Lets get to the point, Apple can't keep making this ludicrous profit on its iPhones for ever, so what is the trigger point to the start of the inevitable decline?
This article knocks android smartphone manufacturers for making just a couple of billion in profit. That is still bloody good business compared to my annual salary, if you compare it to Apples obscene profit it looks minute, but they aren't the ones being greedy and making stupid profit margins.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in. They are introducing finance deals soon so I hear to encourage more people to part with more of their hard earned cash over a an easy payment period. Morally this isn't great but will help keep those premium sales and therefore easy money coming in.
The problem for apple is the best of android and the best of apple are virtually on par with each other.
The core functions of a smartphone which most people use are already nailed. People won't keep paying thousands of dollars for a phone, it's chucking money down the drain.
The same thing happened to PCs, people didn't need more and more power, they were happy with what they had.
I think if you gave the best budget android phone to apple users they'd be surprised how good they actually are, with exception of the camera and iMessage withdrawals.
Yes you can buy expensive cars and expensive house phones, but most people buy what is best bang for buck and that's why android rules on the numbers. Android is in your TVs, it will be in your fridges, in your cars, your scooters, your washing machines, house alarms etc and this is where apple won't be able to compete, due to its closed nature, it relies on others to support its products with a cost to certify them. This is where the number of devices count in the long term, not how much apple stores in its money vault each quarter now, it's how windows became the OS of choice and the PC became the hardware of choice to run it. It's a marathon not a sprint and I think that's where Apples business model which is just really the iphone will come unstuck.
Apples good times will not last, they can't stop the inevitability that the iPhone will cease to be a cash cow for them in the not too distant future.
It seems you are confusing value “best bang for you buck” for “cheapest item that can accomplish a task”. Your are further convuluting the subject by making the assumption that iPhone is expensive (which is highly subjective). Thus your logic seems to be since iPhone is expensive to you and piece of junk Y can preform the same functions eventually all people will buy junk phone Y like you in order to save money. I guess this line of thinking would be logical if either a) the concept of value did not exist or b) all people can only afford junk phone Y, thus rendering value meaningless. The problem here is the concept of value does exist and almost all people understand it. On the cost side, figuring based on median household income (in the US) greater than 50% if people should be able to afford a phone that cost $1,100. This means that there should always be more people opting to purchase “the best bang for their buck” (value) vs “cheapest thing that can accomplish a task”.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform and my wife will stay on her iPhone 6 for another year and Apple hasn't been able to pull unit growth out of any corner for the last two years.
Maybe we are the representation of what he said. That Apple can go on like this forever.
It could be that even Apple is starting to realise this too because when you bought your SE, you had the biggest choice in Apple history to pick from. If the ecosystem were so sticky and users so happy, why change the model?
Another day, another chance to push that bullshit meme again.
Apple's "model" for expansion of the iPhone line has been around since before the iPhone 4 that you won't upgrade because you "Huawei" every day.
The only difference in Apple's "model" over the last 10 years, is that Apple added an SE 16 GB model at the $349 price point.
Really testing the waters there.
Please also note that ASP line...
Again, though, the question is why such a major change to bring us into 2018? If everything was hunky dory, why change a winning formula?
Whichever way you look at it, these are uncharted waters for Apple.
Jesus what a dumb question. Because of course the market is going to become less growth than it was in early days. Now everybody has a smartphone, the early easy growth is over. We’re entering the goldilocks period of a mature market.
But to suggest its because apple is doomed and the crappy knockoffs are about to take over is just hairbrained nonsense. We’ve seen this all before in the personal computing era. Profit trumps market share any day of the week. Your commodity knockoffs will never command the respect and profit that the apple original does. get over it.
Ah yes. The Goldilocks period. That's all well and good.
In fact, when have you heard me not mention saturation over the last year or two?
The problem, is that the issue of flat sales started two years ago, NOT now, and these major changes are happening NOW so no, 'dumb' isn't the word.
Strange that I have been bringing the subject up and people came out with variations of 'Apple knows what it is doing', 'Apple is a Premium brand and doesn't need the mid range', 'there is no profit in the mid range'. You name it, there was a reason Apple wouldn't do what it is doing now. Or focussing on the yearly bonanza quarter and utterly failing to put it into the context of the whole year. Just as has happened here with several comments over the last few weeks that extracted wild conclusions from one 90 day package. A package they know full well is misrepresentative.
And it seems those same people have now suddenly changed tack. Now It's normal to have the widest phone spread in Apple history. It's normal to have prices starting at 300 dollars. It's normal for sales to be flat.
No doubt if Apple makes a more concerted effort in areas it hasn't had much historical influence in until now, it will also be 'normal'.
I wouldn't give up on increased unit sales just yet. First wait to see how things play out at Apple's lower end and if a new SE appears in the spring.
There won't be an end. There'll be a maturing, but until there's a radically new form factor - and at this point, we don't know what that is - there won't be a challenge to smart phones.
Computers got replaced by laptops. PMPs got replaced by phones. Tablets got replaced by large-screen phones. Hard Drives got replaced by SSDs in most cases.
Things only get replaced when there's something that provides such an additional benefit that extra cost is worth it. No one needs an iPod when the iPhone they'd carry around anyway has more advanced music capabilities. No one needs a tablet (Especially a tiny screen one) when my phone can, if I like, have screen just as nice but just a hair smaller. No one needs a big desktop when laptops do most of the same work in a smaller package but can be taken with out.
Now, desktop computers, tablets, mechanical hard drives and PMPs still exist, but they're increasingly niches - and products like these are seen as anachronisms, not the next thing.
Now, COULD Phones one day be replaced? Sure. Some sort of bio-engineering that gives equivalent information I could see. I always joke about Futurama's idea of a phone/camera that goes behind your eye, but in the end, yes, that could happen. But until then a simple piece of glass and metal that slides in and out of your pocket that does 90% of what you could on a computer? It will be the "end" of tech until something better comes along.
And Apple is leading the profitability and innovation in that space.
I think it is premature to call the overall smartphone growth days as being over. This is based on just one quarter data (Q4 2017). I still think there is some more growth to be had on the lower end of smartphone segment, with people in developing countries moving from feature phone to smartphones. Premium segment (phones which cost > $600) being stagnant - Yes, that is already stagnant for last 2.5 years. So there is a possibility that this segment will shrink in the near future and going forward. But we need to wait for another year at least to say that the overall smartphone shipment volumes has saturated and the only way is down going forward.
Apple is a platform building monster. They treat everything as a platform, initially closed for internal use but eventually opened in intelligent and controlled ways to leverage their developer community, which ultimately cements the platform as an integral part of an interconnected and growing ecosystem.
MacOS
iOS
iOS+ (on iPad)
CarPlay
Siri
ApplePay
Watch OS
TVOS
Apple Music
Maps
HomeKit
HealthKit
Metal
Airplay
Machine Learning
AFS (Apple File System)
ARKit
NFC
Do you have data on the "Active users" of each one of them?
The funny thing about Oppo is that they used to sell moderately priced video equipment for TVs but are almost exclusively a high-end seller now. They gave up on that particular volume market a long time ago. The smartphones seem to be working out the same way.
The funny thing about Oppo is that they used to sell moderately priced video equipment for TVs but are almost exclusively a high-end seller now. They gave up on that particular volume market a long time ago. The smartphones seem to be working out the same way.
In smartphones, they charge a "premium" more than even Samsung/HTC/Sony/LG. They seem to believe heavy marketing AND a focus on selfies will get them more sales. For a short term, it worked. Not any longer, it seems. I do think that they will change their strategy of charging "heavy" premium (almost like Apple) for what they offer and reduce the prices ever so slightly, to better compete with the likes of Huawei/Samsung. If they don't, they would join the likes of HTC/Sony/LG on their way out.
Lets get to the point, Apple can't keep making this ludicrous profit on its iPhones for ever, so what is the trigger point to the start of the inevitable decline?
I realize you're just trolling here, but I'll bite and shut this down rather quickly. We now have more than a decade of history which demonstrates how you are wrong. If anything, the trend continues to go in the direction which is opposite of your claim. Apple's average selling prices continues to rise while the commodity based Android devices continue to drop. The Android flagship phones have margins on par with Apple, but the problem is, nobody wants to buy them. There are few Android fans who can afford such high end phones, and for most who can afford a high end phone, most find iPhones to be the better purchase.
Mr. Dilger is correct -- a key factor is "customer sat". Apple doesn't need to use its customers as marks for advertising, and Apple has demonstrated in the past that it actually isn't all that good in that world (see iAd, for example). So by disconnecting the hardware from the ad-delivery business Apple gets a "two-fer"; it plays to its own strengths in hardware and design, and at the same time it hamstrings Google. Nicely done.
One concern -- one important part of customer sat is the ease of connecting Apple products, from iPhones to Airbuds to HomePod to Macs to iPad. One key infrastructure that Apple is neglecting as part of this strategy, it appears to me, is WiFi. Oh, Apple knows how to get things done with other WiFi hubs and boxes out there and has pushed hard (correctly) to get everyone on board with WiFi standards. But Apple's own Airports are getting long in the tooth, and part of the ease of connection in the home environment using Airports was that you had WiFi that "just worked". Perhaps Apple thinks that WiFi has matured enough (like printers) such that it doesn't need to remain a player in WiFi hubs, etc., but I wonder if that's correct.
Agree that the economic landscape is changing and that Apple has done an amazing job adapting and cultivating its eco systems to fit this reality. Customer satisfaction and user experience across the spectrum of services has kept me as a consistent iPhone and iPad buyer for nearly ten years.
I would however caution the handling of one of Apple’s most important strengths, the referenced "customer sat". This trait can be fleating if not nurtured appropriately.
Speaking from my perspective (that many of you are aware), my recent experience with the iPhone battery throttling issues has had an effect on my perception of the company. What was once a five star rating of customer satisfaction has dropped a notch as a result. While it hasn't caused me to move to the competition, I think that it has tempered my enthusiasm for the products and made me contemplate the company's commitment to its older lineup (which has been an industry leading example for many years).
Customer sat is key to Apple's strategy, and it really is in the eye of the beholder. It must remain bulletproof in this changing industry landscape.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform ...
It's a interesting question of why you still are here constantly denigrating a platform and company you are no longer a consumer of...
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform and my wife will stay on her iPhone 6 for another year and Apple hasn't been able to pull unit growth out of any corner for the last two years.
Maybe we are the representation of what he said. That Apple can go on like this forever.
It could be that even Apple is starting to realise this too because when you bought your SE, you had the biggest choice in Apple history to pick from. If the ecosystem were so sticky and users so happy, why change the model?
Another day, another chance to push that bullshit meme again.
Apple's "model" for expansion of the iPhone line has been around since before the iPhone 4 that you won't upgrade because you "Huawei" every day.
The only difference in Apple's "model" over the last 10 years, is that Apple added an SE 16 GB model at the $349 price point.
Really testing the waters there.
Please also note that ASP line...
And the graph shows what I said.
We now have the biggest iPhone spread in history. The question is, why?
This didn't start with the iPhone 4. It is a new situation.
Look a little harder at the graph because the difference is there.
The ''cheaper" models were no way near as varied as they are today (a major difference) and came with serious limitations, the first being capacity. They were effectively crippled. All part of the plan. So much so that if you even so much as dared go for an older model and looked for the capacity that was best for you, you found that capacity had mysteriously vanished from the lineup and to get it, you had to opt for the newer models. Again, all part of the plan.
The same was (and still is, to a point) true for size. Cheaper meant smaller and there was no way around that.
That has all changed since September 17. Not only that, a third model was added to the mix.
You now have something that probably meets your price, capacity, size needs whereas before, things were far more skewed against you.
Btw, the graph is incomplete. Apple was selling the iPhone 6 32 under the radar via special promotions through select resellers in some countries in the second half of 2017.
I can pick up an Apple sanctioned iPhone 6 32GB at an Apple Store within a Store in Barcelona today for 348€. That includes 22% sales tax. That same phone is NOT available via the Apple Spain web.
Again, though, the question is why such a major change to bring us into 2018? If everything was hunky dory, why change a winning formula?
Clearly someone thought this was necessary. Do you doubt that Android and Android handsets were at least part of the reason or was it a desire to shift more units, or both?
Whichever way you look at it, these are uncharted waters for Apple.
I don’t think there’s much “there” there. It is an interesting place, partly come about by the introduction of two top models at the same year, one significantly more expensive. Apple has said that they want to make their ecosystem as accessible as possible. This makes sense, because it’s provenly very sticky. They do it because they can. And part of what it does is show that not everyone has to buy the X.
But at the same time the rapid evolution of the A-series of chips mean both that there will be even faster ones soon but that the old ones will hang around for more than a little while. So what do you do? Take advantage of the opportunity to get more people inside your system.
Yes. The X is a likely special case because new technology was introduced and the price point had to go up. In a year or possibly two we'll be back down to one flagship.
The variation in the low end hasn't varied much. The model expansion has been upwards with plus and now X.
Avon's point has always been stupid because he's trying to imply that Apple is doomed. Apple does want to ship more units but at high ASPs and margins. They don't need or want to race downward or even all that much to the middle. The waters are hardly uncharted and that's just more silly nonsense. He's pretending that Apple hasn't been here before with the iPod.
Apple is positioning the Apple Watch as their "feature phone". As soon as you don't need a phone but can configure via iCloud it's there.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform and my wife will stay on her iPhone 6 for another year and Apple hasn't been able to pull unit growth out of any corner for the last two years.
Maybe we are the representation of what he said. That Apple can go on like this forever.
It could be that even Apple is starting to realise this too because when you bought your SE, you had the biggest choice in Apple history to pick from. If the ecosystem were so sticky and users so happy, why change the model?
Another day, another chance to push that bullshit meme again.
Apple's "model" for expansion of the iPhone line has been around since before the iPhone 4 that you won't upgrade because you "Huawei" every day.
The only difference in Apple's "model" over the last 10 years, is that Apple added an SE 16 GB model at the $349 price point.
Really testing the waters there.
Please also note that ASP line...
And the graph shows what I said.
We now have the biggest iPhone spread in history. The question is, why?
This didn't start with the iPhone 4. It is a new situation.
Look a little harder at the graph because the difference is there.
The ''cheaper" models were no way near as varied as they are today (a major difference) and came with serious limitations, the first being capacity. They were effectively crippled. All part of the plan. So much so that if you even so much as dared go for an older model and looked for the capacity that was best for you, you found that capacity had mysteriously vanished from the lineup and to get it, you had to opt for the newer models. Again, all part of the plan.
The same was (and still is, to a point) true for size. Cheaper meant smaller and there was no way around that.
That has all changed since September 17. Not only that, a third model was added to the mix.
You now have something that probably meets your price, capacity, size needs whereas before, things were far more skewed against you.
Btw, the graph is incomplete. Apple was selling the iPhone 6 32 under the radar via special promotions through select resellers in some countries in the second half of 2017.
I can pick up an Apple sanctioned iPhone 6 32GB at an Apple Store within a Store in Barcelona today for 348€. That includes 22% sales tax. That same phone is NOT available via the Apple Spain web.
Again, though, the question is why such a major change to bring us into 2018? If everything was hunky dory, why change a winning formula?
Clearly someone thought this was necessary. Do you doubt that Android and Android handsets were at least part of the reason or was it a desire to shift more units, or both?
Whichever way you look at it, these are uncharted waters for Apple.
I don’t think there’s much “there” there. It is an interesting place, partly come about by the introduction of two top models at the same year, one significantly more expensive. Apple has said that they want to make their ecosystem as accessible as possible. This makes sense, because it’s provenly very sticky. They do it because they can. And part of what it does is show that not everyone has to buy the X.
But at the same time the rapid evolution of the A-series of chips mean both that there will be even faster ones soon but that the old ones will hang around for more than a little while. So what do you do? Take advantage of the opportunity to get more people inside your system.
Yes. The X is a likely special case because new technology was introduced and the price point had to go up. In a year or possibly two we'll be back down to one flagship.
The variation in the low end hasn't varied much. The model expansion has been upwards with plus and now X.
Avon's point has always been stupid because he's trying to imply that Apple is doomed. Apple does want to ship more units but at high ASPs and margins. They don't need or want to race downward or even all that much to the middle. The waters are hardly uncharted and that's just more silly nonsense. He's pretending that Apple hasn't been here before with the iPod.
Apple is positioning the Apple Watch as their "feature phone". As soon as you don't need a phone but can configure via iCloud it's there.
Avon b7 isn't a big picture guy, so only wants to compare "shipments" and "share" improvement, driven by low cost phones. He hasn't been an iOS user since the iPhone 4, so basically, has no interest in Apple's ecosystem, and therefore, is unable to comprehend the "moat" that Apple provides its users, most of who love that fact.
I've pretty much decided that he's completely narcissistic, which is why he wants so badly to post his worldview on AI.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform ...
It's a interesting question of why you still are here constantly denigrating a platform and company you are no longer a consumer of...
No denigration but no worshipping either.
I left the iPhone platform. I still have Macs, iPads, iPhones and an Apple TV at home though.
That said, I'll have to see how this turns out as a potential Air replacement:
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform ...
It's a interesting question of why you still are here constantly denigrating a platform and company you are no longer a consumer of...
No denigration but no worshipping either.
I left the iPhone platform. I still have Macs, iPads, iPhones and an Apple TV at home though.
That said, I'll have to see how this turns out as a potential Air replacement:
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform ...
It's a interesting question of why you still are here constantly denigrating a platform and company you are no longer a consumer of...
No denigration but no worshipping either.
I left the iPhone platform. I still have Macs, iPads, iPhones and an Apple TV at home though.
That said, I'll have to see how this turns out as a potential Air replacement:
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform and my wife will stay on her iPhone 6 for another year and Apple hasn't been able to pull unit growth out of any corner for the last two years.
Maybe we are the representation of what he said. That Apple can go on like this forever.
It could be that even Apple is starting to realise this too because when you bought your SE, you had the biggest choice in Apple history to pick from. If the ecosystem were so sticky and users so happy, why change the model?
Another day, another chance to push that bullshit meme again.
Apple's "model" for expansion of the iPhone line has been around since before the iPhone 4 that you won't upgrade because you "Huawei" every day.
The only difference in Apple's "model" over the last 10 years, is that Apple added an SE 16 GB model at the $349 price point.
Really testing the waters there.
Please also note that ASP line...
And the graph shows what I said.
We now have the biggest iPhone spread in history. The question is, why?
This didn't start with the iPhone 4. It is a new situation.
Look a little harder at the graph because the difference is there.
The ''cheaper" models were no way near as varied as they are today (a major difference) and came with serious limitations, the first being capacity. They were effectively crippled. All part of the plan. So much so that if you even so much as dared go for an older model and looked for the capacity that was best for you, you found that capacity had mysteriously vanished from the lineup and to get it, you had to opt for the newer models. Again, all part of the plan.
The same was (and still is, to a point) true for size. Cheaper meant smaller and there was no way around that.
That has all changed since September 17. Not only that, a third model was added to the mix.
You now have something that probably meets your price, capacity, size needs whereas before, things were far more skewed against you.
Btw, the graph is incomplete. Apple was selling the iPhone 6 32 under the radar via special promotions through select resellers in some countries in the second half of 2017.
I can pick up an Apple sanctioned iPhone 6 32GB at an Apple Store within a Store in Barcelona today for 348€. That includes 22% sales tax. That same phone is NOT available via the Apple Spain web.
Again, though, the question is why such a major change to bring us into 2018? If everything was hunky dory, why change a winning formula?
Clearly someone thought this was necessary. Do you doubt that Android and Android handsets were at least part of the reason or was it a desire to shift more units, or both?
Whichever way you look at it, these are uncharted waters for Apple.
I don’t think there’s much “there” there. It is an interesting place, partly come about by the introduction of two top models at the same year, one significantly more expensive. Apple has said that they want to make their ecosystem as accessible as possible. This makes sense, because it’s provenly very sticky. They do it because they can. And part of what it does is show that not everyone has to buy the X.
But at the same time the rapid evolution of the A-series of chips mean both that there will be even faster ones soon but that the old ones will hang around for more than a little while. So what do you do? Take advantage of the opportunity to get more people inside your system.
Yes. The X is a likely special case because new technology was introduced and the price point had to go up. In a year or possibly two we'll be back down to one flagship.
The variation in the low end hasn't varied much. The model expansion has been upwards with plus and now X.
Avon's point has always been stupid because he's trying to imply that Apple is doomed. Apple does want to ship more units but at high ASPs and margins. They don't need or want to race downward or even all that much to the middle. The waters are hardly uncharted and that's just more silly nonsense. He's pretending that Apple hasn't been here before with the iPod.
Apple is positioning the Apple Watch as their "feature phone". As soon as you don't need a phone but can configure via iCloud it's there.
With so many billions laying around, Apple is far from doomed and you wouldn't hear that even implied from me.
If Apple only had its Mac business to drive revenues I wouldn't run screaming to the hills. It's not an issue for me.
That's for those who are obsessed with ASP or who have an investment in the company (for whom it would be a different story).
I vote with my money. If I consider prices too high or options sub par, I simply don't buy.
The question is how many people do the same as me.
Flat sales say a lot and have nothing to do with peak smartphone shipments. Perhaps peak iPhone shipments but I don't even think that's the case.
Some people here seem to be changing their tune. Now that some analysts have said that Apple needs to get agressive on pricing, accept little or slow growth at the high end etc, everything seems logical to them and they accept it might happen.
My view is that from September last year, it is already happening and is only the beginning. If the revamped SE gets a spring release it will only bolster the situation.
If they retire the 6 series and go to SE and SE Plus with attractive pricing (like the new iPad in iPad world) it could be a masterstroke.
I have applauded Apple's recent strategic moves. Mainly because I've been arguing for such a move for a while.
However, while some go OTT on one quarter, I prefer to be patient and see how results actually go.
I said that competition at the premium end was going to be the fiercest in recent memory at the end of last year and it was.
That will continue. Yesterday was the S9. In a few weeks we have the P20. Then the Note 9 and Mate 11, plus two Honor flagships. If Apple (SE aside) sticks to its release schedule, we only have the X to September plus an array of foreheaded and chinned phones that will be looking rather dated way sooner than the release dates of any major release.
That's why I hope the SE goes full screen (or as far as it can) if it gets updated.
We've already seen teasers of new battery tech, leaks of phones without physical volume buttons and we know that advanced sub millimetre 3D modelling for small objects is coming along with triple camera arrays. AI is getting more applications. 5G chipsets are ready.
A lot of that could be a reality way before the iPhone X gets an update.
Huawei also presented its digital skies proposal last year for the sub 300m flying vehicle market which will use AI, Cloud and 5G. It might only be the first steps but they need to be taken.
Apple is trying desperately to keep punters upgrading their phones each year or two, ensuring newer models are more expensive, plus expanding the ecosystem for lock in.
I recently bought a one year old SE, I guess that makes me immune to Apple's fabled coercion techniques.
... And I left the platform and my wife will stay on her iPhone 6 for another year and Apple hasn't been able to pull unit growth out of any corner for the last two years.
Maybe we are the representation of what he said. That Apple can go on like this forever.
It could be that even Apple is starting to realise this too because when you bought your SE, you had the biggest choice in Apple history to pick from. If the ecosystem were so sticky and users so happy, why change the model?
Another day, another chance to push that bullshit meme again.
Apple's "model" for expansion of the iPhone line has been around since before the iPhone 4 that you won't upgrade because you "Huawei" every day.
The only difference in Apple's "model" over the last 10 years, is that Apple added an SE 16 GB model at the $349 price point.
Really testing the waters there.
Please also note that ASP line...
And the graph shows what I said.
We now have the biggest iPhone spread in history. The question is, why?
This didn't start with the iPhone 4. It is a new situation.
Look a little harder at the graph because the difference is there.
The ''cheaper" models were no way near as varied as they are today (a major difference) and came with serious limitations, the first being capacity. They were effectively crippled. All part of the plan. So much so that if you even so much as dared go for an older model and looked for the capacity that was best for you, you found that capacity had mysteriously vanished from the lineup and to get it, you had to opt for the newer models. Again, all part of the plan.
The same was (and still is, to a point) true for size. Cheaper meant smaller and there was no way around that.
That has all changed since September 17. Not only that, a third model was added to the mix.
You now have something that probably meets your price, capacity, size needs whereas before, things were far more skewed against you.
Btw, the graph is incomplete. Apple was selling the iPhone 6 32 under the radar via special promotions through select resellers in some countries in the second half of 2017.
I can pick up an Apple sanctioned iPhone 6 32GB at an Apple Store within a Store in Barcelona today for 348€. That includes 22% sales tax. That same phone is NOT available via the Apple Spain web.
Again, though, the question is why such a major change to bring us into 2018? If everything was hunky dory, why change a winning formula?
Clearly someone thought this was necessary. Do you doubt that Android and Android handsets were at least part of the reason or was it a desire to shift more units, or both?
Whichever way you look at it, these are uncharted waters for Apple.
I don’t think there’s much “there” there. It is an interesting place, partly come about by the introduction of two top models at the same year, one significantly more expensive. Apple has said that they want to make their ecosystem as accessible as possible. This makes sense, because it’s provenly very sticky. They do it because they can. And part of what it does is show that not everyone has to buy the X.
But at the same time the rapid evolution of the A-series of chips mean both that there will be even faster ones soon but that the old ones will hang around for more than a little while. So what do you do? Take advantage of the opportunity to get more people inside your system.
Yes. The X is a likely special case because new technology was introduced and the price point had to go up. In a year or possibly two we'll be back down to one flagship.
The variation in the low end hasn't varied much. The model expansion has been upwards with plus and now X.
Avon's point has always been stupid because he's trying to imply that Apple is doomed. Apple does want to ship more units but at high ASPs and margins. They don't need or want to race downward or even all that much to the middle. The waters are hardly uncharted and that's just more silly nonsense. He's pretending that Apple hasn't been here before with the iPod.
Apple is positioning the Apple Watch as their "feature phone". As soon as you don't need a phone but can configure via iCloud it's there.
With so many billions laying around, Apple is far from doomed and you wouldn't hear that even implied from me.
If Apple only had its Mac business to drive revenues I wouldn't run screaming to the hills. It's not an issue for me.
That's for those who are obsessed with ASP or who have an investment in the company (for whom it would be a different story).
I vote with my money. If I consider prices too high or options sub par, I simply don't buy.
The question is how many people do the same as me.
Flat sales say a lot and have nothing to do with peak smartphone shipments. Perhaps peak iPhone shipments but I don't even think that's the case.
Some people here seem to be changing their tune. Now that some analysts have said that Apple needs to get agressive on pricing, accept little or slow growth at the high end etc, everything seems logical to them and they accept it might happen.
My view is that from September last year, it is already happening and is only the beginning. If the revamped SE gets a spring release it will only bolster the situation.
If they retire the 6 series and go to SE and SE Plus with attractive pricing (like the new iPad in iPad world) it could be a masterstroke.
I have applauded Apple's recent strategic moves. Mainly because I've been arguing for such a move for a while.
However, while some go OTT on one quarter, I prefer to be patient and see how results actually go.
I said that competition at the premium end was going to be the fiercest in recent memory at the end of last year and it was.
That will continue. Yesterday was the S9. In a few weeks we have the P20. Then the Note 9 and Mate 11, plus two Honor flagships. If Apple (SE aside) sticks to its release schedule, we only have the X to September plus an array of foreheaded and chinned phones that will be looking rather dated way sooner than the release dates of any major release.
That's why I hope the SE goes full screen (or as far as it can) if it gets updated.
We've already seen teasers of new battery tech, leaks of phones without physical volume buttons and we know that advanced sub millimetre 3D modelling for small objects is coming along with triple camera arrays. AI is getting more applications. 5G chipsets are ready.
A lot of that could be a reality way before the iPhone X gets an update.
Huawei also presented its digital skies proposal last year for the sub 300m flying vehicle market which will use AI, Cloud and 5G. It might only be the first steps but they need to be taken.
Literally, nobody within Apple's ecosystem gives a shit about what Huawei is doing with it's premium phones, however many and varied they are. Oh, except that the P20 adds a notch and leaves the chin. That's fucked up design that will, as you say, be "looking rather dated way sooner than the release dates of any major release"! It is being mocked big time for that, and only two cameras; sad! Hence, why Huawei shouldn't worry about the supposed loss of carrier sales in the U.S.
Huawei competes in the 86% of the market that is Android OS, not the 14% that is iPhone, and is worrisome to Samsung and Xiaomi at most. Do you really think that Huawei is going to steal customers from those two manufacturers without a fight? Be prepared for ASP's much, much, lower than Samung's current record of $245.
Comments
In fact, when have you heard me not mention saturation over the last year or two?
The problem, is that the issue of flat sales started two years ago, NOT now, and these major changes are happening NOW so no, 'dumb' isn't the word.
Strange that I have been bringing the subject up and people came out with variations of 'Apple knows what it is doing', 'Apple is a Premium brand and doesn't need the mid range', 'there is no profit in the mid range'. You name it, there was a reason Apple wouldn't do what it is doing now. Or focussing on the yearly bonanza quarter and utterly failing to put it into the context of the whole year. Just as has happened here with several comments over the last few weeks that extracted wild conclusions from one 90 day package. A package they know full well is misrepresentative.
And it seems those same people have now suddenly changed tack. Now It's normal to have the widest phone spread in Apple history. It's normal to have prices starting at 300 dollars. It's normal for sales to be flat.
No doubt if Apple makes a more concerted effort in areas it hasn't had much historical influence in until now, it will also be 'normal'.
I wouldn't give up on increased unit sales just yet. First wait to see how things play out at Apple's lower end and if a new SE appears in the spring.
Computers got replaced by laptops. PMPs got replaced by phones. Tablets got replaced by large-screen phones. Hard Drives got replaced by SSDs in most cases.
Things only get replaced when there's something that provides such an additional benefit that extra cost is worth it. No one needs an iPod when the iPhone they'd carry around anyway has more advanced music capabilities. No one needs a tablet (Especially a tiny screen one) when my phone can, if I like, have screen just as nice but just a hair smaller. No one needs a big desktop when laptops do most of the same work in a smaller package but can be taken with out.
Now, desktop computers, tablets, mechanical hard drives and PMPs still exist, but they're increasingly niches - and products like these are seen as anachronisms, not the next thing.
Now, COULD Phones one day be replaced? Sure. Some sort of bio-engineering that gives equivalent information I could see. I always joke about Futurama's idea of a phone/camera that goes behind your eye, but in the end, yes, that could happen. But until then a simple piece of glass and metal that slides in and out of your pocket that does 90% of what you could on a computer? It will be the "end" of tech until something better comes along.
And Apple is leading the profitability and innovation in that space.
Do you have data on the "Active users" of each one of them?
One concern -- one important part of customer sat is the ease of connecting Apple products, from iPhones to Airbuds to HomePod to Macs to iPad. One key infrastructure that Apple is neglecting as part of this strategy, it appears to me, is WiFi. Oh, Apple knows how to get things done with other WiFi hubs and boxes out there and has pushed hard (correctly) to get everyone on board with WiFi standards. But Apple's own Airports are getting long in the tooth, and part of the ease of connection in the home environment using Airports was that you had WiFi that "just worked". Perhaps Apple thinks that WiFi has matured enough (like printers) such that it doesn't need to remain a player in WiFi hubs, etc., but I wonder if that's correct.
I would however caution the handling of one of Apple’s most important strengths, the referenced "customer sat". This trait can be fleating if not nurtured appropriately.
Speaking from my perspective (that many of you are aware), my recent experience with the iPhone battery throttling issues has had an effect on my perception of the company. What was once a five star rating of customer satisfaction has dropped a notch as a result. While it hasn't caused me to move to the competition, I think that it has tempered my enthusiasm for the products and made me contemplate the company's commitment to its older lineup (which has been an industry leading example for many years).
Customer sat is key to Apple's strategy, and it really is in the eye of the beholder. It must remain bulletproof in this changing industry landscape.
Yes. The X is a likely special case because new technology was introduced and the price point had to go up. In a year or possibly two we'll be back down to one flagship.
The variation in the low end hasn't varied much. The model expansion has been upwards with plus and now X.
Avon's point has always been stupid because he's trying to imply that Apple is doomed. Apple does want to ship more units but at high ASPs and margins. They don't need or want to race downward or even all that much to the middle. The waters are hardly uncharted and that's just more silly nonsense. He's pretending that Apple hasn't been here before with the iPod.
Apple is positioning the Apple Watch as their "feature phone". As soon as you don't need a phone but can configure via iCloud it's there.
I've pretty much decided that he's completely narcissistic, which is why he wants so badly to post his worldview on AI.
I left the iPhone platform. I still have Macs, iPads, iPhones and an Apple TV at home though.
That said, I'll have to see how this turns out as a potential Air replacement:
https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/huawei-matebook-x-pro-hands-onl
I'm sure that you can't wait for a Mac, iPad, and AppleTV replacement from Huawei.
It should be easy, because Huawei doesn't have to create any OS for those niches; Android OS, Chrome OS, and Windows. Lovely!
If Apple only had its Mac business to drive revenues I wouldn't run screaming to the hills. It's not an issue for me.
That's for those who are obsessed with ASP or who have an investment in the company (for whom it would be a different story).
I vote with my money. If I consider prices too high or options sub par, I simply don't buy.
The question is how many people do the same as me.
Flat sales say a lot and have nothing to do with peak smartphone shipments. Perhaps peak iPhone shipments but I don't even think that's the case.
Some people here seem to be changing their tune. Now that some analysts have said that Apple needs to get agressive on pricing, accept little or slow growth at the high end etc, everything seems logical to them and they accept it might happen.
My view is that from September last year, it is already happening and is only the beginning. If the revamped SE gets a spring release it will only bolster the situation.
If they retire the 6 series and go to SE and SE Plus with attractive pricing (like the new iPad in iPad world) it could be a masterstroke.
I have applauded Apple's recent strategic moves. Mainly because I've been arguing for such a move for a while.
However, while some go OTT on one quarter, I prefer to be patient and see how results actually go.
I said that competition at the premium end was going to be the fiercest in recent memory at the end of last year and it was.
That will continue. Yesterday was the S9. In a few weeks we have the P20. Then the Note 9 and Mate 11, plus two Honor flagships. If Apple (SE aside) sticks to its release schedule, we only have the X to September plus an array of foreheaded and chinned phones that will be looking rather dated way sooner than the release dates of any major release.
That's why I hope the SE goes full screen (or as far as it can) if it gets updated.
We've already seen teasers of new battery tech, leaks of phones without physical volume buttons and we know that advanced sub millimetre 3D modelling for small objects is coming along with triple camera arrays. AI is getting more applications. 5G chipsets are ready.
A lot of that could be a reality way before the iPhone X gets an update.
Huawei also presented its digital skies proposal last year for the sub 300m flying vehicle market which will use AI, Cloud and 5G. It might only be the first steps but they need to be taken.
Huawei competes in the 86% of the market that is Android OS, not the 14% that is iPhone, and is worrisome to Samsung and Xiaomi at most. Do you really think that Huawei is going to steal customers from those two manufacturers without a fight? Be prepared for ASP's much, much, lower than Samung's current record of $245.