People say they want one. Apple makes one. People don't buy one. Apple stops making one.
Rinse. Repeat.
I said I wanted one. I bought a twelve, and immediately upgraded to a 13.
Bought my father a 12 Pro and he hated it ("digs into my crotch during golf swings,"), asked if he preferred my 13 and he said "oh yeah, this is way better). So I gave it to him and bought yet another 13.
There might be a fourth in there that I overlooked.
His phone should be switched off and in his bag whilst playing golf. Fixed it for your Dad.
hmlongco said: People say they want one. Apple makes one. People don't buy one. Apple stops making one.
Rinse. Repeat.
People did buy it, one dealer I know told me that they sold more iPhone Minis months for months than any other non-Apple or Samsung brand model. Sometimes it's not entirely clear why Apple ditches a product; all bad sales rumours are only unconfirmed speculation.
Please. Stop your descent into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. It's really pretty simple: Apple is a publicly owned, for profit company that is in the business of making products that sell well enough to generate sufficient profit to justify keeping them in the product lineup. It keeps making the products that earn their keep and stops making the ones that don't. End of story, The Mini would still be in the lineup if it sold in sufficient numbers, and the story of what one dealer told you for a product that sells globally is absolutely meaningless. Do you think Apple is happy about EOL'ing a new product after just two cycles? Absolutely not. It's questionable if they even made back their costs for research and development of the Mini, costs for tooling and production, design, marketing, etc. after just two years. This isn't to say that the Mini didn't have its fans, and a lot of them, just not enough to make it worthwhile to keep around. Notice also that no major Android manufacturer, even though they seem to run with every new gimmick feature they can dream up, has stepped in to produce a truly premium mini phone--there's no high end Galaxy or Pixel Mini. That's further confirmation that a sufficiently big market for a premium mini phone is simply not there. It's also worth noting that Apple's low-priced and smaller iPhone SE was always the worst selling model in the whole iPhone lineup.
Apple is in the business of making money as a whole. That means that it should look at how a product affects the overall profitability of the company, not whether that product is directly producing a profit.
For instance, many companies will sell some products at a loss. This can bring in customers and increase overall profitability. Costco famously sells $1.50 hot dogs at their snack bar, and $5 rotisserie chickens. These prices are below cost. While Costco loses money on these items, they attract customers who usually end up buying lots of profitable products.
It can sometimes make sense to discontinue a profitable product if it is taking away sales from other more profitable products. Perhaps the profit on the iPhone Mini was noticeably less than the profit on other iPhones. In that case, Apple's overall profit might go up by discontinuing the Mini. While they may lose a few customers, they will make more profit from the remaining customers.
Now, I don't know Apple's actual motivation was. I am just pointing out that decisions on whether or not to keep a product in the lineup can be a bit more complicated than whether or not that product is directly generating a profit.
I think the narrative from Apple used to be that they want to make the best products (for their users) but now I don't know. There is this saying (not from Apple): We focus on serving the customer not to make money. By focusing on our customer, we will make money.
hmlongco said: People say they want one. Apple makes one. People don't buy one. Apple stops making one.
Rinse. Repeat.
People did buy it, one dealer I know told me that they sold more iPhone Minis months for months than any other non-Apple or Samsung brand model. Sometimes it's not entirely clear why Apple ditches a product; all bad sales rumours are only unconfirmed speculation.
Please. Stop your descent into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. It's really pretty simple: Apple is a publicly owned, for profit company that is in the business of making products that sell well enough to generate sufficient profit to justify keeping them in the product lineup. It keeps making the products that earn their keep and stops making the ones that don't. End of story, The Mini would still be in the lineup if it sold in sufficient numbers, and the story of what one dealer told you for a product that sells globally is absolutely meaningless. Do you think Apple is happy about EOL'ing a new product after just two cycles? Absolutely not. It's questionable if they even made back their costs for research and development of the Mini, costs for tooling and production, design, marketing, etc. after just two years. This isn't to say that the Mini didn't have its fans, and a lot of them, just not enough to make it worthwhile to keep around. Notice also that no major Android manufacturer, even though they seem to run with every new gimmick feature they can dream up, has stepped in to produce a truly premium mini phone--there's no high end Galaxy or Pixel Mini. That's further confirmation that a sufficiently big market for a premium mini phone is simply not there. It's also worth noting that Apple's low-priced and smaller iPhone SE was always the worst selling model in the whole iPhone lineup.
Your assumption here is it was a sales problem but evidence says otherwise.
Anytime you'd like to present your "evidence," I'm ready! My evidence is based on a few simple points: 1) Publicly owned, for profit companies don't cancel profitable products that are selling well. 2) Research companies like CIRP that purport to track sales of specific products reported that the Mini was not selling well compared to the rest of the iPhone lineup. 3) No major phone maker is offering a premium mini phone--if the market for such a phone was there, either Samsung, Google or Apple would pursue it.
I'll be rocking the 13 mini until it stops working then. And when it does, if Apple aren't selling a reasonably sized phone I'll probably be looking elsewhere for someone that does.
I'll be rocking the 13 mini until it stops working then. And when it does, if Apple aren't selling a reasonably sized phone I'll probably be looking elsewhere for someone that does.
For last 5 years, ONLY Apple is selling small size phones. The ~2000+ android phones which launched in last 5 years do NOT have even a single usable phone with a size similar to iPhone 13 mini. So, you will have to consider feature phones if not Apple's iPhones.
I'll be rocking the 13 mini until it stops working then. And when it does, if Apple aren't selling a reasonably sized phone I'll probably be looking elsewhere for someone that does.
For last 5 years, ONLY Apple is selling small size phones. The ~2000+ android phones which launched in last 5 years do NOT have even a single usable phone with a size similar to iPhone 13 mini. So, you will have to consider feature phones if not Apple's iPhones.
The reasoning presented here for abandoning the iPhone Mini applies perfectly well to the iPad Mini which is a very small slice of iPads (~10%). Given that the phone market for Apple is much much larger than the tablet market, the iPad Mini should have been given the axe long before the Mini phone. Hence the angst of modestly sized phone lovers is well justified given Apple's inconsistent approach. Add to that, Apple Silicon is uniquely suited to small powerful devices, and Apple could offer what no other OEM could for truly mobile pocketable phones. As noted above, nobody else is addressing that market, which Apple could have to itself - and do it at a premium. Apple is no stranger to high margin low volume markets.
I'll be rocking the 13 mini until it stops working then. And when it does, if Apple aren't selling a reasonably sized phone I'll probably be looking elsewhere for someone that does.
For last 5 years, ONLY Apple is selling small size phones. The ~2000+ android phones which launched in last 5 years do NOT have even a single usable phone with a size similar to iPhone 13 mini. So, you will have to consider feature phones if not Apple's iPhones.
I am aware of this
Wow, I wasn't expecting this answer. But good to know that you are well aware of the situation. And I missed to add another possibility. Apple launching a Flip phone (similar to say Honor Magic V Flip), which in folded state is much more compact than even iPhone 13 mini. But thickness could be an issue in that case.
Consider this alternate theory: The real reason Apple discontinued the iPhone Mini is not because of low sales. But rather, because its smaller screen and form factor discouraged customers from engaging more deeply with the Apple Ecosystem, via purchasing and using apps, web browsing and streaming Apple TV. In other words, the mini 'minimised' how people used their iPhone at a time when Apple (and its telco partners) were trying to maximise usage to boost revenue. Whereas, larger screens encourage people to use their phones as multimedia consumption devices. So Apple took the strategic decision to eliminate the iPhone Mini in order to boost their overall business.
Indeed, Apple's 'low sales' rationale for killing the iPhone Mini never rang true for me, and no doubt for many millions of other customers who own and love them. The iphone Mini is the ONLY Apple model that can be used easily with one hand. Every other Apple phone now requires two handed use - even for me, who has quite large hands.
Apple has every right to do what it wants, of course, but it astounds me that they are ignoring a market for truly compact phones. I just hope they are not doing this in order to boost the profitability of the Apple ecosystem, at the expense of the wonderful iPhone Mini.
As noted above, nobody else is addressing that market, which Apple could have to itself - and do it at a premium. Apple is no stranger to high margin low volume markets.
Apple DID have the "mini" market to itself and at a premium price to boot. So what's your theory about why they abandoned it? Do you think the meeting in Cupertino went something like this:
TIM: Hey, guys, this Mini is selling pretty well for us, the margins at its selling price are great, so tell you what: let's just cancel it so we can piss off the buyers who love the Mini. Show of hands for that idea? Great, it's unanimous. Let's cancel after the 13 Mini. Yeah, I know that means we won't even make back our R&D, tooling and marketing costs for that model, but it's worth it to piss off Mini buyers!"
Listen: I get why people who want a smaller form factor phone are really upset that one is no longer available. I tried a Pro Max for a year and hated it, couldn't wait to get back to the smaller form factor of the regular Pro. What I don't get are the wild explanations and conspiracy theories about why the Mini was cancelled when the obvious and only sensible answer is that a Mini form factor wasn't a good enough business for Apple to stay in it, even when it had that whole market of buyers to itself.
hmlongco said: People say they want one. Apple makes one. People don't buy one. Apple stops making one.
Rinse. Repeat.
People did buy it, one dealer I know told me that they sold more iPhone Minis months for months than any other non-Apple or Samsung brand model. Sometimes it's not entirely clear why Apple ditches a product; all bad sales rumours are only unconfirmed speculation.
Please. Stop your descent into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. It's really pretty simple: Apple is a publicly owned, for profit company that is in the business of making products that sell well enough to generate sufficient profit to justify keeping them in the product lineup. It keeps making the products that earn their keep and stops making the ones that don't. End of story, The Mini would still be in the lineup if it sold in sufficient numbers, and the story of what one dealer told you for a product that sells globally is absolutely meaningless. Do you think Apple is happy about EOL'ing a new product after just two cycles? Absolutely not. It's questionable if they even made back their costs for research and development of the Mini, costs for tooling and production, design, marketing, etc. after just two years. This isn't to say that the Mini didn't have its fans, and a lot of them, just not enough to make it worthwhile to keep around. Notice also that no major Android manufacturer, even though they seem to run with every new gimmick feature they can dream up, has stepped in to produce a truly premium mini phone--there's no high end Galaxy or Pixel Mini. That's further confirmation that a sufficiently big market for a premium mini phone is simply not there. It's also worth noting that Apple's low-priced and smaller iPhone SE was always the worst selling model in the whole iPhone lineup.
Your assumption here is it was a sales problem but evidence says otherwise.
Anytime you'd like to present your "evidence," I'm ready! My evidence is based on a few simple points: 1) Publicly owned, for profit companies don't cancel profitable products that are selling well. 2) Research companies like CIRP that purport to track sales of specific products reported that the Mini was not selling well compared to the rest of the iPhone lineup. 3) No major phone maker is offering a premium mini phone--if the market for such a phone was there, either Samsung, Google or Apple would pursue it.
These are assumptions at best.
Compared to shop owners in this very thread saying it once one of best sellers outside of peak periods. I know repair shops who have noted they are seeing high numbers of them at the moment to keep them alive. The mini is still a benchmark phone for many creditable reviewers who know there is a reason audience for the question.
To me the killer tell is eBay prices for refurbished or second hand higher capacity minis are in the same price range as a 13pro or a15 in the same capacities.
Sure it is all anecdotal but that still beats an assumption of what a company has done when we don’t know why. The problem with your assumptions is they support multiple conclusions. And frankly the sales data matches what is reported that it was a good sustained seller not a peak seller like most models.
As noted above, nobody else is addressing that market, which Apple could have to itself - and do it at a premium. Apple is no stranger to high margin low volume markets.
Apple DID have the "mini" market to itself and at a premium price to boot. So what's your theory about why they abandoned it? Do you think the meeting in Cupertino went something like this:
TIM: Hey, guys, this Mini is selling pretty well for us, the margins at its selling price are great, so tell you what: let's just cancel it so we can piss off the buyers who love the Mini. Show of hands for that idea? Great, it's unanimous. Let's cancel after the 13 Mini. Yeah, I know that means we won't even make back our R&D, tooling and marketing costs for that model, but it's worth it to piss off Mini buyers!"
Listen: I get why people who want a smaller form factor phone are really upset that one is no longer available. I tried a Pro Max for a year and hated it, couldn't wait to get back to the smaller form factor of the regular Pro. What I don't get are the wild explanations and conspiracy theories about why the Mini was cancelled when the obvious and only sensible answer is that a Mini form factor wasn't a good enough business for Apple to stay in it, even when it had that whole market of buyers to itself.
You ignored the fact that Apple has continued to update the iPad mini despite far smaller overall sales. I'm pointing out the incongruity. Given the existence of the iPad mini, it's far more likely that the upsell argument has greater validity than poor sales. Total dollars made > customer satisfaction. I waited 10 years to upgrade my 11" MacBook Air (hoping for an Apple Silicon version), I'll wait as long as possible before replacing my 13 mini. Sales deferral is something Apple may not have factored into their equation.
Comments
It can sometimes make sense to discontinue a profitable product if it is taking away sales from other more profitable products. Perhaps the profit on the iPhone Mini was noticeably less than the profit on other iPhones. In that case, Apple's overall profit might go up by discontinuing the Mini. While they may lose a few customers, they will make more profit from the remaining customers.
Now, I don't know Apple's actual motivation was. I am just pointing out that decisions on whether or not to keep a product in the lineup can be a bit more complicated than whether or not that product is directly generating a profit.
Indeed, Apple's 'low sales' rationale for killing the iPhone Mini never rang true for me, and no doubt for many millions of other customers who own and love them. The iphone Mini is the ONLY Apple model that can be used easily with one hand. Every other Apple phone now requires two handed use - even for me, who has quite large hands.
Apple has every right to do what it wants, of course, but it astounds me that they are ignoring a market for truly compact phones. I just hope they are not doing this in order to boost the profitability of the Apple ecosystem, at the expense of the wonderful iPhone Mini.
TIM: Hey, guys, this Mini is selling pretty well for us, the margins at its selling price are great, so tell you what: let's just cancel it so we can piss off the buyers who love the Mini. Show of hands for that idea? Great, it's unanimous. Let's cancel after the 13 Mini. Yeah, I know that means we won't even make back our R&D, tooling and marketing costs for that model, but it's worth it to piss off Mini buyers!"
Listen: I get why people who want a smaller form factor phone are really upset that one is no longer available. I tried a Pro Max for a year and hated it, couldn't wait to get back to the smaller form factor of the regular Pro. What I don't get are the wild explanations and conspiracy theories about why the Mini was cancelled when the obvious and only sensible answer is that a Mini form factor wasn't a good enough business for Apple to stay in it, even when it had that whole market of buyers to itself.