iPhone 12 lineup pricing identical across carriers after blowback over $30 difference

AppleInsider · October 16, 2020 12:49PM

The Apple Store originally listed any iPhone 12 model not made for Verizon or AT&T as $30 more expensive, but on pre-order day prices are the same across all models.

iPhone 12 pricing identical across carriers

The iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Pro are now available for pre-order, and they are priced the same regardless of character. Apple was thought to have made a special deal with Verizon and AT&T for the pricing to be subsidized, which caused a lot of backlash amongst fans.

If Apple had followed through with the new pricing, it would have appeared that the iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 mini were priced $30 higher when not on those two carriers. Strangely this did not affect the iPhone 12 Pro or iPhone 12 Pro Max pricing.

Whatever the reasoning for the pricing and the change back to identical prices across the line, customers can now rest easy knowing they don't have to be on a specific carrier for special pricing.

The iPhone 12 mini and iPhone 12 Pro Max are available for pre-order on November 6 and will ship on November 13. The iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Pro are now on sale and shipping as soon as October 23.

emttim · October 16, 2020 12:58PM

My receipt has a Verizon discount and on it.

tjwolf · October 16, 2020 1:00PM

The SIM-free version is still $30 more expensive :-(

randominternetperson · October 16, 2020 1:37PM

tjwolf said:

The SIM-free version is still $30 more expensive :-(

Based on that, I suspect what really happened is that the other 2 carriers sucked it up and also subsidized the $30.

flydog · October 16, 2020 1:58PM

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

edited October 2020

aross99 · October 16, 2020 2:16PM

Isn't the $30 discount really just to "make you feel better" about the $30 upgrade fee that the carriers charge? The price really went up $30 as others have said, so in the end you pay the same amount as last year:

2019: $999 + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029

2020: $1029 - $30 "Discount" + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029

The $30 fee is crazy because they never touch the phone and aren't really involved in the "upgrade" of a device.

ios_guy80 · October 16, 2020 2:36PM

aross99 said:

Isn't the $30 discount really just to "make you feel better" about the $30 upgrade fee that the carriers charge? The price really went up $30 as others have said, so in the end you pay the same amount as last year:
2019: $999 + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029
2020: $1029 - $30 "Discount" + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029

The $30 fee is crazy because they never touch the phone and aren't really involved in the "upgrade" of a device.

I call my carrier every year and ask them to waive their fee which they did. However last year they split the difference with me.

goodbyeranch · October 16, 2020 3:35PM

I charge a convenience fee to open my wallet and keep it closed when they don't waive theirs.

dewme · October 16, 2020 3:37PM

flydog said:

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

In Apple's defense, they have always said "starting at" which is a very common and universally applied advertising ploy for most any purchase. That gives them the discretion to have higher priced configurations as long as at least one of them does actually "start at" the advertised price. It's all part of the silly little game that's been played since the dawn of salesmanship and something all adults should be very familiar with and have an immunity to. It's no different than using "x99" in pricing to make you think you're not buying an $800 phone because it's advertised as $799, use of the term "up to" when describing payouts, use of asterisks, and "limited quantities at this price" sorts of things.

Are these advertising ploys just part of a silly game that I'd rather not play? Sure, but do they convey dishonesty, i.e., a deeply concerning character flaw? I don't think so.

edited October 2020

nickmccally · October 16, 2020 4:19PM

designr said:

aross99 said:

Isn't the $30 discount really just to "make you feel better" about the $30 upgrade fee that the carriers charge? The price really went up $30 as others have said, so in the end you pay the same amount as last year:
2019: $999 + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029
2020: $1029 - $30 "Discount" + $30 AT&T upgrade fee = $1029

The $30 fee is crazy because they never touch the phone and aren't really involved in the "upgrade" of a device.

I think this is exactly it. The $30 activation fee by the carriers is kind of a sham. Sounds like most people who try can just get it waived by the carrier.

Activation fee's are added to the bill, not to the price of the phone. This sounds like the price of the device went up, which is inline with the articles stating the reason for discontinuing packaged charger and headphones was a cost cutting measure.

bonobob · October 16, 2020 4:20PM

I didn’t know about this activation fee. I always by the phone SIMless and put the old SIM in the new phone. No fee is involved.

randominternetperson · October 16, 2020 7:02PM

bonobob said:

I didn’t know about this activation fee. I always by the phone SIMless and put the old SIM in the new phone. No fee is involved.

Right, but in this case, for the first time in recent years "simless" costs $30 more than carrier-associated. Bummer.

cloudtalkin · October 16, 2020 7:34PM

dewme said:

flydog said:

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

In Apple's defense, they have always said "starting at" which is a very common and universally applied advertising ploy for most any purchase. That gives them the discretion to have higher priced configurations as long as at least one of them does actually "start at" the advertised price. It's all part of the silly little game that's been played since the dawn of salesmanship and something all adults should be very familiar with and have an immunity to. It's no different than using "x99" in pricing to make you think you're not buying an $800 phone because it's advertised as $799, use of the term "up to" when describing payouts, use of asterisks, and "limited quantities at this price" sorts of things.

Are these advertising ploys just part of a silly game that I'd rather not play? Sure, but do they convey dishonesty, i.e., a deeply concerning character flaw? I don't think so.

That's a defense, yes. Though not a defense for the particular issue addressed in the quote by @flydog . You're right, for the longest time "starting at" has denoted the higher priced configurations. Still does. Pretty sure most people already know this. Apple even goes so far as to subsequently denote pricing for each config. Full transparency. "Starting at" has not denoted higher price for simply choosing a specific carrier. No context of "starting at" would lead anyone to assume carrier specific pricing for the same configs.

Trying to conflate the two together doesn't work. They are not similar at all.

edited October 2020

strangedays · October 16, 2020 9:47PM

dewme said:

flydog said:

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

In Apple's defense, they have always said "starting at" which is a very common and universally applied advertising ploy for most any purchase. That gives them the discretion to have higher priced configurations as long as at least one of them does actually "start at" the advertised price. It's all part of the silly little game that's been played since the dawn of salesmanship and something all adults should be very familiar with and have an immunity to. It's no different than using "x99" in pricing to make you think you're not buying an $800 phone because it's advertised as $799, use of the term "up to" when describing payouts, use of asterisks, and "limited quantities at this price" sorts of things.

Are these advertising ploys just part of a silly game that I'd rather not play? Sure, but do they convey dishonesty, i.e., a deeply concerning character flaw? I don't think so.

No we must be outraged! Rawr!

strangedays · October 16, 2020 9:49PM

bonobob said:

I didn’t know about this activation fee. I always by the phone SIMless and put the old SIM in the new phone. No fee is involved.

I saw that SIM-less option this year but wasn't sure about it. Could one really just buy that version, swap the SIM cards, and not have to let the carriers know whatsoever and save 30 bucks for the scam carrier fee? That would be surprising.

edited October 2020

fastasleep · October 16, 2020 11:10PM

StrangeDays said:

bonobob said:

I didn’t know about this activation fee. I always by the phone SIMless and put the old SIM in the new phone. No fee is involved.

I saw that SIM-less option this year but wasn't sure about it. Could one really just buy that version, swap the SIM cards, and not have to let the carriers know whatsoever and save 30 bucks for the scam carrier fee? That would be surprising.

That’s what I’m doing with T-mobile, every time I get a new iPhone I just pop the SIM in. Only time I have to pay them is if my phone was stolen and I need a new SIM which I think is like $15 or something, though they waived that once. I do not miss AT&T at all since I switched years ago.

razorpit · October 17, 2020 2:18AM

fastasleep said:

StrangeDays said:

bonobob said:

I didn’t know about this activation fee. I always by the phone SIMless and put the old SIM in the new phone. No fee is involved.

I saw that SIM-less option this year but wasn't sure about it. Could one really just buy that version, swap the SIM cards, and not have to let the carriers know whatsoever and save 30 bucks for the scam carrier fee? That would be surprising.

That’s what I’m doing with T-mobile, every time I get a new iPhone I just pop the SIM in. Only time I have to pay them is if my phone was stolen and I need a new SIM which I think is like $15 or something, though they waived that once. I do not miss AT&T at all since I switched years ago.

We switched from AT&T to T-Mobile this past Tuesday and I couldn’t be happier. I’m saving $50/month on 3 phones and 2 watches. And I can finally send/receive text messages when I’m in my basement.

edited October 2020

canukstorm · October 17, 2020 2:34AM

CloudTalkin said:

dewme said:

flydog said:

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

In Apple's defense, they have always said "starting at" which is a very common and universally applied advertising ploy for most any purchase. That gives them the discretion to have higher priced configurations as long as at least one of them does actually "start at" the advertised price. It's all part of the silly little game that's been played since the dawn of salesmanship and something all adults should be very familiar with and have an immunity to. It's no different than using "x99" in pricing to make you think you're not buying an $800 phone because it's advertised as $799, use of the term "up to" when describing payouts, use of asterisks, and "limited quantities at this price" sorts of things.

Are these advertising ploys just part of a silly game that I'd rather not play? Sure, but do they convey dishonesty, i.e., a deeply concerning character flaw? I don't think so.

That's a defense, yes. Though not a defense for the particular issue addressed in the quote by @flydog . You're right, for the longest time "starting at" has denoted the higher priced configurations. Still does. Pretty sure most people already know this. Apple even goes so far as to subsequently denote pricing for each config. Full transparency. "Starting at" has not denoted higher price for simply choosing a specific carrier. No context of "starting at" would lead anyone to assume carrier specific pricing for the same configs.

Trying to conflate the two together doesn't work. They are not similar at all.

Or for that matter choosing a phone on-contract or off-contract

verne arase · October 17, 2020 11:30AM

flydog said:

The "blowback" was about Apple not being honest about the price when it stated $799 during the event, and then posted $799 with an asterisk on its website, when in fact, those prices required an account with certain carriers. And it continues to advertise $799 even though the price is still $829.

I don't get it ... does this mean if you buy at $799 that you're under contract again?

That would certainly suck.

idrey · October 17, 2020 3:06PM

I been buying through Apple and getting the Verizon version which is unlock and I just switch the sim and don’t pay any activation fee. But I buy the pro max so i guess it makes no difference. I actually had no idea there was a price difference.

verne arase · October 17, 2020 4:43PM

idrey said:

I been buying through Apple and getting the Verizon version which is unlock and I just switch the sim and don’t pay any activation fee. But I buy the pro max so i guess it makes no difference. I actually had no idea there was a price difference.

I'm with AT&T, but I'm thinking of changing since they really don't show much love. When I bought my Apple Watch last year they started charging the first month rather than giving a month or two free like other carriers, and I really don't use any of the extras they promise on their unlimited family plan.

I've been buying my iPhones on the Apple Upgrade Program as AT&T - last year a Pro Max - and this year I've paid if off early as my wife wants my 11 Pro Max and I'm going to do another Apple Upgrade Program purchase this year for a 12 Pro Max.

My wife is currently on an iPhone 7 (which she's always using off a power brick) and my daughter on a 7 Plus, and I'm reticent to switch because I don't know if other carriers would support all our phones' frequency bands, but since my wife is getting my 11 Pro Max I'll be swapping up my daughter to a more recent model so I can be more agile in my carrier choice.

So ... I really want to make sure that nothing gets purchased under contract.

iPhone 12 lineup pricing identical across carriers after blowback over $30 difference

Comments