Apple cuts first quarter 2019 iPhone production by 10 percent, report says

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,095member
    LordeHawk said:
    Hmmm... Maybe it's time Apple stoped being so greedy, money and profit orientated and got back to selling great products at an affordable / decent price.
    Cook supposedly says "the iPhone XR has outsold the XS since it's launch in October", ummm yeah, could it be because the XR is a shit wad cheaper than the XS?!
    Don't get me wrong, coz I am an Apple user / lover going on 20 years and I would dearly love to "upgrade" my ageing iPhone 6 to a lovely new current model iPhone but, not at these ludicrous prices.
    Secondly, Apple has reverted back to it's John Scully days of saturating the market with multiple versions of the same product and Apple was 90 days away from being bankrupt. Something Steve Jobs eradicated upon his return to Apple in the 90's and we know how well the company did after that.
    Sorry Mr Cook, you're probably a nice guy but, the advances of technology and idea's died with Steve Jobs and you do not have the ability to think outside the box, therefore, Apple seems to be going no where, whilst still bashing up the prices beyond belief, all the while releasing buggy software that makes the Apple Eco-sphere verging on being as bad as Microcrap (you know who I'm talking about).
    Personally, Steve Jobs should have left Tim Cook in his previous post crunching numbers and doing supply orders. Steve should have made Craig Federighi CEO and front man for the Apple business and brand.
    Rant mode = off ;-)
    Come on Apple, lets get back to being inspiring and great, without the overly high price tags you THINK you can command. Before it's too late.

    Please refrain from posting your ignorant tirades in the future

    Its not “greedy” that Apple maintains a healthy margin to reinvest strategically. 

    For what it's worth I see it as akin to our food-consuming obesity. Apple makes so much profit they have no place to even spend it. It really serves no Apple business needs, nor even general economic ones IMHO, beyond a certain point does it? Effectively profit only for the sake of profit. Just as I don't see it as healthy to eat what you see simply because you can, I don't see it as particularly "healthy" to horde, to concentrate so much wealth into such a small space simply because you can compute how far you can push it.

    IMO Apple maintains margins far higher than they have any business use for. 

    ...and no they aren't the only ones. We won't even get into stratospheric upper management pay, fairly unique to the US, which grows from the "maximize profits" tree. Yeah, I think there's some greed involved.
    edited January 9 80s_Apple_Guymuthuk_vanalingampropod
  • Reply 22 of 38
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,189member
    How do we know that Apple’s designers are forcing engineers to do form over function? How do we know that it’s the designers obsessed with thinness, and not, say, the marketing department? Also there are Windows laptops just as thin as MacBooks that don’t have keyboard issues.
    electrosoft
  • Reply 23 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    How do we know that Apple’s designers are forcing engineers to do form over function? How do we know that it’s the designers obsessed with thinness, and not, say, the marketing department? Also there are Windows laptops just as thin as MacBooks that don’t have keyboard issues.
    You mean like the Dell XPS, or the HP Spectre.....
  • Reply 24 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    cincytee said:
    saarek said:
    The problem, as I see it, is two fold. First, there is no one to reign in Jony anymore.
    That would be rein in, as in a horse, not reign, as in a monarch.
    Quite right, terrible slip up on my part.
  • Reply 25 of 38
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,189member
    gatorguy said:
    LordeHawk said:
    Hmmm... Maybe it's time Apple stoped being so greedy, money and profit orientated and got back to selling great products at an affordable / decent price.
    Cook supposedly says "the iPhone XR has outsold the XS since it's launch in October", ummm yeah, could it be because the XR is a shit wad cheaper than the XS?!
    Don't get me wrong, coz I am an Apple user / lover going on 20 years and I would dearly love to "upgrade" my ageing iPhone 6 to a lovely new current model iPhone but, not at these ludicrous prices.
    Secondly, Apple has reverted back to it's John Scully days of saturating the market with multiple versions of the same product and Apple was 90 days away from being bankrupt. Something Steve Jobs eradicated upon his return to Apple in the 90's and we know how well the company did after that.
    Sorry Mr Cook, you're probably a nice guy but, the advances of technology and idea's died with Steve Jobs and you do not have the ability to think outside the box, therefore, Apple seems to be going no where, whilst still bashing up the prices beyond belief, all the while releasing buggy software that makes the Apple Eco-sphere verging on being as bad as Microcrap (you know who I'm talking about).
    Personally, Steve Jobs should have left Tim Cook in his previous post crunching numbers and doing supply orders. Steve should have made Craig Federighi CEO and front man for the Apple business and brand.
    Rant mode = off ;-)
    Come on Apple, lets get back to being inspiring and great, without the overly high price tags you THINK you can command. Before it's too late.

    Please refrain from posting your ignorant tirades in the future

    Its not “greedy” that Apple maintains a healthy margin to reinvest strategically. 

    For what it's worth I see it as akin to our food-consuming obesity. Apple makes so much profit they have no place to even spend it. It really serves no Apple business needs, nor even general economic ones IMHO, beyond a certain point does it? Effectively profit only for the sake of profit. Just as I don't see it as healthy to eat what you see simply because you can, I don't see it as particularly "healthy" to horde, to concentrate so much wealth into such a small space simply because you can.

    IMO Apple maintains margins far higher than they have any business use for. 

    ...and no they aren't the only ones. We won't even get into stratospheric upper management pay, fairly unique to the US, which grows from the "maximize profits" tree. Yeah, I think there's some greed involved.
    Part of it is maintaining a brand. Go to an outlet mall and the Coach store makes you wait in line to get in the store. Even if the store isn’t that busy you’re waiting in line. With Apple I feel they’re losing some of the reasons you’d pay more for their products. In the Wintel space it’s not cheap plastic anymore. You can say they’re just MacBook Air ripoffs but so what if they’re good (enough) and cheaper? Same thing in the phone space. Everybody is selling metal and/or glass phones now. They all have amazing displays and tiny bezels. Basically the industry has figured out that design matters (and in the case of China, just be copycats) and Apple isn’t necessarily leading the pack here anymore. And once Apple starts ramping up services and making them cross platform it will make charging a premium for their hardware more difficult.
  • Reply 26 of 38
    YP101YP101 Posts: 66member
    If I remember correctly. I think I bought my 6s+ 128GB 3 years ago as $899.
    I bought at that time 3 of them so I am pretty sure I paid almost $1000 per phone after tax.

    I traded in 6S+ as $250 from Apple and bought XR 256GB. I only pay around $695 include tax. Which much cheaper than my original 6S+ I paid for.
    If I using XR for 2 years then I only pay less than $29 per month. Not that bad.

    Current cycle people miscalculate their phone value I think.. Instead trade in, they choose battery swap.($30)
    6,6S is already over 3 years old. Maybe phone still function correctly but soon or later that phone will start break down.

    $749 XR 64GB - $250(6S+ trade in) = $499 What not to like about?
    After 2 years Apple keep this trade in program as it is then I don't think Apple bring back SE model again.

    Other wise you have to rely on telecom plan like buy one get one free for new starter.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    YP101 said:
    If I remember correctly. I think I bought my 6s+ 128GB 3 years ago as $899.
    I bought at that time 3 of them so I am pretty sure I paid almost $1000 per phone after tax.

    I traded in 6S+ as $250 from Apple and bought XR 256GB. I only pay around $695 include tax. Which much cheaper than my original 6S+ I paid for.
    If I using XR for 2 years then I only pay less than $29 per month. Not that bad.

    Current cycle people miscalculate their phone value I think.. Instead trade in, they choose battery swap.($30)
    6,6S is already over 3 years old. Maybe phone still function correctly but soon or later that phone will start break down.

    $749 XR 64GB - $250(6S+ trade in) = $499 What not to like about?
    After 2 years Apple keep this trade in program as it is then I don't think Apple bring back SE model again.

    Other wise you have to rely on telecom plan like buy one get one free for new starter.
    The XR is a great phone, I have no doubt that you'll be happy with it.

    The only point I'd like to make is that the top of the line phone Apple sold in 2015 was the 6S Plus with a starting price of $649, fast forward to 2018 and the starting price of their top of the line phone is $1099, a whopping 40% more. Just think about that for a moment, 3 years ago the top of the range iPhone cost 40% less than it does now.

    avon b7
  • Reply 28 of 38
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 305member
    saarek said:
    YP101 said:
    If I remember correctly. I think I bought my 6s+ 128GB 3 years ago as $899.
    I bought at that time 3 of them so I am pretty sure I paid almost $1000 per phone after tax.

    I traded in 6S+ as $250 from Apple and bought XR 256GB. I only pay around $695 include tax. Which much cheaper than my original 6S+ I paid for.
    If I using XR for 2 years then I only pay less than $29 per month. Not that bad.

    Current cycle people miscalculate their phone value I think.. Instead trade in, they choose battery swap.($30)
    6,6S is already over 3 years old. Maybe phone still function correctly but soon or later that phone will start break down.

    $749 XR 64GB - $250(6S+ trade in) = $499 What not to like about?
    After 2 years Apple keep this trade in program as it is then I don't think Apple bring back SE model again.

    Other wise you have to rely on telecom plan like buy one get one free for new starter.
    The XR is a great phone, I have no doubt that you'll be happy with it.

    The only point I'd like to make is that the top of the line phone Apple sold in 2015 was the 6S Plus with a starting price of $649, fast forward to 2018 and the starting price of their top of the line phone is $1099, a whopping 40% more. Just think about that for a moment, 3 years ago the top of the range iPhone cost 40% less than it does now.

    I get your point, but the 6S Plus cost more. The 6S cost $650. But you did make the point that he shouldn't compare the top phone from 2015 to the bottom new phone of 2018 (Xr), but to the Xs Max.
  • Reply 29 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    AI_lias said:
    saarek said:
    YP101 said:
    If I remember correctly. I think I bought my 6s+ 128GB 3 years ago as $899.
    I bought at that time 3 of them so I am pretty sure I paid almost $1000 per phone after tax.

    I traded in 6S+ as $250 from Apple and bought XR 256GB. I only pay around $695 include tax. Which much cheaper than my original 6S+ I paid for.
    If I using XR for 2 years then I only pay less than $29 per month. Not that bad.

    Current cycle people miscalculate their phone value I think.. Instead trade in, they choose battery swap.($30)
    6,6S is already over 3 years old. Maybe phone still function correctly but soon or later that phone will start break down.

    $749 XR 64GB - $250(6S+ trade in) = $499 What not to like about?
    After 2 years Apple keep this trade in program as it is then I don't think Apple bring back SE model again.

    Other wise you have to rely on telecom plan like buy one get one free for new starter.
    The XR is a great phone, I have no doubt that you'll be happy with it.

    The only point I'd like to make is that the top of the line phone Apple sold in 2015 was the 6S Plus with a starting price of $649, fast forward to 2018 and the starting price of their top of the line phone is $1099, a whopping 40% more. Just think about that for a moment, 3 years ago the top of the range iPhone cost 40% less than it does now.

    I get your point, but the 6S Plus cost more. The 6S cost $650. But you did make the point that he shouldn't compare the top phone from 2015 to the bottom new phone of 2018 (Xr), but to the Xs Max.
    Spot on, he bought the top of the line in 2015, and now has middle of the line for around the same price point. That's not to say that the OP is buying a bad phone, but to get this mid point at the higher memory if you add the trade in plus the financial outlay they are actually worse off than they were buying the top of the range phone cash 3 years ago.

    No wonder Apple's competiton is offering genuinely competitive phones at around $500 less than the XS Max, they've just not added 40% to their pricing in the last 3 years.
  • Reply 30 of 38
    schlackschlack Posts: 699member
    From a consumer perspective, the reason why people are not upgrading as quickly seems obvious. 1. The iPhone 7/8 is just so good. Later versions of the phone only provide incremental value 2. The current iPhones are too expensive (and too large) 3. People are spending more of their budget on other Apple products (iPad/Watch/AirPods, etc.)
    edited January 9
  • Reply 31 of 38
    rob55rob55 Posts: 1,255member
    saarek said:

    The only point I'd like to make is that the top of the line phone Apple sold in 2015 was the 6S Plus with a starting price of $649, fast forward to 2018 and the starting price of their top of the line phone is $1099, a whopping 40% more. Just think about that for a moment, 3 years ago the top of the range iPhone cost 40% less than it does now.

    According to some quick searches, the starting full retail price of a 16GB iPhone 6s Plus was $749 not $649. Also, even compared to the higher original base price of the 6s Plus, the Xs Max is actually over 46% more. 

    Source: https://bgr.com/2015/09/09/iphone-6s-release-date-pricing-preorders-announced/
  • Reply 32 of 38
    YP101YP101 Posts: 66member
    As Rob55 said, that link show( Source: https://bgr.com/2015/09/09/iphone-6s-release-date-pricing-preorders-announced/)
    6S+ 16GB was $749 which same price as XR 64GB price. I don't think you are pay more money.

    6S+ 128GB was $949 and it seems to me XR 256GB $899 is much cheaper phone by simply compare price wise.
    I don't know why people keep saying only look at XS, XS MAX price and keep saying it is expensive.

    I did not buy XS or XS Max due to  MAX is size too big which I don't like about 6S+. Also OLED burn in issue.
    I saw some samsung phone has burn in OLED panel. OLED is not that great for static display such as phone screen.
    I wished Apple refresh SE but I think XR is fine for now.
  • Reply 33 of 38
    The only two issues I see are:

    First, you must compare Apple's iPhone product tiers past with present. It is disingenuous to compare
    their mid level phone (Xr) versus previous top tier phones.

    Second, what are the profit margins on the current models versus the previous models? If they have stayed relatively
    the same, then it makes sense as Apple's costs have increased so will the price of their phones. If profit
    margins have stayed relatively equal over the last ~3-4 years, some are asking Apple to shrink their profit
    margins to keep pricing lower and I don't see Apple doing that outright anytime soon.
  • Reply 34 of 38
    saarek said:
    How do we know that Apple’s designers are forcing engineers to do form over function? How do we know that it’s the designers obsessed with thinness, and not, say, the marketing department? Also there are Windows laptops just as thin as MacBooks that don’t have keyboard issues.
    You mean like the Dell XPS, or the HP Spectre.....
    That’s a general statement and doesn’t mean that much.
  • Reply 35 of 38
    saarek said:
    lenn said:
    Cook is a numbers guy. He's all about profit margins that's why he keeps raising the price on Apple products. Since he's taken over Apple has gotten more and more out of touch with their average customers and are catering to the more affluent segment of the population. They are turning into the BMW of tech companies.
    Apple is a premium brand and that's reflected by premium prices.  Apple products are for affluent consumers, not the peasants that buy cheap android rubbish.  If somebody cannot afford an iPhone then they should look to improve themselves and not expect Apple to lower themselves to appeal to the lowest common denominator.  Average customers buy average products.  Apple products are above average and are perched at the very top.
    Apple has never been cheap, but they were always affordable in their target market, and justifiably so. Typically they were 20-30% more than their nearest competitor when looking at comparable specs across the board.

    They catered for the home and education market as well as the professional market and their prices reflected this. You had the iMac, Mac Mini and MacBook (later MacBook Air) for the home/students and the MacBook Pro and Mac Pro for the professional market.

    The cheapest Mac (Mac Mini) is now $799, in terms of notebooks it's $1200. That's just too much for the average person to even consider, let alone the poorer people whom you are so happy to sideline.

    I started my journey with the Mac when I was 19 and bought the original entry level Mac Mini. I was at that time what you'd probably class as a mere peasant, it was a really big investment for me at the time and required me to sell my beloved gaming PC and cash in a load of overtime.

    Since then I have grown up, secured a decent job and purchased more Apple equipment than I can remember, let alone the people I have converted over the years. I think I can safely say that Apple has sold at least £200,000 worth of computers and accessories out of personal recommendations from me over the years.

    But how can I convert people now, when the pricing is simply not justifiable? The new MacBook Air is beautiful, but it is also easily £400-500 more than the competitors from Dell or HP which, apart from the display resolution, completely kill it in terms of specifications and they have a pretty solid design to boot.

    How about the iPhone, how do I convince someone that the £999 iPhone XS is really at least twice as good as the heavily discounted Samsung Galaxy S9 at £500, let alone the competitors like Huawei?

    Apple always cost more, but you felt that you got more and you'd always make on resale.

    Recently I bought a 2017 MacBook Pro, it's the first time that I have bought a Mac and regretted it afterwards, in fact it has left a really sour taste in my mouth and I am unsure if I will keep it. You see the 2017 model without the touchbar did not get refreshed this year so it is still the dual core version, whereas the other models all got refreshed to quad core. The only reason Apple did this is to push people to spend £300 more on the touchbar version, the touchbar that almost none of their users want. Fuck that.

    So I refused to hand over £300 more, but now I feel screwed by Apple for buying last years already inflated priced tech at today's prices.
    I don’t think the Mac mini you bought packs more power than your “beloved gaming PC” either.

    Speaking about Air, it’s more because Intel can’t make a better processor than Cook is short-sighted.  Think about it, iPad Pro comes with a processor that packs two more big cores that also runs faster, but with roughly the same power consumption, yet doesn’t require any fan like the Air.  Intel makes some of the worst decisions in recent years and that hit Macs pretty bad.

    Of course people can still say why not make it bigger so that will be no problem, but how big is big enough, then?  Intel might bumped its processor twice as hot if they want, so did it mean Apple has to follow its lead, so everyone can be happy about it?

    At least the transition is on its way so we might forget all of these BS.
  • Reply 36 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    DuhSesame said:
    saarek said:
    How do we know that Apple’s designers are forcing engineers to do form over function? How do we know that it’s the designers obsessed with thinness, and not, say, the marketing department? Also there are Windows laptops just as thin as MacBooks that don’t have keyboard issues.
    You mean like the Dell XPS, or the HP Spectre.....
    That’s a general statement and doesn’t mean that much.
    Actually it was rather specific, the original poster asked me to supply names of competing products that are just as thin and do not suffer from the terrible keyboad issues that the Mac Line has, I supplied two of the biggest competitors.
  • Reply 37 of 38
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,142member
    DuhSesame said:
    saarek said:
    lenn said:
    Cook is a numbers guy. He's all about profit margins that's why he keeps raising the price on Apple products. Since he's taken over Apple has gotten more and more out of touch with their average customers and are catering to the more affluent segment of the population. They are turning into the BMW of tech companies.
    Apple is a premium brand and that's reflected by premium prices.  Apple products are for affluent consumers, not the peasants that buy cheap android rubbish.  If somebody cannot afford an iPhone then they should look to improve themselves and not expect Apple to lower themselves to appeal to the lowest common denominator.  Average customers buy average products.  Apple products are above average and are perched at the very top.
    Apple has never been cheap, but they were always affordable in their target market, and justifiably so. Typically they were 20-30% more than their nearest competitor when looking at comparable specs across the board.

    They catered for the home and education market as well as the professional market and their prices reflected this. You had the iMac, Mac Mini and MacBook (later MacBook Air) for the home/students and the MacBook Pro and Mac Pro for the professional market.

    The cheapest Mac (Mac Mini) is now $799, in terms of notebooks it's $1200. That's just too much for the average person to even consider, let alone the poorer people whom you are so happy to sideline.

    I started my journey with the Mac when I was 19 and bought the original entry level Mac Mini. I was at that time what you'd probably class as a mere peasant, it was a really big investment for me at the time and required me to sell my beloved gaming PC and cash in a load of overtime.

    Since then I have grown up, secured a decent job and purchased more Apple equipment than I can remember, let alone the people I have converted over the years. I think I can safely say that Apple has sold at least £200,000 worth of computers and accessories out of personal recommendations from me over the years.

    But how can I convert people now, when the pricing is simply not justifiable? The new MacBook Air is beautiful, but it is also easily £400-500 more than the competitors from Dell or HP which, apart from the display resolution, completely kill it in terms of specifications and they have a pretty solid design to boot.

    How about the iPhone, how do I convince someone that the £999 iPhone XS is really at least twice as good as the heavily discounted Samsung Galaxy S9 at £500, let alone the competitors like Huawei?

    Apple always cost more, but you felt that you got more and you'd always make on resale.

    Recently I bought a 2017 MacBook Pro, it's the first time that I have bought a Mac and regretted it afterwards, in fact it has left a really sour taste in my mouth and I am unsure if I will keep it. You see the 2017 model without the touchbar did not get refreshed this year so it is still the dual core version, whereas the other models all got refreshed to quad core. The only reason Apple did this is to push people to spend £300 more on the touchbar version, the touchbar that almost none of their users want. Fuck that.

    So I refused to hand over £300 more, but now I feel screwed by Apple for buying last years already inflated priced tech at today's prices.
    I don’t think the Mac mini you bought packs more power than your “beloved gaming PC” either.

    Speaking about Air, it’s more because Intel can’t make a better processor than Cook is short-sighted.  Think about it, iPad Pro comes with a processor that packs two more big cores that also runs faster, but with roughly the same power consumption, yet doesn’t require any fan like the Air.  Intel makes some of the worst decisions in recent years and that hit Macs pretty bad.

    Of course people can still say why not make it bigger so that will be no problem, but how big is big enough, then?  Intel might bumped its processor twice as hot if they want, so did it mean Apple has to follow its lead, so everyone can be happy about it?

    At least the transition is on its way so we might forget all of these BS.
    I never claimed that the original Mac Mini was faster than the AMD Gaming PC that I replaced it with. Although Mac OS Tiger with 2GB of Ram could really move.

    The MacBook Air CPU is perfectly acceptable for it's target audience, Apple is also one of the only manufacturers who use what is ultimately a sales flop for Intel.
  • Reply 38 of 38
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 823member
    jume said:
    lenn said:
    Cook is a numbers guy. He's all about profit margins that's why he keeps raising the price on Apple products. Since he's taken over Apple has gotten more and more out of touch with their average customers and are catering to the more affluent segment of the population. They are turning into the BMW of tech companies.
    Apple is a premium brand and that's reflected by premium prices.  Apple products are for affluent consumers, not the peasants that buy cheap android rubbish.  If somebody cannot afford an iPhone then they should look to improve themselves and not expect Apple to lower themselves to appeal to the lowest common denominator.  Average customers buy average products.  Apple products are above average and are perched at the very top.
    Don't be such a fanboy.

    Apple set mad prices. Market reacted by not buying, wether you like it or not. Thats why we have this forum thread.

    Like @Saarek said. iPhone is the best phone, but is not x4 better than Huawei, Samsung and other knockoffs. And its priced 4x!! Yeah iPhone has great design, hw and the best software. But far from what you are saying cheap Android rubbish. There are some decent Android phones that can do everything iPhone can and even do some things better.
    Apple set mad prices?  What does that even mean. Apple has ALWAYS made pricier products than the competition.. that is a fact. Stating that they are a premium brand is also a fact.. that isn't fanboyism.  You have no access to ANY actual sales #'s so you think folks aren't buying iPhone is ignorant at best. Stop with the bullshit Youtube fake Apple fan troll BS and get real.  Apple cut orders last year as well and it zero to do with how the phone sold.

    It also disingenuous to act like that Huawei and Samusng don't sell high end, high price phones. So yes iPhone is 4x better than a crap $250.00 phone made by either of these companies.

    I also don't agree with the peasant comment..as not everyone that decides on a lower price phone is a peasant or not affluent. They just choose to spend their money on other things that are more important to them.



Sign In or Register to comment.