Given that Tim has mentioned it this way, I suspect actual worldwide sales figures differ from this with the 5c being a bit lower. It was noted as being 3:1 when it first came out. As I've said before, more people buying the higher model is a better outcome so it can't really be seen as a failure on their part and even if it's 25% of 50 million units, that's still a lot of phones.
if the cheaper one costs $200 less then you're cooking
They can't just take all the profit margin off it though. If it sells for $550 just now and they make 40%, the build cost is $330. If they sell them as low as $350, they don't make enough profit. That's gross profit too. Net is usually 25% so really they can only drop the net by say 10%, which is $470.
According to many here that ridiculed the other manufacturers for still using 'cheap' plastic. Personally I don't have a problem with it and I much prefer the feel of plastic in my hand than hard metal edges.
People can prefer the feel of plastic but would they pay $550 for it? There are materials that are just considered cheap - plastic cutlery vs metal, plastic plates vs ceramic, plastic watches vs metal/sapphire/glass, plastic jewellery vs metal, plastic tables vs marble. Plastic is considered cheap because of its abundance and its man-made appearance. If they want to make a plastic phone, that's ok but they need to build it to hit a price expectation of a plastic phone and $550 isn't it.
They also have to avoid making too big of a gap between it and the metal phone so having just $350 and $650 won't work out very well. I'd say $150 maximum difference between the two e.g $450 and $600. If they had 3 phones it might work though, plastic at $399, colored iPhone 5 at $499 and 5S at $599.
I actually wish they'd sell an add-on for the iPod Touch that turned it into a phone for the base 'iPhone'. The $299 model with a $100 plastic back that had phone components in it. The battery life would suck but that's mainly when using mobile data and potentially the back can have a battery pack or they would simply recommend that people who use mobile data a lot get the higher models.
I bought a 5c and wish I'd gotten a 5. It's all about the accessories. The 5 & 5s share the same size; cases etc. are interchangeable and there are many available. If you have a nice case or other accessories for a 5, you can reuse them with the 5s. The 5c has very few cases & accessories designed for it.
The 5c may have been targeted at new Apple customers, but once you have one you're effectively locked out of the iPhone accessory ecosystem.
Compared to the 5c, the 5s is a MUCH better value.
NO FREAKING DUH. And? That’s by design. Design.
Why bring out the same, with a few colors when you could have either kept the 5, as is…
It is not the same. Because they explicitly changed it. Because bringing out the 5 as-is would have been the same. Because that is literally the same. Except the 5C was changed. Physically and internally. It is not the same. It is different. Different is not the same.
Apple is doing pretty well overall, but I think they are 'leaving money on the table' by not appealing to those consumers who want a larger handset.
Good. They should keep doing that. Morons who don’t know that a phone needs one-handed use aren’t a large enough market to be worth building for. Same with the people who still use dumb phones. Apple’s “leaving money on the table” by not catering to them, too.
Originally Posted by Jume
I was saying couple of months ago here that iPhone 5c is a flop and no one's is buying it, because it's to expensive for what it is, everyone's started to attack me.
Because you were wrong and we now have the numbers to prove it.
Now here's the result.
Yeah, it sold better than the 4S did.
It's not it's a bad phone but it's too expensive.
The 4S wasn’t. The 4 wasn’t. It isn’t a budget phone.
It should be 100$ or more less then maybe it would sell on emerging market and people who really can't afford the flagship iPhone.
It isn’t for emerging markets. It isn’t a budget phone. It sold better than the 4S.
But most who can throw 500$ for new phone, can also throw 600 and they will rather throw 600 and get all the neat new stuff that 5S offers.
Doy. And? This is by design. Do you not understand this? Was the lineup of 4, 4S, and 5 equally mystifying to you? They want to sell the newest model.
Originally Posted by saarek
…it is not priced correctly which is the reason it has not sold as well as expected.
You know this?
Originally Posted by Inkling
It simply wasn't that appealing.
To you.
For those who want power and features, the 5s was twice the phone for only about $100 more.
WOW. JUST like the last two mid-range phones before it! WHAT a concept!
If Tim Cook had asked me, I'd have suggesting keeping the iPhone 5's marvelous appearance, but tweaking the inside so it could be made and sell for significantly less than a 5s.
So you’d suggest they do EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID, huh? Maybe they should hire you¡
Apple has missed the boat on diversifying its product line.
No, you should get an inkling and understand why they aren’t.
Make a EL (for Extended Live) version of the iPhone. Make a Sport model that's drop-proof to about 12 feet and waterproof to say 30 feet.
Apple isn’t IBM, for heaven’s sake. These ideas appeal to a market that is an order of magnitude smaller than the one toward which 5C is targeted. How’s that supposed to help them?
People can prefer the feel of plastic but would they pay $550 for it? There are materials that are just considered cheap - plastic cutlery vs metal, plastic plates vs ceramic, plastic watches vs metal/sapphire/glass, plastic jewellery vs metal, plastic tables vs marble. Plastic is considered cheap because of its abundance and its man-made appearance. If they want to make a plastic phone, that's ok but they need to build it to hit a price expectation of a plastic phone and $550 isn't it.
It wasn't that long ago that people dropped $550 on a iPhone 3G/3GS and before then I remember people spending $700-900 on unlocked phones. Even today there's plenty of plastic phones being sold for much more than $550.
While we all hate a race to the bottom, it appears as if it may make sense to lower the retail price...maybe by $50. There is and has always been pricing pressure by competitors, but it's obvious that competition has heated up over the last year and if Apple wants to increase its installed base, it needs to lower price (a bit).
You mean like the $49 my son paid and got a $75 Walmart card on Black Friday?? Or the $49 I paid for my mothers and got a $49 Target card just before Christmas??
Apple sold 51 million iPhones, Samsung "shipped" 86 million "smartphones" but only nine million were Galaxy S4's.
The market has spoken, iPhone and smaller sized screens dominate sales.
Enough with the "big screen" crap already.
If a bigger screen ever comes to be, of course, you and TS will be its biggest defenders. Oh, and Apple also *shipped* 51 million. They probably sold more than that as they had built up inventories.
If a bigger screen ever comes to be, of course, you and TS will be its biggest defenders. Oh, and Apple also *shipped* 51 million. They probably sold more than that as they had built up inventories.
Not really, just pointing out reality and countering the idiotic idea that the iPhone's "tiny" screen is somehow illegible when a few years ago people were complaining it was too big.
Most "smartphones" sold have screens the same or smaller than iPhones.
It wasn't that long ago that people dropped $550 on a iPhone 3G/3GS and before then I remember people spending $700-900 on unlocked phones. Even today there's plenty of plastic phones being sold for much more than $550.
There wasn't an alternative back when the 3GS was the flagship model. Android only just got a software keyboard at that point. Samsung's first rip-off came the following year, June 2010:
You're right that people do pay that much for the likes of modern Samsung Galaxy phones when HTC's metal phones are available but the plastic design is seen in reviews as a negative, hence why rumors now are that the S5 will be metal:
People buy plastic phones like the Galaxy S4 in spite of them being plastic, not because they are plastic.
Very true, but they also buy them in spite of there being a metal alternative like the HTC One, which is also why I believe that not many people are swayed by reviews.
While I'm no fan of Samsung they have done a great job marketing, and while we know that they're about as innovative as a potato a good number of people believe that they've surpassed the iPhone.
Tim Cook was correct in his assessment that the iPhone 5S was the iPhone 5C's main competitor.
The $100 price difference between the 5S and the 5C was insufficient to drive sales of the 5C; and Tim Cook also made the mistake of going against Apple's formula, by offering two iPhone models instead of 1.
The iPhone 5S should have been the only iPhone offered.
The iPhone 5C should have been introduced when the iPhone 5 became the 3rd tier phone (if and when a larger screened iPhone 6 came out) - when the iPhone 5 would have taken the place of the iPhone 4S and dropped in price as its costs would have dropped.
In regards to the iPhone 5C, it should have been offered with a white front face instead of black. It would have sold more.
EDIT:
As some have also mentioned about the colors, the iPhone 5C should have been offered in strong primary colors instead of pastels; because primary colors would appeal to both male and female.
Tim Cook was correct in his assessment that the iPhone 5S was the iPhone 5C's main competitor.
The $100 price difference between the 5S and the 5C was insufficient to drive sales of the 5C; and Tim Cook also made the mistake of going against Apple's formula, by offering two iPhone models instead of 1.
The iPhone 5S should have been the only iPhone offered.
The iPhone 5C should have been introduced when the iPhone 5 became the 3rd tier phone (if and when a larger screened iPhone 6 came out) - when the iPhone 5 would have taken the place of the iPhone 4S and dropped in price as its costs would have dropped.
In regards to the iPhone 5C, it should have been offered with a white front face instead of black. It would have sold more.
How about a limited edition (PRODUCT) red version complete with matching red charger, lightning cable and headphones.
Apple could advertise it to raise awareness of (PRODUCT) red and what they do.
How about a limited edition (PRODUCT) red version complete with matching red charger, lightning cable and headphones.
Apple could advertise it to raise awareness of (PRODUCT) red and what they do.
A black version also wouldn't go astray.
I agree. But instead of a Limited Edition model, Apple could just make a Liquid Black iPhone like the original iPhone, with either a black or white face, and offer the different colored iPhone backs as solid primary color cases (with no print on them), that could be either swapped out or be a cover; and make the colored (background) home screen customize-able.
What would have been extremely cool is if Apple offered an illuminated translucent frosted iPhone that could glow and change color (the back light would have to be LED to save on battery). If that is too much, Apple could just offer a frosted iPhone that glowed, and you would have colored translucent covers that you could change.
I didn't buy the 5s because of a fascination with Touch ID. Initially I wasn't interested in the phone because that feature didn't really interest me. I think the folks at Apple are a lot more excited about the potential of Touch ID than your average consumer is, because they can see where they want to take it next. Plus, they need to market with a tangible "star" feature, rather than the best features, like 64 bit & a co-motion sensor, because that stuff is just too esoteric for your average consumer.
If a bigger screen ever comes to be, of course, you and TS will be its biggest defenders. Oh, and Apple also *shipped* 51 million. They probably sold more than that as they had built up inventories.
WHEN the bigger screen iPhone arrives, half the people on AI are going to have an thermonuclear meltdown, the other half will praise for joy.
Comments
Apple should hire me as a consultant or at least for a focus group. I warned from the start that the 5c would bomb with everyone except perhaps young teen girls of the Hello Kitty sort. It simply wasn't that appealing.
I doubt its failure had much to do with TouchID. Most people I know leave their phone unlocked. For those for whom appearance matters, the 5c was ho-hum, no different from dozens of other smartphones. For those who want power and features, the 5s was twice the phone for only about $100 more. Over a two-year lifespan, the difference in cost was mere pennies a day.
[... and a bunch of other stuff.]
--Michael W. Perry, Inkling Books, Auburn, AL
Let's set this straight. The 5c was not a failure. The 5c just did not live up to Apple's expectations. By any other standards, the 5c sold better than every other phone on the planet except the 5s... but, 5c sales did not fill the gap that Apple was hoping it would fill. (I'm sure Apple was hoping for another 7-10 million sales)
How does one define "artificial looking" color? What makes the 5C colors artificial?
I mean not occurring in nature. Or looking like they're man made.
Obviously red and green and such occur in nature, but neon colours look man made. I'm sure with enough Googling you could find some obscure parrot or undersea creature that looks neon, but most people won't have seen it, so to most people those colours will suggest "man made" which is the plastic being truthful to the viewer about it's origins.
There are some survey stats here:
http://www.iphoneincanada.ca/news/iphone-5s-accounts-for-59-of-iphone-sales-in-q4-2013-report/
"the iPhone 5s was the choice of 59% of surveyed customers, 9% higher than that of the iPhone 5 a year previously.
The colourful iPhone 5c accounted for 27% of all sales, 5% less than the iPhone 4S recorded in 2012, when it was the mid-choice for iPhone buyers. This has led CIRP analysts conclude that if Apple had decided to keep the iPhone 5, it would have been more popular than the iPhone 5c."
Given that Tim has mentioned it this way, I suspect actual worldwide sales figures differ from this with the 5c being a bit lower. It was noted as being 3:1 when it first came out. As I've said before, more people buying the higher model is a better outcome so it can't really be seen as a failure on their part and even if it's 25% of 50 million units, that's still a lot of phones.
They can't just take all the profit margin off it though. If it sells for $550 just now and they make 40%, the build cost is $330. If they sell them as low as $350, they don't make enough profit. That's gross profit too. Net is usually 25% so really they can only drop the net by say 10%, which is $470.
http://www.apple.com/ipod-nano/
Yeah if they made Macbook Pros from plastic or even carbon fibre, I really doubt they'd be able to push them for $2k.
I like the some of the anostyle ones:
https://www.anostyle.com/gallery
If they pick the right colors with iPhone 5 parts, they'd be nice. That crimson red one looks great IMO.
People can prefer the feel of plastic but would they pay $550 for it? There are materials that are just considered cheap - plastic cutlery vs metal, plastic plates vs ceramic, plastic watches vs metal/sapphire/glass, plastic jewellery vs metal, plastic tables vs marble. Plastic is considered cheap because of its abundance and its man-made appearance. If they want to make a plastic phone, that's ok but they need to build it to hit a price expectation of a plastic phone and $550 isn't it.
They also have to avoid making too big of a gap between it and the metal phone so having just $350 and $650 won't work out very well. I'd say $150 maximum difference between the two e.g $450 and $600. If they had 3 phones it might work though, plastic at $399, colored iPhone 5 at $499 and 5S at $599.
I actually wish they'd sell an add-on for the iPod Touch that turned it into a phone for the base 'iPhone'. The $299 model with a $100 plastic back that had phone components in it. The battery life would suck but that's mainly when using mobile data and potentially the back can have a battery pack or they would simply recommend that people who use mobile data a lot get the higher models.
I bought a 5c and wish I'd gotten a 5. It's all about the accessories. The 5 & 5s share the same size; cases etc. are interchangeable and there are many available. If you have a nice case or other accessories for a 5, you can reuse them with the 5s. The 5c has very few cases & accessories designed for it.
The 5c may have been targeted at new Apple customers, but once you have one you're effectively locked out of the iPhone accessory ecosystem.
- Jasen.
I will ignore the first question…
You’re explicitly acknowledging it.
NO FREAKING DUH. And? That’s by design. Design.
It is not the same. Because they explicitly changed it. Because bringing out the 5 as-is would have been the same. Because that is literally the same. Except the 5C was changed. Physically and internally. It is not the same. It is different. Different is not the same.
Good. They should keep doing that. Morons who don’t know that a phone needs one-handed use aren’t a large enough market to be worth building for. Same with the people who still use dumb phones. Apple’s “leaving money on the table” by not catering to them, too.
Because you were wrong and we now have the numbers to prove it.
Yeah, it sold better than the 4S did.
The 4S wasn’t. The 4 wasn’t. It isn’t a budget phone.
It isn’t for emerging markets. It isn’t a budget phone. It sold better than the 4S.
Doy. And? This is by design. Do you not understand this? Was the lineup of 4, 4S, and 5 equally mystifying to you? They want to sell the newest model.
…it is not priced correctly which is the reason it has not sold as well as expected.
You know this?
To you.
WOW. JUST like the last two mid-range phones before it! WHAT a concept!
So you’d suggest they do EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID, huh? Maybe they should hire you¡
No, you should get an inkling and understand why they aren’t.
Apple isn’t IBM, for heaven’s sake. These ideas appeal to a market that is an order of magnitude smaller than the one toward which 5C is targeted. How’s that supposed to help them?
It wasn't that long ago that people dropped $550 on a iPhone 3G/3GS and before then I remember people spending $700-900 on unlocked phones. Even today there's plenty of plastic phones being sold for much more than $550.
While we all hate a race to the bottom, it appears as if it may make sense to lower the retail price...maybe by $50. There is and has always been pricing pressure by competitors, but it's obvious that competition has heated up over the last year and if Apple wants to increase its installed base, it needs to lower price (a bit).
You mean like the $49 my son paid and got a $75 Walmart card on Black Friday?? Or the $49 I paid for my mothers and got a $49 Target card just before Christmas??
The other issue why sells are below expectation, is the absurd logic of the ex king of the market pretending his ideas are always ahead.
Who Nokia, "king of the market" before Samsung took the crown or Motorola, "king of the market" before Nokia???
The ex "kings of the market" have become irrelevant, sliding down the slippery slope of losing money chasing marketshare before anything else.
If a bigger screen ever comes to be, of course, you and TS will be its biggest defenders. Oh, and Apple also *shipped* 51 million. They probably sold more than that as they had built up inventories.
If a bigger screen ever comes to be, of course, you and TS will be its biggest defenders. Oh, and Apple also *shipped* 51 million. They probably sold more than that as they had built up inventories.
Not really, just pointing out reality and countering the idiotic idea that the iPhone's "tiny" screen is somehow illegible when a few years ago people were complaining it was too big.
Most "smartphones" sold have screens the same or smaller than iPhones.
I’d be willing to buy a larger screened iPhone to prove how unusable it is. *shrug*
There wasn't an alternative back when the 3GS was the flagship model. Android only just got a software keyboard at that point. Samsung's first rip-off came the following year, June 2010:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_S
You're right that people do pay that much for the likes of modern Samsung Galaxy phones when HTC's metal phones are available but the plastic design is seen in reviews as a negative, hence why rumors now are that the S5 will be metal:
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/samsung-galaxy-s5-to-sport-full-metal-jacket-and-new-camera-tech--1183473
People buy plastic phones like the Galaxy S4 in spite of them being plastic, not because they are plastic.
Very true, but they also buy them in spite of there being a metal alternative like the HTC One, which is also why I believe that not many people are swayed by reviews.
While I'm no fan of Samsung they have done a great job marketing, and while we know that they're about as innovative as a potato a good number of people believe that they've surpassed the iPhone.
The $100 price difference between the 5S and the 5C was insufficient to drive sales of the 5C; and Tim Cook also made the mistake of going against Apple's formula, by offering two iPhone models instead of 1.
The iPhone 5S should have been the only iPhone offered.
The iPhone 5C should have been introduced when the iPhone 5 became the 3rd tier phone (if and when a larger screened iPhone 6 came out) - when the iPhone 5 would have taken the place of the iPhone 4S and dropped in price as its costs would have dropped.
In regards to the iPhone 5C, it should have been offered with a white front face instead of black. It would have sold more.
EDIT:
As some have also mentioned about the colors, the iPhone 5C should have been offered in strong primary colors instead of pastels; because primary colors would appeal to both male and female.
Tim Cook was correct in his assessment that the iPhone 5S was the iPhone 5C's main competitor.
The $100 price difference between the 5S and the 5C was insufficient to drive sales of the 5C; and Tim Cook also made the mistake of going against Apple's formula, by offering two iPhone models instead of 1.
The iPhone 5S should have been the only iPhone offered.
The iPhone 5C should have been introduced when the iPhone 5 became the 3rd tier phone (if and when a larger screened iPhone 6 came out) - when the iPhone 5 would have taken the place of the iPhone 4S and dropped in price as its costs would have dropped.
In regards to the iPhone 5C, it should have been offered with a white front face instead of black. It would have sold more.
How about a limited edition (PRODUCT) red version complete with matching red charger, lightning cable and headphones.
Apple could advertise it to raise awareness of (PRODUCT) red and what they do.
A black version also wouldn't go astray.
How about a limited edition (PRODUCT) red version complete with matching red charger, lightning cable and headphones.
Apple could advertise it to raise awareness of (PRODUCT) red and what they do.
A black version also wouldn't go astray.
I agree. But instead of a Limited Edition model, Apple could just make a Liquid Black iPhone like the original iPhone, with either a black or white face, and offer the different colored iPhone backs as solid primary color cases (with no print on them), that could be either swapped out or be a cover; and make the colored (background) home screen customize-able.
What would have been extremely cool is if Apple offered an illuminated translucent frosted iPhone that could glow and change color (the back light would have to be LED to save on battery). If that is too much, Apple could just offer a frosted iPhone that glowed, and you would have colored translucent covers that you could change.
WHEN the bigger screen iPhone arrives, half the people on AI are going to have an thermonuclear meltdown, the other half will praise for joy.
WHEN the bigger screen iPhone arrives, half the people on AI are going to have an thermonuclear meltdown, the other half will praise for joy.
You, 2008.