Apple’s tough negotiations may have helped create the memory crisis it now faces

Apple CEO Tim Cook (Photo: Getty Images)
Apple CEO Tim Cook (Photo: Getty Images)

In the high-stakes world of semiconductors, the memory market has always been a brutal boom-and-bust cycle. Right now, we’re firmly in the boom phase — but a very different kind of boom than we’ve seen before.

Apple just announced price increases on certain MacBook and iPad models, with some rising by $200 or more. CEO Tim Cook told The Wall Street Journal that the moves are “unavoidable” because of surging memory and storage costs driven by massive AI demand. He described the situation as “unsustainable” for consumer products and called for memory pricing and supply to return to “reasonable levels.”

Just days later, Micron Technology dropped blockbuster earnings — revenue up 346% year-over-year with gross margins approaching 85% — and its Chief Business Officer, Sumit Sadana, offered a pointed counter-narrative in the same Wall Street Journal interview.

Without naming Apple directly, Sadana strongly implied that aggressive pricing tactics by major customers during the 2023 memory downturn played a significant role in today’s supply crunch.

“We told a couple of the customers who were being very aggressive with pricing at that time that this is not constructive,” Sadana said. He added that low prices discouraged capital investments, noting: “A lot of the industry investments got shut down in 2023 because of really poor pricing and really poor margins.”

Micron’s gross profits had even turned negative during that period. The message was clear: when big buyers (and Apple is famously one of the toughest negotiators in tech) drive prices to rock-bottom levels and lock in long-term deals at those rates, suppliers lose the incentive — and the cash flow — to build new capacity.

The Bigger Picture: AI Is Eating the Supply

This isn’t just a classic cyclical story. The current memory shortage is heavily structural and driven by artificial intelligence.

AI data centers are voraciously consuming High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), a premium, high-margin product that uses the same manufacturing capacity as standard DRAM and NAND. When Micron, Samsung, and SK Hynix allocate fab space to HBM for Nvidia GPUs and hyperscalers, there’s simply less left for the DRAM and NAND that go into iPhones, Macs, PCs, and other consumer devices.

Micron’s CEO has already warned that the shortage will extend well beyond 2026. New capacity from major projects isn’t expected to meaningfully come online until 2028. In the meantime, consumer electronics makers are competing for whatever standard memory remains — and paying significantly more for it.

Apple’s Position vs. Micron’s Reality Check

Apple has long used its scale and long-term supply agreements to its advantage. These deals helped insulate the company from earlier price spikes and allowed it to secure favorable terms during downturns. Cook has emphasized that Apple is willing to use its massive balance sheet to help increase capacity, but it has no plans to build its own memory fabs.

From Micron’s perspective, however, those same aggressive negotiations during the weak 2022–2023 period contributed to years of underinvestment across the industry. The result is the tight supply we’re seeing today — and the price hikes Apple is now forced to pass on to customers.

It’s a classic case of reaping what was sown in a highly cyclical, capital-intensive industry.

What This Means Going Forward

For consumers, expect higher prices on memory-intensive devices to persist for the foreseeable future. For the broader tech industry, the era of cheap, abundant memory may be over — at least until new capacity finally ramps up in the late 2020s.

The public back-and-forth between Apple and Micron highlights a fundamental tension: buyers want low prices and reliable supply, while suppliers need healthy margins to justify the enormous investments required for new fabs. When one side dominates negotiations too aggressively during downturns, the entire ecosystem can suffer when demand rebounds — especially when a new, massive demand source like AI enters the picture.

MacDailyNews Take: Whether Apple’s tactics were the primary culprit or simply one factor among many in a complex market, one thing is clear: the RAMageddon memory shortage is real, it’s painful for consumer tech companies, and it’s likely to remain a defining feature of the industry for the next couple of years.

The memory market has spoken — and right now, it’s speaking in very expensive terms.



Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!

Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.

6 Comments

  1. Duh. Should have invest into their own joint venture in to their own private fab shop. They would have ALL the Output, have control and secure their future, but no, wanna be cheap, and haggle hard. now what did that get them? a Tight ass now. Think THIS is why Tim stepped back from CEO so he wouldn’t have the blame of this on him, Too late.

    4
    6
    1. It will now take half a decade to start up such a plant, by which time the RAM crunch may well turn into a massive glut. This is the problem of balance – whatever you start building now starts becoming out of date very quickly…

      1. 5 years. so what? YOU Guarantee YOUR Source, Secure your future supply. and what if the market for AI collapses, All those who jacked up the prices will seek their old customers to fill that gap again, so who does it hurt? Apple has their own plant, won’t hurt them. “whatever you start building now starts becoming out of date very quickly” So the fab currently will also be out of date.

    2. Once upon a time Apple at least assembled stuff that carried its name. Now they just prefer to contract the work out. So while they could certainly afford their own memory fab, they’d need a partner who knows how to make the stuff.

  2. Scale is the answer. AAPL has the $$ to head-up almost anything in their ecosystem, but diverting energy/capital to every sector of their business would be business-suicide. Making chips touches on the absolute limits of science and AAPL found the car beyond their tech/financial capabilities.

    Apple’s “tight ass” and want to “be cheap,” keeps your silly frustrations from being a tidal wave…where you’d buy absolutely nothing.

    Being a lukewarm “fan” of the man, I must acknowledge that Cook’s tight ass wrought over 1500% gains during his tenure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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