“A report from Rosenblatt Securities analyst Jun Zhang recently said that he expects Apple to ship 30 million iPhone X smartphones during the quarter that ends in December (Apple’s first quarter of fiscal-year 2018), and then expects those shipments to ramp up to 40 million units in the quarter that ends in March,” Ashraf Eassa writes for The Motley Fool. “That’s a lot of iPhones being sold for between $999 (the price of the 64 GB iPhone X) and $1,149 (the price of the 256 GB iPhone X). Moreover, Zhang claims that the iPhone X with 256 GB of storage is outselling the one with 64 GB of storage by a staggering two-to-one ratio.”
“With the apparent success of the iPhone X, Apple has now proven that if it builds devices at higher price points, it’ll still be able to sell them in droves,” Eassa writes. “Part of that, of course, is due to the enormous brand equity that Apple has built over the years, but I’d say a larger part is simply that Apple delivered a product with the iPhone X that was worth its asking price.”
“What’s potentially more interesting, though, is the opportunity for Apple to try selling devices at still higher price points,” Eassa writes. “My guess is that Apple will do that with next year’s iPhone lineup by launching a direct successor to this year’s iPhone X at the same price point as this year’s iPhone X, and then launching the rumored iPhone X-like device with a larger 6.46-inch OLED display at an even higher price point.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: “iPhone X Pro” with Apple Pencil support! Starting at $1,199.
ProMotion – especially and naturally coupled with Apple Pencil support – would be a strong reason to choose iPhone X Plus, iPhone X Pro*, or whatever they name it.
*”Pro” means Apple Pencil support already, so it makes sense to use “Pro” for any iPhone with Apple Pencil support, too. – MacDailyNews, November 28, 2017
Regardless, we call it “Samsung’s Torment.” – MacDailyNews, November 13, 2017
Even without Pencil support, tens of millions will queue up online and in front of retail stores for the privilege of owning them!
SEE ALSO:
iPhone X drives Apple’s ‘best ever’ year for smartphone sales – December 1, 2017
Ming-Chi Kuo: Apple working on 6.5-inch ‘iPhone X Plus’ for late 2018 launch – November 13, 2017
I did not buy an iPhone X.
I am not going to buy an iPhone X.
I’m planning to stick with the ‘standard’ iPhone releases and skip the ‘premium’ iPhone releases.
Just personal preference.
The X is the next gen iPhone featuring the tech that will come in new models, there will be no iPhone 9 and 9 Plus next year, you’ll be able to choose from: the X successor, the “X Plus”, the SE 2 and maybe the rumored “6.5 Plus LED”. Apple will probably keep the 8/Plus around for another year. The home button will be gone within 2 years on all models.
Well, whatever the case, count me among those who just like the iOS compared to Android and who doesn’t need to pay premium price for all the premium features. I prefer to save my money and pay the premium on my Macs, thank you very much. 😉
Does Wall Street even acknowledge that iPhone X is an innovative product? I’ll bet it doesn’t. I’m not sure exactly what passes for innovation when it comes to smartphones. One would think that Face ID would be considered innovative if widely accepted by the masses and then copied by all other smartphone manufacturers. (Like the iPhone’s first 64-bit processor was). However, I’m sure analysts will just disregard it as not being innovative.
I’m willing to bet a folding smartphone would be considered innovative but a longer-lived battery wouldn’t. I don’t quite understand how innovation is measured because they’re always saying Apple can no longer innovate. So what exactly is the metric for innovation? How often does a company have to innovate to prove it still can?
The measure of innovation might be tied to how often it is ‘used’ in a certain time period. For example innovating something like a better battery is tied to how often one needs to recharge the device. Innovating on sound or tactile response, even if a smaller improvement, might seem more impressive in comparison.
Perception also may come into play with ‘new’ HW/SW features depending on how obviously different that feature is to the user in comparison to something similar but introduced earlier.
Too early to make actual assessment. Need more data over time. Today’s predictions are just rumors and speculation.
By September Apple will have another OLED supplier online. They will probably be charged with supplying the 6.5″ variation. Because supply will most likely continue to be constrained MDN’s $1199 entry price to the iPhone X “Pro” is probably good. I’ll wager that price point does not include the Apple Pencil.
Comparing a 6.5″ OLED iPhone X to a 7.9″ TFT LED iPad mini, I think the 6.5″ iPhone X WILL cannibalize iPad mini sales.
Hasn’t the Mini already been deprecated? Apple may still be selling existing models, but I’ve not seen any recent upgrading or redesigns done for the Mini. I think it is dead on the vine.
According to this business definition of innovating, Apple seems to meet the criteria:
The process of translating an idea or invention into a good or service that creates value or for which customers will pay.
To be called an innovation, an idea must be replicable at an economical cost and must satisfy a specific need. Innovation involves deliberate application of information, imagination and initiative in deriving greater or different values from resources, and includes all processes by which new ideas are generated and converted into useful products. In business, innovation often results when ideas are applied by the company in order to further satisfy the needs and expectations of the customers.
___________
So, I don’t know why there are always these claims that Apple can no longer innovate. I’d say those claims were wrong if this definition is correct.
One more factor is that is is perceived to be ‘new’ and different enough to the user in comparison to something introduced earlier by the company or its competitors.
In the case of FaceID it is possible that other less secure facial recognition systems are ‘good enough’ for daily use in the user’s perception. (e.g. no one around the user can successfully unlock the device) As a result it is perceived to be less innovative than it may be.
Apple could innovate a better AppStore, why don’t they?