Apple iPhone X Demand Limited, Wall Street Analysts Say

Post by Certhas » Wed, Dec 27, 2017, 12:05 AM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #170

Joeri wrote: post #87

The iphone X is very overpriced when viewed as a utility object, because it doesn’t provide 4x the utility of a $250 phone. But it is very reasonable when viewed as a fashion accessory. A $1000 phone to go inside a $2000 purse is not crazy at all. People keep looking at apple as a tech company and struggling to understand them, but if you view them as a luxury/fashion company who happens to specialize in technology t…

>>> it doesn’t provide 4x the utility of a $250 phone That is not correct. Try taking a photo of a text document with a $250 phone, the text is not readable because the camera and the software is terrible. A better phone would allow you to not have a dedicated scanner.

Post by lostlogin » Wed, Dec 27, 2017, 12:09 AM UTC

orf wrote: post #93

lostlogin wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s terrible because any difference between carrier prices is a large multiple of what the sticker/brochure says. Most plans here (New Zealand) are over 2 years, so any difference in price is 24x greater at the end of the contract. And no one here is paid per month, that’s seen as completely antiquated and they are paid per week or per fortnight.

Really? Nobody is paid per month? Coming from the UK that is unexpected. Are jobs wages advertised per week? What are the real advantages? Surely it's a bit harder to pay for larger purchases as it requires more controlled saving and spending?

Post by user5994461 » Wed, Dec 27, 2017, 12:12 AM UTC

Certhas wrote: post #192

user5994461 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> it doesn’t provide 4x the utility of a $250 phone That is not correct. Try taking a photo of a text document with a $250 phone, the text is not readable because the camera and the software is terrible. A better phone would allow you to not have a dedicated scanner.

I use a Nexus 5X. Refurbished for $180 ($270 new) on amazon right now. The picture quality is excellent and for something basic like taking readable pictures of text documents it's perfectly fine. In fact it's pre-pre-descessor was perfectly fine for that task. I was using it extensively for just that purpose. These expensive phones are luxury devices with almost no added utility. A few milliseconds of delay can make…

Post by matthewmacleod » Wed, Dec 27, 2017, 12:21 AM UTC

make3 wrote: post #187

jrs95 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't necessarily need to be a fashion accessory to justify that price. You're not just getting aesthetics for the money, you're getting performance, battery life, display quality, etc. I'm using my phone a lot on a daily basis, so it's worth paying a bit more to get the best available. There's nothing functionally different about a $2000 purse. Besides, comparing iPhones to purses is basically the same sort of…

I hope you aren't claiming there is anything from a utility perspective that would make the iPhone X a rational purchase, aside from the appearance of wealth which can be utility depending on which business you're in. otherwise there is simply none, let's please cut the bullshit here. well all in all, the premium is purely for the fashion/wealth thing

Post by Certhas » Wed, Dec 27, 2017, 12:24 AM UTC

valuearb wrote: post #43

dkrich wrote: post #21

I think market analysts continue to miss the mark on this story. What I keep hearing over and over are variations of "people are turned off by the $1,000 price tag." I think this is a complete misread. People don't pay $1k for an iPhone because it's the practical thing to do. If practicality is the #1 priority for phone shoppers, they will simply buy a 7 or 8. I don't think this comprises the top of the market, thoug…

I get a new iPhone every 2-3 years. This year I spent $10 a month extra to get the best possible screen and camera on a device I use hours every day. Not because it’s a status symbol. And very happy with my purchase.