Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Mar 2014 10:28 UTC
Apple

Apple is adding a cheaper 8GB iPhone 5C to its smartphone lineup. The new model first appeared on UK carrier O2's site, but has since been added to a number of international Apple Stores including the UK, Australia, and China. In the UK, it's priced at £429, £40 ($66 including sales tax) less than the 16GB model. Should Apple choose to bring the new budget model to the US, the price seems likely to fall somewhere around $499.

An 8GB smartphone for $500. You can buy six Lumia 520s for that - almost one for every day of the week. You have to be utterly void of common sense to buy this phone. Then again, that seems to be the general attitude towards the 5C anyway.

Order by: Score:
Comment by Lorin
by Lorin on Tue 18th Mar 2014 11:36 UTC
Lorin
Member since:
2010-04-06

What can you expect from people who would pay $800 for what is essentially a theme change with nothing significant under the hood.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Lorin
by Kochise on Tue 18th Mar 2014 12:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by Lorin"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

They are free to do so, it's not like Apple force down their throat an iPhone.

Personally, I'm with my HTC Evo 3D since 2011 and just had to change the ROM for a XDA one.

Kochise

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Question For Kochise
by benb320 on Wed 19th Mar 2014 01:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Lorin"
benb320 Member since:
2010-02-23

Why do you sign your posts when your name is already displayed?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Question For Kochise
by Fergy on Thu 20th Mar 2014 00:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Question For Kochise"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Why do you sign your posts when your name is already displayed?

I thought it was a reminder to don't take him serious...

Kind of like ending every comment with: "lol"

Edited 2014-03-20 00:29 UTC

Reply Score: 1

5C rip-off
by SonicMetalMan on Tue 18th Mar 2014 12:47 UTC
SonicMetalMan
Member since:
2009-05-25

Since the original 5C hasn't exactly set sales records due to its exorbitant sales price, why does Apple insist on their current "rape and pillage" sales tactic? Clearly they do not understand the low-end market.

I am guessing that it costs Apple less than $125 USD to have a dumbed-down version of the 5C produced. Why bother? They just need to lower their expectations of per-unit profits and dump these at a much lower price like Nokia does with the Lumia 520/521.

Reply Score: 5

RE: 5C rip-off
by Kochise on Tue 18th Mar 2014 12:59 UTC in reply to "5C rip-off"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

One word : "Groooooowth" (said in a loud and terrible voice)

Kochise

Reply Score: 3

RE: 5C rip-off
by ebasconp on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:15 UTC in reply to "5C rip-off"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Actually the world is full of people wanting (but unable to) buy iPhones, so, this is an opportunity for a lot of them.

Anyway, I wonder what can you do with 8Gb of storage. My wife's tablet has 16Gb and it is almost full with some apps.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 5C rip-off
by MOS6510 on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE: 5C rip-off"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

If you can't spend $800, but you can spend $500 I think you can spend $800 by saving money. The problem is people want to buy stuff NOW and not put money away until they have enough.

My iPhone has 32 GB, because 16 GB isn't enough. I can't imagine someone buying a 8 GB iPhone and being happy (in the long term), unless they just want to use it as a phone in which case it's a rather expensive one.

In my case 32 GB isn't enough either if I start filming.

An 8 GB iPhone, of which around 6 GB (guessing) is for your use, would only make sense around $200 or even less.

Reply Score: 3

RE: 5C rip-off
by Morgan on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:16 UTC in reply to "5C rip-off"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm baffled by this too. A $200 off-contract iPhone would put probably wipe Windows Phone completely off the radar. Not because it's a superior OS, but because of the desire for an Apple device in the low/mid end market, where people who don't want Android have to settle for Windows Phone as the only affordable alternative.

There are those (like me) who feel that Windows Phone is a better platform overall than iOS and Android, but I think they are the minority. For most people, it's iOS or Android, and a low budget iPhone would push out any third options, at least here in the US.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: 5C rip-off
by leos on Thu 20th Mar 2014 20:04 UTC in reply to "RE: 5C rip-off"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

I'm not so sure about that. Would it be smart for Porsche to release a $25,000 car to wipe Ford off the map? I don't think so. I like my iPhone for practical reasons but there is no denying part of Apple's brand is the higher end image than other phones.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: 5C rip-off
by zima on Fri 21st Mar 2014 19:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5C rip-off"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Porsche belongs to Volkswagen Group, which kinda does wipe Ford off the map in inexpensive/value cars ;) (most notably, as Skoda)

Reply Score: 2

RE: 5C rip-off
by majipoor on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:20 UTC in reply to "5C rip-off"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

Clearly they do not understand the low-end market


Clearly you do not understand Apple's business model, you know, the model which allows Apple to make 65% of all mobile profits.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: 5C rip-off
by SonicMetalMan on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:34 UTC in reply to "RE: 5C rip-off"
SonicMetalMan Member since:
2009-05-25

I DO understand, and with crystal-clear clarity. It is also why I do not own any Apple products. Granted the business model for Samsung is not inherently different but two wrongs don't make a right.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: 5C rip-off
by majipoor on Tue 18th Mar 2014 14:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5C rip-off"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

The goal of all companies is the same, the path is different.

Apple and Samsung business models are very different while both very successful.

Apple business model is not compatible with a true low cost smartphone (or any other product).

Whether one like it or not is not relevant for Apple as long as the business model they did chose is efficient.

And for your information, whether a business model is right or wrong depends on the enterprise success (of lack of) and in the mobile space, the only really successful business models are Apple and Samsung's models.

The fact that you consider them as wrong clearly indicates that you do not understand what a business model is.

Edited 2014-03-18 14:39 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: 5C rip-off
by Morgan on Wed 19th Mar 2014 13:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5C rip-off"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Well, Apple has dipped into the low-end realm, albeit not with a smartphone, and it was a good product: The Mac mini. It's had a few bumps in the road (Core Solo, integrated Intel 9xx video) but it's been in constant production in one version or another since 2005.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: 5C rip-off
by leos on Thu 20th Mar 2014 20:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 5C rip-off"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Well, Apple has dipped into the low-end realm, albeit not with a smartphone, and it was a good product: The Mac mini. It's had a few bumps in the road (Core Solo, integrated Intel 9xx video) but it's been in constant production in one version or another since 2005.


Mac mini is not really low end though. It is perhaps medium end, but you can get PCs much cheaper if you're looking for low end (unless you're saying that exact form factor, in which case there just isn't a low end).

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: 5C rip-off
by Morgan on Thu 20th Mar 2014 22:40 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: 5C rip-off"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

My point was that Apple said "we don't know how to make a cheap Mac" then turned right around and made one anyway; the mini is indeed low end for a Mac. They could very well make a low end iPhone, but they probably won't, as you pointed out above with your Porsche analogy. It's a different company today than it was when the Mac mini came out.

Besides, most people with iPhones here in the US tend to get them on contract, therefore heavily subsidized. My old carrier, Sprint, is offering the iPhone 5 for "free" right now. For that reason, a low end iPhone will probably never make it to our shores. Still, I think it's a shame because that same low end iPhone could be had for $200 off contract and would make it available for those of us on prepaid services to reasonably afford.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: 5C rip-off
by zima on Fri 21st Mar 2014 19:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 5C rip-off"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, Apple has dipped into the low-end realm [...]: The Mac mini.

Considering its prices, I would also count it in the medium range...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 5C rip-off
by ebasconp on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:36 UTC in reply to "RE: 5C rip-off"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

You should not base your buys on business models, but in the satisfaction you get while owning a device. IMHO.

It was a reply to SonicMetalMan, sorry! ;)

Edited 2014-03-18 13:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: 5C rip-off
by SonicMetalMan on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 5C rip-off"
SonicMetalMan Member since:
2009-05-25

My handset purchasing decisions are based on a balance of value, performance, and feature set. I typically do a lot of research before I buy and never do I jump on a product as soon as it hits the market. Even if Apple released the newest 5C at a competitive price point relative to other low-end devices, I would not buy without first looking at quite a few user and tech reviews. That's why I am member here, I count on info from outlets like this to help me make informed decisions. I tend to not throw money away on pretty, shiny new phones while I have one that serves me well.

I probably do not represent the type of consumer that Apple tries to snare.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: 5C rip-off
by krreagan on Wed 19th Mar 2014 20:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 5C rip-off"
krreagan Member since:
2008-04-08

Based on what I've seen here, information for an informed decision is very sparse.
Wild uninformed and over-hyped opinions are not the basis for smart decisions.
It's like looking to the Republican party for scientific information.

Reply Score: 3

RE: 5C rip-off
by kristoph on Tue 18th Mar 2014 15:09 UTC in reply to "5C rip-off"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

Apple is testing the waters with this device. Just now Apple is a huge profit engine and they elect not to play in the lower end. You might argue that's a bad long term strategy (that whole Mac/PC of the 90's) but it's serving Apple very well thus far.

I think Apple's core challenge is that iPhone market share and usage in the US is very high, they basically own the high end. But US is a saturated market and growth is flat. So they need higher growth in other markets - which are more price sensitive - without sacrificing the margins in successful markets like US and Japan.

My expectation is that they will slowly reduce the 5C price until they find a sweet spot that balances growth and profit margins.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: 5C rip-off
by majipoor on Tue 18th Mar 2014 15:28 UTC in reply to "RE: 5C rip-off"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

Agree.

One interesting statistics: Apple apparently owns 80% of the $500+ smartphone segment in China.

Now, one can argue whether Apple should target the <$500 segment, but who can seriously think he know better than Apple how to make money?

Reply Score: 2

Think US market
by edwdig on Tue 18th Mar 2014 13:48 UTC
edwdig
Member since:
2005-08-22

Remember the US market, where phones are usually subsidized with contracts. The old 5C is $99 up front with a new contract. The new one is probably free with a new contract. That's a big deal. The phone suddenly becomes an option for a lot more people. It's now the same price as the cheapest Android and Windows phones.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Think US market
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 18th Mar 2014 22:20 UTC in reply to "Think US market"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I agree this is more targeted at US markets than anything, but contracts are dying out here as well. Tmobile doesn't have them, At&t is getting rid of them, Sprint is moving in that direction. Version is the only major carrier to not show any signs of getting rid of contracts.

At&t is doing payment plans instead. The phones from them are the same price if you pay up front, or spread it over 18 or 22 months.

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

The iphone 5c isn't a super cheap phone for customers to buy. Its a super cheap phone for apple to build. Its a replacement for the previous strategy of providing the previous model at a discount. The cost of building apple's flagship wasn't decreasing as much as they would have liked to continue their previous policy. So the 5c is a iphone 5, that's cheaper for apple to build, allowing them to reap higher profit margins.

So why would anyone buy them? The teens I know like the colors, and their parents don't mind paying less than the cost of a iphone 5s.

Reply Score: 5

majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

Another point which has to be considered is that every time one can read that the 5C is not successful, it is because it sells not as well as the 5S.

Is it correct to consider Apple did fail if people do prefer the high end 5S?

But nobody actually know the reason Apple did introduce the iPhone 5C instead of selling the previous generation iPhone 5 at a lowest price.

Many consider that Apple wants and needs to compete against low cost Android smartphones and that the iPhone 5C was their answer. But I think it is completely wrong.

It is not Apple's business model to compete in the low end segment and I don't think Apple want to change their model (why should they?).

I think Apple did try to somehow extend their target market a bit beyond the market targeted by the old iPhone 5 and that the key selling point of the 5C vs the 5 is the colors and the fact it is a new model, not the price. May be Apple did try to targets younger people with the colorful 5C?

Whether the 5C is successful or not depends only on whether Apple earns more money by selling it rather than selling the iPhone 5 at a lowest price.

But once again, the most surprising point to me is to see so many people thinking they know better than Apple how to run their business and who think that the hugely profitable Apple should change its business model to match the business model of companies which for most barely make any profit.

Edited 2014-03-18 15:29 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Never again will I buy an iPhone new...
by The123king on Tue 18th Mar 2014 17:36 UTC
The123king
Member since:
2009-05-28

About 2 months after it was released, i jumped on the iPhone 4. With a contract, the 32Gb one cost me £35 a month (for 18 months) plus £250 up front for the phone. In the end, it averaged out that i nearly spent (or maybe spent more than) £1000 on the phone. Recently picked up a 64Gb 4S for £200 off Ebay. Got a decent spec bump whilst not paying the £700(!?!?!?!) this phone would have cost new.

It makes very little sense nowadays to get the latest and greatest from Apple. Older model phones are plentiful and ridiculously cheap compared to what they'd cost new.

I'll probably hunt eBay again next year and pick up a cheap 5. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Reply Score: 4

Savior Member since:
2006-09-02

Why do you need a new phone every year?

Reply Score: 3

The123king Member since:
2009-05-28

I don't, but when the phone is inevitably depreciated there's no real point of keeping it

Reply Score: 2

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

About 2 months after it was released, i jumped on the iPhone 4. With a contract, the 32Gb one cost me £35 a month (for 18 months) plus £250 up front for the phone. In the end, it averaged out that i nearly spent (or maybe spent more than) £1000 on the phone. Recently picked up a 64Gb 4S for £200 off Ebay. Got a decent spec bump whilst not paying the £700(!?!?!?!) this phone would have cost new.

It makes very little sense nowadays to get the latest and greatest from Apple. Older model phones are plentiful and ridiculously cheap compared to what they'd cost new.

I'll probably hunt eBay again next year and pick up a cheap 5. Lather, rinse, repeat.


You're comparing apples and oranges. When you picked up the iPhone 4 it was state of the art. Now you're getting a 3 year old phone. I don't see that as a deal at all to pay $200 for a phone that won't last nearly as long. I kept my iPhone 4 from release date to winter, and then upgraded to a 5S. Given that the phones seem to have a useful life of about 3.5 years for me, I'm fine with that.

Reply Score: 2

ludicrous
by fran on Tue 18th Mar 2014 17:42 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

A fool and his money soon parted.

Reply Score: 1

Luposian
Member since:
2005-07-27

I owned a 4S prior to it, and would have possibly bought a new one, but they knocked half the memory out of it.

I refuse to buy ANYTHING that uses biometrics... MoTB and all whatnot, so my only option was the 5C. I liked the slimness of it, I liked the color (blue; wish they had grey, but oh, well...), and... ok, the ridiculous swiss cheese protective "cases" were definitately not to my liking, but I found another one (also blue) that works perfectly.

I've accidentally dropped my 5C no less than 3 times (3-4 ft. off the ground) and it hasn't suffered a cracked case yet... thsnkfully.

My thought is... they're knocking off half the RAM of a 5C, because they're phasing out the 4S completely. So, you will have two choices... the 5S (16GB+) and the 5C (8-16Gb). Not surprising.

This may also portend to the soon arrival of the iPhone 6?!?

As long as I can buy an iPhone that doesn't have biometric entry, I'll continue to own/buy them. The day I can't, will be the day I go back to a TracFone or something similar.

Siri got my voice (even though she can be extremely "blond", when it comes to some inquiries). Facetime (if I used it) would get my face. Apple ain't gettin' my fingerprints!

Reply Score: 2

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Two things:
1. They reduced the solid state storage space, not the RAM.
2. Apple doesn't have your fingerprint.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Dr-ROX
by Dr-ROX on Wed 19th Mar 2014 10:26 UTC
Dr-ROX
Member since:
2006-01-03

"C" for "Cheap".

Reply Score: 0

Comment by zima
by zima on Fri 21st Mar 2014 19:03 UTC
zima
Member since:
2005-07-06

So where are those $80 Lumia 520s?

Reply Score: 2