charlesn

Mike Wuerthele said:

studiomusic said:

1 point out of 10 points of growth doesn't seem to be "panic buying" of iPhones. That seems "tiny".

Tim Cook disagrees with you.

Mike, maybe you can clarify something for me. This report from William Gallagher states the following: "During Apple's previous earnings call in May 2025, Tim Cook said that there had been some iPhone panic buying ahead of Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs, but that it had not been significant." Well, I went back to AppleInsider's coverage of the last earnings call and find no mention of Cook using the phrase, "panic buying." In fact, I can find no quotes anywhere from Tim on either call in which he says "panic buying." For the May call, that phrase seemed to have been part of a question put to him, not his words at all, and you reported it like this:

"...Cook did comment on the question of whether panic buying had set in among consumers, prior to the tariff announcement. "We don't believe that there was a significant pull forward due to tariffs into the March quarter," he said. "There's no obvious evidence of it."

And then there's the headline for this report on current earnings: "Fears Over Tariff Price Rises Prompted Panic Buying of iPhones" Really? You make it sound like trying to buy toilet paper in the midst of the Covid lockdown. Here are Tim's actual words about this: ""On the buying ahead relative to worrying about prices and so forth on tariffs, we did see some evidence of that in the early part of the quarter," Cook told CNBC. "We would estimate it to be about one point of the 10 points of company growth." Sorry, but can you point me to where he says there was "panic buying?" And that one point out of ten in revenue growth that he pegs to consumers buying ahead reflects all of Apple's revenue categories, not just iPhones. And to give this some further context: Apple's 10% YOY revenue growth amounted to $8.2 billion in actual dollars. That means 1 point of that 10 point increase would be $820 million. So out of $90 billion in total revenue for the quarter, $820 million can be attributed to consumers buying products ahead to avoid tariffs. That's less than 1% of total revenue. If there's any "panic buying" in that number, I'm sure not seeing it. Also, on the earnings call, Apple attributed one-sixth of the 13% increase in iPhone sales to tariff-related buying ahead. In other words, the tariff buying bumped iPhone sales by 2.1%. That's not nothing, but again, where's the panic in that number? 

Consumers trying to get ahead of an anticipated price increase in a product by buying now happens all the time. There's no panic in it. It's just about trying to buy smart. But nobody wandered into an Apple Store since April 1 and found empty shelves where there used to be iPhones. This just feels like sensationalism for the sake of it, and then trying to baselessly pin it back on Tim Cook. 

It's impossible to run a business seriously under Trump, no surprise from an idiot who knows nothing about business and operates by whim of the moment. with six bankruptcies and counting to prove it. (Bankrupting America will be his crowning achievement.) And even if a deal with India is struck, as well as the deals already concluded, why should anyone take them seriously? Because he signs them? You're kidding, right? Look no further than the Trump-negotiated and signed USMCA--his fabulous deal that he touted as so much better than NAFTA, when it was nothing of the sort--which he proceeded to torch almost as soon as he got back into office. His signature and word mean NOTHING--they're worthless--and are subject to being disregarded at any moment for reasons Trump will happily fabricate when no good reasons exist. 

Stabitha_Christie said:

charlesn said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

Wesley_Hilliard said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

I love a good rumor as much as the next person but can we not normalize this kind of behavior? While it isn't illegal to take someone's photo in public is still an invasion of privacy and promoting this kind of thing will only lead to more instances of this kind of thing. 

Sorry to say, but the law is quite clear, when in public, it is fair game. While I can't take a photo of someone and use it commercially, there's nothing stopping anyone from taking photos, recording video, or capturing audio of anyone in public.

Like I said in the piece, it's not something that's going to be a problem because these kinds of design changes are very rare. Nearly every other prototype iPhone has looked identical to its predecessor with the exception of iPhone X, which was prototyped in a literal brick-sized box IIRC.

I wouldn't worry about this becoming a common way to leak iPhone information.

Not sure if you missed the point or intentionally avoiding it. I clearly stated it wasn’t illegal but legality doesn’t make it right. People should be able to go out in public without someone photographing them. When you use the photos you are ultimately enabling the behavior. Cool that you didn’t break the law but did y’all make the right choice. This person now has their pictures splattered around the internet. The news value?  That there is a new phone and if you put in a giant case no one will see what it looks like? Stop the presses! 

Stabitha, I hear the Photography Police are actively recruiting. Give it some thought. Seems like you'd be an enthusiastic candidate. 

Yes, suggesting that we should respectful of people's privacy is really just me being overbearing. What a terrible world it would be if we respected each other.

This is YOUR idea of what's respectful and how the world should work. And I fully support your right to live your life this way! Have at it! But like most pompous, overbearing people, you believe your POV is correct and that anyone who doesn't abide by it is wrong--in this particular case, they're being disrespectful. No--we just don't agree with your opinion, that's all. 

Stabitha_Christie said:

Wesley_Hilliard said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

I love a good rumor as much as the next person but can we not normalize this kind of behavior? While it isn't illegal to take someone's photo in public is still an invasion of privacy and promoting this kind of thing will only lead to more instances of this kind of thing. 

Sorry to say, but the law is quite clear, when in public, it is fair game. While I can't take a photo of someone and use it commercially, there's nothing stopping anyone from taking photos, recording video, or capturing audio of anyone in public.

Like I said in the piece, it's not something that's going to be a problem because these kinds of design changes are very rare. Nearly every other prototype iPhone has looked identical to its predecessor with the exception of iPhone X, which was prototyped in a literal brick-sized box IIRC.

I wouldn't worry about this becoming a common way to leak iPhone information.

Not sure if you missed the point or intentionally avoiding it. I clearly stated it wasn’t illegal but legality doesn’t make it right. People should be able to go out in public without someone photographing them. When you use the photos you are ultimately enabling the behavior. Cool that you didn’t break the law but did y’all make the right choice. This person now has their pictures splattered around the internet. The news value?  That there is a new phone and if you put in a giant case no one will see what it looks like? Stop the presses! 

Stabitha, I hear the Photography Police are actively recruiting. Give it some thought. Seems like you'd be an enthusiastic candidate. 

bobonet said:

Wesley_Hilliard said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

I love a good rumor as much as the next person but can we not normalize this kind of behavior? While it isn't illegal to take someone's photo in public is still an invasion of privacy and promoting this kind of thing will only lead to more instances of this kind of thing. 

Sorry to say, but the law is quite clear, when in public, it is fair game. While I can't take a photo of someone and use it commercially, there's nothing stopping anyone from taking photos, recording video, or capturing audio of anyone in public.

Would this article count as commercial use?

Nope. This is an Apple news site and this is news.