Apple can't make enough of the iPhone 14 Pro to meet demand

Comments

• Reply 1 of 18

  JFC_PA Posts: 932member

  November 3, 2022 6:16PM

  Worth the wait: my iPhone 14 pro max is terrific. Great cameras, fast and nimble. Battery drain is remarkably low. 

  
• Reply 2 of 18

  Madbum Posts: 536member

  November 3, 2022 6:17PM

  The government 7 day lockdowns imposed was in the area around Foxconn but media report made it sound like it was only Foxconn
  
  also this will actually help production as nobody can leave the factory like the anti USA weibo show they staged couple days ago 

  
• Reply 3 of 18

  Madbum Posts: 536member

  November 3, 2022 6:18PM

  JFC_PA said:

  Worth the wait: my iPhone 14 pro max is terrific. Great cameras, fast and nimble. Battery drain is remarkably low. 

  Yeah with the 16.1 iOS update, my 14 pro has amazing battery life 

  
• Reply 4 of 18

  JFC_PA Posts: 932member

  November 3, 2022 7:04PM

  Yet one can increase production , while increasing demand is far more out of a companies control. 

  
• Reply 5 of 18

  lewchenko Posts: 122member

  November 3, 2022 7:17PM

  Amazing really considering most countries are experiencing a cost of living crisis with energy and interest rates spiralling upwards. The fact that people still prioritise £/$/€ 1000 phones is quite surprising. 

  
• Reply 6 of 18

  Marvin Posts: 15,322moderator

  November 3, 2022 8:23PM

  lewchenko said:

  Amazing really considering most countries are experiencing a cost of living crisis with energy and interest rates spiralling upwards. The fact that people still prioritise £/$/€ 1000 phones is quite surprising. 

  The cost of a phone is a fraction of the cost of living. If it gets upgraded every 3 years on contract, it's $25/month:
  
  https://www.att.com/buy/phones/apple-iphone-14-plus.html
  
  This is an insignificant cost compared to $300/month on food, $1000/month on rent, $200/month on transport/expenses. If someone has $3k/month after tax, more than half is on the main living costs. An iPhone is less than 1% of monthly income.
  
  Apple is in pretty much the best possible market (high volume, premium margins, affordable for billions of people) with the best product, no matter the market conditions.

  
• Reply 7 of 18

  waveparticle Posts: 1,497member

  November 3, 2022 8:44PM

  Marvin said:

  lewchenko said:

  Amazing really considering most countries are experiencing a cost of living crisis with energy and interest rates spiralling upwards. The fact that people still prioritise £/$/€ 1000 phones is quite surprising. 

  The cost of a phone is a fraction of the cost of living. If it gets upgraded every 3 years on contract, it's $25/month:
  
  https://www.att.com/buy/phones/apple-iphone-14-plus.html
  
  This is an insignificant cost compared to $300/month on food, $1000/month on rent, $200/month on transport/expenses. If someone has $3k/month after tax, more than half is on the main living costs. An iPhone is less than 1% of monthly income.
  
  Apple is in pretty much the best possible market (high volume, premium margins, affordable for billions of people) with the best product, no matter the market conditions.

  I am paying over $110/month to AT&T for two lines. That is over four times more than a iPhone.

  
• Reply 8 of 18

  fred1 Posts: 1,112member

  November 3, 2022 8:49PM

  I’m skeptical at best. It certainly seems like another ploy to increase demand, just as with the SE which still can’t be found and last year it was the new iPad Mini. I think Apple is taking advantage of the news about the COVID shutdowns in China to make the 14 harder to get and therefore more in demand. Of course I hope I’m wrong, but . . .

  
• Reply 9 of 18

  Madbum Posts: 536member

  November 3, 2022 11:20PM

  JP234 said:

  While having more demand than supply may on the face of it seem like a good problem to have, it's really just as bad as having more supply than demand. Both restrict cash flow and earnings for a corporation. Both Imbalances require intervention, and are equally difficult to rebalance.
  
  That said, Apple Inc. is just one of myriad global companies that have outsourced their manufacturing processes to unpredictable and outright enemy countries, where governments, not industry, regulate their operations. Tariffs, retaliatory tariffs, Black Swan events (COVID-19 for instance) and those countries' reaction to them, blackmail, are just a fraction of the difficulties encountered in the search for the cheapest labor pools, rather than looking at the big picture: employing the customers who buy the products, rather than subsistence level workers, indentured workers, political prisoners and peons (It's hard to make slaves take pride in their work).
  
  Sure, bringing manufacturing home would cost more in the short term (improvements in quality control processes would eliminate that disparity). But there wouldn't be the constant seesaw cycles of boom and bust that deprive Americans of long-term employment, and companies that are as loyal to their workers as the workers are to them. Steady employment, like America had in the 1950's provided a stable econmy without those disruptions. Americans were not able to afford as many things are we have now, but were they less happy, satisfied or fulfilled than you are now? I'd argue the opposite. Predictability is underrated.
  

  Had to read this twice.
  
  um no, having more demand than supply is 10000 better everyday and twice in Sunday lol

  
• Reply 10 of 18

  Madbum Posts: 536member

  November 3, 2022 11:25PM

  Marvin said:

  lewchenko said:

  Amazing really considering most countries are experiencing a cost of living crisis with energy and interest rates spiralling upwards. The fact that people still prioritise £/$/€ 1000 phones is quite surprising. 

  The cost of a phone is a fraction of the cost of living. If it gets upgraded every 3 years on contract, it's $25/month:
  
  https://www.att.com/buy/phones/apple-iphone-14-plus.html
  
  This is an insignificant cost compared to $300/month on food, $1000/month on rent, $200/month on transport/expenses. If someone has $3k/month after tax, more than half is on the main living costs. An iPhone is less than 1% of monthly income.
  
  Apple is in pretty much the best possible market (high volume, premium margins, affordable for billions of people) with the best product, no matter the market conditions.

  100 percent right. Every person need their phones, my 82 year old mom is on her phone all day , reading news and watching health clips on your tube, messaging with her friends.
  
  she did nOne of that 10 years ago! $25 -$30 a month is all it costs for a new iPhone , compared that to $200 extra a month  for gas now on average! Or $300 a month  for food!
  
  Apple is in a good spot I agree. Being connected is just too big part of people lives now.
  
  and ironically, when locked down in China, the phone connection to outside world even more important.
  
  what do people do sitting locked down for weeks? Shop or upgrade for new phone to help them better get through their lock down 
  
  over the need for new shoes or bag or clothing….

  edited November 2022
• Reply 11 of 18

  Madbum Posts: 536member

  November 3, 2022 11:27PM

  fred1 said:

  I’m skeptical at best. It certainly seems like another ploy to increase demand, just as with the SE which still can’t be found and last year it was the new iPad Mini. I think Apple is taking advantage of the news about the COVID shutdowns in China to make the 14 harder to get and therefore more in demand. Of course I hope I’m wrong, but . . .

  What incentive would Apple have to make it hard for people to pay them $1k for IPhone 14 pro?

  
• Reply 12 of 18

  fred1 Posts: 1,112member

  November 4, 2022 11:51AM

  Madbum said:

  fred1 said:

  I’m skeptical at best. It certainly seems like another ploy to increase demand, just as with the SE which still can’t be found and last year it was the new iPad Mini. I think Apple is taking advantage of the news about the COVID shutdowns in China to make the 14 harder to get and therefore more in demand. Of course I hope I’m wrong, but . . .

  What incentive would Apple have to make it hard for people to pay them $1k for IPhone 14 pro?

  As I said, the incentive is to give them the incentive to buy in the first place (There's a shortage? Then everyone must be buying them. I need to buy one too!) or to buy a more expensive model. That second doesn’t hold true in this case, but it certainly does with cheaper models, like the SE I’ve been trying to buy for weeks.

  
• Reply 13 of 18

  JFC_PA Posts: 932member

  November 4, 2022 3:08PM

  Madbum said:

  JFC_PA said:

  Worth the wait: my iPhone 14 pro max is terrific. Great cameras, fast and nimble. Battery drain is remarkably low. 

  Yeah with the 16.1 iOS update, my 14 pro has amazing battery life 

  👍 Over last night, sub 1% per hour drop. 

  
• Reply 14 of 18

  tyler82 Posts: 1,101member

  November 4, 2022 4:04PM

  I got my pro max by checking apple store website/ app every day (sometimes several times a day) until one was available at my local apple store. This took about a week of persistence. They can still be had but you gotta act on it quick! I love my purple 256gb phone, coming from an iphone SE it is definitely money well spent! The island is my favorite feature, you forget that the "notch" is even there when using it. I shoot all my photos and videos in the highest quality settings now, and the photos I have taken turn out looking like they were taken buy a professional: https://i.imgur.com/MDepa3u.jpg

  
• Reply 15 of 18

  sunman42 Posts: 264member

  November 4, 2022 5:56PM

  JP234 said:

  While having more demand than supply may on the face of it seem like a good problem to have, it's really just as bad as having more supply than demand. Both restrict cash flow and earnings for a corporation. Both Imbalances require intervention, and are equally difficult to rebalance.
  
  That said, Apple Inc. is just one of myriad global companies that have outsourced their manufacturing processes to unpredictable and outright enemy countries, where governments, not industry, regulate their operations. Tariffs, retaliatory tariffs, Black Swan events (COVID-19 for instance) and those countries' reaction to them, blackmail, are just a fraction of the difficulties encountered in the search for the cheapest labor pools, rather than looking at the big picture: employing the customers who buy the products, rather than subsistence level workers, indentured workers, political prisoners and peons (It's hard to make slaves take pride in their work).
  
  Sure, bringing manufacturing home would cost more in the short term (improvements in quality control processes would eliminate that disparity). But there wouldn't be the constant seesaw cycles of boom and bust that deprive Americans of long-term employment, and companies that are as loyal to their workers as the workers are to them. Steady employment, like America had in the 1950's provided a stable econmy without those disruptions. Americans were not able to afford as many things are we have now, but were they less happy, satisfied or fulfilled than you are now? I'd argue the opposite. Predictability is underrated.
  

  Wow. I wonder how many times it has to be said. While Apple's move some years ago to production in China no doubt took advantage of low-cost assembly labor, that was not the reason for the move. China offered literally unparalleled supply chain engineering depth and a vast, domestic electronics industry ready to start production of pretty much anything on a moment's notice. What Apple was buying was a combination of good QA (overseen by Cupertino personnel) and redesign agility (thanks to the supply chain engineering depth) it couldn't;t achieve elsewhere.
  
  I don't know how Apple is handling those factors in India and Vietnam, but it is clearly reacting to the problematic Beijing policy on covid, as well, perhaps, to a perception that long-term relations between the US and China are swirling down the drain.

  
• Reply 16 of 18

  waveparticle Posts: 1,497member

  November 4, 2022 8:02PM

  JP234 said:

  sunman42 said:

  JP234 said:

  While having more demand than supply may on the face of it seem like a good problem to have, it's really just as bad as having more supply than demand. Both restrict cash flow and earnings for a corporation. Both Imbalances require intervention, and are equally difficult to rebalance.
  
  That said, Apple Inc. is just one of myriad global companies that have outsourced their manufacturing processes to unpredictable and outright enemy countries, where governments, not industry, regulate their operations. Tariffs, retaliatory tariffs, Black Swan events (COVID-19 for instance) and those countries' reaction to them, blackmail, are just a fraction of the difficulties encountered in the search for the cheapest labor pools, rather than looking at the big picture: employing the customers who buy the products, rather than subsistence level workers, indentured workers, political prisoners and peons (It's hard to make slaves take pride in their work).
  
  Sure, bringing manufacturing home would cost more in the short term (improvements in quality control processes would eliminate that disparity). But there wouldn't be the constant seesaw cycles of boom and bust that deprive Americans of long-term employment, and companies that are as loyal to their workers as the workers are to them. Steady employment, like America had in the 1950's provided a stable econmy without those disruptions. Americans were not able to afford as many things are we have now, but were they less happy, satisfied or fulfilled than you are now? I'd argue the opposite. Predictability is underrated.
  

  Wow. I wonder how many times it has to be said. While Apple's move some years ago to production in China no doubt took advantage of low-cost assembly labor, that was not the reason for the move. China offered literally unparalleled supply chain engineering depth and a vast, domestic electronics industry ready to start production of pretty much anything on a moment's notice. What Apple was buying was a combination of good QA (overseen by Cupertino personnel) and redesign agility (thanks to the supply chain engineering depth) it couldn't;t achieve elsewhere.
  
  I don't know how Apple is handling those factors in India and Vietnam, but it is clearly reacting to the problematic Beijing policy on covid, as well, perhaps, to a perception that long-term relations between the US and China are swirling down the drain.

  Moving supply from China to India and Vietnam is just more of the same thing. I'm old enough to remember when we used to call imports "cheap Japanese (crap)." Then the Japanese wanted to buy the things they made, quality outpaced American manufacturing, and labor got too expensive. Enter South Korea to pick up the cheap labor slack for Japan. Repeat the same scenario. Move to China. repeat. Move to India. repeat. Move to Vietnam. repeat.

  
  

  Depressed regions of Africa and South America are next. American lifestyles require wage slavery by other nations to subsidize our lifestyles. At his peak, Nike paid Tiger Woods more than all their employees in Asia combined. Think on that a moment.

  Capitalism is how Americans enjoy good lifestyles. Many foreigners come to America and found the same thing is sold much cheaper in US than their country. Why is that? Because the manufacturer sell to American buyers at lower price. This is how WalMart, Costco work, 
• Reply 17 of 18

  waveparticle Posts: 1,497member

  November 5, 2022 3:09AM

  JP234 said:

  waveparticle said:

  JP234 said:

  sunman42 said:

  JP234 said:

  While having more demand than supply may on the face of it seem like a good problem to have, it's really just as bad as having more supply than demand. Both restrict cash flow and earnings for a corporation. Both Imbalances require intervention, and are equally difficult to rebalance.
  
  That said, Apple Inc. is just one of myriad global companies that have outsourced their manufacturing processes to unpredictable and outright enemy countries, where governments, not industry, regulate their operations. Tariffs, retaliatory tariffs, Black Swan events (COVID-19 for instance) and those countries' reaction to them, blackmail, are just a fraction of the difficulties encountered in the search for the cheapest labor pools, rather than looking at the big picture: employing the customers who buy the products, rather than subsistence level workers, indentured workers, political prisoners and peons (It's hard to make slaves take pride in their work).
  
  Sure, bringing manufacturing home would cost more in the short term (improvements in quality control processes would eliminate that disparity). But there wouldn't be the constant seesaw cycles of boom and bust that deprive Americans of long-term employment, and companies that are as loyal to their workers as the workers are to them. Steady employment, like America had in the 1950's provided a stable econmy without those disruptions. Americans were not able to afford as many things are we have now, but were they less happy, satisfied or fulfilled than you are now? I'd argue the opposite. Predictability is underrated.
  

  Wow. I wonder how many times it has to be said. While Apple's move some years ago to production in China no doubt took advantage of low-cost assembly labor, that was not the reason for the move. China offered literally unparalleled supply chain engineering depth and a vast, domestic electronics industry ready to start production of pretty much anything on a moment's notice. What Apple was buying was a combination of good QA (overseen by Cupertino personnel) and redesign agility (thanks to the supply chain engineering depth) it couldn't;t achieve elsewhere.
  
  I don't know how Apple is handling those factors in India and Vietnam, but it is clearly reacting to the problematic Beijing policy on covid, as well, perhaps, to a perception that long-term relations between the US and China are swirling down the drain.

  Moving supply from China to India and Vietnam is just more of the same thing. I'm old enough to remember when we used to call imports "cheap Japanese (crap)." Then the Japanese wanted to buy the things they made, quality outpaced American manufacturing, and labor got too expensive. Enter South Korea to pick up the cheap labor slack for Japan. Repeat the same scenario. Move to China. repeat. Move to India. repeat. Move to Vietnam. repeat.

  
  

  Depressed regions of Africa and South America are next. American lifestyles require wage slavery by other nations to subsidize our lifestyles. At his peak, Nike paid Tiger Woods more than all their employees in Asia combined. Think on that a moment.

  Capitalism is how Americans enjoy good lifestyles. Many foreigners come to America and found the same thing is sold much cheaper in US than their country. Why is that? Because the manufacturer sell to American buyers at lower price. This is how WalMart, Costco work, 

  Capitalism is not how Americans enjoy good lifestyles. Foreign low wage and child labor are how Americans enjoy good lifestyles.

  
  

  the reason you can buy a flannel shirt for $8-10 at Walmart? Because the man making it was being paid $5.00 a day. Or a week. Not because the mfr. gives Walmart a discount. That same shirt made here would cost 20-40 times as much.

  You misunderstood me. I said the same flannel shirt was sold at higher price in foreign country than in US. Even if it is made in US. It is still true.