Reuters withdraws report of Phil Schiller’s ‘cheaper iPhone’ denial citing ‘substantial changes’

Reuters has withdrawn the story headlined ‘Apple exec dismisses cheaper phone as a market share grab-report’ which was based on a Shanghai Evening News report that was subsequently updated with substantial changes to its content.

MacDailyNews cited the same report on Thursday , as did AppleInsider which noted “that Schiller allegedly told the newspaper that Apple is not interested in making a ‘cheap,’ low-profit iPhone. The Next Web had reported that it confirmed with Apple that Schiller’s comments came from an ‘official interview,’ as did the report from Reuters, which is now rescinded.”

“It’s unclear exactly what the ‘substantial changes’ made to the story are,” AppleInsider reports. “As of Friday morning, the original story remains hosted at, claiming that Schiller said Apple will not develop ‘cheap smartphones.'”

Read more in the full article here.

Related article:
Apple’s Phil Schiller: Cheap iPhone will ‘never be the future of Apple products’ – January 10, 2013


  1. There will be a “less expensive” iPhone, but I don’t believe we will see it in NA or the EU. It will spook WS, but profits will rise because of it and all will be well. Munster did cut his outlook, but it’s still well over $800, so big desl.

  2. This is beginning to reek of a move against Apple containing a “mediagate” element. We’ve all seen a substantial stock drop (that does not bother me) and all the rumors, conjectures and theories from the analysts and media about nearly every reasons and influences about it, save for one… preemptive and premeditated stock manipulation.

    Normally I would not see this as suspicious but it’s been brought up so many times here by many of those who post at this site. For all that though, I haven’t seen a single media story following up on this possibility.

    The withdrawal of some media about this story seems suspicious, especially when you try to find the original source. It is said that the original story is hosted at interestingly enough with no link provided to it.

    As it turns out is a Chinese newspaper but trying “Schiller” in the search engine it appears that the latest article with the word “Schiller” in it was from 2011.

    So where is the original article (even if it’s in Chinese)?

    It just doesn’t feel right.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.