Tim Cook Calls $999 iPhone X a “Value Price” in New Interview

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Many believe that the iPhone X’s $999 price tag is too high, but Tim Cook thinks the cost is appropriate: in fact, he thinks it’s a bargain, being that the phone includes the latest technologies but can be paid for over long periods of time thanks to subsidies and discounts.

“Well, it’s a value price actually for the technology that you’re getting. As it turns out, most people are paying for phones over long periods of time. And so, very few people will pay the full price of the phone initially. Also, most people actually trade in their current phone, and some carriers throw in subsidies and discounts. When you look at it, the iPhone in particular has become so essential in our daily lives, people want it do more and more and more. So we’ve built more and more technologies into it to be able to do that.”
 
It's $375 worth of "the latest technologies" and it's absolutely NOT a bargain, not by a long shot. But then again, for someone in his position, making the kind of income he does, it's not surprising for him to say such things - he'd say it even if he wasn't Apple's CEO more than likely.
 
thesmokingman said:
Wow, they are re-writing the book on stupid where $1k is a value.
Click to expand...
A few years ago, If I said I could sell you a high-end laptop computer for $1k, you'd think I had stolen it. Now it's quite common to find high-end products at that price.

Value is in the eye of the purchaser.

I still use a flip phone, so this is not a value to me, but if it shows value over the cheaper phones, others may.
 
jardows said:
A few years ago, If I said I could sell you a high-end laptop computer for $1k, you'd think I had stolen it. Now it's quite common to find high-end products at that price.
Click to expand...

A good laptop for $1k today? Sure. A high-end one? Not at that price.
 
Megalith said:
Many believe that the iPhone X’s $999 price tag is too high, but Tim Cook thinks the cost is appropriate: in fact, he thinks it’s a bargain, being that the phone includes the latest technologies but can be paid for over long periods of time thanks to subsidies and discounts.

“Well, it’s a value price actually for the technology that you’re getting. As it turns out, most people are paying for phones over long periods of time. And so, very few people will pay the full price of the phone initially. Also, most people actually trade in their current phone, and some carriers throw in subsidies and discounts. When you look at it, the iPhone in particular has become so essential in our daily lives, people want it do more and more and more. So we’ve built more and more technologies into it to be able to do that.”
Click to expand...

You're not paying $1000, you're paying 10 easy payments of $100 + processing.

Dumb ass statement is dumb ass.
 
"As it turns out, most people are paying for phones over long periods of time"

Didnt they just try to end a law suite saying its unreasonable to warranty a phone or have it functional, for the duration of the cell phone contract?
 
refraxion said:
We're on a hardware forum where people spend exorbitant amounts of money. I don't think "value" is what people here are after. Not defending Apple, I'm not sayin' I'm just sayin'
Click to expand...
Travolta said:
Yet people here spend $700+ for graphics cards to play games with. Go figure.
Click to expand...

There's one thing that I really despise when it comes to iPhone X's price tag relative to what you are getting:

I do not believe that Apple is pushing the boundary on what should be offered to the general consumers in terms of experience with that $1000 price tag

-I don't think that W1/W2 chip Bluetooth headphones are the very edge of audio listening experience at all
-I do not think that FaceID is the most effective mean of using your device when fingerprint has the advantage of not needing the user to face the phone in order to use the thing
-I think of Animoji and Apple's AR attempt as catching up to parity
-I see Apple only reaching feature parity with some of the Android flagships
-I actually feel that Apple has regressed in usability when compared to iPhone 6S

Therefore, I can't say that it is a value proposition, and that iPhone X is more about vanity.
 
The economy is that good!

The Google Pixel 2 is supposed to be within ear shot of the Iphone X price.

Samsung Galaxy S8+ is $850.

I don't see the outrage here. Ya it's pricey. And I'm sorry other companies can't manage to charge MSRP for any extended amount of time, but that's not Apple's problem.
 
Paying in installments doesn't make it cost any less, you just pay longer. Not sure what sort of crack he's snorting on that one. Similarly, claiming it's not that bad because you can trade in your own phone is also terrible. Gee, if I sell my old phone, it makes the new one cheaper? NO! I just use the money to help pay on the new one, it's still the same price. Carrier subsidies also mean you're on a shit contract and will be paying more than you need to, adding to the cost in the long run. All his shit boils down to is "you don't have to pay $999 in a single shot, so pay no attention to any other terms." Might as well be a shill for a payday loan lender or one of the buy-here car lots. What a load of crap.

I'm not saying it is or isn't a good deal (though I'm sure the teardown analysis will show a typically-Apple markup). It is what it is. If you want it, get it. Just don't try to sell me a shit sandwhich and say that it's organic.
 
Yet people here spend $700+ for graphics cards to play games with. Go figure.
Click to expand...

The difference here is that $700 graphics cards can provide a better experience than a $400 one. This is hardly the case for phones, where competing products actually can (and have more features).
 
None of us here really are opposed to a sticker price out of sticker shock.
What many of us care about is whether or not if the product can empirically justify its asking price in terms of performance instead of relying on intangible perception of value.
 
More like "If you invested $200 in apps into an iPhone and your last iPhone is dead, what option do you have?"

Sure some people will buy it because it's apple. But it's still an !@#$@ reaping.

As my friend said, "How do you milk a sheep? Make them pay $1000 for their next iPhone"
 
Reimu said:
None of us here really are opposed to a sticker price out of sticker shock.
What many of us care about is whether or not if the product can empirically justify its asking price in terms of performance instead of relying on intangible perception of value.
Click to expand...

They can charge whatever the f they want. But they shouldn't try to justify it. It's just horse manure and we know it. It treats us like dummies.

However it does stick a lot of people in a bad position though when their old iPhone dies.
 
No wonder Apples sales are stagnant and now trending on decline. The CFO only knows how to raise prices. And he lives in a world where everyone are swimming in money.

Talk about being disconnected!
 
Tiberian said:
It's $375 worth of "the latest technologies" and it's absolutely NOT a bargain, not by a long shot. But then again, for someone in his position, making the kind of income he does, it's not surprising for him to say such things - he'd say it even if he wasn't Apple's CEO more than likely.
Click to expand...

Yes, maybe all tech alone is worth no more than $375, but the Apple logo alone is worth over $1000, so it's a bargain. And let's not forget about the magic imbued in every iDevice, that's invaluable! :D
 
Glock24 said:
Yes, maybe all tech alone is worth no more than $375, but the Apple logo alone is worth over $1000, so it's a bargain. And let's not forget about the magic imbued in every iDevice, that's invaluable! :D
Click to expand...

I am really frustrated about how that Apple having the fastest ARM implementation with the A11, yet the whole package is a step back and outright compromise in user friendliness.
I don't think that a $1000 device should in any way force the users to live the dongle life for one, and that $1000 device is inconsiderate to the user enough that it doesn't come included with a fast charger despite having support for quick charging.

And yes, I don't consider the AirPods to be equals of dedicated IEMs or the Beat Solo 3 to be anywhere equal to Bose's QuietComfort 35, yet they are priced as such.
 
Travolta said:
Yet people here spend $700+ for graphics cards to play games with. Go figure.
Click to expand...

No one calls a $700 buck 1080ti a value. It's not a value card, its a high end card. Value is tossed out the window on high end. Maybe you are missing it?

Jim Kim said:
But it comes with a 1 year warranty.
Click to expand...

That highlights the need for their awesome extended warranty, am I right?
 
Apple Care also went from 129 to 199. Not putting much faith in the product either.
 
thesmokingman said:
No one calls a $700 buck 1080ti a value. It's not a value card, its a high end card. Value is tossed out the window on high end. Maybe you are missing it?



That highlights the need for their awesome extended warranty, am I right?
Click to expand...
My point is, people still spend $700+ per graphics card (yes some people still do sli) to play computer games. I don’t care if it’s high end, you’re still playing games with it. That’s all.
 
Edit
thesmokingman said:
No one calls a $700 buck 1080ti a value. It's not a value card, its a high end card. Value is tossed out the window on high end. Maybe you are missing it?

That highlights the need for their awesome extended warranty, am I right?
Click to expand...

I disagree! 1080ti is great value when compared to Pascal Titan.

Travolta said:
My point is, people still spend $700+ per graphics card (yes some people still do sli) to play computer games. I don’t care if it’s high end, you’re still playing games with it. That’s all.
Click to expand...

With a notable difference: we pay that kind of money because the card is better in a performance standpoint to the prior generation by a noted margin, and we bitch about a measly 25% increase instead of a 70% performance jump!
 
Travolta said:
My point is, people still spend $700+ per graphics card (yes some people still do sli) to play computer games. I don’t care if it’s high end, you’re still playing games with it. That’s all.
Click to expand...

You're not making much of a point so I don't see why you keep replying?


Reimu said:
Edit


I disagree! 1080ti is great value when compared to Pascal Titan.
Click to expand...

rofl, ok you got me there.
 
I wonder for how long the american customers can maintain apples profits, given that the rest of the planet has pretty much moved to android because of apple prices.

They keep doing the same thing with their Mac line since the day it was launched. Actually before, since Lisa started at 10K in the 80's!
 
grtitan said:
I wonder for how long the american customers can maintain apples profits, given that the rest of the planet has pretty much moved to android because of apple prices.
Click to expand...

Just for the record: the pricing of the Pixel XL 2 aka Google's next flagship phone was announced a short time ago and it's $849 for the 64GB model and $949 for the 128GB model so, Android device manufacturers aren't going to let Apple steal all the profits, not even close - even the Galaxy Note8 is way way up there as well.
 
Tiberian said:
Just for the record: the pricing of the Pixel XL 2 aka Google's next flagship phone was announced a short time ago and it's $849 for the 64GB model and $949 for the 128GB model so, Android device manufacturers aren't going to let Apple steal all the profits, not even close - even the Galaxy Note8 is way way up there as well.
Click to expand...
Just noticed that.

The main difference between google and samsung, google will not cut the price at all for the pixel, samsung will rather quickly, just see the S8.

But in general, this is a bullshit move in all fronts.
 
The phones aren't being priced with the expectation that you will pay $999 up front. They are being priced with the expectation that you will get it either through your carrier's 24 month no-interest payment plan or through the Apple monthly plan. ~$41 a month for 24 months is a lot more palatable than shelling out a wad of cash up front (there is an entire field of psychology on this; look up psychology of consumption).

The payment plans are actually preferable for the carriers and Apple since they ensure a regular cash flow (rather than one time purchases which tend to be topheavy towards the quarter of product launch). In addition, those on payment plans are more likely to upgrade regularly. If you are already budgeted for ~$41 a month, you can upgrade and simply keep paying the ~$41 a month. If you bought the phone outright, you would be looking at another large cash outlay which tends to make people hold on to their older models longer.
 
The big 4 carriers in the US have moved away from the standard 2-year payment thing for a while now. They still have pay-over-time plans, sure, but not like it was even 2 years ago. And most people that I am familiar with and have discussions with never buy over time anyway, they either fork over the lump retail price of the device or they don't get it.
 
Tiberian said:
The big 4 carriers in the US have moved away from the standard 2-year payment thing for a while now. They still have pay-over-time plans, sure, but not like it was even 2 years ago. And most people that I am familiar with and have discussions with never buy over time anyway, they either fork over the lump retail price of the device or they don't get it.
Click to expand...

The carriers have been phasing out the 2 year contract with a discounted lump sum price. They replaced it with payments over 24 months and they push it heavily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top