[fauigerzigerk]

>I don't think this quarter indicates that the devices are too expensive

I don't claim that it does. My point is that there is a trade-off between increasing the average selling price of hardware and broadening the user base so you can sell more services to more people.

Apple's market share is now dangerously low in some parts of the world, including some rich European countries. It makes features and services that are restricted to Apple devices completely useless or far less valuable.

[scarface74]

You can’t discount both the older generation phones that Apple still sells, the used market, and hand me down phones effect on the installed base.

Every phone that Apple has introduced since 2013 is still getting updates. The 2015 iPhone 6s still runs circles around midrange Android phones and is even faster than flagship Android phones in single core performance.

[fauigerzigerk]

I'm not discounting it. I'm a happy iPhone 6 user myself. But the trickle down effect you're talking about has to start with some people actually buying new iPhones at some point. I'm a bit worried that Apple is overplaying its hand.

A premium strategy is fine. A luxury strategy could be a disaster, especially if they intend to make money on services that require broad adoption.

[edmundsauto]

In non-US locales, aren't iPhones a major luxury item and status symbol? Increasing pricing to decrease the number of users feeds into this marketing strategy.

[scarface74]

In most industrialized countries, the iPhone market share is above 30%

https://deviceatlas.com/blog/android-v-ios-market-share

Definitely not a status symbol.