7 ms·

> the sales numbers if it were poor versus the rest of the lineup. For one, the sales were still perfectly respectable. "Versus the rest of the lineup" is doin

by bigstrat2003 5d ago

> the sales numbers if it were poor versus the rest of the lineup. For one, the sales were still perfectly respectable. "Versus the rest of the lineup" is doing a ton of work here, because the rest of the iPhone models sell like crazy. For two, it is still bizarre that manufacturers refuse to make small phones even with that in mind. If you wear very small clothes (or very large clothes) that won't sell as many units, your options are limited, you have to pay more, but you aren't forced to go naked. But there's nobody out there doing the equivalent strategy for phones.

armadyl 5d ago
Bro the Mini was a flop for Apple, it could barely surpass 5% of all iPhone sales during its run. It would be nonsensical for a publicly traded company to leave money on the table and keep an underperforming product alive when they could put that towards the better performing bigger screen iPhones instead. For a small company sure it could be considered a success. I don’t think tech can be compared to the fashion industry. Also that example doesn’t really work. Because you basically have a locked in group who needs the clothes. Just also culturally there’s reasons why these clothing sizes exist. Nobody needs a small phone. But across the board it makes no sense for any OEM to make small phones when the data all shows that bigger screens sell more. That’s just absorbing an unnecessary opportunity cost. I think the only real way small phones will reach the market at this point in time is via a private company that’s basically run as a passion project. Honestly in this case the consumers do share the blame. They begged for the mini and didn’t show up. If apple couldn’t do it it’s unlikely that the android oems could.
- bigstrat2003 5d ago
  A brief search says that iPhone sales in 225 were approximately $200 billion. 5% of that is therefore approximately $10 billion. If you call that a "massive flop", your standards are completely unrealistic. That is a massive success. And no, the clothes analogy is not flawed. The point is that in other markets, niche tastes and needs get served even if it isn't as cheap or plentiful. It's only the phone manufacturers which refuse to try to get sales from a smaller (but still quite extant) market.
  - microtonal 5d ago
    A brief search says that iPhone sales in 225 were approximately $200 billion. 5% of that is therefore approximately $10 billion. If you call that a "massive flop", your standards are completely unrealistic. That is a massive success. It's all about scale. Yes 10B is a lot for most companies, but for Apple 5% is just a blip on the radar. They probably also did their market research and found that the vast majority of Mini users would buy another iPhone model if they discontinued the Mini. Those facts combined give Apple little incentive to continue the lineup. Another thing that further clouds the 5% discussion is that some Mini purchasers may have bought it not because of the size, but because it was $100 cheaper while still getting the same SoC. Maybe those buyers were disappointed by the worse battery life, and Apple could choose to axe it or make it the same price as the regular iPhone and it would drop way below 5%.
    - armadyl 5d ago
      Thanks you said it better than I would’ve
- ta8903 5d ago
  But you see people talking about the mini almost every time there's a discussion about iPhones (or phones in general). Surely it would have been worth it to Apple to keep the mini alive just to avoid the negative press and pretend they care about their consumers beyond making a profit. But I guess it really isn't possible to do things like that in a publicly traded company.
  - microtonal 5d ago
    But you see people talking about the mini almost every time there's a discussion about iPhones (or phones in general). ...in tech forums where people hold strong opinions about tech and the people who have their pet peeves come out. IRL I have rarely heard somebody wanting Apple to bring the Mini back. Or the stereo jack for that matter.
- Dylan16807 5d ago
  > Bro the Mini was a flop for Apple, it could barely surpass 5% of all iPhone sales during its run. They were making the SE at the exact same time as the mini, two years in a row, and the mini still got billions in sales. If they want a bigger percent, then do it less often and don't split the demand. It's been four and a half years since they did either mini or SE. People would buy plenty. > leave money on the table > opportunity cost If it cost them that much to have extra models, they wouldn't have five iphone 16 variants that are all just different enough to need five internal layouts. And four 17 variants plus the air.
  - armadyl 5d ago
    Don’t know what else to say here I guess you and the others here know more than Tim Cook does.
    - Dylan16807 5d ago
      That's a weird statement. Do you think knowing the most about something inevitably leads you to a specific decision? It doesn't. And this isn't something that would affect their revenue particularly much. So while it's possible I've missed an important factor, even if I'm 100% right it could make sense for most people to say "do the option that leads to more happy customers, while still making boatloads of money", while a CEO says "we have enough happy customers, go for the extra sliver of money". Or an extra payment from Meta or whatever, I wasn't really talking about that idea, I was just arguing against their abandonment of small phones. The point is, don't use CEOs to guide your intuition of what decisions are best.
      - armadyl 4d ago
        I would argue that it’s weird to expect that Apple should maintain a product that sells less when people have consistently shown that they will buy the better performing product anyway instead of not buying at all. Like this isn’t a hypothetical, Apple literally released the Mini and it was the worst performing item in their iPhone lineup by far. If it was profitable enough, Cook would’ve kept it. Like ultimately I don’t necessarily disagree with what you’re trying to say, but like this: > “do the option that leads to more happy customers, while still making boatloads of money", while a CEO says "we have enough happy customers, go for the extra sliver of money". The consumers do take some blame here cause they did take the Mini away and people just ended up buying the other more expensive iPhones instead of not buying one at all. Why would Apple do anything different in that case? The obsession with the Mini is something that is only really popular within an online bubble and isn’t reflective of real life trends, people here are being extremely disconnected from the public with this (and this is coming from someone who wants Apple to add a desktop mode to iOS). The only time Apple seems to maintain lagging product lines are with things like the Air which seemed to essentially be an R&D product for the Duo.

armadyl 5d ago

Bro the Mini was a flop for Apple, it could barely surpass 5% of all iPhone sales during its run. It would be nonsensical for a publicly traded company to leave money on the table and keep an underperforming product alive when they could put that towards the better performing bigger screen iPhones instead. For a small company sure it could be considered a success. I don’t think tech can be compared to the fashion industry. Also that example doesn’t really work. Because you basically have a locked in group who needs the clothes. Just also culturally there’s reasons why these clothing sizes exist. Nobody needs a small phone. But across the board it makes no sense for any OEM to make small phones when the data all shows that bigger screens sell more. That’s just absorbing an unnecessary opportunity cost. I think the only real way small phones will reach the market at this point in time is via a private company that’s basically run as a passion project. Honestly in this case the consumers do share the blame. They begged for the mini and didn’t show up. If apple couldn’t do it it’s unlikely that the android oems could.

bigstrat2003 5d ago
A brief search says that iPhone sales in 225 were approximately $200 billion. 5% of that is therefore approximately $10 billion. If you call that a "massive flop", your standards are completely unrealistic. That is a massive success. And no, the clothes analogy is not flawed. The point is that in other markets, niche tastes and needs get served even if it isn't as cheap or plentiful. It's only the phone manufacturers which refuse to try to get sales from a smaller (but still quite extant) market.
- microtonal 5d ago
  A brief search says that iPhone sales in 225 were approximately $200 billion. 5% of that is therefore approximately $10 billion. If you call that a "massive flop", your standards are completely unrealistic. That is a massive success. It's all about scale. Yes 10B is a lot for most companies, but for Apple 5% is just a blip on the radar. They probably also did their market research and found that the vast majority of Mini users would buy another iPhone model if they discontinued the Mini. Those facts combined give Apple little incentive to continue the lineup. Another thing that further clouds the 5% discussion is that some Mini purchasers may have bought it not because of the size, but because it was $100 cheaper while still getting the same SoC. Maybe those buyers were disappointed by the worse battery life, and Apple could choose to axe it or make it the same price as the regular iPhone and it would drop way below 5%.
  - armadyl 5d ago
    Thanks you said it better than I would’ve
ta8903 5d ago
But you see people talking about the mini almost every time there's a discussion about iPhones (or phones in general). Surely it would have been worth it to Apple to keep the mini alive just to avoid the negative press and pretend they care about their consumers beyond making a profit. But I guess it really isn't possible to do things like that in a publicly traded company.
- microtonal 5d ago
  But you see people talking about the mini almost every time there's a discussion about iPhones (or phones in general). ...in tech forums where people hold strong opinions about tech and the people who have their pet peeves come out. IRL I have rarely heard somebody wanting Apple to bring the Mini back. Or the stereo jack for that matter.
Dylan16807 5d ago
> Bro the Mini was a flop for Apple, it could barely surpass 5% of all iPhone sales during its run. They were making the SE at the exact same time as the mini, two years in a row, and the mini still got billions in sales. If they want a bigger percent, then do it less often and don't split the demand. It's been four and a half years since they did either mini or SE. People would buy plenty. > leave money on the table > opportunity cost If it cost them that much to have extra models, they wouldn't have five iphone 16 variants that are all just different enough to need five internal layouts. And four 17 variants plus the air.
- armadyl 5d ago
  Don’t know what else to say here I guess you and the others here know more than Tim Cook does.
  - Dylan16807 5d ago
    That's a weird statement. Do you think knowing the most about something inevitably leads you to a specific decision? It doesn't. And this isn't something that would affect their revenue particularly much. So while it's possible I've missed an important factor, even if I'm 100% right it could make sense for most people to say "do the option that leads to more happy customers, while still making boatloads of money", while a CEO says "we have enough happy customers, go for the extra sliver of money". Or an extra payment from Meta or whatever, I wasn't really talking about that idea, I was just arguing against their abandonment of small phones. The point is, don't use CEOs to guide your intuition of what decisions are best.
    - armadyl 4d ago
      I would argue that it’s weird to expect that Apple should maintain a product that sells less when people have consistently shown that they will buy the better performing product anyway instead of not buying at all. Like this isn’t a hypothetical, Apple literally released the Mini and it was the worst performing item in their iPhone lineup by far. If it was profitable enough, Cook would’ve kept it. Like ultimately I don’t necessarily disagree with what you’re trying to say, but like this: > “do the option that leads to more happy customers, while still making boatloads of money", while a CEO says "we have enough happy customers, go for the extra sliver of money". The consumers do take some blame here cause they did take the Mini away and people just ended up buying the other more expensive iPhones instead of not buying one at all. Why would Apple do anything different in that case? The obsession with the Mini is something that is only really popular within an online bubble and isn’t reflective of real life trends, people here are being extremely disconnected from the public with this (and this is coming from someone who wants Apple to add a desktop mode to iOS). The only time Apple seems to maintain lagging product lines are with things like the Air which seemed to essentially be an R&D product for the Duo.