[ginger123]

Interesting theory from Gruber ! "If you want to argue that Apple should never create an iPhone with a higher starting price than what we have today, you’re implicitly arguing that Apple should never put any components into a new iPhone that can’t be made at iPhone 7’s scale. I think that’s dangerous strategically, leaving Apple open to attack from competitors making premium phones with components (cameras, displays, new sensors, new battery technologies, etc.) that can only be produced in single-digit millions per quarter."

[giobox]

I think Gruber is right, but the problem that's going to be hard to sell to some buyers is that many of these "supply constrained" components are _only_ an issue for Apple's giant sales. I think it's clear that individually, no or very few single android handset models sell at iPhone scale. Samsung and others will continue to be able to fit "premium" constrained features like OLED displays to their cheaper phones, simply because they don't have to make as many of them.

In the case of the iPhone, I'm potentially paying the premium solely because it's hard for Apple to scale production - a harder sell if several competing Android handsets that are not as supply constrained can offer these things for 3 or 4 hundred dollars less. I'm willing to bet this will work out ok for Apple in the end, but if this happens it's probably going to be a rough ride among some journalists like we saw with the verge's myopic reporting over the 7's headphone jack removal.

I think there's another additional motivation which Gruber doesn't touch on - as iPhone sales growth starts to cool, it's going to get harder for Apple as a company to continue growing at its typical rate, especially when the iPhone is responsible for ~70% of Apple's earnings. Juicing the margins on the most expensive iPhone models could be an attractive way (for Apple shareholders anyway...) to boost iPhone revenues in general to keep the growth train going.