cheaper IPHONES on way

nitna bitna

jus heard apple are introducin cheaper alternatives to iphone 4 and 5,,wonder what the price will be

yoyo

Moved from Comp & Tech

Andy Magic

nitna bitna wrote: »

jus heard apple are introducin cheaper alternatives to iphone 4 and 5,,wonder what the price will be

Any chance of a link?

HomeBuyer

nitna bitna wrote: »

jus heard apple are introducin cheaper alternatives to iphone 4 and 5,,wonder what the price will be

I'm glad you heard it. All my doubts about Apple have now been washed away. Thanks for posting this.

guil

nitna bitna wrote: »

jus heard apple are introducin cheaper alternatives to iphone 4 and 5,,wonder what the price will be

Any chance of tonight's lotto numbers

shamelessidiot

Do you always believe what you hear?

ZENER

If Apple want penetration into the future smartphone market they will have to do something drastic ! I consider myself an Apple Fanboy but I don't have an iPhone because I have no confidence in the platform. Too locked in and way too expensive ! I'd reconsider if the iPhone had a realistic price point comparable to Android handsets. I have an Experia S at the moment and loving it !

Ken

tigershould

rumours seem to be gathering pace.

Sept 8 announcement for iPhone 5C

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/29/pegatron-employee-describes-role-in-producing-apples-lower-cost-plastic-iphone/

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/28/photo-of-plastic-packaging-with-iphone-5c-name-surfaces/

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/26/another-alleged-image-of-the-low-cost-iphone-rear-shell-surfaces/

Mark.87

These rumours have been going around for a while now. There have been loads of leaked stories and pictures of it. Apple has saturated their high end market so need something new to stay competitive.

Some "hard-core" fans I know say they don’t like the idea of a cheaper iPhone, they say it will reduce the value of the Apple brand and make it less “exclusive” for them. However I think its just what Apple needs to stay in the game.

Supposedly Apple is going to announce the “cheaper” iPhone (and probably a 5S and upgrades to other devices) in September. We will see what happens!!!

basill

I read a tech article a few years back where they costed out the components in an iPhone and got some change out of 30USD if I remember correctly. Now these things without a subsidy are 600EUR plus. Even allowing for supplier margins and of course Apples markup the profit is enormous. Putting out a plastic fantastic 5C is just taking the mick. They could easily drop prices on their existing products without compromising quality should they wish to.

Anyway the phone could actually be supplied free should they wish. The revenue from the other streams is enormous eg: iTunes etc.

Sad Professor

basill wrote: »

Anyway the phone could actually be supplied free should they wish. The revenue from the other streams is enormous eg: iTunes etc.

No it isn't. iTunes and the App Store account for a very small part of Apple's revenue. Their goal with iTunes has always been to break even. They use it primarily to encourage hardware sales. I'm sure they aren't running it at a loss and probably make a small profit from it, but nothing major. They are a hardware company and that's where almost all their profits come from.

whiterebel

basill wrote: »

I read a tech article a few years back where they costed out the components in an iPhone and got some change out of 30USD if I remember correctly. Now these things without a subsidy are 600EUR plus. Even allowing for supplier margins and of course Apples markup the profit is enormous. Putting out a plastic fantastic 5C is just taking the mick. They could easily drop prices on their existing products without compromising quality should they wish to.

Anyway the phone could actually be supplied free should they wish. The revenue from the other streams is enormous eg: iTunes etc.

I'd say your memory is failing you there. At the start of production runs the figure was closer to €300, which comes down significantly as volumes increase.

Sad Professor

Those component cost breakdowns also usually fail to take into account the cost of shipping, marketing, R&D, etc - all of which would be quite significant.

Mark.87

basill wrote: »

I read a tech article a few years back where they costed out the components in an iPhone and got some change out of 30USD if I remember correctly. Now these things without a subsidy are 600EUR plus. Even allowing for supplier margins and of course Apples markup the profit is enormous. Putting out a plastic fantastic 5C is just taking the mick. They could easily drop prices on their existing products without compromising quality should they wish to.

Anyway the phone could actually be supplied free should they wish. The revenue from the other streams is enormous eg: iTunes etc.

+1 on what Sad Professor and whiterebel said. I do think your figures are way off, otherwise Apple isnt making enough money for the amout of products they are selling. However it is true that they do have one of the highest mark-ups in the whole industry (its worked out well for the company and doesn’t seem to bother their VERY loyal customers).

Never the less, every other manufacture sells a range of phones from high end - high spec (some in the same price range as iPhones) to mid/low end with reduced specs, hardware and functionally. There is clearly a market for both.

hoodwinked

the problem with this move is anyone who disagrees is seen to be a fanboy who loves the exclusivity of high price apple products,

when in fact anyone can get an iphone free on a 24 month contract these days,

my issue with the 'cheaper' iphone is by splitting into 2 there will be less focus on the main product,

they play catch up a lot these days how are they going to manage two separate iphone platforms? the 'cheaper' one is hardly going to have the same functionality otherwise no-one will bother going for the most expensive one, so that will mean stretched resources similar to what Android had in years gone by, you see how fractured Android platforms are on android devices, how many people are on different versions,


the reason i chose apple was i like my computer to mess around with and my phone to just work, just make calls, make texts, give me access to facebook, i didn't want 101 customizable menus, if i did i'd have gone with android,

so apple turning into android with these 'cheap' versions is not for me.

laraghrider

ZENER wrote: »

If Apple want penetration into the future smartphone market they will have to do something drastic ! I consider myself an Apple Fanboy but I don't have an iPhone because I have no confidence in the platform. Too locked in and way too expensive ! I'd reconsider if the iPhone had a realistic price point comparable to Android handsets. I have an Experia S at the moment and loving it !

Ken

I'm on my second iphone as is my wife. In total we've spent an enormous amount of €49 on all 4 iphones. Can't get much cheaper than that.

When you say you've no confidence in the platform how do you mean? It's stable, reliable and has everything you need. What more do you want in a platform? I also constantly hear the argument of 'too locked down'. In exactly what way?

Sad Professor

@hoodwinked, if you are afraid of Apple's focus becoming divided on too many products then you're a bit late. The time for worrying about that was several years ago. They are already becoming stretched thin with online services, TV, watches and whatever else is in the pipeline. A new plastic iPhone is nothing considering that it will probably just be an iPhone 5 with a plastic shell and a lower resolution screen. It's not going to cause nearly as much fragmentation in iOS as the iPad mini or switch to Retina did, which is still tiny compared to the problems with Android.

This new lower cost iPhone is not going to be a "cheap" iPhone anymore than the iPad Mini was a cheap iPad or the Mac Mini was a cheap Mac. Apple don't do cheap. They make products to satisfy different segments of the market. The last time they made something that I would consider cheap was the 14-inch iBook.

I don't expect the new iPhone will have considerably less functionality than it's higher-end brother either. If that means it eats into their iPhone 5 sales, then so be it. Unlike Microsoft, Apple isn't in competition with itself. The iPad Mini cannibalised iPad sales and the MacBook Air cannibalised MacBook Pro sales. As Jobs used to say, “If you don't cannibalise yourself, someone else will".

hoodwinked

Sad Professor wrote: »

@hoodwinked, if you are afraid of Apple's focus becoming divided on too many products then you're a bit late. The time for worrying about that was several years ago. They are already becoming stretched thin with online services, TV, watches and whatever else is in the pipeline. A new plastic iPhone is nothing considering that it will probably just be an iPhone 5 with a plastic shell and a lower resolution screen. It's not going to cause nearly as much fragmentation in iOS as the iPad mini or switch to Retina did, which is still tiny compared to the problems with Android.

This new lower cost iPhone is not going to be a "cheap" iPhone anymore than the iPad Mini was a cheap iPad or the Mac Mini was a cheap Mac. Apple don't do cheap. They make products to satisfy different segments of the market. The last time they made something that I would consider cheap was the 14-inch iBook.

I don't expect the new iPhone will have considerably less functionality than it's higher-end brother either. If that means it eats into their iPhone 5 sales, then so be it. Unlike Microsoft, Apple isn't in competition with itself. The iPad Mini cannibalised iPad sales and the MacBook Air cannibalised MacBook Pro sales. As Jobs used to say, “If you don't cannibalise yourself, someone else will".

it just feels like this is a step in the wrong direction i guess, we will have to wait and see on the functionality but i get the feeling this is going to be more 'look at the pretty colours' gimmicky rather than a serious contender to the iphone.

D_BEAR

The "cheap" iPhone will replace the 4 and 4s iphones so all iphones will have the same screen size I read on engadget. If this happens it should cost the same as an iphone 4 around €400.

As for costing $30 to manufacture its closer to $200 when it was new
http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/iPhone5-Carries-$199-BOM-Virtual-Teardown-Reveals.aspx

Sad Professor

hoodwinked wrote: »

it just feels like this is a step in the wrong direction i guess, we will have to wait and see on the functionality but i get the feeling this is going to be more 'look at the pretty colours' gimmicky rather than a serious contender to the iphone.

Possibly you are right. I'm not really sure what else they can do to differentiate them. But with the iPhone 5 going aluminium, I'd imagine there is a market for something more colourful, not to mention sturdier and less susceptible to dents, which I always felt was a big selling point of the old Plasticbook. And if it's a couple of hundred cheaper, then all the better!

Apple need to be able continue to innovate with the iPhone. But they are also under enormous pressure to lower the price. They can't do both. The one phone model that has worked to date isn't really workable anymore. They can't keep selling previous gen models for 3 years when they are also introducing things like Retina, taller screens and lighting connectors in the latest model. This is what's causing all of the fragmentation at the moment.

hoodwinked

Sad Professor wrote: »

Possibly you are right. I'm not really sure what else they can do to differentiate them. But with the iPhone 5 going aluminium, I'd imagine there is a market for something more colourful, not to mention sturdier and less susceptible to dents, which I always felt was a big selling point of the old Plasticbook. And if it's a couple of hundred cheaper, then all the better!

Apple need to be able continue to innovate with the iPhone. But they are also under enormous pressure to lower the price. They can't do both. The one phone model that has worked to date isn't really workable anymore. They can't keep selling previous gen models for 3 years when they are also introducing things like Retina, taller screens and lighting connectors in the latest model. This is what's causing all of the fragmentation at the moment.

oh how i miss the plasticbook whenever i add another dent in my macbook...


innovation wise they are stalling, i think the iwatch nonsense shows that, i still don't get this lower the price pressure though, whatever about stateside, here in Ireland they are free on contract (id assume its roughly the same in the uk) and anyway if lowering the price means an inferior product in any way it should be a no go,

if you want a cheaper product go with a different phone,

the fragmentation with the lightning connector should realistically be short term, in another year or two people will have 4 or 5 lightning connectors lying around as they upgrade their ipads/iphones/ipods..etc

as for the screen size and everything else, yes there is a difference but that was always there, the original iphone was vastly different to the 3g? and the 4 was different to the 3gs?

how come it never mattered before?

tigershould

i know loads of users who barely scrape iphone functionality.
ie. its just a phone, with email/internet and a decent camera
i spoke to one user recently who had their iphone for over a year and had never visited the app store! (i'm not trying to be sexiest, but from my experience, this is mainly female users)

so there is definately a need for a 'cheaper' iphone (with 'pretty' colours).

i think, if Apple hit their target market we will see an end to the following argument:

Andorid user: "Android is better becasue its much more popular than iOS - look at the stats of the number of devices running it"

Apple user: "iOS is best because your stats dont take account of all the low end Android devices that arent even run the latest version"

Sad Professor

hoodwinked wrote: »

oh how i miss the plasticbook whenever i add another dent in my macbook...


innovation wise they are stalling, i think the iwatch nonsense shows that, i still don't get this lower the price pressure though, whatever about stateside, here in Ireland they are free on contract (id assume its roughly the same in the uk) and anyway if lowering the price means an inferior product in any way it should be a no go,

if you want a cheaper product go with a different phone,

the fragmentation with the lightning connector should realistically be short term, in another year or two people will have 4 or 5 lightning connectors lying around as they upgrade their ipads/iphones/ipods..etc

as for the screen size and everything else, yes there is a difference but that was always there, the original iphone was vastly different to the 3g? and the 4 was different to the 3gs?

how come it never mattered before?

I think your assumption that this lower cost model with be functionally crippled in some way is fuelling your opposition to it. As D_BEAR said, I think this plastic iPhone is just a replacement for the iPhone 4 and 4S. What's the difference between selling a 2-3 year old phone and making a new, lower cost model that is refreshed every year? From a consumer's perspective it's surely better as means you are getting a newer phone that will be supported for longer. It also has the advantage of being designed specifically to appeal to a different segment of the market who may prefer having a plastic enclosure and priced to attract younger people who don't want to be tied into a contract for 18 months.

As for the differences between previous models, changing the connector on the phone forcing you buy new accessories, and changing the screen size resulting in half of your apps running in letterbox mode while you wait for developers to update them caused far more fragmentation than anything in the iPhone 3G, 3GS and 4.

basill wrote: »

Daily smail says £112 to manufacture. Not that you would ever believe a word they say. Just google and the world will open up to you. lots of sources and lots of differing views on cost. But it was a US publication that costed it to be much lower and they took into account volume discounts. In any case it won't be 200 that is for sure. Geez a factory in Ireland could assemble it for that and still make a margin.

Perhaps the ones wanting to amp up the price paid over the odds through adverts or the like! Or we're seduced by marketing gurus and the big flashy advert in the daily rag. They are cheap as chips on corporate deals which should tell you something.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2059829/Apples-iPhone-4S-price-How-really-costs-make.html

What corporate deals?

And those are component costs. What about all the other costs? Do people work for free? How much does it cost to ship things across the world, to store them, to market them, to design them, to provide customer support for them, to repair them under warranty?

120_Minutes

Apple stopped being an exclusive brand when everyone started buying iphones.

using the "loss of exclusivity" excuse when discussing a cheaper iphone is lazy imo.

godtabh

Sad Professor wrote: »

And those are component costs. What about all the other costs? Do people work for free? How much does it cost to ship things across the world, to store them, to market them, to design them, to provide customer support for them, to repair them under warranty?

Assembly costs I assume would cover the manufacturer's costs

laraghrider

tigershould wrote: »

i think, if Apple hit their target market we will see an end to the following argument:

Andorid user: "Android is better becasue its much more popular than iOS - look at the stats of the number of devices running it"

Apple user: "iOS is best because your stats dont take account of all the low end Android devices that arent even run the latest version"

To be honest the whole android -v- ios argument is tiresome and just plain ridiculous. Can people not be just happy with what they've bought if it works for them and not feel the need for clarification from some internet stranger to justify their purchase. I'm talking both sides of the argument here.

Some like the open nature of android some like the simplicity of ios. Each to their own. People calling others idiots for not making the same choice they did is so amazingly arrogant it's unreal.

basill

So how many can a worker assemble in an hour then? Must be cents per unit in labour costs. To answer an earlier question well they do essentially "work" for free or at least not far from it.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/29/apple-investugates-claims-china-factory

banquo

tigershould wrote: »

i'm not trying to be sexiest

Been there bro. It's a tough life, but it's the burden we're born with.

flyguy

whiterebel wrote: »

I'd say your memory is failing you there. At the start of production runs the figure was closer to €300, which comes down significantly as volumes increase.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ihs-iphone-5-costs-207-to-manufacture-2012-09-25

Not that high but not that low either. Anyway don't think it's a ridiculous profit margin, production cost isn't everything. R&D, overhead, shipping and a lot of advertising will add a lot to the bill, it wouldn't surprise me if apple make less on an iPhone than Samsung make on a galaxy...
The thing that does (still) annoy me is larger memory than standard is a ridiculous markup and that fact that the files keep on getting bigger (better camera/video, bigger iOS file) but the base model remains 16gb...
It's time the new iPhone 5s will start at 32gb and to get bigger memory should cost no more than an exta €50 (which is already about 400% profit).

Inquitus

I think the biggest issue is it looks like shít if those leaked pics are correct, it looks like a poor kirf of some of samsung's plastic cack.

flyguy

When the first rumours of a cheap iPhone surfaced it was said this phone would be aimed at markets where the regular iPhone is considered too expensive for most people, like India/china. It was also suggested the phone would not even be sold here/western world.
Dunno of that still applies but don't really care, I'm only interested in something that's better than my current iPhone 5. I don't mind if a cheap iPhone looks cheap cause I won't be buying it. I can also imagine if you pay good money for the next premium iPhone you don't want the cheap one to look the same or even similar...

tigershould

They would have to limit functionality.

If there were 2 models, both with identical processors, camera, screen but one was half the price because it had a plastic case - I think I'd opt for the lower cost.

More likely, there will be some fundamental differences that make 'power users' opt for the pricier model.

Mark.87

hoodwinked wrote: »

the problem with this move is anyone who disagrees is seen to be a fanboy who loves the exclusivity of high price apple products

There is nothing wrong with wanting a high-end high-spec device. It’s your money to spend on how you like. If anything this move could potentially take all the kids, etc. away from the expensive one making it more exclusive (I know a few parents that would be very happy)!!!

hoodwinked wrote: »

it just feels like this is a step in the wrong direction i guess, we will have to wait and see on the functionality but i get the feeling this is going to be more 'look at the pretty colours' gimmicky rather than a serious contender to the iphone.

If I had to guess I would say the “cheaper” iPhone functionally will be reduced in hardware (lower res screen, camera, plastic components, maybe slower chip or less ram) but I don’t think it will be crippled by any means... it is Apple after all. Just because a product has reduced specs from its bigger brother doesn’t mean that it still won’t out-shine a lot of others in the market. Also I highly doubt it will ever be a “serious contender to the iPhone”. I think it is more to fill existing market gaps which Apple currently is not it or are losing market shares of (younger kids, etc.). I think the plastic multi-coloured backs (if true) is a great idea. It is keeping a definite division in styling between the two products. I can’t see my boss pulling out his pink or lime green phone during a meeting!!!

D_BEAR wrote: »

The "cheap" iPhone will replace the 4 and 4s iphones so all iphones will have the same screen size I read on engadget. If this happens it should cost the same as an iphone 4 around €400.

Replacement or not, I hope it will be cheaper than that. I would love to see it at €250 - €300.

Sad Professor wrote: »

Apple need to be able continue to innovate with the iPhone. But they are also under enormous pressure to lower the price. They can't do both.

I totally disagree with this. Innovation doesn’t have to mean high price, this is just something larger companies are feeding us. There are plenty of innovative devices around the world that don’t have a high price tag.

Apple is stalling innovation wise despite making how much money in the past few years!!! They are stalling as they have lost their way and have been too long at the top. The most innovation and hardest work is done by the people in the number 2 spot.

laraghrider wrote: »

To be honest the whole android -v- ios argument is tiresome and just plain ridiculous. Can people not be just happy with what they've bought if it works for them and not feel the need for clarification from some internet stranger to justify their purchase. I'm talking both sides of the argument here.

Some like the open nature of android some like the simplicity of ios. Each to their own. People calling others idiots for not making the same choice they did is so amazingly arrogant it's unreal.

Agree with you 100% on that, it’s such a personal choice. At least it is fun to watch people argue which is better. I think the core of what has been said in this thread is not Android v iOS but more will a “cheaper” iPhone create an iOS v iOS issue.

banquo

It's to generate more revenue from India, China, etc.

Good move, too.

guil

Can't see it being anywhere near €250. I doubt they will sell it cheaper than the opioid touch

Mark.87

guil wrote: »

Can't see it being anywhere near €250. I doubt they will sell it cheaper than the opioid touch

Unfortunately neither can I... that’s why I said I would love to see it going for 250-300

Sad Professor

400 (the price of the current 4) seems likely.

banquo

^^ Yup.

Fingleberries

guil wrote:

Can't see it being anywhere near €250. I doubt they will sell it cheaper than the ipod touch

iPod sales have fallen off a cliff in recent quarters (from Q3 Apple financial results), summarised that sales of the iPod line dropped 19 percent sequentially (since Q2 2013) and 32 percent year-over-year (compared to Q3 financial 2012).

Introducing the 5C, or whatever they may call it, would likely be the replacement for the iPod touch line.

It will also ensure that all current iPhones for sale have the same screen size and they can sell this as the entry level iPhone, missing some of the fancy parts of the top-range model (instead of having a low storage 4S as the basic one, which has the old 3.8'' screen size). For example, it may still use some of the older chipsets or internals from the iPhone 4s line - just to wring every last drop from those production lines.

The iPhone 5 will become the mid-level one and will have some bells and whistles that the iPhone 5c will not have, and the iPhone 5S will become the top level one with all the bells and whistles (such as the rumoured Fingerprint sensor in the Home button).

Going by previous Apple pricing models, it is probably more likely that

• The 5c will come in between the €300-€400 (about $400-500) without contract / subsidy
• The iPhone 5 will come in the €500-600 bracket, and
• The iPhone 5s will be the premium handset (in the €600+ price range)

They'll hardly be going to the bargain phone market (such as the Lumia 520 - €99 PAYG - which incidentally is still a decent phone for that price), but probably taking aim at the mid-range phones like Lumia 820, HTC One Mini, Galaxy S4 mini.