Worth mentioning that this looks to be based on mean salaries rather than modal so your real world percentages would likely be higher.
The footnote explicitly says “median”. What makes you doubt that?
Calculating the UK out:
- £799 for the phone
- 2.91% of pay
- Salary they calculated it at is £27,457
That sits abit lower than the median here in the UK but the mean is much higher
The UK government says the median household income is 32,349£, the mean is 39,328£ in 2022. Data from 2020: the median was 29,900£, while the mean was 36,900£.
In both cases the median comes way closer to the £27,457 you calculated than the mean.
Agreed
No, it literally says it’s based on the median at the bottom.
I assume it is based on net income, correct?
Yeah, for some reason electronics are one of the few items that basically cost the same in Switzerland as in the neighbouring countries, which make them fairly cheap in terms of buying power.
The food prices though …
Homegrown problem
Importing food is made deliberately difficult and expensive in order to support Swiss agriculture.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-food-so-expensive-in-Switzerland
I trust nothing on Quora to the point where if it’s a top result on a search I try to figure out how I messed up the question.
But this one is very likely really one of the reasons.
Isn’t this just lowest median salary displayed a different way?
Sort of, they also use the local price. So tarrifs play a role.
Is the cost of an iPhone in usd in all these different countries available in the same format?
Its over 300 dollars more expensive in Denmark than in the US…
1115 dollars here
800 msrp in the US
Although, the US price is without tax, while the danish price probably is (can only speak for Germany but to my knowledge, this is the same for all of Europe). Doesn’t make up the entire difference but at least some of it.
They are made in the countries where people can’t afford to buy them too.
Absolutely insane amount of profits for these things.
Probably costs like 100 dollars per phone to make. Would be interesting to know.
According to Nikkei it costs $501 to make an iPhone 14 Pro Max which is sold at $1099. It’s still very fat, but there’s no way something like this only costs $100 lol.
You’re also paying for researching new technologies. They don’t just magically slap the parts together every year and come out with a new iPhone.
Yes that new USBC technology, real ground breaking shit
Do not underestimate Apple’s R&D costs. While yes, the new iPhones barely look different, their internals sometimes change drastically and especially the new processors are quite a feat every year. Apple‘s ARM SoCs have consistently been either among the top performers in the industry or, especially lately, the top chips outright. There’s massive R&D behind that. If course, they still have a hefty profit margin on every iPhone but it’s not just slapping a USB-C port into last year’s devices.
Thank you!
i remember hearing a few years ago about it costing around $200 to make the latest and greatest galaxy note 10, and it had an msrp around the thousand dollar mark. phones have MASSIVE profit margins and honestly its probably just been getting bigger and bigger since then.
I couldn’t find your $200 figure, all I found was that the note 8 costed $369 against a price of $950 and that the note 20 ultra costed $549 against an initial price of $1299.
Interesting seen this way.
Word of note though. Salaries are quiet spread out. The people likely to buy new iPhones are likely people earning top 1% of salaries in most countries in Africa.
If this viz is focusing on average salary, then it is a general description and should not be compared to other countries with different income spreads (min-max). It can be quite deceptive. Upper middle class in a place like Kenya or Myanmar live a far more better life overall than say lower middle class folk in the US.
It never occurred to me to look at things I buy as a percentage of my yearly salary and now I am terrified.
Would also be interesting to see this series with a “net income” type of divisor (as opposed to “revenue” for the sake of analogy) to adjust for differences in CoL
Would this look any different if it displayed average salary instead of iPhone price as a percentage of average salary?
Yes because items are priced differently in different countries
On top of what the other comment said, median is used, not average.
deleted by creator
And all the Applefanboys will be like “shut up and take my money”.
And all the colored girls say doo do doo doo do doo doo doo
I think baby shark says that one
I want the better camera and larger screen, but I do not want to pay full price. Verizon won’t subsidize it for me because I am still “paying off” the “free” iPhone 13 they gave me when I traded in my pretty new iPhone 11. The “free” consists of them billing me $22 a month, and them paying that charge themselves on the same bill. I’m sure there are explanations for how this benefits them, but I struggle to understand this Rube Goldberg billing strategy.
You should read contracts before you sign them.
This information reflects the current contract terms Verizon offers to everyone.
iPhone is $899 + tax. Verizon pays Apple what you pay for the iPhone. You sign a contract for 36 months that states you’ll pay Verizon a monthly installment without interest.
As for the “free” phone, it really can be free. Based on their own internal metrics is what makes you eligible. Accounts the system has flagged for fear of losing (retention), good standing (no missed payments), long time customers (loyalty), new customers, or when there is an abundance of stock and a new model is set to release. The catch is that you’re on the hook for the price of the phone if you upgrade early or want to cancel your line. The average rep is not letting you upgrade because the system says no. A manager can override but if they do, you lose the credit. Your next bill will include the price of the phone. They’re still making money off you in the long term whether or not the phone is free. It’s calculated business.
Telecos make minimal amounts on the hardware - its all in the batshit insane service costs. To give an (out of date ) example, back when ATT was getting rid of contracts I talked with some people who knew the ins and outs. On the contract model, the first 6 months paid for the device subsidy and the network, the last 18 months was pure profit. They where all super excited about the financial gains of no longer needing to do phone subsidies, but still have the customer locked in for 2+ years.
It could be a tax thing, move some of their expenses to a different year? Or they were able to negotiate leasing from the supplier, instead of paying up front they use the money to invest in the company or invest it / stock buybacks.
I’m not a finance guy or have any special knowledge. Above is pure speculation.
Are you a native advertising agency posting awareness of Apple products?
Can we please just cut down on the cynicism? Do Apple products even need awareness?
Yes they do absolutely. Turn on the TV and see colourful ads of young hipsters using Apple products and dancing to trendy music.
If Apple products did not need awareness then Apple would not spend billions of $ a year advertising them.
Corporations aren’t stupid they don’t waste money and resources on ineffectual efforts.
People need constant reminder of Apple products otherwise why would anyone buy an phone with half the capabilities of the competition and 4x the price.
This post is likely a different kind of ad, one which gets people taking and thinking about Apple products which keep them top of mind.
People are aware of Apple constantly and it’s extremely hard to forget about them; the ads are made to incentivize you to buy them. This post does not do that. Would an article about AOL’s discbombing marketing strategy released during that time be an ad? Just making people know these exist doesn’t incentivize anyone except fanatics; to incentivize them you need to tell people about the features, not the expensive freaking price.
It absolutely incentivizes the target audience. Apple isn’t a technology company they are a lifestyle company. They aren’t selling a value proposition, they are selling an image.
Apple is a tech company that markets itself as a luxury/lifestyle company. People already know the image, and those who didn’t already find value in Apple or luxury products will not be accepted by such images.
Removed by mod
