You mean iPhone XI and XI+, and then the iPhone 9 will be the cheaper version with the… same CPU package. I guess they’re hoping that production costs will let them make the iPhone XII the same price as the earlier iPhones were, because they’re boned on the naming if they can’t do that. Unless they go back to S, which gives them three years to get the price down. Then it would be iPhone XI and iPhone 8S, iPhone XII and iPhone 9, and iPhone XIII and iPhone 9S.
And if they hadn’t been idiots and had just dropped the number back in, oh, say… 2012, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
You mean iPhone XI and XI+, and then the iPhone 9 will be the cheaper version with the… same CPU package. I guess they’re hoping that production costs will let them make the iPhone XII the same price as the earlier iPhones were, because they’re boned on the naming if they can’t do that. Unless they go back to S, which gives them three years to get the price down. Then it would be iPhone XI and iPhone 8S, iPhone XII and iPhone 9, and iPhone XIII and iPhone 9S.
And if they hadn’t been idiots and had just dropped the number back in, oh, say… 2012, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Do you think they'll use Roman numerals for all cardinal numbers 10 and above? They could, but I'm not expecting it.
Soli said: Do you think they'll use Roman numerals for all cardinal numbers 10 and above? They could, but I'm not expecting it.
I mean, I know they call it the “iPhone ecks” instead of “iPhone ten”, but it’s obviously the “iPhone 10.” I stopped seriously caring about their nomenclature when they called the 6th iPhone, running iOS 6 on an A6 processor the “iPhone 5,” but for the sake of the consumer who doesn’t give a shit about this stuff you’d think they’d at least make some fucking sense to ease understanding of what’s what. Releasing the iPhone 8 and iPhone 10 the same year? And with the same internals? And simultaneously ending their decade-long trend of S models, thereby skipping the iPhone 7S? John Q. Public (or Granny Example) doesn’t understand that. One thing’s certain: with them not calling it the iPhone 10, they won’t bring back their S-model names. The iPhone Excess wouldn’t poll well even with people who don’t pay attention. What’s wrong with “iPhone”? Just call it that. Everyone who cares would know it as “iPhone (2018)” to distinguish from “iPhone (2017)”, et. al. John Q. Public says, “What’s your best one?” Apple Store employee holds up the newest model. “What are those?” “Models from years past. Not as fast, but they’re all cheaper.” “Oh? What does this do that those don’t?” And now it’s a sales pitch. Boom. Not that hard.
But I look forward to seeing Samsung continue their naming right up through the Galaxy STEN. And SELEVEN and STWELVE and STHIRTEEN. Because they can’t change numbers to numerals like Apple, so why not numbers to letters?
The company has had "limited success" trying to pitch the iPhone X at $999
Er … okay. 🙄
That narrative is so stupid, it's almost comical. On the last earnings call, Tim said the X was the best selling phone that quarter and proceeded to give the total # of iPhones sold. I'm trying to understand how the most expensive phone Apple has ever offered and is the best seller of all the bazillions of iphones sold could be considered a limited success.
Apple Apple doesn’t break out its #s but if you divide #sold by iPhone earnings you’ll quickly figure out whih one sold better after all, the higher the # more likely its th x
So: iPhone X+: $999 iPhone X: $899 6.1" iPhone (9+ or Whatever): $799 iPhone 8+: $699 iPhone 8: $599 iPhone 7+: $469? iPhone 7: $349? iPhone 6s+ iPhone 6s Apple probably kill the 6 and 7 series completely and I can see a possible SE2 at $399-$499 for replacement there.
There's no reason to think that they'll kill the 7 series. Instead, their history says that they'll drop the 6S series and charge $100 less for the 7 than what they want for the 8 (adjusted for storage capacity)
The company has had "limited success" trying to pitch the iPhone X at $999
Er … okay. 🙄
That narrative is so stupid, it's almost comical. On the last earnings call, Tim said the X was the best selling phone that quarter and proceeded to give the total # of iPhones sold. I'm trying to understand how the most expensive phone Apple has ever offered and is the best seller of all the bazillions of iphones sold could be considered a limited success.
Did they report on an ASRP in the last earnings call?
$796. $100 higher than the year ago quarter.
That could also mean very high sales of of iPhone 8 Plus, not just iPhone X.
Yeah except for the fact that Cook said it was the X that was the biggest seller since it came out. Why is this so hard for people to come to grips with??
"Since it came out"
There was another part of the quarter that had iPhone 8 series phones (and no X available) and pent up demand for them too.
78Bandit said: The X sold pretty good, but I don't think it was anywhere near expectations at that rate.
Ming initially predicted first quarter sales of 40M+, dropped it to under 30M, and eventually said it would be around 20M.
Ming's (he's an idiot) wildly different guestimates of iPhone X unit sales are representative of WS's ability to correctly estimate anything related to Apple. Only Apple knows how many units (of anything) they are going to sell. Apple prepares accordingly. WS, on the other hand, are generating estimates using incomplete data and/or flawed algorithms.
Not meeting WS expectations is not a bad thing. What is a bad thing, is not meeting management's guidance. Since Maestri became CFO Apple exceeds (on average) low of range revenue guidance by about 3%. This last quarter was no exception. Apple exceeded low revenue guidance by 5.1%, exceeding the top of range revenue guidance. You can't do that by selling fewer iPhones than expected BY MANAGEMENT.
How do you get 5 weeks? Not including pre-sales, the iPhone X hit the market on 03 Nov 2017. Their first fiscal quarter of 2018 ended on 30 Dec 2017. That's 58 days of sales. That means that it was 58 days of sales, which translates to over 8¼ weeks. The entire quarter was 91 days or 13 weeks, which means it was 64% of the quarter being counted, but since the event was back in 12 Sept 2017 many just waited to buy the iPhone X when it went on sale. I can assert that the iPhone 8 Plus being a less expensive device per GB over the iPhone 7 Plus is not a reason for a jump in $100 in ASRP.
Well done Soli. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody that posted here did the math before posting?
The company has had "limited success" trying to pitch the iPhone X at $999
Er … okay. 🙄
That narrative is so stupid, it's almost comical. On the last earnings call, Tim said the X was the best selling phone that quarter and proceeded to give the total # of iPhones sold. I'm trying to understand how the most expensive phone Apple has ever offered and is the best seller of all the bazillions of iphones sold could be considered a limited success.
Did they report on an ASRP in the last earnings call?
$796. $100 higher than the year ago quarter.
That could also mean very high sales of of iPhone 8 Plus, not just iPhone X.
Yeah except for the fact that Cook said it was the X that was the biggest seller since it came out. Why is this so hard for people to come to grips with??
Because people are absolutely stuck on the $999.00 price tag and the thinking that if they think it's ridiculous, or they can't afford it than no one can and it couldn't possibly sell well.
Here’s some math on average selling price, in particular Apple’s holiday quarter ASP of $795, and how to achieve it given Apple’s current iPhone lineup, in millions of units.
This is basically a variant of what financial analysts do, except they have survey data (or their imaginations) on how well particular models sell versus others.
An ASP of $795 is achievable with iPhone 8 Plus sales, but you will have to accept some unusual sales trends. 1. 8 Plus models would have to sell 2.5x more units than 8 models. 2. 256 GB 8 Plus models would have to outsell 64 GB models. 3. 8 Plus models would constitute 37% of iPhone sales.
All of those are highly likely to be false. The scuttlebutt, likely from buyer surveys, is that 8 Plus models and regular 8 models sold about the same amount, nearly 1:1 or 50:50, and that was remarked to be a remarkable trend. 256 GB models outselling 64 GB models by 30% is flatly unbelievable as that goes against all buying trends of the past few years if not forever. Then, 8 Plus model achieving 37% of the mix is also unbelievable. Something this big will be clearly be seen in survey data and would be remarked by all parties, like the carriers, retailers, etc.
Just an example of how the numbers would work out. Maybe I overestimated how many 6S and 7 model sales, who knows.
Comments
And if they hadn’t been idiots and had just dropped the number back in, oh, say… 2012, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
But I look forward to seeing Samsung continue their naming right up through the Galaxy STEN. And SELEVEN and STWELVE and STHIRTEEN. Because they can’t change numbers to numerals like Apple, so why not numbers to letters?
There was another part of the quarter that had iPhone 8 series phones (and no X available) and pent up demand for them too.
Not meeting WS expectations is not a bad thing. What is a bad thing, is not meeting management's guidance. Since Maestri became CFO Apple exceeds (on average) low of range revenue guidance by about 3%. This last quarter was no exception. Apple exceeded low revenue guidance by 5.1%, exceeding the top of range revenue guidance. You can't do that by selling fewer iPhones than expected BY MANAGEMENT.
Well done Soli. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody that posted here did the math before posting?
This is basically a variant of what financial analysts do, except they have survey data (or their imaginations) on how well particular models sell versus others.
An ASP of $795 is achievable with iPhone 8 Plus sales, but you will have to accept some unusual sales trends.
1. 8 Plus models would have to sell 2.5x more units than 8 models.
2. 256 GB 8 Plus models would have to outsell 64 GB models.
3. 8 Plus models would constitute 37% of iPhone sales.
All of those are highly likely to be false. The scuttlebutt, likely from buyer surveys, is that 8 Plus models and regular 8 models sold about the same amount, nearly 1:1 or 50:50, and that was remarked to be a remarkable trend. 256 GB models outselling 64 GB models by 30% is flatly unbelievable as that goes against all buying trends of the past few years if not forever. Then, 8 Plus model achieving 37% of the mix is also unbelievable. Something this big will be clearly be seen in survey data and would be remarked by all parties, like the carriers, retailers, etc.
Just an example of how the numbers would work out. Maybe I overestimated how many 6S and 7 model sales, who knows.