Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone | Hacker News Reader

They sold 77.316 million iPhones for $61.576 billion. If I do the calculation right, that's an average revenue per iPhone of $796.

That seems extremely high to me. Also, iPads bring in less revenue per unit sold (13.170 million sold for $5.862 billion of revenue, or $445 per iPad)

What do they count in iPhone revenue? “deferrals and amortization of related software upgrade rights and non-software services.” according to https://www.apple.com/newsroom/pdfs/Q1_FY18_Data_Summary.pdf, but what are those, and why would they be different for iPhones vs iPads?

View on HN

> If I do the calculation right, that's an average revenue per iPhone of $796. That seems extremely high to me.

The iPhone X is either $1000 or $1200. Since they said it’s their best selling phone on a per week basis, it wouldn’t be hard for that to drive up the average selling price compared to last year.

> Also, iPads bring in less revenue per unit sold

They released the newest iPad last year, the one that is effectively and air to but only cost about $300. Since the entry level “modern“ iPad (not a model a few years old) used to be $500 it makes sense that they may have lower revenue per unit.

> What do they count in iPhone revenue? “deferrals and amortization of related software upgrade rights and non-software services.”

Apple Care, iPhone Upgrade Program, etc

You can imagine why the numbers would be different for iPads. Also, for people who are on the iPhone Upgrade Program, they are required to have Apple Care as part of the deal, so that plays a role as well. It drives up the ASP.

AppleCare falls under “Services” in that PDF, so that can’t be it.

Or is “AppleCare+” different from “AppleCare”? (That wouldn’t fully surprise me, given that Apple tries to be as unclear as the SEC allows them to be in their reporting)

That's a good point, I'm not quite sure.

AppleCare extends the warranty, AppleCare+ does that and includes two incidents of accidental damage insurance.

Have used the incidents in the past, got an as-new refurb after accidentally dropping on concrete / in water.

High average phone revenue means more X's are selling.

An iPhone X is almost twice the cost of a Samsung S8. Is it really twice the phone? Is the FaceID hardware really that expensive?

1.6x is not "almost twice" and that's comparing the larger storage X to the base S8.

Samsung S8 64GB - 499 GBP -> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06XYMCMHD

iPhone X 64GB - 897 GBP -> https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B076GQZRR9 (there is one seller for 800 GBP, but it has 0% positive ratings and looks like a scam)

1.8x for the same size

It's not really a like for like comparison. The S8 has been out for a while and has had its price cut down as a result. You always get better value for money if you stay slightly behind the curve and don't buy the fanciest, newest thing going.

The iPhone X price is still ridiculous, don't get me wrong, but Samsung phones are pretty damned expensive on launch, too.

Also, the S8 is the smallest (even though it's got the same size screen as the iPhone X) and cheapest of the 8-series flagships from Samsung (the other two being the S8+ and Note 8).

The Note 8 launch price was pretty close to the iPhone X.

In the US, that's $999 for iPhone X 64GB[0], or $724.99 for Samsung S8 64GB. So just under 1.4x.

[0] https://www.apple.com/iphone/ [1] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-galaxy-s8-64gb-unlocked...

S8 was 690 GBP at launch. You still have a fair point though as 8 months after launch (July 2018), I'm sure the X will still be 897.

iPhone X - Geekbench single core: 4224, multicore: 10401

S8 - Geekbench single core: 2008, multicore: 6475

iPhone X wins by 60% to 105% on speed alone, and so would the cheaper iPhone 8 which has the same processor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com