caskey

I’m on that plan and I think I can explain. Even though on the surface it looks very similar, the current version is really a disguised financing plan by a third party bank. Apple integrates the process really strongly so if feels like they’re the one selling you monthly payments but they really get payment for the phone in full. You pay monthly payments to the bank that does the financing and at the end of a year, you have the option to send the phone in and the bank and Apple have a backend deal where Apple pays them the balance due and then can turn around and refurbish the phone and resell it. You can also keep the phone and keep making payments and if you pay it off you keep it. 

This new product seems to be a true subscription run by Apple where they charge monthly and you are renting the device. 

robin huber said:

Isn’t there already a similar program where you get a new phone every year while making a continuing monthly payment? How does that compare?

entropys said:

Why not just straight with Mastercard or visa? Logo issues?

Might even make it easier to expand Apple Card overseas.

Credit cards don't work that way. Visa and MasterCard are the payment networks but not the actual issuers of cards. Credit Cards must be issued by a bank that provides the financial backbone for the account. There is a lot of regulations involved which is why Apple can't simply just issue the cards themselves. They need to partner with a bank that can manage the accounts and create the cards. International is even more complicated because of the individual banking regulations a company must adhere to in each country to comply with the law. Apple will need to find banking partners in every company they want to issue cards in to be compliant with the law.

The creator of this video has made a statement that it was a staged skit, he was not arrested and only spent about 30 seconds of driving with the headset on. Please update the article to reflect the creators statement. 

darkvader said:

Good, because I see no value in having an American Express card.  They're not accepted most places any more, probably because their merchant fees are exorbitant.

That's a load of BS...I put 99% of all my spending in the US on my primary AMEX card and have maybe been turned down by 1 or two merchants out of hundreds and hundreds and it's usually some chain that has a very exclusive VISA or MC partnership. AMEX is accepted virtually everywhere. You may not personally want to use one, but it's simply factually incorrect that they're "not accepted at most places anymore"

What a pathetic attempt to get press coverage by blaming Apple. Apple stated from the beginning that the port was not to be used for anything but their own diagnostics. You can't use it in a way that is not only not supported, but publicly stated that it's not to be used and then blame them for your company sucking.

This is a total overreach. Would it be fair, for example, to force Square to allow other credit card processors like PayPal or Shopify’s software to use the Square credit card reader with their apps? There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Just because it’s popular to bash big tech does not mean it’s legal in this free market economy. 

chuck burr said:

Apple is opening itself for an antitrust case by removing competition from the store.

Afarstar said:

“If accurate, Apple's existing stock of first-gen units may be enough to feed demand until the second-gen iteration launches.”

What demand?

370,000 in 8 months...so on average around 1,500 a day. Just because YOU might not want one doesn't mean others don't. Is it selling in the same quantities as iPhone? Of course not, it's a niche product, but I'm sure there's plenty of firms out there that would see a sales number of 1,500 units a day as quite a good demand. It's all relative.

rob53 said:

If the chip doesn't include all operational capabilities then it should be considered defective and either disposed of or sold for no more than half its fully functional cost.

This happens everywhere in manufacturing...look at agriculture. Less than perfect but totally fine veggies get used for frozen/dried/processed products when their more attractive brothers and sisters are the ones that make it to the produce shelves at the store. As long as the materials function the way they need to for the product they're being used in, it is wasteful to simply dispose of them...driving up the component costs for all models of phone the chips are being produced for.



 If someone tells me a fully functional A18 SoC only costs $100 why does the rest of the iPhone cost so much? 

Possibly because a phone is made up of hundreds of other components beside the SoC as well as labor, shipping and all the development? They're not just handing you a chip when you buy an iPhone. 

 Someone is reaping the benefits of every new Apple device.

Yep! Congratulations, you've discovered how a business works.

clexman said:

So the cops that originally said this was happening weren't idiots. They were on to something.

Well...they were kind of idiots because they came up with a cockamamy story about how the phones were secretly talking to each other and sending covert signals to reboot when this is a much more simple and less "conspiracy" kinda answer. They could have easily reported that there was some kind of rebooting going on, however they insisted it was more of a conspiracy to try and make Apple look shady and therefore they're being idiots about it.