The cheapest iPhone from Apple are not announced advertisers by volume sellers: iPhone 8, X are

This is not a news that Apple is grabbing all profits from the smartphone industry. But new data shows that Apple's most expensive new flagship iPhone products accomplish this largely by themselves, indicating that analyst gossip about smartphone users really want devices less Dear ones are totally crazy.

A press release presenting sales data from Counterpoint Research for May showed that Apple was in virtual connection with Samsung, supposed to bring back the crown of the smartphone model after the iPhone X who had fallen behind Galaxy S9 Plus. in April. However, the figures of the company actually present a very different picture.

Samsung has two flagship models that have been in the top ten (S9 and S9 Plus), but Apple has three (iPhone 8, X and 8 Plus). The other spots are picked up by Xiaomi, Huawei and Vivo / OPPO (two brands of the Chinese BKK).

So, in reality, Apple's flagship products accounted for just over 36% of the top 10 handsets in the world, while Samsung's top models accounted for nearly 24%. It's actually not a tight race in the high end segment at all.

It is much more dramatic to choose a "winning" model number on a monthly basis, but the truth is that Apple is simply selling a lot more high-end units than Samsung, despite the large volumes of other phones. This explains why Apple is making so much more money than Samsung's flagship products are much more profitable than the intermediate and lower volume sellers.

Also important for understanding market demand: these top ten models account for 18.8% of all smartphone shipments globally. This means that Apple's three most expensive models accounted for 36.2% of the world's flagship sales, even though the majority of the best-selling flagship models were much cheaper.

Xeomi Redme 5A is priced at around $ 420; Huawei P20 Lite is $ 395; Vivo X21 is $ 520; and OPPO A83 is about $ 150. Counterpoint also noted, specific to the A83, that sales volumes were driven by "an abundant promotion and price declines". Yet, Apple has overwhelmingly surpassed all of its unit volume sales despite the much higher prices of its premium iPhone 8, 8 Plus and X models. It's pretty statistically clear that price is not the biggest factor influencing sales among the most popular models in the world, at least for Apple.

Apart from these ten models, price is certainly a factor of competitiveness among the models. the majority of the smartphone market (nearly 82% of other models, per unit). This is not controversial and is well known, due to the fact that the average selling price of Androids is now less than $ 200. This translates into low prices, phone vendors struggling for sustainable profitability. The scores of the Chinese manufacturers simply ceased their activities, even though high-end models of Apple have maintained sales volumes and even slightly increased.

The cheaper iPhone from Apple are not best sellers!

Conversely, Apple also offers cheaper iPhone models: the 7, 7 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus and the cheapest models: iPhone SE, starting at $ 399 (or about $ 260US in India) .

It is worth noting that none of these models appear in the top ten overall units in volume. This means that each of these older iPhones has been surpassed in sales volumes by the OPPO A83, which has completed the top ten with a 1.2% share of global smartphone sales.

Even though the iPhone 7 has fallen just outside of these top ten models to about 1% of global sales, it still should be a small minority of Apple's total sales. So much for the media narrative that customers did not buy the iPhone X because of the sticker shock and were buying more and more cheaper iPhone models instead.

This story has been repeated incessantly by analysts and even newspapers whose shameless fake Japan Nikkei on Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg . Their reports continued to claim as a fact that shoppers are actively avoiding the high-priced iPhone X because of its price (and so-called "lack of convincing new features"), despite the fact that it's not the price. lack of evidence that this is really happening.

Counterpoint's data is quite clear – there is no possibility that this is true.

Historical data is also very clear about this: despite huge volumes of iPhone sales (which eclipsed Samsung's global sales volumes in the December quarter), the majority of customers Apple have always opted for the most recent model year. regardless of discounts of $ 100, $ 200 or even more on previous generations of the iPhone.

Also remember that no one expected the iPhone X to be Apple's volume sales leader. Apple itself has positioned it as a high-end "concept phone" showing its intention for the future, although users can choose to pay a premium to buy now and experience from the vision of the company. Incredibly, even when the sales data began to indicate that the iPhone X was very popular, reporters reiterated the idea that the iPhone X had a price too high for customers' customers. Apple, and that a fork revolution was in progress. Incredibly, even as sales data began to indicate that the iPhone X was very popular, reporters reiterated the idea that the iPhone X was too expensive for customers to use. Apple, and that a fork revolution was underway and that Apple was struggling to cut production.

Even immediately after Apple reported that the iPhone X was actually the most popular iPhone in weekly sales every week after its launch quarter after quarter, the reports continued to erect pure fiction backed by nothing more than conjectures and rumors of cuts in the supply chain that boldly predicts a result that never really happened.

Even more ridiculously, these reports claimed that Apple had been plotting internally to build billions of dollars worth of iPhone X models that it would have realized that it could not sell only a few months after the launch, resulting in a "reduction" of production orders and desperate efforts to liquidate. If that had been the case, Apple would have had to close 40 million units with an average retail price greater than $ 1,000, or $ 40 billion in revenue in January, without causing a total collapse of the Asian logistics chain. This complete bullshit and udder has been repeated by all the last corners of technical media, without even suspicion of suspicion or fact checking. To this day, the Nikkei Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg have still not acknowledged that their reports were grossly erroneous or even really changed over the price or the demand for the iPhone X. They have all only offered the humblest of charges that iPhone X has defied their predictions without ever admitting their claims about what was happening at retail or in the chain. Apple's supply proved to be completely wrong and impossible. false.