The primary reason for the continuing negative narratives around the iPhone X are its price point. Those who are on the Apple negativity bandwagon decided to appoint themselves as the guardians of our wallets by deciding how much Apple should charge for its top-of-the-line product. They set their own price bar, decided to defend it to the death, and now demand to receive the praise and adoration of all of the smartphone purchasers they have saved from Apple's price gouging wickedness by pointing to lower than expected sale numbers for the X. What they've failed to admit is that Apple actually provides a wide range of iPhone choices at a range of different price-performance and feature points. Apologies to the Apple peelers for using the C word, i.e., "choice," since they think all Apple customers are little blind sheep who only do what they're told to do by Tim & Jony.
Apple has never before offered such a wide variety of choices in its iPhone product line. Customers and customer alone will decide what they're willing to pay for an iPhone that best fits their needs. If the "X" marks the spot for someone, then so be it. Others will find their sweet spot with the 8 or 8 Plus, maybe even the SE. Do these same folks get all bent out of shape about Chevy Cruze sales numbers exceeding Chevy Corvette sales numbers? Probably, because they're a bunch of idiots.
No surprise here. Most iPhone users want a proper Home Button. It makes the iPhone so easy to use. I know two friends who switched back from iPhone X to iPhone 8 because they missed the home button.
If any iphone upgrader is worried about the price difference of say $200, Im sure they will stick w the 8 or 8+. Some of us dont care about the price difference, some of us have disposable $ and some don’t so why don’t you surveys me.....most of my friends who upgraded went w iphoneX and they loved it. Agreed
Right away in the title of this article we find skepticism at someone else’s skepticism about the iPhone X. Get over it Apple crowd. I’m a fan too but FETCH IS NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. Let it go. It’s overpriced and people finally proved there is a tipping point, though that tipping point was way higher than even I expected, admittedly.
Hmm, let's see which I should believe about iPhone sales, the CEO of the company or a third party that interviewed 500 consumers (using some undisclosed methodology).
A CEO of any big company has always a hidden agenda when he/she makes a public statement. 500 comsumers can speak freely with their tongue on their heart. So yes I would believe more the 500 consumers.
Then you're a fool if you believe he's lying -- as a C-level exec of a publicly traded corp, Cook is prohibited from lying to stockholders.
Good thing you're not one of them.
Just admit that you want Apple to fail and stop trying to be rational about it.
I don’t think Cook is lying, but it’s also in his interest to put the best spin on things he can. If this report is true, so what? The iPhone X is Apple’s top of the line phone with a premium price. The iPhone 8 is still a *very* competent phone and it’s significantly cheaper. For some people, having the top of the line is worth the price premium, but for the majority of consumers, the iPhone 8 is more than adequate and will be so for several years. Either way, Apple sells a phone.
If if I had to buy a phone today, it would probably be an iPhone 8. Spending an extra $200 for FaceID isn’t worth it for me, and the iPhone X doesn’t have any other features I particularly want or need.
Right away in the title of this article we find skepticism at someone else’s skepticism about the iPhone X. Get over it Apple crowd. I’m a fan too but FETCH IS NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. Let it go. It’s overpriced and people finally proved there is a tipping point, though that tipping point was way higher than even I expected, admittedly.
Sorry, but that's a load of crap. It's priced high because it was difficult to scale, and despite this it killed it at least during the last quarter where Cook said so explicitly. Recent reports have it as the #1 profit-earning smartphone on the market, meaning it's doing well. I know that pains you.
But even if it's true that in subsequent quarters the non-top-tier iPhone models are selling more, so what? This remains good news, because they're still iPhones. And as noted it's expected that lower-tiered models will sell more than top-tier models.
Heads, Apple wins, tails, knockoffs lose. Take your pick.
First of all, of course it's the #1 profit-earning smartphone on the market...it's the HIGHEST PRICED. That doesn't mean it's doing well. That means it makes the most profit PER UNIT. And why would it pain me anyway? I have mutual funds invested in Apple. I own more 3 Apple computers and 2 iPhones. It doesn't pain me. It pains me to see the continued fanboyism that can't accept a notch and a $1000 minimum price tag might not have been the rousing success Apple had grown to think would come. Like I said, Apple tested the elasticity of the rubber band and it appears to have snapped.
What do knockoffs have to do with anything. Objection your honor...relevancy??
I know it is cool iPhone, but over $1000 for phone?
Google Pixel 2 XL = $950
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
The only people I know who got iPX make over 100Kyr. And not even all the people I know that make 100Kyr got one, so, it’s kinda expected that a $1000 phone is going to sell fewer units than one nearly half the price.
Really only a couple analysts that truely “get” Apple.
I know it is cool iPhone, but over $1000 for phone?
Google Pixel 2 XL = $950
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
Where do you get your comparison pricing? Google Pixel 2 XL is $549 or $649 right now at Verizon. How much is the iPhone X? I'll help you out -- $999 and $1149. Not even close. Galaxy S9+ is $629. Not even close to $1000 (which is the LOW END of the iPhone X).
I love how people tout a companies PROFITS on a smart phone as some sort of measure of it's success...the way I read it, take an overpriced phone, and all the schmucks that buy it, and that generates lots of profit for the company. Hint -- HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. You think they made all that profit on a 15% margin? LOL!
It seems quite a few people have no understanding of how businesses work.
Apple sells its products at a price it thinks the market will bear. Obviously it can’t be too high otherwise no one would buy them; it can’t be too low or it won’t be able to turn a profit and/or it could be investigated for anti-competitive behavior.
Those of you skeptical about a state-of-the-art smartphone that runs on the latest chip fabrication technology and VCSELs costs $1000, please do us all a favor and go out and invent a better phone. Put your money where your mouth is. I will be the first to buy your product if you can topple Apple. Don’t forget that mechanical watches are still priced in the hundreds of thousands and do a worse job at telling accurate time than a cheap quartz yet people still bought them.
The only people I know who got iPX make over 100Kyr. And not even all the people I know that make 100Kyr got one, so, it’s kinda expected that a $1000 phone is going to sell fewer units than one nearly half the price.
Really only a couple analysts that truely “get” Apple.
Let see if I understand this. Because the only two people YOU know that have an X make >$100K per year, then obviously the demographic for the average iPhone X consumer is someone that makes over $100K per year? Interesting...you run an analytics company or something?
I was just in the Apple store tonight and was debating buying a product red 8+ iPhone just based on the appeal of the look! But after reading this article; I going to be picking one up tomorrow! LOL! I already have a space grey iPhone X and an iPhone SE!
Phones are sold differently in the USA. With all the “buy one, get one free” promotions it’s no wonder the 8 outsold the X.
That just means globally the X outsold the 8...
Well, I hope not, and not just because that would mean I would’ve been wrong twice in adjacent quarters.
Contrary to the gleeful braying of the resident cheapskates, Apple doesn’t make phones that people can’t afford. Just because they can’t afford one, doesn’t mean that no one can. This is why Apple makes phones at a range of prices (but of course, the RC think that they should be entitled to a top-flight phone for the price of a low-end Android model).
The plan has always been for the lower end models to outsell the top-tier model. That’s how it works. If the iPhoneX is still outselling the 8 and the 8+ then that would mean Apple had priced the X too low, or the differentiation is not enough to make the 8 a compelling buy.
I know it is cool iPhone, but over $1000 for phone?
Google Pixel 2 XL = $950
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
Where do you get your comparison pricing? Google Pixel 2 XL is $549 or $649 right now at Verizon. How much is the iPhone X? I'll help you out -- $999 and $1149. Not even close. Galaxy S9+ is $629. Not even close to $1000 (which is the LOW END of the iPhone X).
I love how people tout a companies PROFITS on a smart phone as some sort of measure of it's success...the way I read it, take an overpriced phone, and all the schmucks that buy it, and that generates lots of profit for the company. Hint -- HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. You think they made all that profit on a 15% margin? LOL!
Get the hell outta here buddy, go get your econ 101 course and then come back and yap.
Yes, fracking profit is a measure of success, that's how business works buddy boy.
You can't price crap at a high price for any length of time. So, high price means people estimate the value they get from what they buy is WORTH IT.
That other products are priced less means that people think their product are simply not worth more. QED. Now ,go and play .
Pricing power means profits for the company.
Being able to charge a high price means you're products is worth it to the buyer.
So, despite making more money, being more educated, these people according to you for a decade bought a product from a company that was ripping them off?
According to you, that would make those Apple buyers, which have by far the highest demos, all somehow idiots and not having normal human behavior of looking out for what's best for them.
If that's what you are saying, you'd be a troll. Are you a troll...Hmm.... I think you are.
I know it is cool iPhone, but over $1000 for phone?
Google Pixel 2 XL = $950
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
Where do you get your comparison pricing? Google Pixel 2 XL is $549 or $649 right now at Verizon. How much is the iPhone X? I'll help you out -- $999 and $1149. Not even close. Galaxy S9+ is $629. Not even close to $1000 (which is the LOW END of the iPhone X).
I love how people tout a companies PROFITS on a smart phone as some sort of measure of it's success...the way I read it, take an overpriced phone, and all the schmucks that buy it, and that generates lots of profit for the company. Hint -- HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. You think they made all that profit on a 15% margin? LOL!
So the Pixel really crashed and burnt, huh?
According to techradar: "the Pixel 2 XL starts at US$849 (£799, AU$1,399) for the base 64GB model, while the 128GB version is priced at US$949 (£899, AU$1,549)."
It's not @chasm's fault if the prices on the Pixel are dropping faster than anyone can keep track.
$949 for the 128GB version. I'd say that is pretty comparable to $1149 for the 256GB iPhone.
The only thing overpriced was the Pixel, which is why the prices dropped by $300!!
With age, things to appear more and more quickly. So this reportage theme -- speculative pieces about sales of any Apple device get proven wrong at the next quarterly earnings report. As it will be this time.
And some empirical crap:
Based only on observation in and around NYC: I've been seeing a lot of X's, hardly any 8/8 Plus. FWIW, of course.
And then there's this: When the iPhone first rolled out, I saw an amazing number of people from a modest economic background, so to speak, with what our beloved corporate media were reporting as an expensive luxury device. But it turns out that an expensive phone was more affordable and did a large chunk of the work that an unaffordable laptop did. In other words, the apparent luxury device was a more affordable solution. The moral, as always: Corporate media reportage is a mix of laziness, bias and ignorance compounded by the need to have reportage reflect predetermined scenarios. And what's important to us often isn't what the media feel needs to be reported.
Right away in the title of this article we find skepticism at someone else’s skepticism about the iPhone X. Get over it Apple crowd. I’m a fan too but FETCH IS NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. Let it go. It’s overpriced and people finally proved there is a tipping point, though that tipping point was way higher than even I expected, admittedly.
Sorry, but that's a load of crap. It's priced high because it was difficult to scale, and despite this it killed it at least during the last quarter where Cook said so explicitly. Recent reports have it as the #1 profit-earning smartphone on the market, meaning it's doing well. I know that pains you.
But even if it's true that in subsequent quarters the non-top-tier iPhone models are selling more, so what? This remains good news, because they're still iPhones. And as noted it's expected that lower-tiered models will sell more than top-tier models.
Heads, Apple wins, tails, knockoffs lose. Take your pick.
First of all, of course it's the #1 profit-earning smartphone on the market...it's the HIGHEST PRICED. That doesn't mean it's doing well. That means it makes the most profit PER UNIT. And why would it pain me anyway? I have mutual funds invested in Apple. I own more 3 Apple computers and 2 iPhones. It doesn't pain me. It pains me to see the continued fanboyism that can't accept a notch and a $1000 minimum price tag might not have been the rousing success Apple had grown to think would come. Like I said, Apple tested the elasticity of the rubber band and it appears to have snapped.
What do knockoffs have to do with anything. Objection your honor...relevancy??
You may want to rewrite your comment after realizing that the news about the X being the most profitable was about that one phone model sucking up 35% of global profits in the entire smartphone market. It’s not ‘most profit per unit’, it’s the most profit period, in aggregate.
I know it is cool iPhone, but over $1000 for phone?
Google Pixel 2 XL = $950
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
Where do you get your comparison pricing? Google Pixel 2 XL is $549 or $649 right now at Verizon. How much is the iPhone X? I'll help you out -- $999 and $1149. Not even close. Galaxy S9+ is $629. Not even close to $1000 (which is the LOW END of the iPhone X).
I love how people tout a companies PROFITS on a smart phone as some sort of measure of it's success...the way I read it, take an overpriced phone, and all the schmucks that buy it, and that generates lots of profit for the company. Hint -- HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. You think they made all that profit on a 15% margin? LOL!
Naysayer spin: HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET.
Reality: A product that provides incredible value, like a secure, smoothly performing, privacy-protecting supercomputer that fits in you pocket (pretty much only iPhones fit that bill) can represent a great value proposition in the minds of consumers at prices ranging from $349 to 1149.
And companies that make a focused range of models of such products sharing many internal components and selling as new models for years after each was a flagship (pretty much only Apple fits that bill) can make outsized profits while providing their customers with the above-mentioned value proposition.
Duh! Almost by definition, lower priced models of anything will sell more units than higher priced models. The surprise would be if they didn't.
Which sells more units? A high level Toyota Camry or a Lexus? A Sony A8F 65" OLED TV at $3800 list or a Sony X850F at $1800? A Hershey's chocolate bar at $1 a bar or some hand made chocolate at $30 a pound? Etc.
Not always - the cheapest new car in the UK is probably the Dacia Sandero at £6995, but I would put any money on something like a VW Golf or Ford Focus outselling it at more than twice the price. Even comparing within the same brand/model, I'd say there are more Golf GTIs and Golf Rs than base model Golf Ss, there certainly is around my area anyway.
To me, it's interesting that in 2018 Apple sells less new models (8, 8+, X combined account for 60%) and more old models than in 2017 (when 7 and 7+ combined accounted for almost 70%).
Comments
Apple has never before offered such a wide variety of choices in its iPhone product line. Customers and customer alone will decide what they're willing to pay for an iPhone that best fits their needs. If the "X" marks the spot for someone, then so be it. Others will find their sweet spot with the 8 or 8 Plus, maybe even the SE. Do these same folks get all bent out of shape about Chevy Cruze sales numbers exceeding Chevy Corvette sales numbers? Probably, because they're a bunch of idiots.
If if I had to buy a phone today, it would probably be an iPhone 8. Spending an extra $200 for FaceID isn’t worth it for me, and the iPhone X doesn’t have any other features I particularly want or need.
What do knockoffs have to do with anything. Objection your honor...relevancy??
Galaxy S9+ = $950
Both are arguably close and arguably inferior (at least by dint of not running iOS if nothing else) to the iPhone X. Paying $950 or so for an Android flagship is okay, but $1000 for an iPhone? Outrageous. (rolls eyes) Yes, highly advanced and custom-integrated technology never costs more than commoditized parts (rolls eyes even more).
As for the article itself, I suspect those who claim to agree with this assessment will be feeling foolish come May 2 -- there's no data that indicates that Cook's statement three months ago that the iPhone X is the best-selling model of iPhone isn't still true -- but of course if you add up the combined sales of other iPhones against the one model, sure they might "outsell" the iPhone X.
It's amusing that some commenters here have apparently already forgotten the report of just a few days ago that the iPhone X takes 35 percent of all smartphone profits by itself -- a huge chunk of all of Apple's share of smartphone profits. If the iPhone X weren't selling as well as the iPhone 8, wouldn't the report have reflected that?
Really only a couple analysts that truely “get” Apple.
I love how people tout a companies PROFITS on a smart phone as some sort of measure of it's success...the way I read it, take an overpriced phone, and all the schmucks that buy it, and that generates lots of profit for the company. Hint -- HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. You think they made all that profit on a 15% margin? LOL!
Apple sells its products at a price it thinks the market will bear. Obviously it can’t be too high otherwise no one would buy them; it can’t be too low or it won’t be able to turn a profit and/or it could be investigated for anti-competitive behavior.
Those of you skeptical about a state-of-the-art smartphone that runs on the latest chip fabrication technology and VCSELs costs $1000, please do us all a favor and go out and invent a better phone. Put your money where your mouth is. I will be the first to buy your product if you can topple Apple. Don’t forget that mechanical watches are still priced in the hundreds of thousands and do a worse job at telling accurate time than a cheap quartz yet people still bought them.
Contrary to the gleeful braying of the resident cheapskates, Apple doesn’t make phones that people can’t afford. Just because they can’t afford one, doesn’t mean that no one can. This is why Apple makes phones at a range of prices (but of course, the RC think that they should be entitled to a top-flight phone for the price of a low-end Android model).
The plan has always been for the lower end models to outsell the top-tier model. That’s how it works. If the iPhoneX is still outselling the 8 and the 8+ then that would mean Apple had priced the X too low, or the differentiation is not enough to make the 8 a compelling buy.
So the Pixel really crashed and burnt, huh?
It's not @chasm's fault if the prices on the Pixel are dropping faster than anyone can keep track.
Naysayer spin: HIGH PROFITS = EXCESSIVE MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET.
Reality: A product that provides incredible value, like a secure, smoothly performing, privacy-protecting supercomputer that fits in you pocket (pretty much only iPhones fit that bill) can represent a great value proposition in the minds of consumers at prices ranging from $349 to 1149.
And companies that make a focused range of models of such products sharing many internal components and selling as new models for years after each was a flagship (pretty much only Apple fits that bill) can make outsized profits while providing their customers with the above-mentioned value proposition.