When does Apple drop prices on older iPhone models?

[Ant]

When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?

Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)
--
Colony is currently infected/sick with a nasty flu! It came early too. :(
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org /
/ /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

[nospam]

In article <U7WdndVgLZuUxuzA...@earthlink.com>, Ant

<a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:

> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?

when the new ones are announced, and older models sometimes go away.

[Your Name]

On 2019-09-05 18:59:21 +0000, Ant said:
>
> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>
> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)

Apple rarely changes the prices on their devices, usually only when
there has been enough movement in currency exchanges rates. New models
usually simply replace the old ones.

Apple itself is pretty good at stock control and so doesn't usually
have huge numbers of unsold devices when the next model is due,
although resellers and Apple's "refurbished" store can sometimes have
cheaper prices on small amounts of unsold old stock when new models are
released, but the cheapest way to get an older model is to buy an
officially refurbished second-hand one.

Another way to get cheaper prices is to wait for the Black Friday sales
or via student discounts, but the discount isn't huge.

Possibly the best prices are from reseller sales. Some of the Apple
news websites such as AppleInsider.com keep track of these for American
buyers, but others may have to rely on price comparison websites
instead.

[nospam]

In article <qkrrqb$19ik$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Your Name

<Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:

> >
> > When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> > Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
> >
> > Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)
>
> Apple rarely changes the prices on their devices, usually only when
> there has been enough movement in currency exchanges rates. New models
> usually simply replace the old ones.

false. older iphones are kept in the lineup and sold for less than the
new ones, which has been the case for about a decade. same for ipads,
apple watch and sometimes macs.

[Chris]

Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>
> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)

They don't typically. What they do do is reassign last year's model to a
lower price band. That happens when this year's model is released.

You may be able to find cheaper deals on iPhones via the networks.

[Rod Speed]

Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote

> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?

Normally well after they have been replaced by later models.

We have seen some very low prices on 16GB 6S iphones.

> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?

Normally after.

> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)

Still smirking.

[jeikppkywk]

"Your Name" <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote in message
news:qkrrqb$19ik$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On 2019-09-05 18:59:21 +0000, Ant said:
>>
>> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
>> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>>
>> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)
>
> Apple rarely changes the prices on their devices, usually only when there
> has been enough movement in currency exchanges rates. New models usually
> simply replace the old ones.

That's wrong. There are currently very decent prices on 16GB 6S iphones.

> Apple itself is pretty good at stock control and so doesn't usually have
> huge numbers of unsold devices when the next model is due, although
> resellers and Apple's "refurbished" store can sometimes have cheaper
> prices on small amounts of unsold old stock when new models are released,
> but the cheapest way to get an older model is to buy an officially
> refurbished second-hand one.

That's wrong too.

> Another way to get cheaper prices is to wait for the Black Friday sales or
> via student discounts, but the discount isn't huge.

The discount on the 6S is huge.

[sms]

On 9/5/2019 11:59 AM, Ant wrote:
> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>
> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)

Price drops on older devices generally occur in September right after
the next generation of the device is released.

For example, the 32GB iPhone 7 debuted at $649 in September 2016. In
September 2017, when the iPhone 8 was introduced, the 32GB iPhone 7
dropped $100 to $549. In September 2018, when the iPhone Xs and Xr were
introduced, the 32GB iPhone 7 dropped another $100 to $449.

[Lewis]

In message <qkrslo$i1f$1...@dont-email.me> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
>> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>>
>> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)

> They don't typically. What they do do is reassign last year's model to a
> lower price band. That happens when this year's model is released.

Sometimes. Sometimes the previous model just goes away. For example,
the iPhone X did not go to another price tier, it simply went away.


--
I was good and deleted the "You *&;#$ing moron" before posting aren't
you proud of me?

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-05 14:59, Ant wrote:
> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?

Sometimes before the announcements, you get lower prices at retailers
other than the Apple Store. So places like Best Buy etc may have a sale
on iPhones to get rid of inventory. (This would be during summer, not
last minute like now).

Something else to consider: sometimes when Apple announces a phone
"survives" another year, it survives with some differences. For
instance, as an "old phone", the 6S got upgraded to 64GB as "base"
config, instead of the original 16GB.

Generally, phones that cease to be sold do so on the day of
announcement. The product is quickly pulled from shelves and from the
web site.

Phones that continue would often see new lower pricing and/or change
config on the day of the announement (or the next day when stores re-open).

Note: last year, carriers continued to sell some "retired" phones as NEW
for quite a few months after those ceased to be available from Apple.

[Your Name]

On 2019-09-06 00:10:32 +0000, jeikppkywk said:
> "Your Name" <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote in message
> news:qkrrqb$19ik$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 2019-09-05 18:59:21 +0000, Ant said:
>>>
>>> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
>>> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>>>
>>> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)
>>
>> Apple rarely changes the prices on their devices, usually only when
>> there has been enough movement in currency exchanges rates. New models
>> usually simply replace the old ones.
>
> That's wrong. There are currently very decent prices on 16GB 6S iphones.

Oh dear. Here we go yet again .... *PLONK* :-\

[Your Name]

I forgot to add that there are rumours again circulating that Apple
will be releasing a new "low cost" iPhone model, but not until 2020.

Apple to sell 'low-cost' iPhone in 2020 next year to perk up sales
------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple is expected to release a low-cost iPhone in 2020 in an attempt
to win back market share from rivals Huawei and Samsung.

The device will be similar in size to the iPhone 8, which features a
4.7-inch display, and will have the same internal components as this
year's flagship iPhones, according to Japan's Nikkei Asian Review.

However, it could feature a lower-quality liquid crystal display
instead of a thinner OLED screen to reduce costs.


<https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/115559958/apple-to-sell-lowcost-iphone-in-2020-next-year-to-perk-up-sales>

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-06 01:11, Your Name wrote:

> I forgot to add that there are rumours again circulating that Apple
> will be releasing a new "low cost" iPhone model, but not until 2020.

Which means that on the Sept 10 Evangelical speech by Tim Apple, that
model is not likely to be unveiled AND Apple will fill low cost with the
older phones either the 7 or 8.

Will be interesting how Apple positions the replacement of the Xs
against the replacement of the Xr. Would Apple create greater distance
betwene the 2 in terms of pricing ?

While Apple apologists praise the XR, I see it differently. Apple has
been pushing the XR far more agressively than it has done for any other
models in past. To me it means demand for it has been soft. I see the
XR as being too expensive to be in the lower cost bracket, yet too
limited in features for its price (lack of zoom lens for camera, lack of
OLED, bigger body).


I wouldn't be surprised if Apple were to move to a single vintage of
phones each year, a Max screen (Xs Max), a normal one (XS) and a "Mini"
(iPhone 5), updated every year with same CPU. The smaller one would have
LCD screen and single camera.

At the end of the day, when Apple recycles previous models to lower
price point, it has resulted in nearly indistinguishable models betwene
the 6s, 7 m 8 and X/Xs and nothing to fill the smaller phone needs (aka
iPhone 5 size).

Moving to a single vintage would bring back sopme diversity in the phone
models between a small, medium and large phone.

[nospam]

In article <OHmcF.85553$G14....@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> While Apple apologists praise the XR, I see it differently. Apple has
> been pushing the XR far more agressively than it has done for any other
> models in past. To me it means demand for it has been soft.

demand for it is *not* soft.

overall demand for all smartphones, not just apple, is less since
people are keeping their phones longer.

> I see the
> XR as being too expensive to be in the lower cost bracket, yet too
> limited in features for its price (lack of zoom lens for camera, lack of
> OLED, bigger body).

have your vision checked, since you're seeing things that do not exist.

[Chris]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <qkrslo$i1f$1...@dont-email.me> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:
>>> When does Apple usually drop prices on older iPhone models?
>>> Before or after their announcements of new iPhone models?
>>>
>>> Thank you for reading and hopefully answer soon. :)
>
>> They don't typically. What they do do is reassign last year's model to a
>> lower price band. That happens when this year's model is released.
>
> Sometimes. Sometimes the previous model just goes away. For example,
> the iPhone X did not go to another price tier, it simply went away.

True.

[Lewis]

In message <060920190242016826%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <OHmcF.85553$G14....@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>> While Apple apologists praise the XR, I see it differently. Apple has
>> been pushing the XR far more agressively than it has done for any other
>> models in past. To me it means demand for it has been soft.

> demand for it is *not* soft.

He's repeated this bullshit several times for 10 months now.

>> I see the XR as being too expensive to be in the lower cost bracket,
>> yet too limited in features for its price (lack of zoom lens for
>> camera, lack of OLED, bigger body).

> have your vision checked, since you're seeing things that do not exist.

The XR is a great phone and I'm very happy with it. I do not regret
getting it at all and I prefer it over my wife's XS. I probably would
have preferred and XS Max, but not for the price difference.

--
Twentieth century? Why, I could pick a century out of a hat,
blindfolded, and come up with a better one.

[sms]

On 9/5/2019 8:31 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

<snip>

> Note: last year, carriers continued to sell some "retired" phones as NEW
> for quite a few months after those ceased to be available from Apple.

And they are still selling them via MVNOs and prepaid subsidiaries. It
can go on for a year or more.

For example, here’s the 6s Plus at Total Wireless, a Tracfone brand that
uses Verizon, for $199.99:
<https://shop.totalwireless.com/shop/en/totalwireless/phones/tw-iphone-6s-plus-32gb>
and here’s the iPhone 7 for $299
<https://shop.totalwireless.com/shop/en/totalwireless/phones/tw-iphone-7-32gb>.

And here is the 6s Plus on Cricket
<https://www.cricketwireless.com/cell-phones/smartphones/apple-iphone-6s-plus-32gb-space-gray.html>.
I have one of these, unlocked for use on Verizon.

Remember how the iPhone SE made a brief return to the Apple web site and
how many they sold? There were large quantities of older models,
somewhere in the supply chain. The 6s is four generations old now, and
you can still buy new ones.

When a company orders parts for x number of phones, they just build x
number of phones, even if that means building more than can be sold
during the phones planned availability. Then they have to unload the
excess. The MVNOs and prepaid subsidiaries of regular carriers are the
perfect sales channel.

[nospam]

In article <qktbsj$m0g$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> Remember how the iPhone SE made a brief return to the Apple web site and
> how many they sold?

nobody outside of apple knows how many were sold.

> There were large quantities of older models,
> somewhere in the supply chain. The 6s is four generations old now, and
> you can still buy new ones.
>
> When a company orders parts for x number of phones, they just build x
> number of phones, even if that means building more than can be sold
> during the phones planned availability. Then they have to unload the
> excess. The MVNOs and prepaid subsidiaries of regular carriers are the
> perfect sales channel.

that's not how apple does things.

[Lewis]

In message <gtflpl...@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2019-09-06, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <060920190242016826%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <OHmcF.85553$G14....@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei
>>> <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> While Apple apologists praise the XR, I see it differently. Apple has
>>>> been pushing the XR far more agressively than it has done for any other
>>>> models in past. To me it means demand for it has been soft.
>>
>>> demand for it is *not* soft.
>>
>> He's repeated this bullshit several times for 10 months now.
>>
>>>> I see the XR as being too expensive to be in the lower cost bracket,
>>>> yet too limited in features for its price (lack of zoom lens for
>>>> camera, lack of OLED, bigger body).
>>
>>> have your vision checked, since you're seeing things that do not exist.
>>
>> The XR is a great phone and I'm very happy with it. I do not regret
>> getting it at all and I prefer it over my wife's XS. I probably would
>> have preferred and XS Max, but not for the price difference.

> I hear nothing but praise for it from friends and family. If I wasn't
> perfectly happy with my X, I'd probably get the XR.

Only reason I moved up was that I was on a 7.

The only way I will upgrade this year is if 1) There is a purple iPhone
and/or 2) oldest kid decides the 6S Plus really needs to get improved.

--
'It is always useful to face an enemy who is prepared to die for his
country,' he read. 'This means that both you and he have exactly the
same aim in mind.'

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-06 14:08, Jolly Roger wrote:

> The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
> shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
> in the US for the third quarter of 2019.

3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.

Heck, ecen when I bought my XS, and told the Red shirted one at Apple
Store I had done my research and decided to buy an XS, she asked "are
you sure you don't want an XR" (there were already specials if you
bought an XR, but no special if you bought an XS).

In the past, Apple never pushed one model like that at the epxense of
its flagship model.

[nospam]

In article <Y%ycF.85561$G14....@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
> > shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
> > in the US for the third quarter of 2019.
>
> 3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
> towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.

it was selling extremely well before that.

from november, 2018, just *one* *month* after it became available for
purchase:
<https://www.cnet.com/news/apples-iphone-xr-has-been-its-top-selling-iph
one-since-launch-and-it-will-give-money-to-product-red/>
Apple's iPhone XR has been outselling the iPhone XS and iPhone XS
Max every day since the cheaper, colorful phone hit the market last
month.

[sms]

On 9/6/2019 1:07 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

<snip>

> Heck, ecen when I bought my XS, and told the Red shirted one at Apple
> Store I had done my research and decided to buy an XS, she asked "are
> you sure you don't want an XR" (there were already specials if you
> bought an XR, but no special if you bought an XS).
>
> In the past, Apple never pushed one model like that at the epxense of
> its flagship model.

There are so many factors at play. A big issue lately has been
commitments to purchase a certain number of screens from Samsung or pay
a penalty. But it was OLED screens for the Xs and Xs Max that was the
issue, people were buying the Xr instead so sales of the Xs and Xs Max
were lower than expected.

But I guess cutting the price on the Xs and Xs Max in order to increase
sales and decrease penalties was not something that they wanted to do.
And that would have affected Xr sales.

<https://bgr.com/2019/07/05/iphone-xs-sales-performance-force-apple-to-reimburse-samsung/>

[Lewis]

In message <Y%ycF.85561$G14....@fx13.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2019-09-06 14:08, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
>> shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
>> in the US for the third quarter of 2019.

> 3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
> towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.

Your typical bullshit FUD snipping tactic again, I see.

> In the past, Apple never pushed one model like that at the epxense of
> its flagship model.

Not true, many times employees verify that you really want the more
expensive device. They are not working on commission, and it is more
important to Apple that each customer get the device they need without
spending too much money.


--
Someone's behind this. Someone wants to see a war. [...] I've got to
remember that. This isn't a war. This is a crime. --Jingo

[Lewis]

In message <qkv2sb$o8r$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/6/2019 1:07 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

> <snip>

>> Heck, ecen when I bought my XS, and told the Red shirted one at Apple
>> Store I had done my research and decided to buy an XS, she asked "are
>> you sure you don't want an XR" (there were already specials if you
>> bought an XR, but no special if you bought an XS).
>>
>> In the past, Apple never pushed one model like that at the epxense of
>> its flagship model.

> There are so many factors at play. A big issue lately has been
> commitments to purchase a certain number of screens from Samsung or pay
> a penalty. But it was OLED screens for the Xs and Xs Max that was the
> issue, people were buying the Xr instead so sales of the Xs and Xs Max
> were lower than expected.

Only in China.

> But I guess cutting the price on the Xs and Xs Max in order to increase
> sales and decrease penalties was not something that they wanted to do.
> And that would have affected Xr sales.

This is anal cyst fantasy bullshit.

--
Lister: What d'ya think of Betty? Cat: Betty Rubble? Well, I would go
with Betty... but I'd be thinking of Wilma. Lister: This is crazy. Why
are we talking about going to bed with Wilma Flintstone? Cat: You're
right. We're nuts. This is an insane conversation. Lister: She'll never
leave Fred, and we know it.

[sms]

On 9/6/2019 1:07 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

> On 2019-09-06 14:08, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
>> shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
>> in the US for the third quarter of 2019.
>
> 3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
> towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.

The marketing of the XR was a strategic move to ensure that potential
customers knew that a lower=priced product was available, after there
was price resistance for the X, and Xs.

This strategy worked almost too well. Many buyers didn't really care
about OLED versus LED screens but wanted a larger screen iPhone and the
Xs Max was just too pricey. Not everyone cares about owning the flagship
product.

What most customers didn't realize was a key extra feature that is on
the Xs and Xs Max, but not on the Xr, 4x4 MIMO. How is a salesperson in
a store going to explain 4x4 MIMO to a non-engineering customer? It
would be almost as bad as trying to explain how NFC works to Rod Speed.
The XIr will apparently have 4x4 MIMO.
<https://www.pcmag.com/article/364768/exclusive-iphone-xs-crushes-xr-in-cellular-signal-test-resu>

A side issue of the success of the Xr was the over-commitment to Samsung
for OLED screens.
<https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-770-million-Samsung-iPhone-displays-supply_id117445>.
Normally you wouldn't have such a large penalty but Samsung built
separate production lines for the OLED panels for Apple.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-07 13:52, sms wrote:

> This strategy worked almost too well. Many buyers didn't really care
> about OLED versus LED screens but wanted a larger screen iPhone and the
> Xs Max was just too pricey. Not everyone cares about owning the flagship
> product.

Since Apple has traditionally been very good with marketing and since
Tim Cook was hired, very good and planning production runs, I'd say the
streategy didn't work "too well", I think it was very deliberate.

The XS and XS Max got short marketing runs, and once the XR was
released, Apple differered from previous years in pushing mostly just
the XR with incentives for only that one new phone and not for Xs/max.

So it is no surprise that sales of the XR are disproportionate now. The
question is what would they have been had Apple not decided to
deliberately only push the XR.

> the Xs and Xs Max, but not on the Xr, 4x4 MIMO. How is a salesperson in
> a store going to explain 4x4 MIMO to a non-engineering customer?

For me, the key point on the Xs vs XR was the zoom camera which, in
hindsight, I have found to be of greatest value. The other big feature
was the Xs having smaller body than the Xr despite having equal or
larger screen.

> A side issue of the success of the Xr was the over-commitment to Samsung
> for OLED screens.

I doubt these stories are true. Apple is able to turn on a dime when it
comes to marketing/promotions and would have stopped promoting the CR at
the expense of the Xs if that had been the case and would have included
the Xs in the promotions.

But what this does say is that Apple knows it has reached a price
ceiling with the fagship model being too expensive to maintain volume
needed to remain relevant and this means I will be very observant of any
signals Apple sends at this week's keynote on prices (and any signals
about the incoming China tariffs that will raise price of iPhone in USA).

Remember this: outside of USA, Apple made the conscious decision, at the
time other currencies fell, to raise prices for its products to
cannibalize volume in exchange for maintaining margin once sale number
are patriated to USD.

So when the cost of iPHONE rises by 15% in USA, Apple will liekly want
to protect its margin, just as it did in other countries and that means
a price increase in USD.

[nospam]

In article <ql0qoa$lo1$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The marketing of the XR was a strategic move to ensure that potential
> customers knew that a lower=priced product was available, after there
> was price resistance for the X, and Xs.

nope, since the xs and xr were introduced at the same time with their
prices already set, and the previous year's iphone x had been the best
selling iphone to date.

> This strategy worked almost too well. Many buyers didn't really care
> about OLED versus LED screens but wanted a larger screen iPhone and the
> Xs Max was just too pricey. Not everyone cares about owning the flagship
> product.

nothing wrong with that.

> What most customers didn't realize was a key extra feature that is on
> the Xs and Xs Max, but not on the Xr, 4x4 MIMO. How is a salesperson in
> a store going to explain 4x4 MIMO to a non-engineering customer? It
> would be almost as bad as trying to explain how NFC works to Rod Speed.
> The XIr will apparently have 4x4 MIMO.

that makes little to no difference to pretty much everyone.

[nospam]

In article <%nScF.61690$R23....@fx22.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> For me, the key point on the Xs vs XR was the zoom camera which, in
> hindsight, I have found to be of greatest value. The other big feature
> was the Xs having smaller body than the Xr despite having equal or
> larger screen.

but lower resolution.

> > A side issue of the success of the Xr was the over-commitment to Samsung
> > for OLED screens.
>
> I doubt these stories are true. Apple is able to turn on a dime when it
> comes to marketing/promotions and would have stopped promoting the CR at
> the expense of the Xs if that had been the case and would have included
> the Xs in the promotions.

of course it's bogus. it's just a bunch of analysts making up stuff to
manipulate the stock price.

> But what this does say is that Apple knows it has reached a price
> ceiling with the fagship model being too expensive to maintain volume
> needed to remain relevant and this means I will be very observant of any
> signals Apple sends at this week's keynote on prices (and any signals
> about the incoming China tariffs that will raise price of iPhone in USA).

nope, since the next best selling iphones beind the xr are the xs and
xs max.

> Remember this: outside of USA, Apple made the conscious decision, at the
> time other currencies fell, to raise prices for its products to
> cannibalize volume in exchange for maintaining margin once sale number
> are patriated to USD.

nope. they *lowered* prices due to exchange rates.

[sms]

On 9/7/2019 11:10 AM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2019-09-07 13:52, sms wrote:
>
>> This strategy worked almost too well. Many buyers didn't really care
>> about OLED versus LED screens but wanted a larger screen iPhone and the
>> Xs Max was just too pricey. Not everyone cares about owning the flagship
>> product.
>
> Since Apple has traditionally been very good with marketing and since
> Tim Cook was hired, very good and planning production runs, I'd say the
> streategy didn't work "too well", I think it was very deliberate.

Except that sales of the Xs models did not meet expectations and they
ended up not meeting their commitment of OLED screens from Samsung,
which was costly.

The bottom line is that there were simply not enough customers to meet
sales expectations of both the Xr and the Xs models. Reducing prices on
the Xs Max would not have generated additional iPhone sales, it would
just have moved some of the sales from the Xr to the Xs Max. So one or
the other was going to suffer.

The OLED screen was not the only advantage of the Xs Max over the Xr,
but it would have been dicey to try to market the Xs Max as having
better radio and antenna subsystems than the Xr. The press would have
had a field day with that narrative. Most people still aren't aware of
this since most don't read the articles that did the testing.
Fortunately, the XIr is supposed to have 4x4 MIMO. And in 2020 we'll see
the XII models which presumably will have 5G and Qualcomm radios.

[nospam]

In article <ql0vag$go1$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Except that sales of the Xs models did not meet expectations and they
> ended up not meeting their commitment of OLED screens from Samsung,
> which was costly.

nonsense. they were the second best selling iphones, behind the xr.

> The bottom line is that there were simply not enough customers to meet
> sales expectations of both the Xr and the Xs models. Reducing prices on
> the Xs Max would not have generated additional iPhone sales, it would
> just have moved some of the sales from the Xr to the Xs Max. So one or
> the other was going to suffer.

neither suffered.

> The OLED screen was not the only advantage of the Xs Max over the Xr,
> but it would have been dicey to try to market the Xs Max as having
> better radio and antenna subsystems than the Xr. The press would have
> had a field day with that narrative. Most people still aren't aware of
> this since most don't read the articles that did the testing.
> Fortunately, the XIr is supposed to have 4x4 MIMO. And in 2020 we'll see
> the XII models which presumably will have 5G and Qualcomm radios.

the xr has better battery life and a *very* good lcd with the same
resolution as the xs max in a smaller and less expensive device, which
matters a *lot* more than checklist items that won't ever be noticed in
normal use.

[Lewis]

In message <ql0qoa$lo1$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/6/2019 1:07 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
>> On 2019-09-06 14:08, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>> The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
>>> shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
>>> in the US for the third quarter of 2019.
>>
>> 3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
>> towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.

> The marketing of the XR was a strategic move to ensure that potential
> customers knew that a lower=priced product was available, after there
> was price resistance for the X, and Xs.

Right, because Apple spun up an entire world wide marketing campaign for
the XS is the three weeks (four?) between when the XS came out. Sure they
did.

No, they did not.

> 4x4 MIMO

Completely useless to the vast majority of users at this point.

--
Why live in the world when you can live in your head?

[sms]

On 9/7/2019 11:10 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

> So it is no surprise that sales of the XR are disproportionate now. The
> question is what would they have been had Apple not decided to
> deliberately only push the XR.

No way to know that. But the experts said that the heavy marketing of
the Xr was a direct response to the lower than expected sale of the Xs
line, and that the lower than expected sales of the Xs line were due to
the high price, especially for the Max version. There was big demand for
a large screen iPhone, but not starting at $1099! The Xr's success was
because of the demand for a large screen iPhone at a good price point.
Without the Xr, demand for the Xs Max would not necessarily have gone up
by much.

The restarting of the X production was to try to use the number of OLED
screens that they had committed to since the Xs and the X use the same
screen.

The iPhone XI is actually less expensive to produce than the X because
of the removal of 3D Touch, as well as due to drops in the cost of
memory. We will soon know if these reduced costs will be passed on to
consumers (unlikely), or at least if there won't be price increases
(likely). But in 2020, with the reports of 5G and the return of Touch
ID, prices will likely go up.

<snip>

>> A side issue of the success of the Xr was the over-commitment to Samsung
>> for OLED screens.
>
> I doubt these stories are true. Apple is able to turn on a dime when it
> comes to marketing/promotions and would have stopped promoting the CR at
> the expense of the Xs if that had been the case and would have included
> the Xs in the promotions.

Why would you doubt it? It has been widely reported, by highly reputable
sources. Has anyone disputed it (I mean other than the usual suspects on
forums like this one)?

> But what this does say is that Apple knows it has reached a price
> ceiling with the fagship model being too expensive to maintain volume
> needed to remain relevant and this means I will be very observant of any
> signals Apple sends at this week's keynote on prices (and any signals
> about the incoming China tariffs that will raise price of iPhone in USA).

They have already said that volumes are less important than selling more
services. All phone manufacturers are experiencing sales drops of
flagship phones. But the other manufacturers don't have the revenue from
services to offset the lower sales of hardware.

The tariffs are not yet in effect for phones and may never go into
effect. Remember, dear leader's main concern right now is getting
re-elected.

The event on September 10th is not the time to talk about tariffs. The
goal is to deescalate the situation not aggravate it.

> So when the cost of iPHONE rises by 15% in USA, Apple will liekly want
> to protect its margin, just as it did in other countries and that means
> a price increase in USD.

A 15% price rise would not be sustainable. If the tariffs go into effect
then at least some part of the cost would have to be absorbed by the
manufacturer.

[nospam]

In article <ql17dc$tva$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> > So it is no surprise that sales of the XR are disproportionate now. The
> > question is what would they have been had Apple not decided to
> > deliberately only push the XR.
>
> No way to know that. But the experts said that the heavy marketing of
> the Xr was a direct response to the lower than expected sale of the Xs
> line, and that the lower than expected sales of the Xs line were due to
> the high price, especially for the Max version.

what 'experts' were these?

because apple repeatedly said the xr, xs and xs max have been the best
selling iphones to date. sales are *up*, other than in china, which is
due to other factors.

> There was big demand for
> a large screen iPhone, but not starting at $1099!

given that the xs max has been the second best selling iphone, behind
the xr, no.

> The Xr's success was
> because of the demand for a large screen iPhone at a good price point.
> Without the Xr, demand for the Xs Max would not necessarily have gone up
> by much.

the xr is only slightly larger than the xs with the resolution of the
xs max.

> The restarting of the X production was to try to use the number of OLED
> screens that they had committed to since the Xs and the X use the same
> screen.

it wasn't restarted because it hasn't stopped. the x is now made for
other markets.

> The iPhone XI is actually less expensive to produce than the X because
> of the removal of 3D Touch, as well as due to drops in the cost of
> memory. We will soon know if these reduced costs will be passed on to
> consumers (unlikely), or at least if there won't be price increases
> (likely). But in 2020, with the reports of 5G and the return of Touch
> ID, prices will likely go up.

you have no idea what the cost is, what features it will or won't have
or what changes to prices this year or next might be.

>
> >> A side issue of the success of the Xr was the over-commitment to Samsung
> >> for OLED screens.
> >
> > I doubt these stories are true. Apple is able to turn on a dime when it
> > comes to marketing/promotions and would have stopped promoting the CR at
> > the expense of the Xs if that had been the case and would have included
> > the Xs in the promotions.
>
> Why would you doubt it? It has been widely reported, by highly reputable
> sources.

because those 'highly reputable' sources have a lengthy history of
falsifying reports to manipulate the market.

apple wasn't stuck with a pile of displays. the entire concept is just
silly.

> Has anyone disputed it (I mean other than the usual suspects on
> forums like this one)?

ad hominem, and it has been widely disputed.

> They have already said that volumes are less important than selling more
> services. All phone manufacturers are experiencing sales drops of
> flagship phones. But the other manufacturers don't have the revenue from
> services to offset the lower sales of hardware.

first thing you've said that's correct, and the only thing.

> The tariffs are not yet in effect for phones and may never go into
> effect. Remember, dear leader's main concern right now is getting
> re-elected.

the tariffs are in effect for many of apple's products and there are
*no* signs that anything is going to change in december for iphones.

> The event on September 10th is not the time to talk about tariffs. The
> goal is to deescalate the situation not aggravate it.

not necessarily. the more pressure to end the trade war, the better.

> > So when the cost of iPHONE rises by 15% in USA, Apple will liekly want
> > to protect its margin, just as it did in other countries and that means
> > a price increase in USD.
>
> A 15% price rise would not be sustainable. If the tariffs go into effect
> then at least some part of the cost would have to be absorbed by the
> manufacturer.

what's not sustainable is expecting apple and other affected
manufacturers to eat the cost, which has to come from somewhere.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-07 14:19, nospam wrote:

> nope, since the next best selling iphones beind the xr are the xs and
> xs max.

"best selling" is grtest marketing meaningless gobbledeegook.

"Sales of the XR in 2018=2019 were the best ever for that model".

And when prices rise, of course revenues rise, so it becomes easier to
claim increased revenues even when volumes actually declines.

In many of the rumours about an "SE" coming back, it is mentioned Apple
sees the nee dto regain market share. This would indicate they realise
that losing marketshare to maintain margins is not good for the long term.

The good news is that the sharpie wielding actor who thinks he is
playing the role of President on a reality show may do far more harm to
Android marketplace than to Apple. If Huawei and others are forced off
Android, that means a huge drop for Android market share. But also huge
drop in volume for Qualcomm.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-07 15:10, sms wrote:

> Except that sales of the Xs models did not meet expectations and they
> ended up not meeting their commitment of OLED screens from Samsung,
> which was costly.

Assuming Apple made no mistakes in pushing the XR at the expense of XS,
one theory is that the profit marging on the XR was higher, and Apple
knew that the price point for the XS was too high for many markets
around the world. Pushing the XS would have meant lowering margins on a
phone whose pargins were likely already low because Apple had reached a
ceiling on the prove people are willing to pay for phones.

So Sept 10 will be far more about pricing and positioning than actual
model features.

It is possible Apple will have a very high end "luxury phone with all
the innovative features, and the mass market model targetted to normal
people where the manufacturing costs will be low enough to alow Apple to
sell it at affordable price.

So the "Luxe" iPhone amy have 4 cameras, and the new "flagship" will
only have 2 and the SE only have 1. Likely all with same sensors, same
CPU etc. But different screens and other areas where production costs
can be lowered.

But I dont think we will see the platic casing for the 5C.

The stories of Apple waiting till spring of 2020 for the "SE"
equivalemnt are a bit strange. Perhaps they expect to push people onto
its new flagship ahd "Luxe" models first, and only later offer an
affordable phone.

In a way, it woudl make sense for Apple to announce all 3 this week and
mention the SE will be avaulable after Christmas. Thsi way, those who
want affordable phone would wait instead of switching to Android.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-07 17:53, nospam wrote:

> because apple repeatedly said the xr, xs and xs max have been the best
> selling iphones to date. sales are *up*, other than in china, which is
> due to other factors.

You seem to forget that Apple had to issue an unusual warning to
investors that sales of phones were not going to meet expectations that
Apple had set. Doing so shouts quite loudly "we miscalculated".

The "best sales ever" was limited to a few named country, of which
Canada was part.

The rest were down. China was mentioned because it missed targets that
set those wrong expectations. Other countries that were down were not a
big issue because had predicted they woudl be down so they met expectations.

Apple phones were not the best sales ever. They were the best sales in a
few named markets.

And Apple made sure one couldn't compare XS and XR because the 2
families were released in different quarters.

So the rush to get XR happened in the quarter that followed the one that
contained the rush to get XS/XS max. So of course, in thats econd
quarter, you can claime the XR beat the XS. But not a fair comparison.

[nospam]

In article <VNZcF.372922$cG6.3...@fx34.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > nope, since the next best selling iphones beind the xr are the xs and
> > xs max.
>
> "best selling" is grtest marketing meaningless gobbledeegook.

nope. it's something which can be measured.

> "Sales of the XR in 2018=2019 were the best ever for that model".

that's not what was said.

> And when prices rise, of course revenues rise,

not necessarily. price it too high and revenues fall.

> so it becomes easier to
> claim increased revenues even when volumes actually declines.

revenues wasn't the metric.

> In many of the rumours about an "SE" coming back, it is mentioned Apple
> sees the nee dto regain market share. This would indicate they realise
> that losing marketshare to maintain margins is not good for the long term.

apple doesn't chase market share.

> The good news is that the sharpie wielding actor who thinks he is
> playing the role of President on a reality show may do far more harm to
> Android marketplace than to Apple. If Huawei and others are forced off
> Android, that means a huge drop for Android market share. But also huge
> drop in volume for Qualcomm.

no.

[nospam]

In article <qVZcF.511950$tG2.4...@fx48.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> Assuming Apple made no mistakes in pushing the XR at the expense of XS,

they didn't do that.

> one theory is that the profit marging on the XR was higher, and Apple
> knew that the price point for the XS was too high for many markets
> around the world. Pushing the XS would have meant lowering margins on a
> phone whose pargins were likely already low because Apple had reached a
> ceiling on the prove people are willing to pay for phones.

no.

> So Sept 10 will be far more about pricing and positioning than actual
> model features.

definitely not.

[nospam]

In article <7i_cF.462853$6H5.1...@fx45.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > because apple repeatedly said the xr, xs and xs max have been the best
> > selling iphones to date. sales are *up*, other than in china, which is
> > due to other factors.
>
> You seem to forget that Apple had to issue an unusual warning to
> investors that sales of phones were not going to meet expectations that
> Apple had set. Doing so shouts quite loudly "we miscalculated".

that was largely china.

> The "best sales ever" was limited to a few named country, of which
> Canada was part.
>
> The rest were down. China was mentioned because it missed targets that
> set those wrong expectations. Other countries that were down were not a
> big issue because had predicted they woudl be down so they met expectations.
>
> Apple phones were not the best sales ever. They were the best sales in a
> few named markets.

read what i wrote.

> And Apple made sure one couldn't compare XS and XR because the 2
> families were released in different quarters.

nonsense. they would have preferred to release them at the same time,
and the xs shipped only a week before the end of the quarter.

> So the rush to get XR happened in the quarter that followed the one that
> contained the rush to get XS/XS max. So of course, in thats econd
> quarter, you can claime the XR beat the XS. But not a fair comparison.

even though the xr shipped a month later, it became the best selling
iphone, with the xs max in second place.

[sms]

On 9/7/2019 8:09 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2019-09-07 17:53, nospam wrote:
>
>> because apple repeatedly said the xr, xs and xs max have been the best
>> selling iphones to date. sales are *up*, other than in china, which is
>> due to other factors.
>
> You seem to forget that Apple had to issue an unusual warning to
> investors that sales of phones were not going to meet expectations that
> Apple had set. Doing so shouts quite loudly "we miscalculated".

The numbers of units sold was still very good. The failure to meet sales
expectations was also felt by other mobile phone makers like Samsung.

Smart phones are becoming a commodity. It's similar to what happened
with flat screen TVs. The bottom fell out of that market. Manufacturers
struggle to add new features that will encourage replacement sales. Some
of the stuff is useful, such as building in set top box functionality
and eliminating the need for a Roku or Apple TV box.

China is an unfixable problem for Korean and U.S. smart phone companies.
WeChat is the defacto operating system and it makes little different
which phone you run it on.

[Chris in Makati]

On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 03:37:58 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>In message <Y%ycF.85561$G14....@fx13.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>> On 2019-09-06 14:08, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>> The CIRP, or Consumer Intelligence Research Partners have recently
>>> shared data which reveals the iPhone XR as the best selling iPhone model
>>> in the US for the third quarter of 2019.
>
>> 3rd quarter. And that is because Apple pushed its marketing so strongly
>> towards the XR instead of pushing its 3 phones.
>
>Your typical bullshit FUD snipping tactic again, I see.

That's it Louis. Knock him down with one of your famous "FUDster"
blows. He won't dare come back after that.

[sms]

On 9/7/2019 7:35 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2019-09-07 14:19, nospam wrote:
>
>> nope, since the next best selling iphones beind the xr are the xs and
>> xs max.
>
> "best selling" is grtest marketing meaningless gobbledeegook.

Precisely.

What is true that the Xr has been the best selling phone in the U.S., as
well as the best selling iPhone, for several quarters.

However, the question of what is the best selling phone is not the
issue. What is the issue that volumes of all flagship phones are down.
Unit sales of iPhones have fallen for the last three quarters.

<snip>

> In many of the rumours about an "SE" coming back, it is mentioned Apple
> sees the nee dto regain market share.

There is a demand for a small, mid to high-performance phone. A
bezel-less 4.7" phone could be about the same size as the SE. The
problem is that customers would expect the SE2 (or the XR mini) to be
significantly less expensive than an Xr, and it wouldn't be much less
expensive.

> This would indicate they realise
> that losing marketshare to maintain margins is not good for the long term.

True, but at some point, margins cannot fall below a certain level. 74%
was great. 60% is still great. But 40% would not be great.

>
> The good news is that the sharpie wielding actor who thinks he is
> playing the role of President on a reality show may do far more harm to
> Android marketplace than to Apple. If Huawei and others are forced off
> Android, that means a huge drop for Android market share. But also huge
> drop in volume for Qualcomm.

Uh, no. <https://www.ubergizmo.com/2019/09/hisilicon-kirin-990/>. Dear
leader may keep Huawei, ZTE, etc., out of the U.S. but Qualcomm is not
going to be the beneficiary. And if Qualcomm thought that it was hard to
get Apple to pay royalties, just wait until it comes to some other phone
manufacturers that aren't using Qualcomm chips, but that are using their IP.

[nospam]

In article <ql2nvp$po6$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> > This would indicate they realise
> > that losing marketshare to maintain margins is not good for the long term.
>
> True, but at some point, margins cannot fall below a certain level. 74%
> was great. 60% is still great. But 40% would not be great.

margins are nowhere near that high.

[Lewis]

In message <ql17dc$tva$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/7/2019 11:10 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

>> So it is no surprise that sales of the XR are disproportionate now. The
>> question is what would they have been had Apple not decided to
>> deliberately only push the XR.

> No way to know that. But the experts said that the heavy marketing of
> the Xr was a direct response to the lower than expected sale of the Xs
> line,

Those experts are morons. These are the same sorts of people whop claim
a new camera in an iPhone is a "reaction" to something for a few months
back, which is absurd and betrays just how fucking clueless they are.

There simply was not enough time between the XS release and the XR
release to spin up an entirely new marketing campaign.

> and that the lower than expected sales of the Xs line were due to

Which again, proves how stupid they are. There was ONE MARKET where the
XS sales were down, China. Everywhere else it did fine. But they have to
make up their bullshit stories to get their clicks., so facts>? Fuck
facts.

> The restarting of the X production was to try to use the number of OLED

Wow, you are still repeating that entirely bullshit false story?

> The iPhone XI is actually less expensive to produce than the X because

And now you are just making things up about a product which specs you do
not know.

> Why would you doubt it? It has been widely reported, by highly reputable

No, it has been widely REPEATED. That starts with REP just like reported
does, but they are entirely different words. There was NO reporting
involved. Not even the tiniest scrap of fact anywhere to be seen.

--
Get in there you big furry oaf! I don't care what you smell!

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-08 03:43, sms wrote:

> Smart phones are becoming a commodity. It's similar to what happened
> with flat screen TVs.

Yes and no.
When you look at north american acrriers, they like to push hard on the
"popular" phones such as Samsungs and iPhones. And for good reason
because selling you a more expensive phone helps raise ARPU since you
pay higher monthly fee to pay back that mroe expensive phone.

Because the commodity phones are less profitable to carriers, they may
make them available, but they don't push them much. being part of
"promoted" phones allows the manufacturers to price those phones higher.
But as Apple learned/is learning, it is reaching limits, and the more
expensicve the phone, the longer people need to keep them.

As well, phones now last longer. Not only physically, but also because
the feature set takes much longer to become obsolete because each year's
model has incrementally smaller and smaller improvements.

The real danger ois that with incremental imprvements becoming smaller
at the high end, the low end is catchingt up in features. So justifying
the pice difference between a commodity and "Luxury" phone will become
harder and harder.

[nospam]

In article <c5bdF.83487$%g5.1...@fx21.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Because the commodity phones are less profitable to carriers, they may
> make them available, but they don't push them much. being part of
> "promoted" phones allows the manufacturers to price those phones higher.
> But as Apple learned/is learning, it is reaching limits, and the more
> expensicve the phone, the longer people need to keep them.

except that's not what happened.

remember all of the pundits and analysts claiming that the iphone x,
the first $999 iphone, was 'too expensive'?

<https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/02/the-analysts-were-wrong-the-iphone-x-is-
now-the-most-popular-iphone.html>
Several analysts and banks have suggested in recent weeks that
demand for Appleąs most high-end iPhone, the iPhone X, has been
waning.

Apple proved them wrong in its earnings report on Tuesday evening.
...
łThe iPhone X has been a huge success and itąs the first time since
we split the lineup back at iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus that the top
model has been the top-selling model,˛ Cook said.