I've tried at least several times to have an iPhone bought back by Apple - in their certified stores, only to be told that the back-cover is broken, which effectively makes the device unusable.
you see, an iphone becomes unusable the moment the glass breaks, this is what apple reps. think makes up the value of the phone. not the chips inside, or cameras, but the stupid glass cover.
and they wouldn't buy back. so this whole upgrade nonsense is perhaps valid only in very extraordinary situations.
nerdjon 19 hours ago [-]
The math for the new program is kinda perplexing, my guess is that they are hoping that most people just will send in the device and upgrade.
> If you decide to buy the device, the purchase option fee is the list price minus any lease payments you’ve made minus any remaining discounts or trade-in credit. (excluding tax and any damage fees).
Lets look at a couple examples:
iPhone 17 pro max would be $1199 to buy (~1273 with tax) or $34.99 for 24 months totaling $839.76. So would cost 433.33 at the end of the lease to keep it
The cheapest 16" MBP would be 2,999 to buy (3186.44 with tax) or $57.99 for 36 months (or 80.99 for 24 months). 2087.64 or 1943.76. So around ~1k to buy it at the end.
It looks like you can keep making payments for 6 months to lower the buyout price a little bit.
So worst case scenario this is a 3 and a half year interest free loan with a higher payment at the end.
Seems not terrible? As long as you treat it as a loan and not a lease you can end at any point it seems fine and nothing really shady about it. You still have the option to own the device for the original cost.
Other than the loss of the iPhone upgrade program and the yearly upgrades, am I missing something here? I guess the biggest thing is you likely can't just pay it off and be done with it if you had the money.
paxys 18 hours ago [-]
> iPhone 17 pro max would be $1199 to buy (~1273 with tax) or $34.99 for 24 months totaling $839.76. So would cost 433.33 at the end of the lease to keep it
A lot of people aren’t going to have that $433 at the end of the lease to purchase the device outright, and so will have to roll it into another 2-year monthly payment, and another one after that.
So the goal of the program is the same as every other similar one - they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream, while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
Aurornis 17 hours ago [-]
> A lot of people aren’t going to have that $433 at the end of the lease to purchase the device outright
I think you're looking at this too much from the perspective of someone who wants to own the phone, not as someone who wants to consider a lease.
Leases are not a new invention. A lot of people, including very financially savvy and well off people, choose to lease rather than buy depending on the circumstances.
It preserves optionality. If you get to the end of the lease period and there’s a new iPhone you want or the battery isn’t holding up, you can choose not to buy it. You don’t have to deal with selling it or trading in.
If someone doesn’t have $400 to buy out the residual then I doubt they would have had the cash to pay for the whole thing up front. I don’t understand what your argument is.
> So the goal of the program is the same as every other similar one - they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream, while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
It’s an option. They’re not turning anything into anything. Anyone who wants to buy the device can buy it. You now also have the option to lease it for 12 or 24 months and then after that you can still buy it if you want. Or you can not buy it.
It’s options. You don’t have to use it.
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
> If someone doesn’t have $400 to buy out the residual then I doubt they would have had the cash to pay for the whole thing up front.
That’s the entire point. They would have bought a cheaper phone, or held on to their old one, but are now paying perpetual monthly payments.
There’s a reason car dealerships never ask “how much can you afford”, but “how much do you want to pay every month”.
There’s a reason Klarna is running the program for them.
br0wnr1c3 3 hours ago [-]
I think this is exactly right — when the options on the table are:
- iPhone 17 (~$800)
- iPhone 17 Pro Max (~$1200)
a person may reasonably make the choice that they don't need the Pro Max and buy the regular 17.
Now, when the options are:
- iPhone 17 ($23/month)
- iPhone 17 Pro Max ($35/month)
$12/month extra doesn't seem too bad, except the fact that after 24 months you can't afford to keep the phone and are effectively forced to upgrade to a new iPhone.
I agree that more options are generally better for consumers, but these types of leasing programs are predatory and come at a time when everything is becoming a subscription.
Spooky23 14 hours ago [-]
What if I don’t want to “own my phone”?
Look, I have one camera with me and one child. As long as the camera gets better every year, I’m gonna want a better camera, every year. I don’t want to deal with carriers and trade-in shopping. Unfortunately this particular deal sucks compared tot he old one.
I’m not financially irresponsible. I value these devices highly and value my time.
spaqin 11 hours ago [-]
No one's really stopping you from owning nothing and being happy.
Spooky23 10 hours ago [-]
They did - they turned a 24 month loan/AppleCare that you could re-swizzle with a new phone and exchange the device on the same terms (except the cost delta for the phone) to a shitty leasing arrangement that costs 25% more.
adamtaylor_13 5 hours ago [-]
> That’s the entire point. They would have bought a cheaper phone
This kinda sounds like, "We should make it hard for people to make poor financial decisions." Which seems like an answer completely orthogonal to the problem at hand.
pwagland 4 hours ago [-]
What is the problem at hand?
How to get customers to make poor financial decisions? How to sell more phones to people that can't really afford them?
Seriously, what is the problem that is being solved?
JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago [-]
> They would have bought a cheaper phone, or held on to their old one
Or they would have just bought the new phone and sold their old one for dimes on the dollar on e.g. Gazelle.
Aurornis 17 hours ago [-]
You know those financially irresponsible people don’t need this program, right? They would have used a credit card to buy it with much worse terms
You seem tilted at Apple for offering a financing option, but your real gripe is apparently with some people who have poor financial decision making skills. Those people could (and probably would) do a lot worse with traditional options like a credit card.
Can we at least compare apples to apples (hah) and look at the actual terms of the program here? Honestly they're not bad, and I say that as someone who leans toward purchasing outright.
ghaff 2 hours ago [-]
Leasing is just a financial transaction. You need to run the numbers, evaluate the alternatives, and peer at least a bit into the future. I've never leased a car and I doubt I'd lease a phone if only to keep my options open. (At the moment, I'm in the situation where I trashed an older phone on a hiking trip so I'll probably upgrade my iPhone 15 Pro sooner than I otherwise would just so I have a usable backup while traveling again.)
apparent 15 hours ago [-]
> You know those financially irresponsible people don’t need this program, right? They would have used a credit card to buy it with much worse terms
I thought of this also. The question is whether they will now spend even more on the phone since they won't be paying as much in interest. If so, it's savvy of Apple to suck up that difference instead of letting it go to credit card companies.
Presumably Klarna's share is lower because Apple is rumored to be able to nerf these devices if a series of payments are missed. [1]
Those numbers aren't typical but it's still the case that credit cards generally have significantly higher interest rates if you don't pay in full by the due date than just about any other sort of loan (that admittedly not everyone can qualify for).
edoceo 12 hours ago [-]
Oof.
HeWhoLurksLate 16 hours ago [-]
> They would have used a credit card to buy it with much worse terms
average credit card interest rate: 18-25% APR [0][1]
average klarna effective interest rate:25-33% APR [2]
getting what are effectively individual lines of credit per-burrito or iphone is crazy work and I wouldn't recommend it most of the time. Save some money up, people!
> average klarna effective interest rate:25-33% APR [2]
> getting what are effectively individual lines of credit per-burrito or iphone is crazy work and I wouldn't recommend it most of the time.
I think this whole sub-thread has gone off track from people who aren't reading the actual terms of the Apple deal.
Nobody's talking about getting a 33% Klarna loan for an iPhone or burrito. You included 2 statistics and 3 citations that have nothing to do with the program we're talking about.
We're trying to talk about the Apple program in the link, not some other financial services complaints that people have about other things.
nekooooo 16 hours ago [-]
it's a 0% loan with a buyout at the end for 2 years though. not 33% APR.
madeofpalk 15 hours ago [-]
People are keeping their phones for longer and longer. This makes it as attractive as possible to pay for a new phone at a more frequent rate.
The bet here is that Apple would much rather you spend ~$35/month perpetually than $1200 every 4 years.
This is a 'good deal' if you're already someone who upgrades their phone frequently, but I would imagine this would end up getting a whole bunch of people to pay more money in the long run to Apple.
Dylan16807 12 hours ago [-]
It's also a good deal if you want to keep the phone for 8 years. Just make sure you take the buy option.
aucisson_masque 8 hours ago [-]
> It preserves optionality. If you get to the end of the lease period and there’s a new iPhone you want or the battery isn’t holding up, you can choose not to buy it. You don’t have to deal with selling it or trading in.
If you don't buy it at the end of the 24 month, you've been paying for a very costly lease.
2/3 of the price for a 24 month lease whereas iphones are updated for 7, 8 years ? And the resell value is very good.
Especially financially, it would make zéro sense.
Twisell 6 hours ago [-]
That is the actual point of this program.
Apple clearly pay the fees for the customers loan but at the end, the only real mistake the customer can make and might regret is switching out of the Apple ecosystem.
That's clever and only mildly evil. Financial savvy people will use it as a "no fee loan" if they can't pay upfront. Less savvy will be more receptive to the commercial discourse at the end of the lease. Eco-deniers will think twice before renewing every year.
And it's actually a consolidation of existing options because Apple already offered "no fee loan" here in EU but you had to choose the option to begin with. Now it's look like this is a single contract and you choose the option at the end of the lease.
8 hours ago [-]
Mistletoe 16 hours ago [-]
Why on earth are we leasing phones now???
throw0101a 15 hours ago [-]
> Why on earth are we leasing phones now???
Same reason some people lease cars:
* want the New Thing regularly
* are happier with OpEx than CapEx (can be handy for business/accounting reasons)
wolvoleo 13 hours ago [-]
I think people don't really buy phones every year anymore because they can't afford it. But because they're kinda meh year on year. I don't buy apple anymore but my Samsung S23 from 3 years ago has the exact same cameras as the current S26. Same screen, same form factor. Only thing that's new is a slightly faster SoC and a bit more memory for AI features I dont really use anyway. I just don't see the point in upgrading anymore.
SV_BubbleTime 11 hours ago [-]
Some upgrades are meh, occasionally I want one thing. Like next upgrade I really want a higher optical zoom than 3x.
But I think unlike leasing vehicles, where the vehicle has the same power (approximately and within usable limits) the new phones bring a new battery. If swappable battery was a thing everywhere; that would further depress the sale of new phones.
0x457 16 hours ago [-]
Well, lets do math:
- from this thread: iPhone 17 pro max would be $1199 to buy (~1273 with tax) or $34.99 for 24 months totaling $839.76. So would cost 433.33 at the end of the lease to keep it
If you upgrade your phone every 1-2 years then what you pay for the phone is something like "full cost - optimistic trade-in value". I see no reason not to do if you know you going to upgrade.
horsawlarway 14 hours ago [-]
I don't understand this mindset. I get that people who are going to upgrade to the latest flagship phone every 18-24 months will probably do better with this, but realistically... those people are fucking insanely financially irresponsible (and if you can afford it - no shade, I guess, its your money - lord knows I burn lots of cash on hobby projects of my own, although I tend to buy things that are actually projects, and not just glitz...)
But there's just nothing to run on phones built in the last 5+ years that actually puts the hardware through its paces (in the phone form factor, laptops and desktops I'd be lot more forgiving on). The cameras aren't really getting better. The battery capacities seem to be mostly "the same". There's just no practical "reason" to justify the expense at this point (and I'll fully acknowledge this wasn't always the case - there was a period there in the early 2010s where phones were getting better rapidly and upgrading was a big deal).
They're basically buying an expensive piece of jewelry that they'll throw away in 24 months. Like... just buy a cheaper model and get some real jewelry. At least that could be passed down at some point instead of becoming e-waste.
p1necone 13 hours ago [-]
Yeah I'm on the same page - I spend a couple hundred bucks on a low-end-of-midrange android phone every few years (usually because I broke the old one by doing something stupid like walking into the ocean with it in my pocket). I can't fathom why I would want to spend 5-10x on a flagship to do... what exactly?
My current phone (Motorola g34) runs all the games fine, and that's probably the heaviest thing people use phones for. I do take photos, but like I'm not running a photography business, and social media compresses them to shit anyway so the quality is perfectly fine.
vladvasiliu 5 hours ago [-]
Well, you could buy a waterproof phone, which wouldn't break if you walked into the ocean with it in your pocket?
I use my phones as GPS attached to my motorbike's handlebars. They get drenched in downpours, frozen in the winter, and baked in the summer sun multiple times a year. They don't skip a beat and only require the occasional battery change.
My current phone is an iphone 14, still on its original battery. It replaced a 7 which had its battery changed 5 years in. The 7 replaced a galaxy s5 which I stupidly forgot in a taxi, but it was still good enough for my uses.
There are uses for higher-end phones, among which "longer periods between changes".
ZekeSulastin 14 hours ago [-]
So how much annually do you spend on your hobbies, anyways, if you're going to declare getting a new phone every two years "fucking insanely financially irresponsible" :p Glass houses and all that, right?
olyjohn 13 hours ago [-]
I mean... what kind of hobby is owning the latest phone? Especially when the latest phone is barely an upgrade over the previous one.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
Do you know what’s cool about hobbies? They don’t have to be reasonable! They don’t have to be financially responsible! They’re hobbies! That’s the whole point!
Listen, whatever you do that’s your hobby I’m certain is also a giant waste of money and very financially irresponsible. And if not, learn how to have fun and stop being so boring.
abanana 1 hours ago [-]
> They don’t have to be financially responsible
They do if you don't have the money to throw away. That's the whole point - far too often, the people who throw their money away on these things are the same people who spend all their time complaining they're struggling to afford the basics, like feeding their family.
Yes it's fine if you have plenty of money to waste on what you enjoy, but the majority of people don't.
what 12 hours ago [-]
People spend more on their daily coffee than they would upgrading their phone every two years. Significantly more.
beacon294 12 hours ago [-]
LLMs are set to.increase hardware demands a lot. Although I don't necessarily think this is related to the program change.
I know this comment is deep in a thread, but to me it looks like they simply prefer to own the whole apple device payment cycle and not use partners.
BNPL has been a huge bubble outside the traditional credit bubble, this is the same. It doesn't seem like a big divergence excepting that it gives them a contact point and a stick with which to prod customer into a new phone sooner.
macintux 14 hours ago [-]
For me, the primary value of my phone is the camera, and the telephoto on the iPhone Pro Max models has gotten significantly better in the 2.5 years since mine was released.
Were it not for the camera, I could have stopped upgrading 10 years ago.
My point is, not everyone values the same things you do. The new Siri AI only runs on 15 Pro and higher, I think. New features do arrive in newer phones.
Barbing 14 hours ago [-]
iPhone 17 Pro is binoculars and also eliminated 16 Pro battery anxiety.
Value in being part of the discussion for a whole year every year too. You realllly have to care about stuff like these factors though (or hate investing your money or have too much).
SV_BubbleTime 11 hours ago [-]
This is exactly where I’m at. Want a higher zoom. I’m about three years old now and feeling it.
sneak 9 hours ago [-]
> I get that people who are going to upgrade to the latest flagship phone every 18-24 months will probably do better with this, but realistically... those people are fucking insanely financially irresponsible
This is not remotely true. I buy each and every flagship iPhone every year on or near release day for cash. I have done so every release since the first iPhone came out.
Each September or October my old phone goes into a desk drawer forever, or is wiped and gifted to a partner or close friend. I do not recover any of the costs at the end of the 12 months.
In total, it is way less than $200 per month. That’s not “fucking insanely financially irresponsible” by any stretch of the imagination. $2k per year is a trivial amount of money for the most-often-used computer in my entire life. It pays for itself in the first few weeks of the year.
Separately, I spend another 10-20k per year on computer software and services, because it assists my business in making many times that in revenue. Hell, even my hobby AWS S3 account is like $35/mo and that’s like the same as the lease payment for the flagship iPhone Pro under this program.
Upgrading each year brings real performance benefits, despite your claim that phones don’t materially improve each generation. Whether or not that is worth replacing it before it breaks or not is a separate conversation, but let’s not pretend that upgrading annually is exactly equivalent to lighting $2k on fire. Anyone who participates regularly in US “bar culture”, for example, is spending more each month on drinks than I spend to carry the latest flagship iPhone, and nobody is claiming that eating out three times a month or going to the bar with your buddies every Friday night is “fucking insanely financially irresponsible”. Tech is so cheap now that it’s a trivial amount of money in the grand scheme of things.
(You’ll probably flip when you hear I replace my $7k work laptop every 12-24 months, too.)
Furthermore, I’m not even an extreme outlier. I know people who regularly buy the flagship iPhone for their entire family, in cash, every year. It’s a bit spendy if you’re not using it for business (but who isn’t, in 2026, where every single thing you do is an app) but it’s still simply not that much money in real terms when you consider it’s well under $2k/year/device. Hell, a nice lunch for two people at a decent restaurant even without alcohol is pushing $100 in most cities.
abanana 1 hours ago [-]
> way less than $200 per month... $2k per year
For the vast majority of consumers, these prices are insane.
> trivial amount of money... I’m not even an extreme outlier
It's also true that the majority of high-earners refuse to understand that they're in the top few percent for income. I'm not sure whether what I'm reading here is a sincere mistaken belief - the general psychological effect where a person believes their own sense of "normal" is normal to everyone - or a deliberate attempt to get a rise out of other commenters.
> another 10-20k per year on computer software and services, because it assists my business in making many times that in revenue... replace my $7k work laptop every 12-24 months
So those are business costs? They don't belong in this discussion.
SV_BubbleTime 11 hours ago [-]
Mine is about three years old now and I want a better camera.
closetohome 15 hours ago [-]
This math is what lead me to the iUp program in the first place. It's effectively a guaranteed 50% trade-in, which came out to about $200-300 in actual money that I was theoretically sacrificing in exchange for not having to worry about the cosmetic condition of the phone or weirdos on ebay.
And it came with AppleCare+ with Theft and Loss. I stopped using a case. I lived free.
macintux 14 hours ago [-]
I’ll never stop using a case. Too clumsy, too careless. 2-3 days without my phone would be manageable but why?
olyjohn 13 hours ago [-]
My screen is cracked, and I still prefer it over a case. Just a personal preference, I think.
Onawa 11 hours ago [-]
Phones these days are so slippery without a case though... Is it just me? Feels like trying to hold on to a wet bar of soap sans case.
ghaff 52 minutes ago [-]
I don't think so. Maybe I'm just used to it but I like the gripiness of my Otterbox case in addition to the protection it provides. My prior iPhoen might have survived a hiking trip if I had an equivalently robust case (and the newer Otterbox Defender cases are much less clunky than the older ones were).
vladvasiliu 5 hours ago [-]
This. They're also too big, so if you don't wear baggy pants it can be a pain to maneuver in and out of jeans pockets. But then, if I'm visiting somewhere unfamiliar in the middle of nowhere and drop it and it becomes unusable, I can have a pretty bad time.
prmoustache 6 hours ago [-]
Disregarding the commodity of a big screen, they have the wrong shape to be honest for something that is made to be handled.
ghaff 49 minutes ago [-]
I've handled the Maxes and they're just too big for my taste. It's not a financial thing. I'm by no means a phone size minimalist but my 15 Pro feels like just the right size for a phone at this point.
GolfPopper 15 hours ago [-]
I'm a little confused on why anyone would pay this much for a phone. (Although if you consider it conspicuous consumption that happens to work as a phone, I can believe that.)
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
I’m certain there are things you pay for that I would look at and go “I’m a little confused on why anyone would pay this much for x. (Although if you consider it conspicuous consumption that happens to work as x, I can believe that.)”
But I wouldn’t, because I actually understand that people are different and like it that way.
Consider: your opinion is worthless when it comes to what I care about in terms of luxuries I enjoy, just as mine is worthless when it comes to what you care about in terms of luxuries you enjoy.
It’s way better when you don’t run around judging other people for liking different things than you.
sneak 9 hours ago [-]
I’ve always been told when computer shopping to “buy the fastest cpu and the most ram you can afford”. This goes doubly for revenue-generating devices.
My iPhone is the computer I use most every day, by a WIDE margin.
ghaff 41 minutes ago [-]
>"buy the fastest cpu and the most ram you can afford”.
I would append "subject to diminishing returns" for your use cases.
I could afford maxed-out computers (within reason) but, for most purposes, the premiums for the very top-of-line exceeds any discernible increase in functionality I would experience.
al_borland 9 hours ago [-]
I’m not sure this is the best advice anymore. So many people’s needs don’t demand much of a computer.
My last personal computer purchase was an M1 Pro MBP 4 years ago. I could have maxed it out and my life would be the same, but instead I bought on the low end… or somewhere in the middle if we look at Apple’s lineup as a whole.
It’s now 4 years later. This is the longest I’ve probably ever kept a laptop. It’s still running fine, I’m not hurting for more power, and will like wait another 1-3 years before an upgrade… maybe more, we’ll see.
The laptop is a glorified Chromebook for me. I do edit some photos from time to time, encode some video, and code a bit. But 95% of the time, I’m just looking at webpages. Maxing the thing out would have been a massive waste of money.
My work laptop is also a MBP of a similar generation. It’s not up to me when it’s upgraded, but it also wasn’t maxed out, and it’s still fine. VS Code and Outlook aren’t going to run fast enough to matter with a M5 Mac and 128GB or RAM. The bottleneck isn’t my laptop, it’s bureaucracy.
For some, having top end specs will matter, but that is a shrinking percentage of the overall market.
ghaff 36 minutes ago [-]
I think that's right. My M1 MBP suits me just fine. (I do have a lighter MacBook Air but that's because my old Intel-based MacBook finally gave up the ghost and was out of support anyway--and I mostly work downstairs but want my "main" computer in my office. As well as for travel.)
lovich 15 hours ago [-]
That’s tame when people are leasing literal meals with klarna
The Davos ghouls are proven right each and every day:
> You'll own nothing. And you'll be happy
Back to indentured servitude we go, where by "we" I mean us, the poors, not the wealthy, nor their relatively still well-off direct servants (like many of the users here working for Big Tech).
tw600040 17 hours ago [-]
Someone who won't have that $433 has no business even thinking about a 1200$ phone in the first place
dzonga 17 hours ago [-]
you overestimate the financial health of most Americans.
most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population.
Aurornis 16 hours ago [-]
The median US household has a net worth of $200,000. Even a 50th percentile US household is very wealthy by global standards.
Credit card statistics are heavily manipulated because it's easy to make them sound terrible. I don't know which factoid specifically you're referring to, but the studies about "X percent of Americans couldn't handle an emergency expense without putting it on a credit card" often use tricks like including anyone who would pay by credit card if they could. I remember reading some of these studies and realizing that I would have been included in the statistic because I prefer to use a credit card where I can, even though I pay it off before interest accrues.
cronin101 16 hours ago [-]
Net worth or net income? Being 40yo with only 200k of worth between two when you’re halfway through your working life and have had 10y of appreciation of assets isn’t very much to go forward with.
kube-system 9 hours ago [-]
> The median US household has a net worth of $200,000.
Which is primarily the market value of the home they live in. They can’t pay a bill with it.
The median American household has $8000 of liquid cash in all of their cash accounts combined.
jandrewrogers 8 hours ago [-]
> The median American household has $8000 of liquid cash in all of their cash accounts combined.
That’s a lot of liquid cash. It reinforces the idea that the median American household has an unparalleled amount of money to burn on whatever.
kube-system 6 hours ago [-]
That includes savings. The median checking account is $2800. People can burn from that $8000 but it’ll be at the expense of being able to handle an unexpected emergency expense, or a goal they’re saving up for.
And this is the median, which means that half of US households have less than this. Which is quite a lot of people who still use phones.
16 hours ago [-]
underlipton 13 hours ago [-]
>Even a 50th percentile US household is very wealthy by global standards.
Not by purchasing power. We're also in a weird position compared to our "peers" in that most of them have relatively easy access to much less wealthy neighbors via over-land transit or a cheap plane ride, whereas we have to travel quite a distance or pay for extremely expensive plane tickets. Which means that we're stuck here with what a USD buys in the US, instead of being able to hop over to someplace else where a dollar goes further. We also work more than our peers, so our per-hour earnings take a hit compared to theirs.
I could go on. The trick is trying to gaslight Americans into second-guessing the economic pain they've increasingly felt over the past few decades. The 50th percentile American household lives worse than the 50th percentile household of quite a few less-wealthy countries.
dzonga 16 hours ago [-]
averages strike again.
Median wealth in the U.S just around $100k - see Wikipedia & other databases.
how many people own houses ? & for those people that own houses - average equity in those houses is less than 45%.
ain't no factoid - but lived reality of most people. maybe on the coasts where techies and finance bros live - but the rest of america is facing a bleak financial reality.
Aurornis 15 hours ago [-]
> averages strike again.
My comment said "median" explicitly
The number was for household wealth. I think you're looking at individual wealth, which would naturally be lower because it's spread across more people.
I think what he means is that if you can't swallow $433 on one payment, it is more likely you can't support and accumulate monthly subscriptions either and you should look at sub $200 smartphones.
It is not like having a $1200 flagship smartphone is a requirement to earn a living like, say, having a mean of transportation is to many people not living close to their workplace. There is nothing one do in a flagship that you can't do - albeit maybe with less quality or slower - than a lower end one. All allows to make and receive calls, use messaging, have a browser, apps.
To be honest, I am clumsy and break stuff easily so I have never spent more than $200 on a smartphone, my current one is a pixel 6a running grapheneos that I bought for 180€ 2.5 years ago. It makes very good photos actually and is fast enough for everything I do. I understand people can want something nicer but it is not a need.
gruez 17 hours ago [-]
>when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population.
That's not really applicable because:
1. the study is for an "unexpected" expense. This you can see from 2 years away
2. The wording in the study was something along the lines of "would have to dip into savings", not that they literally don't have any money for it. The fed's survey of consumer finances shows the median household has between 7-13k (depending whether you're counting median income or median wealth) in their checking accounts
Should people be more financially responsible? Yes
Are they today? No
In a rational world payday loans, predatory auto loans, BNPL, perpetually rolling credit card debt etc would not need to exist. Yet these sectors are rapidly growing and companies in it are thriving.
gruez 16 hours ago [-]
>Not sure what you are trying to argue.
I'm saying the specific claim of "most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population" is false.
Zambyte 16 hours ago [-]
There are phones that cost a lot less though. 50% of Americans being unable to afford iPhones doesn't mean they should just lease them. People need to stop associating so much personal sense of worth with their handheld computer.
- written on my S10
Danox 13 hours ago [-]
For many that is their only computer in that context having a smartphone definitely isn’t a bad thing. What’s bad is not saving up to buy it. Do not buy it on credit if you don’t have to, however, it must be said that if you get an iPhone, it does have better resale value (all Apple computers, and iPads) have a longer lifespan software wise, probably more than most other smartphones, which comes back to the question why are you renting or leasing? Just buy it on time with minimum interest upfront if you absolutely must buy it? Owner of an 11 Pro iPhone from 2019. With one or two years of Apple software support left?
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
> People need to stop associating so much personal sense of worth with their handheld computer.
This might be the funniest thing I’ve ever read on this nerd website.
harvey9 4 hours ago [-]
A lot of people buy phones as conventional status symbols rather than for nerd points. My massive generalisation is hn values doing something interesting with the hardware.
oniony 16 hours ago [-]
Crazy you had such a pertinent message written on your S10.
Danox 13 hours ago [-]
And those people never get to a point where they save anything, renting, leasing, pay as you go, credit cards, reverse mortgages are a losing game the house always wins.
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
Have you met…America?
16 hours ago [-]
PunchyHamster 17 hours ago [-]
wait till you see what people do with car payments
Zambyte 16 hours ago [-]
Selling my car that I fully owned in favor of a nice bicycle and an e-scooter was one of my best financial decisions in the last few years.
I don't have to deal with insurance, parking (if parking is free by you, it shouldn't be), maintenance (I work on them myself, I just pay for cheap parts), and fuel is effectively free. That's all on top of the car payment for people who haven't paid off their car.
frmersdog 13 hours ago [-]
Genuinely wish I had done so when I lost my job at the beginning of the pandemic. I've dumped so much money into a vehicle that's falling apart, which I've driven probably less than 25k miles since. If you can't justify car ownership with your income, they're a money pit.
harvey9 4 hours ago [-]
My car is fully owned and justified by my commute taking 3x longer by bus. Time saved is as important a measure as miles driven.
esikich 13 hours ago [-]
You do understand that unless you live in a relatively warm metropolis this is literally not an option right?
sakjur 10 hours ago [-]
There are real infrastructural reasons it's harder to do in North America compared to Europe, but that's not it.
Biking is relatively popular and definitely feasible within ten km or so from most city or town cores here in Scandinavia, not just the metropolises.
Scoring6931 6 hours ago [-]
You need to travel more. Plenty of people in Canadian cities rely on public transport just fine.
olyjohn 12 hours ago [-]
The Netherlands would like to have a talk with you.
sneak 9 hours ago [-]
Tell me you’ve never slipped on ice riding a bike in Europe in the winter without telling me you’ve never slipped on ice riding a bike in Europe in the winter.
Scoring6931 6 hours ago [-]
Europe has a concept novel to most Americans which is known as public transport.
tshaddox 15 hours ago [-]
Isn't the 0% APR financing essentially just a sales expense? Even if people generally don't immediately roll into another 2-year agreement, the main reason zero-interest financing works for the sellers is simply that it makes it easier for people to spend money on expensive high-margin stuff.
Multi-year zero-interest loans are also commonplace in high-price, high-margin specialty retail: think La-Z-Boy, Sleep Number, home improvement, hot tubs, home gym equipment, etc.
maxerickson 20 minutes ago [-]
Probably the better way to look at it is that the finance charges are built into the price.
paxys 15 hours ago [-]
They also charge heavy interest and fees to people who miss payments, but in this case that will be captured by Klarna.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
Klarna does not charge interest or fees to people who miss payments.
tshaddox 14 hours ago [-]
Yes, and for most of those retailers I mentioned the financing is handled by e.g. Synchrony Bank.
apparent 15 hours ago [-]
> So the goal of the program is the same as every other similar one - they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream, while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
Yep, which reduces the need to make new devices notably better than old ones, since you'll always have a steady stream of customers coming off their leases.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
Are you seriously arguing that Apple is doing this so they don’t have to keep making devices any better? I just want to be very clear about this.
apparent 12 hours ago [-]
That gets it backwards. They're not doing this because they want to make devices that are less compelling purchases, but they are aware that their coming pipeline will in general not as be compelling to potential upgraders as in the past. This is largely because the category has matured, and people don't feel the need to upgrade nearly as often as 5-10 years ago.
By getting people to be default-subscribers rather than purchasers who may decide to upgrade, they improve their odds of keeping a larger chunk of their hardware revenue stream.
bijowo1676 17 hours ago [-]
its not that they wont have $433, it is that people will be unwilling to shell out $433 for two year old device, if they have an option to renew it for a shiny new model and roll forward into another BNPL loan
gruez 17 hours ago [-]
I checked the price for a used iPhone 15 pro (ie. 2 year old iPhone) on ebay and it's around $400-$500. Therefore the implied depreciation of the lease is pretty fair, unlike the lowball offers you typically get for trading in a phone.
s0rce 16 hours ago [-]
I just bought a 1 year old iPhone 16 on Facebook marketplace for $400. You can find pretty good prices if you don't need the latest device.
olyjohn 12 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure why this was downvoted. Plenty of iPhone 16s on swappa for around this price.
DarmokJalad1701 15 hours ago [-]
> roll forward into another BNPL loan
It is not rolled forward. If they don't want to pay the $433, then they don't. They return the device and the new device's lease doesn't include that $433.
It's not like a used car loan that some people have that keeps growing with each transaction (and at insane interest rates).
ksec 16 hours ago [-]
>they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream,
Precisely what they should have done for service revenue instead of milking App Store for the past 10 years. They should also have bundled Apple Care as part of it.
It would also allow them to hike up their price for iPhone. For example I wouldn't be surprised if the upcoming iPhone Fold and next year's iPhone 20 / XX start at $1499 to $1999.
My question is how will this roll out world wide, is this going to be like Apple Credit Card, Apple Cash and other things that is US only? Who is actually paying for the interest free loan. Somewhere along the line someone has got to give.
This is all good direction that is happening in the past 12 months, MacBook Neo, Apple Upgrade. Hopefully they will also fix the software part. macOS doesn't need annual upgrade. Perhaps neither do iOS. And the last thing would be about the App Store. But I guess that will take a lot longer.
lesuorac 18 hours ago [-]
> while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
But they're not actually interest in owning 2 year old phones though right?
They're just interest in you / 2ndary market not owning any?
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
A refurbished iPhone 15 Pro is selling for $929 on their website right now. Trade in price for that exact model is $410. So yes they are very interested in that old phone.
Aurornis 17 hours ago [-]
I take it you’ve never purchased an Apple refurbished product? They’re in excellent condition. They do not look like 2-year used and abused trade ins. If trade-ins are going back to the refurb inventory (which I don’t know if they do) then it’s only after extensive actual refurbishment and new parts.
They’re not putting it back into a box, listing it for sale, and pocketing the difference.
fckgw 17 hours ago [-]
They have the ability to tear the whole thing down to guts and screws. They absolutely do replace the case, glass and battery and sell as refurbished. They already do complete case swaps on their Macs.
ezfe 16 hours ago [-]
The ones that are not in great condition get sent to third parties and sold for slightly less. But Apple will replace the screen or battery and sell them themselves as well. I've gotten Apple refurb products with minimal signs of wear.
ToucanLoucan 17 hours ago [-]
It's still obviously making them money. How much, who's to say, likely highly variable depending on the condition of the phone. But if it didn't make them money they wouldn't do it, they're not a charity.
I'd imagine even a phone they can't fix to sell still has some value, even as scrap to them especially as the costs of every damn material that goes into any electronic device continue to soar.
And that all being said: two things can be simultaneously true at once. Leasing is a perfectly valid form of... well you can't really say ownership, acquiring goods I guess? And it also does mean Apple can now turn what may have been one-shot purchases into people who are just fine paying a monthly payment ad infinitum. And that, in turn, opens the door for keeping people on a perpetual new-phone treadmill of monthly payments that involve them never actually owning anything.
You can very easily tie this into the Samuel Vimes Boots Theory of Economics:
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
Aurornis 17 hours ago [-]
> It's still obviously making them money.
They’re obviously making money on the whole purchase and program because they’re a business, not a charity.
The assumption that they’re making significantly more money on this than direct sales may or may not hold. It could be that they’re targeting a similar level of end-to-end profit as direct sales but using this to expand their market by providing more purchasing options.
Some people get angry at the prospect of a company making money, but they’re not charities. Everyone should do the math and decide which purchase options work for them. What works for you may not be appropriate to force on to the rest of the population.
smallmancontrov 17 hours ago [-]
Since the days of Samuel Vimes, durable goods have undergone spectacular deflation and health care, housing, and education have undergone spectacular inflation.
One month of median US rent buys three 55" TVs.
The math has changed.
s0rce 16 hours ago [-]
Durable goods also seem much less durable. I go through way more fridges, dishwashers, etc then previously.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
Really? How many fridges have you gone through in 10 years? This might be the way you treat things, because for me and mine all of these are still a single digit: 1.
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
The internals in that phone are probably worth more today used than brand new 2 years ago.
trollbridge 15 hours ago [-]
Given how rapidly iPhones depreciate, being able to just give it back after 2 years is pretty reasonable. My 16 Pro Max is worth maybe $500 on the resale market.
notyourwork 13 hours ago [-]
Have to milk the economic tit for all it’s worth.
ezfe 16 hours ago [-]
It doesn't get "rolled in," since you don't have to transfer any liability to the next lease.
quickthrowman 17 hours ago [-]
> A lot of people aren’t going to have that $433 at the end of the lease to purchase the device outright
If someone can’t plan ahead 2 years for a $433 expense, they definitely should not have a top of the line iPhone. When my income was low I had an iPhone SE that cost $329.
thisislife2 17 hours ago [-]
If everyone was as rational as you, Americans wouldn't be living in debt that most cannot afford. Most Indians have a healthy fear of debt, and that is why the iPhone doesn't have a larger share of the mobile phone market here as it really is unaffordable to most Indians (as it is for many in America). Americans however have accepted debt as a normal part of their lifestyle. When a rich man says poor people shouldn't be ordering food through Door Dash, it sounds very cynical but there is a basis of truth in it that some poor people really do not know how to manage their finances.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
This is not why Americans are in debt. If you really think this you understand so little.
That rich man was born into wealth, so he has no concept of the lives of poor people.
Danox 13 hours ago [-]
Most people don’t take a personal finance class and they also don’t plan ahead short term thinking is the norm and that percentage is over 50% of the population.
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
Well there’s a reason Americans have $1.25 trillion in credit card debt.
maratc 16 hours ago [-]
Now let's count their mortgage debt.
jay_kyburz 13 hours ago [-]
I would have thought this was about Tax. I'm sure its different in every country, but I believe a lease is very different to purchasing hardware.
giancarlostoro 17 hours ago [-]
Let's suppose that Apple somehow doesn't release any new iPhones during this leasing window, what happens then? Does Apple ship you back a new phone that's essentially the same model? I know this is unlikely, but I am curious.
The other thing to consider, that while Apple might sell you the phone for $400 or whatever, they might re-sell it as refurbished for $700.
enahs-sf 19 hours ago [-]
It feels like there’s a psychological component here for you to feel obliged to upgrade at the end of the 2 or 3 year term. Who wants to pay $1k for a 3 year old MacBook? Trading in/up will feel natural. It does feel less and less like you own the hardware though.
Grombobulous 17 hours ago [-]
This is exactly what’s going on here.
You literally don’t own the hardware, it’s a lease.
That said, you can purchase with financing with an Apple Card, or with numerous other financing options like carrier financing. However, leasing allows the purchase prices of phones to continue climbing while still presenting a palatable monthly payment.
I think what’s going to happen with this is a lot of people will be lured in with low payments and then be surprised with the ending “keep your phone” payment, where it will feel like it makes more sense to just get the new phone and continue the same payments.
Paying a $400 payment on a 2 year iPhone will look insane as that’s the depreciated value of a 2 year old phone.
gruez 16 hours ago [-]
>Paying a $400 payment on a 2 year iPhone will look insane as that’s the depreciated value of a 2 year old phone.
Check ebay. That's around the price of a pro series iPhone 2 years old.
Grombobulous 12 hours ago [-]
That's exactly what I mean.
If you're the person who has leased this phone, you make all your payments and get to the end and your bill to keep the phone forever is going to seem kind of high.
Obviously, that's logical. In your lease, you have only paid the price of depreciation.
Just like with cars leasing is the most expensive way to own them, but I guess there's a certain buyer who doesn't want old stuff.
blackqueeriroh 12 hours ago [-]
You all really do not understand. Many people will gladly pay the $433 at the end because they’ve been able to get a new job and make more money in the interim.
Grombobulous 9 hours ago [-]
I think that a big chunk of those lessees will be deciding between coming up with $433 in cash or give the phone back and continue with the same payment and they’ll choose the latter.
But then again maybe the person doing the lease knows this already and just wants a new phone frequently.
My worry is that a lot of people will see a lower payment and not realize that they’re getting the phone at the end of the term.
jedberg 9 hours ago [-]
Except in this case you're not paying any extra. In fact it's cheaper to lease and then own an iPhone with this program because of the time value of money.
It's an interest free loan for 2/3 of the price.
thisislife2 17 hours ago [-]
Or, they can still pay the $400 and try to resell it for higher. And then buy a cheaper Android when they finally realise being in debt for making a fashion statement is stupid.
Grombobulous 12 hours ago [-]
I don't think this is about Android versus Apple, there are definitely Android phones sold on credit and there are definitely high-end expensive Android phones out there (Samsung Galaxy Z Fold8 Ultra).
nerdjon 19 hours ago [-]
That I could see, I guess the question comes down to how often to people upgrade. That comes down to discipline.
Is a 3 year upgrade cycle for a MacBook Pro unreasonable? Would you get a lower spec machine since you were not trying to maximize the life of the machine? I know I always tend to overspec my machine to keep it for as long as possible.
My M3 MBP with 36GB of ram (looks like it was about 2500 3 years ago) would get me $945 in trade in credit. May be able to get more on eBay but I can't argue with just doing trade in is easier. A bit less than I would "save" by just upgrading at the end of the lease and this already is not the base model so the number does shift.
Especially when I look at the payment options right now I could finance that MBP about $250 on my Apple Card for 12 months no interest, or $57.99 for 36 months. and then I get a new one.
Would probably depend on what it is I was doing with the machine, am I doing tasks that would actually benefit from better and better machines like video editing and similar tasks or am I just using my computer fairly basic in a way that even an M1 machine still handles just fine.
dgellow 18 hours ago [-]
> Is a 3 year upgrade cycle for a MacBook Pro unreasonable?
For a personal machine? Yes that’s something I see as unreasonable, MacBook Pros have a very long lifespan. M1 laptop are still pretty awesome machines. For a business an upgrade every 3 years could make sense
chorizo 17 hours ago [-]
I still use a 16GB MacBook Air for all my development and simulation work (4P+4E+8GPU cores). Even wrote my own Metal gpu code to offload part of the simulation workflow. Modded the MacBook Air with thermal pads and a homemade cooling pad made from cardboard and a usb fan to limit throttling. I’ve run simulations for over 24 hours and kept temps below 90C successfully. A newer Mac mini would be better, but those are so expensive now.
jonhohle 17 hours ago [-]
I have an M1 Pro with 32GB of RAM and am hoping to make it through the rampocalypse. This may be my longest upgrade cycle, but fortunately the machine is fast enough for most things including LLMs.
nerdjon 17 hours ago [-]
I mean we are talking about the "Pro" machine. I think there is likely an argument to be made that if you are not doing a task that would genuinely improve with more powerful hardware do you actually need the Pro machine and you could instead go with a MacBook Air that you keep for far longer since your doing basic tasks. I do think there is still some ideas of the pro vs the Air that we are still stuck with from the Intel days.
Is that threshold for using a Pro machine 3 years, I don't know probably not for most people. My M3 Pro from almost 3 years ago is still running beautifully. I could make the argument that more power would benefit what I do with this machine without a doubt, is it worth the upgrade? I don't know, but I would be lying if I have not been thinking about it.
But I also think about the mentality I had when I bought this machine, and the mentality I had when I was looking at possible upgrades just a few weeks ago. Possibly paying more to overspec the machine compared to my current use case assuming that I want to continue to use it in 3 to 4 years.
I don't know if that calculation is necessary as cut as dry.
thewebguyd 17 hours ago [-]
> do you actually need the Pro machine and you could instead go with a MacBook Air that you keep for far longer since your doing basic tasks
This is probably the case for a lot of people, but Apple is smart with their lineup and there are several what I'd call "not pro" features that are gated by the MBP (and iPad pro) which is unfortunate.
Primarily, 120hz screen, SD card reader, HDMI port. None of those are really "pro" featuers, they're just basics I'd expect on any premium laptop.
That being said, 3 years is a tad on the aggressive side for an upgrade cycle for a laptop. I just upgraded my M1 last year, and this M4 Pro will easily last a year or two longer before I feel a compelling need to upgrade, outside of getting RAM constrained. Use case is photo+video production. So for me, a 5 year cycle would be about right.
But also depends on how you spec it out. If you are just buying the base model, then 3 years makes sense. If you spend extra to max it out, you'll be able to hold onto it for 6+ years.
Danox 13 hours ago [-]
A top-of-the-line M series MacBook Pro, or a Mac Studio Ultra will command more than a $1000.
halJordan 18 hours ago [-]
Is that terrible though? You're saving $1000 on a 2/3 year cadence. I'm not a fan of the one size must fit all mentality, and that the one size is the conception that we must all run every piece of he into the ground before replacing it.
SkiFire13 18 hours ago [-]
You're saving $1000 if you were normally throwing away your 2/3 year old phone instead of selling it to someone else.
19 hours ago [-]
giancarlostoro 17 hours ago [-]
> my guess is that they are hoping that most people just will send in the device and upgrade.
That's precisely why they set it up this way, honestly leasing always made more sense for businesses. I prefer to keep my phones, peace of mind knowing, if I lose something that somehow did not make it to the backups, I can just turn on my old phone and find it.
wombat-man 24 minutes ago [-]
Yeah I switch between android and iPhone sometimes so there's always something I forget to transfer over. After a long enough time I can wipe it and have it as a backup phone.
gofreddygo 6 hours ago [-]
I see this as psychology driven, not math. It pushes people to look at new options and tempt an upgrade at the end of the lease (pay $1000 for a 3 year old mac or just upgrade ?).
This also pushes term completion with early termination charges (discourage selling before term ends).
And they know money will be tight for their consumers, they can't lower prices anytime soon so give out 0% loans.
Following their tradition of screwing the frugal, cheapest options seem to be excluded.
Its a subscription model for Apple hardware.
Spooky23 14 hours ago [-]
It’s all about the AppleCare. I’ve used the upgrade program from the beginning. The issue with it from Apple is if I have an iPhone, iPad, MacBook I’m not gonna buy the $20/mo AppleCare.
They are also dumping a weird risk premium on the end user. I literally get a new phone every year with the upgrade program, there’s no way I’ll be doing that going forward, at least through the lease. I’ll just buy it with cash and wait for a deal.
musictubes 11 hours ago [-]
AppleCare is even more important with the lease. If you lose the phone you have to pay Klarna to replace it. There might also be lease cancellation fees on top of that.
That is my big problem with leasing portable things. I never get AppleCare because I can self insure. But if I lose the phone 8 months into the lease I am deep in a hole.
Spooky23 10 hours ago [-]
They want their $19.99 so you cover your other stuff.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Over the years, I’ve never bought AppleCare why? Intel iMac 27 inch computer lasted 9 1/2 years. Everything else iPad, iPhone 7 years and more easy…
futhey 10 hours ago [-]
So the buyout price is never going to match depreciation, and in almost all cases keeping the device doesn't make sense.
The flip side of this, Apple gets more control of the resale market, pushing more buyers into the new device market.
In theory it lets them solve any market problems that emerge where independent resale markets let high quality devices cannibalize sales of new devices.
qurren 15 hours ago [-]
I also wonder whether this leasing thing is also a covert way to get people to be subject to more tracking. If you own a device you have a legal right to do anything to it you want, including jailbreak it or install your own OS that executes things differently. If you lease it you don't necessarily have that right since you are only leasing the rights to use it, not modify it.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Leasing/renting/warranties is a way of making continuous money from an individual or a company the process is the same.
Far beyond the actual/original cost of the item which is why it’s not a good deal for an individual.
Once again, taking advantage of short term thinking.
anonymousiam 16 hours ago [-]
Aside from the financial analysis, there is also the fact that this strategy from Apple will prevent customer churn to alternative phones.
fishingisfun 16 hours ago [-]
that doesnt happen lol
illwrks 15 hours ago [-]
This is crazy, this is just PCP finance… for a phone!
MrGilbert 18 hours ago [-]
If I were good at financial math (which I'm not), I would calculate that against a regular loan. E.g., how high would the interest be, if you were to keep the device.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Considering the lifespan of an Apple device, and resale value you are better off just buying it is cheaper in the long run.
gruez 18 hours ago [-]
its interest free
gigatexal 6 hours ago [-]
This is predatory. I don’t like it. They should just split the cost equally over the number of months so at the end you have paid it off.
fckgw 19 hours ago [-]
They still have a 12mo lease term if you want to upgrade yearly.
dgellow 18 hours ago [-]
Wait, do people actually upgrade yearly? I always thought it was hyperbolic
zwily 12 hours ago [-]
Every year since the first iPhone came out. It's sort of superstition at this point. Not sure what would happen if I broke the streak.
It's not common (I think average upgrade cycle on iPhone is a little more than 3 1/2 years now, and getting longer every cycle) but it's not unheard of. The iPhone hold value well enough that you can often trade it in at something like a $200 discount and just get the new one.
Considering the cost of a battery replacement, it's not the worst value proposition in the world.
dbbk 16 hours ago [-]
I do for my iPhone yes. It's definitely overkill and certainly not recommended for 99% of people.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Crazy the ultimate in short term thinking…
engineer_22 17 hours ago [-]
Are there any “gotchas” of leasing vs owning the device? Do your rights to the data change? Does your responsibility to maintain the fit and function of the device change? How does lease vs buy benefit the consumer?
dyauspitr 17 hours ago [-]
It’s a forcing function for an upgrade. You pay 75% of the cost of the device for each 2 year cycle and many people will keep doing that in perpetuity. Compared to someone that keeps their phone for 6-7 years, the leasee will pay 3x as much over that 6 year period. Apple will also get the phone back and resell the refurbished one for 50% of its original price.
Apple will benefit in two ways. They will make 125% of what they used to make on every phone they sold because they can sell it twice and more people will be forced into the two year upgrade cycle (because they can’t afford the buyout at the end) increasing their overall sales numbers in general. If you’re a consumer, you should just treat this as a 24 month interest free loan and then buy the phone outright at the end of that period. If you put the outright cost of the phone into a bond (say 7.5%) during that period, you will even get 3 months payment free and only pay for 21 out of those 24 months.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Absolutely, you pay more people need to take a finance class, or buy shares in Apple, do one or the other or both. Please…
17 hours ago [-]
apercu 18 hours ago [-]
"You'll own nothing and you will love it"
socalgal2 18 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure I understand all the hate in this thread.
I had a friend who bought a new Mac every year, selling his old Mac. His calculation was that it was about the same price as keeping one Mac and upgrading every 5 years.
I'd consider leasing a Mac through this program. I priced one out, with the options I chose it's $8149, lease for $177 (6372 for 3yrs, 8496 for 4yrs).
Yes, at the end of those 3 years I don't have a mac, I have to keep paying, but I'd prefer a new Mac every 3yrs and it's just easier than trying to sell it for $1777. It doesn't seem like a bad deal to me, plenty of people lease cars. Plus, if you consider you can keep your moneny in interest earning account, then at 3% you'd end up with $2256
I'm not saying that makes it a good deal for you, but I personally like the idea of not paying out $8149 day one, especially for something I know has a shelf life. I'm on an 2021 M1 Mac. It works great. But I've also tried to run 70b LLMs and run out of memory (64g), so I think about upgrading to 128g which, being Apple, I can only do by buying a new mac.
alt227 26 minutes ago [-]
Lets not beat around the bush. These new finance options are coming alongside price hikes, and they seem to make it slightly more confusing for the customer to understand.
This will definitely offset some of the loss they will get from people buying a lower model phone or laptop due to the price hikes, as thats exactly what it is designed to do.
swat535 18 hours ago [-]
I don't see the point for consumers. Perhaps a minority will buy a new model every year but many people keep their devices for years to come.
Companies that require frequent hardware refreshes would benefit from this, though Apple already had has programs for those.
Aurornis 17 hours ago [-]
> Perhaps a minority will buy a new model every year
It’s not just a 1 year program.
The comment you replied to had numbers for the 4 year option.
criddell 17 hours ago [-]
> I don't see the point for consumers.
Isn't it this:
>> His calculation was that it was about the same price as keeping one Mac and upgrading every 5 years.
alsetmusic 9 hours ago [-]
Assisted a an internal-client with a 12 yo Dell all-in-one yesterday. I recognized his voice, as this was the third or fourth time. Knowing the landscape ahead of assisting him allowed me to be a super-star. He already seemed to like me, but I cleared a lot of BS by telling him what was possible from memory of the setup. Learning how bad it was was a different conversation, less fun.
crazygringo 16 hours ago [-]
> I had a friend who bought a new Mac every year, selling his old Mac.
I considered that at one point, and it would have made sense based on prices alone, but it didn't work at all once I factored in having to pay sales tax on a brand-new Mac each year, and the cut eBay takes on a sale, and the fact that the eBay buyer also has to pay sales tax.
If I lived in a state with no sales tax, and could rely on selling locally with Facebook Marketplace or something, then I'd totally do it just for the infinite warranty coverage alone!
Still bugs me that states charge sales tax even on used items. It just seems wrong.
sixtiethutopia 16 hours ago [-]
> Still bugs me that states charge sales tax even on used items. It just seems wrong.
Yes VAT is a better system.
aucisson_masque 8 hours ago [-]
I bet you'd have sell it for much more than 1777 at the end of the 3 years. As long as you don't break, you'd find a buyer in less than a day at this price, this is insanely good.
Usually you'd find people asking for 4 to 6k$
aetherspawn 15 hours ago [-]
That, and, its kind of nice to have $8k extra on hand if you need it.
_zie 17 hours ago [-]
"If you’re leasing an iPhone, you’ll need to connect to AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon when you enroll."
Damn, this is the dealbreaker for me.
Leasing an unlocked iPhone and being able to use my current $25/mo MVNO of choice (US Mobile) may have actually tempted me (I currently buy outright and then tell myself I'll sell my current phone when I upgrade, but in reality I just have iPhone graveyard at home.)
jborichevskiy 16 hours ago [-]
It's a little unclear; they make you select a carrier, but buried in the fine print is:
"For iPhone only: In order to lease an iPhone, you must select an eligible carrier (but you cannot use a prepaid carrier plan). A leased iPhone is always unlocked, so you can switch carriers at any time, subject to your carrier’s terms."
So it... is unlocked? I am also on US Mobile and don't want to leave it
ben1040 15 hours ago [-]
This is unchanged from the upgrade program terms before. The phone is unlocked, but when you take delivery of the phone you have to activate it on a Big 3 carrier's postpaid plan.
madeofpalk 15 hours ago [-]
So, the phones arrived locked? You can't use them with any carrier you want?
musictubes 11 hours ago [-]
Phone is unlocked but you have to put in carrier info when you buy the phone. You have to activate a line from one of the big three carriers to use the program at all.
17 hours ago [-]
user00005 17 hours ago [-]
Well, Apple did just hit a 5 trillion market cap with a PE ratio of 41.
With hardware prices increasing, selling financially challenged people on 'cheap' monthly payments seem like one way to keep the stock price pumped at these levels.
I guess they are one of the good trillion corporations though?
> With hardware prices increasing, selling financially challenged people on 'cheap' monthly payments seem like one way to keep the stock price pumped at these levels.
I feel like some people are ignoring the fact that "financially challenged people" have always been paying monthly payments for their phones via their carrier's lease programs, which are very popular and have been a thing since the first iPhone.
People need phones, this is a good program.
> I guess they are one of the good trillion corporations though?
This but unironically
r0fl 13 hours ago [-]
“Financially challenged” people never paid for their phones with cash
They were probably using credit cards at 29% to buy the exact same phones that are now 0%
Net net it’s a win
paxys 17 hours ago [-]
I wonder what the reaction here would have been if Klarna had independently announced this program, instead of the current version which is Apple branded with a tiny “run by Klarna” in the footer.
dsl 13 hours ago [-]
Seeing as Apple is sunsetting a program that is far superior as a consumer, the two are not unrelated.
lysace 17 hours ago [-]
Haha!
xp84 19 hours ago [-]
Seems like a good place to also mourn the canonical best iPhone financing method - the blissfully simple Apple Card payment plan. They got rid of it[1] (except if you're engaging in the postpaid carrier contract foolishness) in 2023, which coincidentally was the last time I felt the need to get a new iPhone.
I know a lot of people use postpaid, but I can't understand why. I'd challenge anyone to justify that decision, given that the phone "deals" are rarely even much of a subsidy as opposed to a financing scheme that acts as a contract, and the plans cost about triple what I pay every month, for fewer features and equivalent at best priority and speeds.
I'm on Verizon postpaid, 4 lines on Unlimited Plus for $31/line. That's hard to beat pre-paid for comparable service. Yes, I have to threaten to leave Verizon once a year to get them to add a bunch of customer loyalty discounts, but that's not less work than switching pre-paid carriers to chase deals.
I subscribe to /r/NoContract/ so I have a pretty good idea what's out there.
Visible+ is a comparable pre-paid plan, it's $29/mo but that's a teaser rate and to keep it past one year, you'd have to port out and port back in for whatever deal they have in one year. The normal price is $35/mo, so I'm beating that. (Visible would also mean managing 4 separate accounts since they have no multi-line plans.)
Total Wireless is a bit cheaper ($26/mo) but I keep reading terrifying customer service issues with them including most recently losing number during the porting process.
Aside, I briefly used US Mobile earlier this year to port a VoIP line to Google Voice (GV will only port-in mobile numbers). US Mobile's customer service is exceptional. Would recommend them heartily for pre-paid service. But they don't currently beat what I'm getting from Verizon post-paid. I'd consider them if I can't keep my loyalty discounts next year.
tzs 17 hours ago [-]
It should be noted that with Visible+ after the $29/mo promotional rate ends in 12 months and it goes to the regular $35/mo you could switch to the annual plan. That's $375/year, equivalent to $31.25/mo if we ignore the time value of money.
Another thing to note about Visible+ is that if you have an Apple Watch with cellular and want to use that with your plan there is absolutely no reason to consider Visible+.
Watch support can be added for $10/mo but that brings the total to the same as their highest level plan, Visible+ Pro, which includes watch support. That plan is $45/mo $450/year ($37.50/mo) and promotional discounts run out.
As far as I was able to tell, Visible+ Pro is the best or very close to the best deal for people who want Apple Watch support in the US and only want one line. You can get lower prices per line on postpaid plans with multiple lines but if you will only have one the postpaid plans are ridiculous (even before you add in watch support).
xp84 14 hours ago [-]
> 4 lines on Unlimited Plus for $31/line.
Important: Does this include taxes and the many "regulatory offset fees" or whatever they call them? My numbers do include everything.
Looks like that plan[1] offers 30GB of mobile hotspot. I get 50GB.
The Unlimited Plus throttles video by default to either 480p, unless you're in a UWB (mmWave?) tower you get 720p. You can get "up to 720p" even on "plain" 5G by adjusting a setting though. My plan does the same default as well, but when I adjust a setting, I get unthrottled video.
You get 50% off a data plan for a watch, which looks like is a $10 plan? So $5 add-on for a watch. My plan includes a watch for free.
It doesn't look like you get international roaming with Unlimited Plus. I get 20GB of roaming in 125 countries in my plan. I've used it, it works great.
And to get the rate you're talking about, you have to buy 4 lines. No problem for you, but it's notable that singletons pay $80 (with autopay) for that plan. Mine is $32.50 since I pay annually (actually it was less because I paid during a sale, but I don't want to make claims that aren't easily available anytime). I don't have to ever call and threaten them to stay at $32.50 because that's the full price.
Anyway, that's US Mobile as you may have guessed - and that's their best, Unlimited Premium plan.
Oh, I also pay an extra $10 a month to add a second eSim on a different network, a feature they offer. It uses your same allowances (for me, hotspot is the only thing that's metered anyway) but means that I can hop between AT&T and Verizon towers at will. You can also just port your main line to a different network at any time, if you just decide that you want to. They support all three US networks.
> Important: Does this include taxes and the many "regulatory offset fees" or whatever they call them? My numbers do include everything.
Yes. Breakdown per line:
UNLIMITED PLUS $55
Auto Pay & paper-free discount -$10
LOYAL $20 FOR 12 MO -$20
Surcharges $4.57
Taxes & gov fees $1.48
Total $31.05
Verizon dollars -$0.30
I realize that there are pre-paid plans out there with various options some people find essential like Apple Watch or Hotspot or International roaming or whatever. I don't need any of that. You asked why anyone would choose post paid. For me it's because the pre-paid options aren't better for my needs and not really any cheaper.
FWIW, for years I was a Verizon employee and had a 50% discount which is why I started post-paid. They also have the best service in my area. I'm no longer an employee so they treat me like any other customer and I'd pay full price but for the loyalty discounts.
But you don't need to be a former employee to get those. You just need to haggle with customer service once a year. Some years all I have to do is unlock the line and ask for the porting code and they immediately text me a discount.
jerlam 18 hours ago [-]
Visible has a family/friends plan - called "Inner Circle" - that comes with a $5/month discount on the Visible+ or Pro plans, and allows one account to pay for all the others.
js2 18 hours ago [-]
Ah, cool, looks like they added that about a year ago. I hadn't looked at Visible recently. But Inner Circle just brings Visible+ down to the same price I'm already paying Verizon ($30/mo/line) since it doesn't stack with other promos and doesn't combine with an annual plan. And I'd still have to setup four separate accounts, I could just pay them all in one place.
Still, thanks for pointing it out.
Velocifyer 18 hours ago [-]
Metro By T-Mobile works well, if you navigate through the website to find the $25/month ($30 without autopay or for the first month) postpaid unlimited plan. It is a T-Moblie MVNO.
It is hard to get eSIM to work, but they have good customer service (but you need accses to a phone to call them, so you should try something like textnow or Google Voice) which helped my friend set it up.
It is not a intruductory offers, AFIK.
phoghed 18 hours ago [-]
My internet provider (Spectrum) is a Verizon MVNO and is cheaper than that. I’ve got two lines and a watch add on for $70/mo, and I don’t even have their internet service anymore because I switched to a better fiber to the door provider.
I check with people that come around or in random stores if they can beat it, alas they cannot.
alexjplant 19 hours ago [-]
> I know a lot of people use postpaid, but I can't understand why.
Two reasons: data caps and device cost.
People want iPhones but they cost $1000 outright which isn't a small amount of cash these days so they roll the cost of the device into their monthly bill. The average consumer also doesn't understand how mobile data versus 802.11 works - their kid doesn't activate Wi-Fi on their phone or download anything, they see a large number with "GB" on the end, and they pay whatever is necessary to keep the Instagram scrolling and Disney+ flowing.
Buying an iPhone outright, flipping the old one every few years (they hold their value well) and using a $30 a month 10GB plan is doable if you have money and are savvy enough to download podcasts and use your home's AP for data.
Carriers certainly aren't incentivized to educate consumers better since they'd rather make money on device installments and milk them for hundreds of dollars a month because they "have a large family and need a lot of data". Home broadband marketing is even worse - why a family of four "needs" 500 Mbps down is absolutely beyond me. In an ideal society this type of consumer literacy would be taught in school but I'm not holding my breath.
xp84 14 hours ago [-]
There's no need to settle for a measly $10GB plan for that kind of money. Mine costs $32.50 and includes unlimited data (actually not deprioritized, too) and 50GB of hotspot.
If you really can settle for 10GB though, you could do it for even less.
I can see how some people feel like the phone financing is something they need if they have cash flow problems and trouble accessing credit, but boy do those postpaid carriers make you pay for it, both in the payments themselves, AND in the plan itself costing more than twice as much what I pay even if you've finished paying off your phone payments.
electriclove 19 hours ago [-]
Do family plans require them to be postpaid?
js2 19 hours ago [-]
The 0% financing fine print is as follows:
> Financing available to qualified customers, subject to credit approval and credit limit, and requires you to select Citizens One Apple iPhone Payments or Apple Card Monthly Installments (ACMI) as your payment type at checkout at Apple. In order to buy an iPhone with ACMI, you must select one of the following carriers (but you cannot use a prepaid carrier plan): AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon. An iPhone purchased with ACMI is always unlocked, so you can switch carriers at any time, subject to your carrier’s terms.
pishpash 17 hours ago [-]
Apple card installment isn't allowed on EPP stores, right? And you lose credit card extended warranty coverage, which is worth 5% of purchase price easily.
Aurornis 19 hours ago [-]
Interesting decision. As far as I can tell, the iPhone Upgrade Program was structured like a loan where you owned the device but kept making payments. You then had the option to trade up to a new phone and add more months to the loan, or to pay out the remainder of the loan (24 months?)
They’re discontinuing this and replacing it with Apple Upgrade, which is structured as a lease. Apple owns the device and you make payments. You either return the device or buy it out at the end.
The distinction probably doesn’t matter much to the typical consumer, other than the final price differences. Some people have an emotional attachment to knowing they own the phone instead of leasing it (I’m emotionally attached to this position, however illogical) but in the end it comes down to having a device in your hand for a monthly payment.
rurifjciri 17 minutes ago [-]
The big distinction is whether the lease/loan ends with the requirement to pay a lump sum or not.
Your monthly payments stopping and you own a device is a world apart from your ability to pay monthly ends, and, unless you can find $x hundred dollars, you need to roll onto a new monthly lease.
Mathematically there might not be much in it from a $in/out perspective, but for people who don’t have large disposable incomes the reality is they are vastly different
acmnrs 19 hours ago [-]
The iPhone Upgrade Program was a 24-month 0% financing program for iPhones. The replacement Apple Upgrade<https://www.apple.com/shop/apple-upgrade> is a leasing program that also covers iPads, Macs, and Apple Watches.
Instead of automatically owning the device after making all payments, you can choose return/upgrade/buy it at the end of the lease. The new program is backed by Klarna instead of Citizens Bank, uses a soft credit check, and no longer includes AppleCare+ by default.
The fact that the page is not particularly clear about any of this should tell you everything you need to know about this change.
Someone 19 hours ago [-]
> and no longer includes AppleCare+ by default.
On the one hand that gives users an option.
On the other hand, that is a way to hide a price increase. Also, those doing this are almost obliged to take AppleCare, as (https://www.apple.com/shop/apple-upgrade):
“What do I do if my device gets lost or is stolen?
If you have AppleCare+ Theft and Loss for your iPhone, iPad, or Apple Watch, you can file a claim at mysupport.apple.com/theftandloss.
If you don't have AppleCare+ Theft and Loss coverage and your device is stolen or lost, you'll need to close out your lease by paying the early termination fee or choose to pay the purchase option fee (plus any applicable taxes and fees). You can do that at an Apple Store, or through the Klarna app. You can then start a new lease with Apple Upgrade, finance with Apple, or buy your next device with a one-time payment.
You will continue to be charged your monthly lease payments until you either pay the early termination fee or purchase option fee. If you take no action, Klarna will continue to charge you your monthly lease payment through the extension period, and you will be charged the purchase option fee through Klarna.”
drdexebtjl 16 hours ago [-]
That’s evil.
So if the target demographic, the person that does not have money to buy an iPhone outright, is mugged, they need to essentially buy the iPhone outright or they start racking up interest and fees.
(I don’t care if they say the target demographic is “people who upgrade every 2 years” instead. If that were really the case, you don’t need financing, just a buy-back program)
ArchOversight 14 hours ago [-]
This is the same as when you get a phone through a mobile carrier. T-Mobile doesn't care that I got mugged, they want their money.
drdexebtjl 11 hours ago [-]
It’s not the same. With a mobile carrier, you could just continue to make monthly payments as normal, and at the end of your contract, the payments stop.
With this program, you can either pay a lump sum to cancel the lease early, or you can continue making monthly payments, but at the 24-month mark, since you can’t return the phone, you’ll still owe them $430.
tzs 9 hours ago [-]
Mugging is not a good example. If the phone is stolen that would typically be covered under the personal property coverage included on most homeowners or renters insurance.
ct0 14 hours ago [-]
Fairly certain there is no forgiveness with lease terms. Also, Im surprised that Apple Care is not a requirement, but it seem more like a decision to put the risk on the lender rather than Apple in the case of loss. I would expect a majority of people to buy the apple care for a few dollars more per month.
lotsofpulp 15 hours ago [-]
People must really like the dopamine rush of feeling outraged.
Giving people the option to not buy insurance is not evil. It's just a seller giving a buyer options at different price points.
drdexebtjl 11 hours ago [-]
Giving people options that will in practice put them into spiraling debt slavery is objectively evil.
lotsofpulp 17 minutes ago [-]
Great, lets remove the option of refined sugar, alcohol, saturated fats, detached single family homes (due to it resulting in individual cars, the leading cause of injury and death, and expenses that leads to "debt slavery"), etc.
Also, no more leasing/renting cars, or really any kind of borrowing at all, as people should not have the option to become liable in the future, for anything. Because if a $1,000 to $2,000 lease puts them in a spiral of debt slavery, anything more than that surely will.
bradleybuda 8 hours ago [-]
Given that the median household income in the US is $83k, I don’t think that losing $1k on a busted phone is likely to put many into “spiraling debt slavery”
drdexebtjl 6 hours ago [-]
57% of Americans live from paycheck to paycheck and don’t have an emergency $1k to spare.
If they had the money to buy the phone outright, they would probably buy it outright.
Dylan16807 12 hours ago [-]
It's not specifically the option to skip insurance, it's the option to finance something so prone to damage without insurance. And yeah, it's bad for that to be an option.
monocularvision 19 hours ago [-]
Yes, this appears to be entirely about raising the price of iPhones without raising the cost of iPhones. Most people don’t buy it out right so they need a way to ease the prices raised by keeping the monthly payments around the same. The difference is you have to return the phone at the end instead of owning it.
whatever1 17 hours ago [-]
So essentially 2 years worth of payments, with a reasonable monthly payment, will not be enough to buy an apple device.
999900000999 19 hours ago [-]
More tricks to hide rising prices across the board.
Looks like a recession indicator to me.
kgwgk 19 hours ago [-]
I wish we got some shrinkflation and they brought back the iPhone mini.
cloudfudge 15 hours ago [-]
Yes please. I can't really believe it but I'm researching android phones because I will not upgrade to something larger than my 3rd gen iPhone SE.
ahmd-sh 19 hours ago [-]
perhaps even a... great depression indicator? (ref: wvfrm ep. 364)
bdcravens 19 hours ago [-]
Additionally, the loan program was administered by Citizens Bank, not Apple.
Retr0id 18 hours ago [-]
Man, the concept of leasing a phone is grim. The way hardware gets locked down these days, it feels like you never really own it in the first place. Leasing makes it explicit: you don't.
You'll own nothing and you'll feel weird about it.
mattlutze 2 hours ago [-]
An interesting lesson from the "certified pre-owned" programs in automakers and mobile network providers.
Permanent "leasers" swap devices every few years, stocking the company's second-hand options and increasing average lifetime value of the participating products.
t1234s 1 hours ago [-]
I remember dell had a lease program for laptops many many years ago. This made sense for business tax reasons.
fny 11 hours ago [-]
Holy hell--you can rent a 32GB M5 MacBook Air for $33 a month.
You can stick that in your closet for one hell of an agent playground.
A standard $33 server has trash specs by comparison.
5 hours ago [-]
Havoc 4 hours ago [-]
Seems solid. Though it’ll have to be mostly idle. The air doesn’t dissipate heat all that well
TiredOfLife 8 hours ago [-]
A shared vps with 8 core 9950x3d and 32gb of ram is twice that
Makes sense they discontinued it given that the last 5 iphones have been almost exactly the same
Havoc 4 hours ago [-]
Yeah a 3-4 year cadence seems optimal now
Esp if you can swing a battery replacement at 2 years
meatmanek 19 hours ago [-]
Indeed. I used to be on the upgrade program so I could upgrade every year, but decided to skip the 16 and keep my 15 until the 17 came out.
Even if you are upgrading every single year, it works out roughly the same to just buy every phone outright and then trade in last year's model -- you typically get ~half your purchase price back as trade-in value after a year anyway.
xp84 19 hours ago [-]
Hey that's not fair, there has been one actually useful "innovation" -- switching to USB-C like the rest of the world has been using for 10 years. Literally nothing has made me feel the slightest craving for a new iPhone since getting my 15 Pro Max.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
The rest of the world should switch speed up and use thunderbolt five and tandem oled in return. :)
19 hours ago [-]
jjice 17 hours ago [-]
This is probably just a personal lifestyle thing, but I'd rather have a cheaper, not as good thing that I own outright rather than lease (not own) a nicer, better thing. Cars, phones, computers, whatever it is. I don't like the idea of not owning the stuff I use every day, if I could just own something not as good instead.
thisislife2 17 hours ago [-]
I have come to the realisation that it just makes more sense to buy repairable / upgradeable electronics / computers and cars, used. You save a lot of money that way, and the second-sales market has also become more organised so you don't really waste time too in the process.
amelius 5 hours ago [-]
There's another side to this. If you don't own the phone, then it is in Apple's best interest to keep the phone running. No more planned obsolescence, or not caring if it breaks after the warranty period is over. Maybe not owning is the more environmentally friendly choice?
jghn 17 hours ago [-]
Technically my current iPhone is part of the upgrade program, but I paid if off years ago.
Why haven't I upgraded? Because there's no mini and all they make are phablets now.
Daneel_ 9 hours ago [-]
I was in the mini camp as well, but the reality is that even the mini can't be used one-handed with ease. Based on that, I switched to a pro max model and haven't looked back. If no one-handed option is available then I'll take the most useful two-handed option, even if it pains me to do so. The 4S was the last true one-handed option in my opinion.
JBAnderson5 17 hours ago [-]
Will they ever come out with a new mini?
If they don’t, is it possible to buy a new 13 mini anymore? Or just replace the battery?
layer8 16 hours ago [-]
New ones don’t seem to be available any more, you probably need to go refurbished. Last year some third-party sellers still had new units available. Replacing the battery is always an option.
It doesn’t look like Apple will be going back to something smaller than the 17e. Unless you count the upcoming foldable, which while shorter than the mini, however is also wider, thicker and heavier.
jghn 13 hours ago [-]
Unlikely. I'm hoping when the foldable models come out that the folded version is a decent form factor. And then I can just not bother unfolding it.
isaachinman 12 hours ago [-]
iPhone 15 Pro is a reasonable size, in my opinion. Still large compared to years past.
imagetic 17 hours ago [-]
Amen
rufjejriWirj 29 minutes ago [-]
A lot of people are talking about financially challenged people needing to lease but this enables wealthy developers to compare the (monthly) price of hardware that can run an open weight LLM locally to their Claude subscriptions…
Getting very expensive Mac hardware leased is where the juice is. As well as normalising subscription revenue and you own nothing of course, but the interesting dynamic will be shifting 10k hardware to developers that wouldn’t have considered dropping 10k on their setup
apparent 15 hours ago [-]
Interestingly, Apple is apparently going to be able to nerf the devices if the customer misses a series of payments. [1]
Presumably this ability means that Klarna has a lower risk of nonpayment, and is willing to accept a smaller cut of the total price from Apple.
Note that they already do this if you buy a mac on an Apple Card, and they even go so far as to link your AppleID that you may have had for decades. I bought a new mac last year and signed up for the 0% Apple Card financing and if I'd have known about this little bit of leverage they use, I would have created a brand new AppleID to partition it off.
apparent 14 hours ago [-]
What do they do to your Mac if you don't make payments?
boston_clone 10 hours ago [-]
they make you upgrade to Tahoe and force you to use liquid glass
blackqueeriroh 11 hours ago [-]
I’m confused where it says they will be able to nerf them.
Reads to me like there’s code that could be that, but it’s not certain.
apparent 10 hours ago [-]
> If the contract is no longer in good standing, Apple’s system services can place the iPhone in “Restricted Mode,” which blocks access to most apps until the payment or contract issue is resolved, while keeping a small set of apps available.
philamonster 19 hours ago [-]
This is my last iPhone/smartphone (13 mini).
recursivedoubts 19 hours ago [-]
legit could be your last phone ever, why upgrade?
alonzomorning77 19 hours ago [-]
apple upgrade forced obsolescence maybe?
jjice 17 hours ago [-]
FWIW Apple has had some of the best device support lifetimes of any smartphone. Google started guaranteeing their 7 years of updates sometime around the Pixel 6 or so I want to say.
This is all a relative scale though. But if we're looking at smartphones specifically, I'd argue Apple has been the least force obsolescence of anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some smaller manufacturer niche cases that surpass it.
Danox 12 hours ago [-]
Apple devices generally have Longevity and resale value in comparison to PCs the only thing of value in a used PC usually is usually just the graphics card although memory may be coming into play these days.
recursivedoubts 18 hours ago [-]
if you are willing to run an old OS (and the OS's are getting worse too) then I think you should be OK
cloudfudge 15 hours ago [-]
It's not a great option. My "old" phone that I use to install junk apps (e.g. I buy some hardware that requires an app to set up) and which mostly sits in a drawer is a 2nd gen iphone SE, and it's getting to the point where I'm going to be forced to replace it, because the OS hasn't been upgraded in a while (it errors) and some apps won't install on it now.
brcmthrowaway 17 hours ago [-]
Switching to grapheneOS
mgh2 12 hours ago [-]
This is genius, I am sure the finance department saw the benefits of the leasing model:
1. New customers: lower barrier to entry, try, or switch into the ecosystem.
2. Loyal customers: Upgrade propensity is increased as friction decreases.
3. Innovators: offers options for those who want to try a model, but might later change their minds for something that better suits them.
All this increases exposure and engagement to the brand, which translates to increasing sales and revenue.
enos_feedler 12 hours ago [-]
I mean this isn’t rocket science. I feel ideas like these are always sitting on the back burner waiting to deploy. The same goes with product features. They know the upside and impact to finances and are just waiting for the right conditions to pull the trigger
monk_grilla 11 hours ago [-]
Can anyone explain why Apple needed Klarna for this?
They have Apple Card so presumably they are capable of providing financial services like loans on their own, why bring in a third party who will take a cut and force your consumers onto their app with a bad reputation?
ameliaquining 11 hours ago [-]
Apple absolutely does not provide Apple Card in-house, and in particular is not loaning you the money when you use it. Among many other reasons, for that to be legal would require Apple to be a bank, which they're not and they definitely don't want to be, because being a bank is a huge pain, and in particular means signing up for an extremely heavyweight regulatory compliance regime.
Apple Card is the result of a co-branding deal between Apple and Goldman Sachs (which is currently in the process of exiting the deal and being replaced in that capacity by JPMorgan Chase). Apple provides the branding and some minor fintech features; Goldman (or in the future Chase) issues the card and is on the hook if people don't pay their credit card bill.
Presumably for this particular program using Klarna was cheaper because Klarna already specializes in precisely this kind of transaction.
Fluorescence 1 hours ago [-]
> because Klarna already specializes in precisely this kind of transaction
I think Apple gets sweetheart deals so their partners often lose money. Klarna likely sees this as a marketing coup to have their predatory sussness promoted by the Apple halo brand.
If there was profit to be had, I'm sure Apple could buy a small bank and spin it off as a subsidiary with little drama, it's just not the best of their options.
y1n0 11 hours ago [-]
Goldman Sachs is the issuer for Apple Card.
wxw 19 hours ago [-]
> To make way for Apple Upgrade — a new experience that offers more products and terms that work for you — we’re saying goodbye to the iPhone Upgrade Program.
It looks like this leasing program is just moving into a more generic/Apple-wide offering... not sure if the fine print changes.
[edit: from the comments, it sounds like the difference is it was previously 0% interest financing and no longer is]
bri3d 18 hours ago [-]
It's "just" a restructuring; the previous setup was a really bizarre financial product where Citizens Bank gave you a 24-month 0% personal loan to buy an iPhone, but Apple would also buy your phone and loan out and sell you a new one every 12 months.
Now it's just a normal lease product with a 0% money factor through Klarna, that also works across Apple.
What this does is gives Apple more "price flexibility" (aka, they can raise prices more easily, which was probably a lot of the driver for this), but also gives consumers more buying power flexibility since it's a simple product that works across the board rather than a bizarre iPhone specific optimized financial instrument.
bredren 15 hours ago [-]
Citizens was the worst part of the prior program
wxw 14 hours ago [-]
Makes sense, thanks!
fckgw 19 hours ago [-]
The new Apple Upgrade is also 0%, but has lower monthly payments and a balloon payment at the end, like a typical lease. It's not just cost / 24mo.
codesnik 15 hours ago [-]
I wonder what apple will do with returned devices. Are they actually refurbishable, on average, to a condition that's resellable, or will they go straight to recycling just to keep numbers of new sales up?
leoh 4 hours ago [-]
The house never loses
iphonemaxing 11 hours ago [-]
Do you think Apple wants to control all the old iphones so in the near future people can't repurpose them for inference servers once all hardware gets jailbroken by AI? I forsee all software and hardware becoming unlocked by anyone since there is a will and the way is becoming so easy with AI assistance. The cat and mouse game is about to end!
rickdeckard 6 hours ago [-]
Apple rather wants to make it unattractive for users who frequently change phones to
1. Consider trying other brands
2. Pass on their existing (still quite capable) phone to a family member (taking him/her out of the purchasing loop)
3. Stick with the existing model for longer as they don't find a compelling reason to upgrade.
Noor004 2 hours ago [-]
100% agree
cschep 17 hours ago [-]
As an owner of Stripe stock should be I bummed that Stripe didn't get this contract? Or.. happy they are powerful enough that they must not have gotten favorable terms so they didn't bother?
squirreljak 18 hours ago [-]
I don’t see what’s the big deal about this tbh. They’re probably making this financing program for the soon to be announced iPhone and MacBook ultras, which will be more expensive than we expect
arjie 18 hours ago [-]
This sounds like an incredible deal, doesn't it? Transforming a capital cost to an operational cost is fantastic. The total cost to use over 2 years is also much lower on this kind of thing. I suppose the reason not to use it is that you can use an old device for much longer. My wife and parents are on an iPhone 13 and I'm on an iPhone 16. The cost over that period is consequently much lower.
In any case, doesn't this sound like an insane contract for Klarna to have signed? It's freaking Apple. Mind blowing deal for a buy-now-pay-later company to sign. Imagine being in the chain for an Apple product. What a coup.
zeristor 16 hours ago [-]
I’ve bought my last two iPhones with the 0% 24 month installments, seems like an obvious thing to do.
Does this replace that as well?
mrweasel 2 hours ago [-]
We just get used iPhones, it's really the only reasonable option. If to many opt for Apples iPhone upgrade program that's going to put me in a bit of a spot.
Ideally I think a reasonable price for a phone, for my use case, is around $200 (incl. my 25% VAT). That leave me with the option of getting a really shitty Android phone with an operating system from a company I have zero trust in or pay slight more than I'd like for a four year old and use iPhone with an operating system I trust ever so slightly more.
For people like me, who view a smart phone as a necessary annoyance there are very few options. The few apps I have and need aren't running on open source operating system and modern society has decided to make my life rather hard with out those apps.
Right now I'm using a 2nd generation iPhone SE, it solves the same problems that my iPhone 6 did and I don't see how an iPhone 17 would make parking, mobile payments or charging my car any easier. People keep talking about how good the cameras have become, yet they don't even bother switching to portrait mode when taking pictures of people close up. When we're out my photos are often then ones people ask for and use, because I actually spend a few minutes on it, yet my phone have the shittier camera!
b3ing 15 hours ago [-]
If you stop paying do you just send the device back or drop it off at the Apple Store
mmooss 19 hours ago [-]
Are the prices competitive with the used market? Just one datapoint: I know someone who tried to trade in a laptop; Apple offered ~$200, eBayers were buying for ~$400.
paxys 19 hours ago [-]
No there’s a big gap, but it is meant for people who want a guaranteed amount without going through the trouble of selling it privately.
pishpash 17 hours ago [-]
eBay takes a 13%+ cut, then there's shipping, so you're looking at $300 after cost of business. If you're selling a lot, sure, capture that $100 difference. If you're selling one and dealing with buyers, you'll spend at least one hour taking pictures, writing the ad copy, doing client management, going out to ship + gas to get to the post office, risk of buyer return/fraud. Say you're worth $50/hour and you're being very efficient and do all that in one hour, you may end up with a net economic gain of $40-50 after all that. Is it worth it?
Marsymars 15 hours ago [-]
Whenever I sell used good, I use ebay to set the price, but I sell locally, so there's no shipping/fees involved.
Local prices around me always seem weirdly high - I sort ebay by cheapest price+shipping, match that, and that usually puts me cheaper than 90% of local listings and gets me plenty of interest.
TBH I'm not clear on why anybody outside of rural areas is selling on ebay for non-niche things.
pishpash 9 hours ago [-]
I can think of a few reasons:
1) Digital goods, so very little friction.
2) No liquidity locally so you go to the large market.
3) Selling large volume.
4) Some third party to verify payment when it's not cash.
There are more and more alternatives though.
tamimio 19 hours ago [-]
So this new one seems like hardware-as-a-service subscription, the hardware is basically rented out, and since everything is linked to apple account it’s easier to lock it remotely if you don’t pay that month. They are probably planning to increase the prices and are introducing this model so it looks less of a payment method, except you don’t even own it.
18 hours ago [-]
IAmGraydon 19 hours ago [-]
So they're going to subtract the residual from the price and divide that by some term, just like leasing a car. Doesn't seem like a bad way to get a phone and in the end, they just automatically own the residual instead of buying it from you. It seems like a more predicable way to do the same thing most people are already doing.
xp84 19 hours ago [-]
I think "most people" have been shifting towards longer than 24-month replacement cycles. Leasing with a fixed end is probably predicted in their financial models to do a better job of getting more people onto a strict 24 month cycle. Nobody will want to actually buy out their lease on a 2-year-old phone, so they'll turn it in and lease another one, so Apple can throw it into the shredder[1] and show an additional sale on their books.
They won't throw it into the shredder. They'll capture the residual by wholesaling it second-hand, same as with trade-in's.
xp84 15 hours ago [-]
They already do shred as many as they can (as my link documented) because used iPhones merely existing compete with Apple's offerings.
Think of it from Apple's perspective: You sell a phone for $1,100 and get a 37%[1] margin on it, so that's a $407 profit margin, and a $693 cost to make it.
That phone gets Apple $768 in lease payments according to their site.
Then they take the phone back from the user at 2 years old. EBay shows 2-year-old iPhone 15 Pros going for about $400 so let's assume the wholesale prices is $300.
So Apple has the old phone and can sell it for $300 pure profit before tax or $237 after 21% federal tax, but they know that its existence will displace a new iPhone sale somewhere. Or they can declare it as "too damaged to resell" and shred it, probably take a tax deduction (for the official residual of $332? I'm not sure) for that loss, offsetting $70 of taxes elsewhere, and (very very important point here) because they know they'll sell one incremental new phone, they can expect to have an additional $1100 of topline revenue to show, and another $407 gross profit that they get to book.
Sell it: $237 - $70 opportunity cost of tax deduction they don't get = +$167 to gross profit,
Shred it: +$1100 topline, +$407 in gross profit, +$70 in EBITDA.
I'm not a real accountant so I'm sure a few of these figures are off, but I think my main point is valid: Since Apple's main motivation is to increase their stock price, they may benefit more from shrinking the aftermarket than they would from harvesting the value of the old iPhone.
This logic does depend on an additional working semi-late-model iPhone finding its way into the hand of a person, or there being a chain of people, at the end of which having someone who won't buy a brand new iPhone this year, but I think it's hard to argue it doesn't.
Conversion is different at $1100 vs. $400 so it's not a straight 1:1 $167 vs $70; the beancounters will weight by the likelihood of getting the amount in the first place. You also have to consider the long-term value of converting, e.g. the being in the Apple ecosystem vs. going to Android if they don't convert. Finally, the cannibalization argument is stronger if the alternative is a new low-tier phone like SE or some special pricing for third-world markets. That's not selling at $1100, it'll be much closer to residual on the used phone. It's hard for me to believe the market pricing is off by so much that something that destroys value in the system like shredding working phones is a net economic gain even for Apple.
Note that in your earlier link they are shredding non-working phones that need repair, so those residual values are closer to scrap value. That's different.
17 hours ago [-]
drnick1 19 hours ago [-]
This kind of business model is just another manifestation of "you'll own nothing and be happy."
Unless you are happy with Apple or Google literally owning your phone and everything in it, the solution is to buy a Pixel, with cash, unlock the bootloader, and flash GrapheneOS.
thewebguyd 19 hours ago [-]
Except in this case, you can still choose to own it at the end of the lease. The total lease price (if you buy it at the end) is the exact same as the retail price, there's no interest and no extra fees.
drnick1 19 hours ago [-]
The issue is deeper than than. Even if you buy, not lease, the iPhone, you don't control the software. Apple is still the effective owner, and tells you what you can and can't run on your own device. Worse, Apple is able to remotely inject user-hostile programs, such as the planned CSAM scanner that was planned but ultimately abandoned[0].
All of that is true, but has nothing to do with the new payment plan apple just released.
MagicMoonlight 16 hours ago [-]
[dead]
DDayMace 11 hours ago [-]
"For now, you can continue making your remaining monthly payments." Aww, thanks for the reminder Apple!
bartvk 5 hours ago [-]
I hate this weird, manipulative and soft language.
LoganDark 18 hours ago [-]
"Leases are provided by Klarna". Great. Klarna doesn't want to give me a high limit, so this is actually worse.
My MacBook Pro was over $6,000 refurbished, and this was before Apple raised prices. There's not really a point in financing smaller purchases that you can just buy outright.
question, since I couldn't find it anywhere in the terms yet: Does iPhone Upgrade Program also require the iPhone be placed into the new "partner financial lock" status, seperate of the SIMlock status (which will remain unlocked)?
It will be curious to see if the first Klarna defaults will start triggering a future Restricted Mode on the phone and the parts get blacklisted from re-use.
I assume certain apps will get an entitlement from Apple to enable/disable this on the device.
interestingly, if you try and configure the lease for an ipad, the accessories are not bundled, and you have to buy them separately and pay them in full and upfront. or you can finance them separately via klarna (?)
that's a bit of a deal-breaker for me, at least for the ipad.
r0fl 19 hours ago [-]
Leasing isn’t “I can’t afford to buy it.” It’s about capital allocation.
Why would I tie up $1,200 upfront in a device that’s going to be obsolete in a couple of years when I can spread the cost over time, preserve cash flow, and (if it’s a legitimate business expense) deduct the lease payments?
Keeping $1,200 in my business earning a return is often worth more than prepaying for a depreciating asset.
People happily lease $80,000 vehicles for exactly these reasons. Applying the same logic to a $1,200 phone isn’t irrational, just the same financing decision at a much smaller scale.
thewebguyd 19 hours ago [-]
Yeah everyone's naysaying this but it seems like a no brainer?
There's no interest, no fees. The total lease price (if you buy out at the end) is the same as the retail price. There's no downside to it at all.
If you are someone who upgrades annually, you're now paying ~$599 split over 12 payments vs. ~$1199 up front and either trading in or trying to sell your last gen privately. It works out to about even on a trade-in->upgrade every year cycle, only you don't have to fork over the $600 up front.
luisln 17 hours ago [-]
When you return the device, it needs to be in mint condition. You now have a credit obligation with Klarna, whereas on the pervious system, there was also 0% financing but it was bundled AppleCare+.
I don't think anyone will ever excercise the buyout option since the phone will never be worth more than the buyout price. And like you're saying, this program does not make sense unless you are upgrading every single year.
I mean in any case, every option looks defensible once you've accepted the premise that you need a new phone every 12 months. Any minute differences in costs are just rounding errors. Like I really don't think someone upgrading every year is going to have a significantly different retirement income because they saved $1200 every year by not buying the iphone outright. It's really just a convenience thing, not a financial decision.
kart23 15 hours ago [-]
the other problem is if it’s stolen or damaged.
they literally say you will pay large fees in those cases. it’s basically self insuring.
Marsymars 15 hours ago [-]
> People happily lease $80,000 vehicles for exactly these reasons.
Well, kinda. Various vehicles have fleet-only trim levels that are the cheapest models available. The reasons that you'd lease a $80k Ford F-150 Raptor are somewhat different than the reasons that you'd lease a $39k F-150 XL.
cloudfudge 15 hours ago [-]
For that matter, why would you pay $1200 for a phone?
14 hours ago [-]
redsocksfan45 15 hours ago [-]
[dead]
likelybot 19 hours ago [-]
[dead]
likelybot 19 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
viccis 19 hours ago [-]
They're switching to a lease model. Almost certainly because of the cost of components, but also in their interests to continue the "you'll own nothing" trend. They're even using Klarna as the leasing provider.
iscoelho 19 hours ago [-]
The Apple Upgrade lease model isn't even a replacement as you have to wait 24 months before upgrading.
The entire point of the iPhone Upgrade Program was to make it painless to swap to the newest iPhone every year. Without that, there's no value proposition.
smith7018 19 hours ago [-]
They have 12 month options for the Apple Upgrade program. I just checked how much it would cost to get an iPhone 17 PM + AppleCare+ with theft protection like I currently get from the IUP and it's $3 more a month.
iscoelho 19 hours ago [-]
I stand corrected! This doesn't look too bad then.
smith7018 19 hours ago [-]
I mean, it is $36 more a year but I guess that's not terrible. What will be interesting is the tax paid up front. IIRC, I paid tax on the entire device every time I renewed rather than just paying it during each month. So I always thought it wasn't the best deal because I paid tax on a device that I only ended up paying off half of before renewing and starting the process again. I could be wrong, though. I'm not the best with finances.
iscoelho 17 hours ago [-]
I don't think iPhone Upgrade Program was ever the best deal to be honest. It's just convenient.
IAmGraydon 19 hours ago [-]
I don't know about you, but I like to own things that appreciate. Why would I care about leasing something that just loses value as time passes? This is not a bad way to get your phone, IMO.
thewebguyd 19 hours ago [-]
Yeah, especially considering most people already do this in some fashion but through their carriers (at least in the US) w/ carrier financing + those extra $10/month "upgrade anytime" programs and they end up paying more than what leasing from Apple will work out to.
Especially if you're someone who upgrades every year. 12 month option on a 17PM works out to ~$599 for the year vs. $1199 each year. $599 is roughly what you'd pay for each years new model assuming you trade in your previous gen each time, so at worst it's even with what an annual upgrader was paying already, at best you might make out a little better (assuming you are just doing trade-ins and not private sale).
There's no interest or fees, and you get to buy it out at the end if you want to own it, and the lease price is the same as the retail price, I see no downside.
viccis 19 hours ago [-]
Historically, owning them meant when one person upgrades, other family members could get their old ones. I use my old iPhone as a dev phone for iOS coding. I can also just enjoy having a working device that I'm not still paying for once it's paid off.
The iUP was better about giving the choice to just buy it out at the end. This one is more rigid:
>Terminating your Apple Upgrade Lease: Closing your lease and returning your device terminates your lease. You may incur substantial fees if you terminate your lease before the end of your initial lease term. You may have the option to upgrade to a new device by entering into a new lease agreement and returning your prior device. If you upgrade, your new monthly payments may be greater than your prior monthly payments. If you do not upgrade, terminate your lease, or purchase your device by the end of the initial lease term, the lease will convert to a month-to-month lease for up to six months. Your monthly payments may increase during the month-to-month periods. If you take no action at the end of your extension period, you will be charged the purchase fee under your lease. You will not own your device at the end of your lease, unless you pay the purchase fee. Insurance is not included in your lease, and you may incur damage fees if the device is lost, stolen, or not returned in the condition required by the lease.
Partnering with Klarna explains it quite a bit. They make money on penalties. This new plan has all sorts of sticks it will beat you with if you stray off the path, so it's perfect for them.
qwertyuiop_ 11 hours ago [-]
You'll own nothing and you'll be happy - World Economic Forum.
amazingamazing 18 hours ago [-]
People whine about everything. This is a free loan compared to Apple MSRP.
pishpash 17 hours ago [-]
First-party MSRP at that. What's a few % free loan discount in comparison to almost any other retail pricing out there that is periodically 10-15% off.
amazingamazing 14 hours ago [-]
Where can you consistently get 10-15% off apple products?
pishpash 8 hours ago [-]
Like every holiday sale? Costco and Amazon discount Apple products all the time, and of course there is EPP and student pricing.
Pay $32/mo (so $770 total) to use an iPhone for two years and then give it back to Apple.
This is truly the most dystopian timeline.
filoleg 19 hours ago [-]
> Pay $32/mo (so $770 total) to use an iPhone for two years and then give it back to Apple.
At the end of your device lease term, you have an option to buy out your leased device. With the buy out cost being equal to the device sticker price minus the amount you had already paid on your lease.
Why? Leasing has always been an option that some people and businesses prefer, depending on the circumstances. It’s commonly done with cars. In business situations leasing can be very common because it works well with your cash flow and doesn’t require taking more debt on your books.
You can buy out the item at the end of the lease term. Some people like this optionality because they get to defer the purchase decision into the future and benefit from any new information, like whether or not a new iPhone is worth upgrading to or how the battery is holding up.
paxys 19 hours ago [-]
The fact that we need to use the financing models of cars for basic consumer electronics is the dystopian part.
darrenf 18 hours ago [-]
Then I guess we’ve been in the dystopia for almost a century now. When I was a kid in the 70s and 80s we leased our TV and VCR. It was hugely common in the UK, the company was on many high streets and literally called Radio Rentals, founded 1930: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Rentals
> Radio Rentals was the largest television rental group in the UK and claimed that at its peak it had more than two million customers, more than 500 shops, 3,600 technicians, 2,700 skilled installers and a large ancillary staff. It had sales and service locations across the UK; the Radio Rentals logo being a common sight on many High Streets.
iamnothere 17 hours ago [-]
We still have this in the US, it’s called Rent-A-Center and it’s a way to extract extra money from poor people for luxuries they can’t afford.
kube-system 8 hours ago [-]
Y’all forget about the history of telephones?!
Until the 1980s almost all telephones in the US were rented from the phone company.
Renting isn’t some strange uncharted territory — owning a phone is the new concept.
Aurornis 19 hours ago [-]
You don’t need to do it. It’s an option.
Also calling the latest iPhone “basic consumer electronics” is out of touch. The budget options are older generation iPhones or other phones, not one of the most expensive brands on the market.
fckgw 19 hours ago [-]
You can still just buy it. This is another payment option.
iamnothere 18 hours ago [-]
For now
malshe 16 hours ago [-]
What makes you think Apple would not accept 100% payment today if someone wants to buy the device outright?
iamnothere 14 hours ago [-]
Today = now. So yes, they accept this, for now.
The way things are going, in the future I can see device makers deciding that a lease-only model might be preferable, both for recurring revenue and deeper control. If you don’t own your device, you can’t complain too loudly about right to repair, device restrictions, or software end-of-life.
A lease model would also prevent resale, so devices could be “verified” as belonging to a particular person for their entire lifetime. This simplifies the various verified identity schemes.
A lease model means that your lease could be revoked and your device bricked if you violate the terms. To “ensure good behavior”.
pishpash 17 hours ago [-]
You already do it for music and TV shows. That's not cheap either.
tekla 19 hours ago [-]
"need" is doing a lot of work for a luxury product
applfanboysbgon 19 hours ago [-]
The most dystopian thing about this timeline is how completely normalised corporate propaganda is.
> While our customers have loved the iPhone Upgrade Program, we’re always looking for ways to give them more flexibility, better value, and a more seamless experience.
If I were malicious dictator for life, there would be a special section in my gulags for the people who write copy that entails telling customers it's raining while pissing on them.
19 hours ago [-]
Rendered at 13:25:05 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
you see, an iphone becomes unusable the moment the glass breaks, this is what apple reps. think makes up the value of the phone. not the chips inside, or cameras, but the stupid glass cover.
and they wouldn't buy back. so this whole upgrade nonsense is perhaps valid only in very extraordinary situations.
If I am reading the FAQ here properly: https://www.apple.com/shop/apple-upgrade.
> If you decide to buy the device, the purchase option fee is the list price minus any lease payments you’ve made minus any remaining discounts or trade-in credit. (excluding tax and any damage fees).
Lets look at a couple examples:
iPhone 17 pro max would be $1199 to buy (~1273 with tax) or $34.99 for 24 months totaling $839.76. So would cost 433.33 at the end of the lease to keep it
The cheapest 16" MBP would be 2,999 to buy (3186.44 with tax) or $57.99 for 36 months (or 80.99 for 24 months). 2087.64 or 1943.76. So around ~1k to buy it at the end.
It looks like you can keep making payments for 6 months to lower the buyout price a little bit.
So worst case scenario this is a 3 and a half year interest free loan with a higher payment at the end.
Seems not terrible? As long as you treat it as a loan and not a lease you can end at any point it seems fine and nothing really shady about it. You still have the option to own the device for the original cost.
Other than the loss of the iPhone upgrade program and the yearly upgrades, am I missing something here? I guess the biggest thing is you likely can't just pay it off and be done with it if you had the money.
A lot of people aren’t going to have that $433 at the end of the lease to purchase the device outright, and so will have to roll it into another 2-year monthly payment, and another one after that.
So the goal of the program is the same as every other similar one - they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream, while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
I think you're looking at this too much from the perspective of someone who wants to own the phone, not as someone who wants to consider a lease.
Leases are not a new invention. A lot of people, including very financially savvy and well off people, choose to lease rather than buy depending on the circumstances.
It preserves optionality. If you get to the end of the lease period and there’s a new iPhone you want or the battery isn’t holding up, you can choose not to buy it. You don’t have to deal with selling it or trading in.
If someone doesn’t have $400 to buy out the residual then I doubt they would have had the cash to pay for the whole thing up front. I don’t understand what your argument is.
> So the goal of the program is the same as every other similar one - they want to turn a one-time device purchase into a perpetual monthly revenue stream, while keeping ownership of the asset at the end.
It’s an option. They’re not turning anything into anything. Anyone who wants to buy the device can buy it. You now also have the option to lease it for 12 or 24 months and then after that you can still buy it if you want. Or you can not buy it.
It’s options. You don’t have to use it.
That’s the entire point. They would have bought a cheaper phone, or held on to their old one, but are now paying perpetual monthly payments.
There’s a reason car dealerships never ask “how much can you afford”, but “how much do you want to pay every month”.
There’s a reason Klarna is running the program for them.
a person may reasonably make the choice that they don't need the Pro Max and buy the regular 17.
Now, when the options are: - iPhone 17 ($23/month) - iPhone 17 Pro Max ($35/month)
$12/month extra doesn't seem too bad, except the fact that after 24 months you can't afford to keep the phone and are effectively forced to upgrade to a new iPhone.
I agree that more options are generally better for consumers, but these types of leasing programs are predatory and come at a time when everything is becoming a subscription.
Look, I have one camera with me and one child. As long as the camera gets better every year, I’m gonna want a better camera, every year. I don’t want to deal with carriers and trade-in shopping. Unfortunately this particular deal sucks compared tot he old one.
I’m not financially irresponsible. I value these devices highly and value my time.
This kinda sounds like, "We should make it hard for people to make poor financial decisions." Which seems like an answer completely orthogonal to the problem at hand.
How to get customers to make poor financial decisions? How to sell more phones to people that can't really afford them?
Seriously, what is the problem that is being solved?
Or they would have just bought the new phone and sold their old one for dimes on the dollar on e.g. Gazelle.
You seem tilted at Apple for offering a financing option, but your real gripe is apparently with some people who have poor financial decision making skills. Those people could (and probably would) do a lot worse with traditional options like a credit card.
Can we at least compare apples to apples (hah) and look at the actual terms of the program here? Honestly they're not bad, and I say that as someone who leans toward purchasing outright.
I thought of this also. The question is whether they will now spend even more on the phone since they won't be paying as much in interest. If so, it's savvy of Apple to suck up that difference instead of letting it go to credit card companies.
Presumably Klarna's share is lower because Apple is rumored to be able to nerf these devices if a series of payments are missed. [1]
1: https://9to5mac.com/2026/07/21/ios-27-code-suggests-apple-co...
Oh, sweet summer child...
https://wallethub.com/answers/cc/highest-credit-card-interes...
average credit card interest rate: 18-25% APR [0][1] average klarna effective interest rate:25-33% APR [2]
getting what are effectively individual lines of credit per-burrito or iphone is crazy work and I wouldn't recommend it most of the time. Save some money up, people!
[0] https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/research/current... [1] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/average-credit-c... [2] https://wealthvieu.com/debt/credit-card-debt/klarna-review/
> getting what are effectively individual lines of credit per-burrito or iphone is crazy work and I wouldn't recommend it most of the time.
I think this whole sub-thread has gone off track from people who aren't reading the actual terms of the Apple deal.
Nobody's talking about getting a 33% Klarna loan for an iPhone or burrito. You included 2 statistics and 3 citations that have nothing to do with the program we're talking about.
We're trying to talk about the Apple program in the link, not some other financial services complaints that people have about other things.
The bet here is that Apple would much rather you spend ~$35/month perpetually than $1200 every 4 years.
This is a 'good deal' if you're already someone who upgrades their phone frequently, but I would imagine this would end up getting a whole bunch of people to pay more money in the long run to Apple.
If you don't buy it at the end of the 24 month, you've been paying for a very costly lease.
2/3 of the price for a 24 month lease whereas iphones are updated for 7, 8 years ? And the resell value is very good.
Especially financially, it would make zéro sense.
Apple clearly pay the fees for the customers loan but at the end, the only real mistake the customer can make and might regret is switching out of the Apple ecosystem.
That's clever and only mildly evil. Financial savvy people will use it as a "no fee loan" if they can't pay upfront. Less savvy will be more receptive to the commercial discourse at the end of the lease. Eco-deniers will think twice before renewing every year.
And it's actually a consolidation of existing options because Apple already offered "no fee loan" here in EU but you had to choose the option to begin with. Now it's look like this is a single contract and you choose the option at the end of the lease.
Same reason some people lease cars:
* want the New Thing regularly
* are happier with OpEx than CapEx (can be handy for business/accounting reasons)
But I think unlike leasing vehicles, where the vehicle has the same power (approximately and within usable limits) the new phones bring a new battery. If swappable battery was a thing everywhere; that would further depress the sale of new phones.
- from this thread: iPhone 17 pro max would be $1199 to buy (~1273 with tax) or $34.99 for 24 months totaling $839.76. So would cost 433.33 at the end of the lease to keep it
If you upgrade your phone every 1-2 years then what you pay for the phone is something like "full cost - optimistic trade-in value". I see no reason not to do if you know you going to upgrade.
But there's just nothing to run on phones built in the last 5+ years that actually puts the hardware through its paces (in the phone form factor, laptops and desktops I'd be lot more forgiving on). The cameras aren't really getting better. The battery capacities seem to be mostly "the same". There's just no practical "reason" to justify the expense at this point (and I'll fully acknowledge this wasn't always the case - there was a period there in the early 2010s where phones were getting better rapidly and upgrading was a big deal).
They're basically buying an expensive piece of jewelry that they'll throw away in 24 months. Like... just buy a cheaper model and get some real jewelry. At least that could be passed down at some point instead of becoming e-waste.
My current phone (Motorola g34) runs all the games fine, and that's probably the heaviest thing people use phones for. I do take photos, but like I'm not running a photography business, and social media compresses them to shit anyway so the quality is perfectly fine.
I use my phones as GPS attached to my motorbike's handlebars. They get drenched in downpours, frozen in the winter, and baked in the summer sun multiple times a year. They don't skip a beat and only require the occasional battery change.
My current phone is an iphone 14, still on its original battery. It replaced a 7 which had its battery changed 5 years in. The 7 replaced a galaxy s5 which I stupidly forgot in a taxi, but it was still good enough for my uses.
There are uses for higher-end phones, among which "longer periods between changes".
Listen, whatever you do that’s your hobby I’m certain is also a giant waste of money and very financially irresponsible. And if not, learn how to have fun and stop being so boring.
They do if you don't have the money to throw away. That's the whole point - far too often, the people who throw their money away on these things are the same people who spend all their time complaining they're struggling to afford the basics, like feeding their family.
Yes it's fine if you have plenty of money to waste on what you enjoy, but the majority of people don't.
I know this comment is deep in a thread, but to me it looks like they simply prefer to own the whole apple device payment cycle and not use partners.
BNPL has been a huge bubble outside the traditional credit bubble, this is the same. It doesn't seem like a big divergence excepting that it gives them a contact point and a stick with which to prod customer into a new phone sooner.
Were it not for the camera, I could have stopped upgrading 10 years ago.
My point is, not everyone values the same things you do. The new Siri AI only runs on 15 Pro and higher, I think. New features do arrive in newer phones.
Value in being part of the discussion for a whole year every year too. You realllly have to care about stuff like these factors though (or hate investing your money or have too much).
This is not remotely true. I buy each and every flagship iPhone every year on or near release day for cash. I have done so every release since the first iPhone came out.
Each September or October my old phone goes into a desk drawer forever, or is wiped and gifted to a partner or close friend. I do not recover any of the costs at the end of the 12 months.
In total, it is way less than $200 per month. That’s not “fucking insanely financially irresponsible” by any stretch of the imagination. $2k per year is a trivial amount of money for the most-often-used computer in my entire life. It pays for itself in the first few weeks of the year.
Separately, I spend another 10-20k per year on computer software and services, because it assists my business in making many times that in revenue. Hell, even my hobby AWS S3 account is like $35/mo and that’s like the same as the lease payment for the flagship iPhone Pro under this program.
Upgrading each year brings real performance benefits, despite your claim that phones don’t materially improve each generation. Whether or not that is worth replacing it before it breaks or not is a separate conversation, but let’s not pretend that upgrading annually is exactly equivalent to lighting $2k on fire. Anyone who participates regularly in US “bar culture”, for example, is spending more each month on drinks than I spend to carry the latest flagship iPhone, and nobody is claiming that eating out three times a month or going to the bar with your buddies every Friday night is “fucking insanely financially irresponsible”. Tech is so cheap now that it’s a trivial amount of money in the grand scheme of things.
(You’ll probably flip when you hear I replace my $7k work laptop every 12-24 months, too.)
Furthermore, I’m not even an extreme outlier. I know people who regularly buy the flagship iPhone for their entire family, in cash, every year. It’s a bit spendy if you’re not using it for business (but who isn’t, in 2026, where every single thing you do is an app) but it’s still simply not that much money in real terms when you consider it’s well under $2k/year/device. Hell, a nice lunch for two people at a decent restaurant even without alcohol is pushing $100 in most cities.
For the vast majority of consumers, these prices are insane.
> trivial amount of money... I’m not even an extreme outlier
It's also true that the majority of high-earners refuse to understand that they're in the top few percent for income. I'm not sure whether what I'm reading here is a sincere mistaken belief - the general psychological effect where a person believes their own sense of "normal" is normal to everyone - or a deliberate attempt to get a rise out of other commenters.
> another 10-20k per year on computer software and services, because it assists my business in making many times that in revenue... replace my $7k work laptop every 12-24 months
So those are business costs? They don't belong in this discussion.
And it came with AppleCare+ with Theft and Loss. I stopped using a case. I lived free.
But I wouldn’t, because I actually understand that people are different and like it that way.
Consider: your opinion is worthless when it comes to what I care about in terms of luxuries I enjoy, just as mine is worthless when it comes to what you care about in terms of luxuries you enjoy.
It’s way better when you don’t run around judging other people for liking different things than you.
My iPhone is the computer I use most every day, by a WIDE margin.
I would append "subject to diminishing returns" for your use cases.
I could afford maxed-out computers (within reason) but, for most purposes, the premiums for the very top-of-line exceeds any discernible increase in functionality I would experience.
My last personal computer purchase was an M1 Pro MBP 4 years ago. I could have maxed it out and my life would be the same, but instead I bought on the low end… or somewhere in the middle if we look at Apple’s lineup as a whole.
It’s now 4 years later. This is the longest I’ve probably ever kept a laptop. It’s still running fine, I’m not hurting for more power, and will like wait another 1-3 years before an upgrade… maybe more, we’ll see.
The laptop is a glorified Chromebook for me. I do edit some photos from time to time, encode some video, and code a bit. But 95% of the time, I’m just looking at webpages. Maxing the thing out would have been a massive waste of money.
My work laptop is also a MBP of a similar generation. It’s not up to me when it’s upgraded, but it also wasn’t maxed out, and it’s still fine. VS Code and Outlook aren’t going to run fast enough to matter with a M5 Mac and 128GB or RAM. The bottleneck isn’t my laptop, it’s bureaucracy.
For some, having top end specs will matter, but that is a shrinking percentage of the overall market.
The Davos ghouls are proven right each and every day:
> You'll own nothing. And you'll be happy
Back to indentured servitude we go, where by "we" I mean us, the poors, not the wealthy, nor their relatively still well-off direct servants (like many of the users here working for Big Tech).
most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population.
Credit card statistics are heavily manipulated because it's easy to make them sound terrible. I don't know which factoid specifically you're referring to, but the studies about "X percent of Americans couldn't handle an emergency expense without putting it on a credit card" often use tricks like including anyone who would pay by credit card if they could. I remember reading some of these studies and realizing that I would have been included in the statistic because I prefer to use a credit card where I can, even though I pay it off before interest accrues.
Which is primarily the market value of the home they live in. They can’t pay a bill with it.
The median American household has $8000 of liquid cash in all of their cash accounts combined.
That’s a lot of liquid cash. It reinforces the idea that the median American household has an unparalleled amount of money to burn on whatever.
And this is the median, which means that half of US households have less than this. Which is quite a lot of people who still use phones.
Not by purchasing power. We're also in a weird position compared to our "peers" in that most of them have relatively easy access to much less wealthy neighbors via over-land transit or a cheap plane ride, whereas we have to travel quite a distance or pay for extremely expensive plane tickets. Which means that we're stuck here with what a USD buys in the US, instead of being able to hop over to someplace else where a dollar goes further. We also work more than our peers, so our per-hour earnings take a hit compared to theirs.
I could go on. The trick is trying to gaslight Americans into second-guessing the economic pain they've increasingly felt over the past few decades. The 50th percentile American household lives worse than the 50th percentile household of quite a few less-wealthy countries.
Median wealth in the U.S just around $100k - see Wikipedia & other databases.
how many people own houses ? & for those people that own houses - average equity in those houses is less than 45%.
ain't no factoid - but lived reality of most people. maybe on the coasts where techies and finance bros live - but the rest of america is facing a bleak financial reality.
My comment said "median" explicitly
The number was for household wealth. I think you're looking at individual wealth, which would naturally be lower because it's spread across more people.
Source: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/table...
The average (mean) is closer to $1 million per family, but that's not a useful number.
[0]: https://www.ubs.com/global/en/media/display-page-ndp/en-2026...
It is not like having a $1200 flagship smartphone is a requirement to earn a living like, say, having a mean of transportation is to many people not living close to their workplace. There is nothing one do in a flagship that you can't do - albeit maybe with less quality or slower - than a lower end one. All allows to make and receive calls, use messaging, have a browser, apps.
To be honest, I am clumsy and break stuff easily so I have never spent more than $200 on a smartphone, my current one is a pixel 6a running grapheneos that I bought for 180€ 2.5 years ago. It makes very good photos actually and is fast enough for everything I do. I understand people can want something nicer but it is not a need.
That's not really applicable because:
1. the study is for an "unexpected" expense. This you can see from 2 years away
2. The wording in the study was something along the lines of "would have to dip into savings", not that they literally don't have any money for it. The fed's survey of consumer finances shows the median household has between 7-13k (depending whether you're counting median income or median wealth) in their checking accounts
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/chart...
Should people be more financially responsible? Yes
Are they today? No
In a rational world payday loans, predatory auto loans, BNPL, perpetually rolling credit card debt etc would not need to exist. Yet these sectors are rapidly growing and companies in it are thriving.
I'm saying the specific claim of "most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population" is false.
- written on my S10
This might be the funniest thing I’ve ever read on this nerd website.
I don't have to deal with insurance, parking (if parking is free by you, it shouldn't be), maintenance (I work on them myself, I just pay for cheap parts), and fuel is effectively free. That's all on top of the car payment for people who haven't paid off their car.
Biking is relatively popular and definitely feasible within ten km or so from most city or town cores here in Scandinavia, not just the metropolises.
Multi-year zero-interest loans are also commonplace in high-price, high-margin specialty retail: think La-Z-Boy, Sleep Number, home improvement, hot tubs, home gym equipment, etc.
Yep, which reduces the need to make new devices notably better than old ones, since you'll always have a steady stream of customers coming off their leases.
By getting people to be default-subscribers rather than purchasers who may decide to upgrade, they improve their odds of keeping a larger chunk of their hardware revenue stream.
It is not rolled forward. If they don't want to pay the $433, then they don't. They return the device and the new device's lease doesn't include that $433.
It's not like a used car loan that some people have that keeps growing with each transaction (and at insane interest rates).
Precisely what they should have done for service revenue instead of milking App Store for the past 10 years. They should also have bundled Apple Care as part of it.
It would also allow them to hike up their price for iPhone. For example I wouldn't be surprised if the upcoming iPhone Fold and next year's iPhone 20 / XX start at $1499 to $1999.
My question is how will this roll out world wide, is this going to be like Apple Credit Card, Apple Cash and other things that is US only? Who is actually paying for the interest free loan. Somewhere along the line someone has got to give.
This is all good direction that is happening in the past 12 months, MacBook Neo, Apple Upgrade. Hopefully they will also fix the software part. macOS doesn't need annual upgrade. Perhaps neither do iOS. And the last thing would be about the App Store. But I guess that will take a lot longer.
But they're not actually interest in owning 2 year old phones though right?
They're just interest in you / 2ndary market not owning any?
They’re not putting it back into a box, listing it for sale, and pocketing the difference.
I'd imagine even a phone they can't fix to sell still has some value, even as scrap to them especially as the costs of every damn material that goes into any electronic device continue to soar.
And that all being said: two things can be simultaneously true at once. Leasing is a perfectly valid form of... well you can't really say ownership, acquiring goods I guess? And it also does mean Apple can now turn what may have been one-shot purchases into people who are just fine paying a monthly payment ad infinitum. And that, in turn, opens the door for keeping people on a perpetual new-phone treadmill of monthly payments that involve them never actually owning anything.
You can very easily tie this into the Samuel Vimes Boots Theory of Economics:
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
They’re obviously making money on the whole purchase and program because they’re a business, not a charity.
The assumption that they’re making significantly more money on this than direct sales may or may not hold. It could be that they’re targeting a similar level of end-to-end profit as direct sales but using this to expand their market by providing more purchasing options.
Some people get angry at the prospect of a company making money, but they’re not charities. Everyone should do the math and decide which purchase options work for them. What works for you may not be appropriate to force on to the rest of the population.
One month of median US rent buys three 55" TVs.
The math has changed.
If someone can’t plan ahead 2 years for a $433 expense, they definitely should not have a top of the line iPhone. When my income was low I had an iPhone SE that cost $329.
That rich man was born into wealth, so he has no concept of the lives of poor people.
The other thing to consider, that while Apple might sell you the phone for $400 or whatever, they might re-sell it as refurbished for $700.
You literally don’t own the hardware, it’s a lease.
That said, you can purchase with financing with an Apple Card, or with numerous other financing options like carrier financing. However, leasing allows the purchase prices of phones to continue climbing while still presenting a palatable monthly payment.
I think what’s going to happen with this is a lot of people will be lured in with low payments and then be surprised with the ending “keep your phone” payment, where it will feel like it makes more sense to just get the new phone and continue the same payments.
Paying a $400 payment on a 2 year iPhone will look insane as that’s the depreciated value of a 2 year old phone.
Check ebay. That's around the price of a pro series iPhone 2 years old.
If you're the person who has leased this phone, you make all your payments and get to the end and your bill to keep the phone forever is going to seem kind of high.
Obviously, that's logical. In your lease, you have only paid the price of depreciation.
Just like with cars leasing is the most expensive way to own them, but I guess there's a certain buyer who doesn't want old stuff.
But then again maybe the person doing the lease knows this already and just wants a new phone frequently.
My worry is that a lot of people will see a lower payment and not realize that they’re getting the phone at the end of the term.
It's an interest free loan for 2/3 of the price.
Is a 3 year upgrade cycle for a MacBook Pro unreasonable? Would you get a lower spec machine since you were not trying to maximize the life of the machine? I know I always tend to overspec my machine to keep it for as long as possible.
My M3 MBP with 36GB of ram (looks like it was about 2500 3 years ago) would get me $945 in trade in credit. May be able to get more on eBay but I can't argue with just doing trade in is easier. A bit less than I would "save" by just upgrading at the end of the lease and this already is not the base model so the number does shift.
Especially when I look at the payment options right now I could finance that MBP about $250 on my Apple Card for 12 months no interest, or $57.99 for 36 months. and then I get a new one.
Would probably depend on what it is I was doing with the machine, am I doing tasks that would actually benefit from better and better machines like video editing and similar tasks or am I just using my computer fairly basic in a way that even an M1 machine still handles just fine.
For a personal machine? Yes that’s something I see as unreasonable, MacBook Pros have a very long lifespan. M1 laptop are still pretty awesome machines. For a business an upgrade every 3 years could make sense
Is that threshold for using a Pro machine 3 years, I don't know probably not for most people. My M3 Pro from almost 3 years ago is still running beautifully. I could make the argument that more power would benefit what I do with this machine without a doubt, is it worth the upgrade? I don't know, but I would be lying if I have not been thinking about it.
But I also think about the mentality I had when I bought this machine, and the mentality I had when I was looking at possible upgrades just a few weeks ago. Possibly paying more to overspec the machine compared to my current use case assuming that I want to continue to use it in 3 to 4 years.
I don't know if that calculation is necessary as cut as dry.
This is probably the case for a lot of people, but Apple is smart with their lineup and there are several what I'd call "not pro" features that are gated by the MBP (and iPad pro) which is unfortunate.
Primarily, 120hz screen, SD card reader, HDMI port. None of those are really "pro" featuers, they're just basics I'd expect on any premium laptop.
That being said, 3 years is a tad on the aggressive side for an upgrade cycle for a laptop. I just upgraded my M1 last year, and this M4 Pro will easily last a year or two longer before I feel a compelling need to upgrade, outside of getting RAM constrained. Use case is photo+video production. So for me, a 5 year cycle would be about right.
But also depends on how you spec it out. If you are just buying the base model, then 3 years makes sense. If you spend extra to max it out, you'll be able to hold onto it for 6+ years.
That's precisely why they set it up this way, honestly leasing always made more sense for businesses. I prefer to keep my phones, peace of mind knowing, if I lose something that somehow did not make it to the backups, I can just turn on my old phone and find it.
This also pushes term completion with early termination charges (discourage selling before term ends).
And they know money will be tight for their consumers, they can't lower prices anytime soon so give out 0% loans.
Following their tradition of screwing the frugal, cheapest options seem to be excluded.
Its a subscription model for Apple hardware.
They are also dumping a weird risk premium on the end user. I literally get a new phone every year with the upgrade program, there’s no way I’ll be doing that going forward, at least through the lease. I’ll just buy it with cash and wait for a deal.
That is my big problem with leasing portable things. I never get AppleCare because I can self insure. But if I lose the phone 8 months into the lease I am deep in a hole.
The flip side of this, Apple gets more control of the resale market, pushing more buyers into the new device market.
In theory it lets them solve any market problems that emerge where independent resale markets let high quality devices cannibalize sales of new devices.
Far beyond the actual/original cost of the item which is why it’s not a good deal for an individual.
Once again, taking advantage of short term thinking.
From: https://www.sellcell.com/blog/how-often-do-people-upgrade-th...
Considering the cost of a battery replacement, it's not the worst value proposition in the world.
Apple will benefit in two ways. They will make 125% of what they used to make on every phone they sold because they can sell it twice and more people will be forced into the two year upgrade cycle (because they can’t afford the buyout at the end) increasing their overall sales numbers in general. If you’re a consumer, you should just treat this as a 24 month interest free loan and then buy the phone outright at the end of that period. If you put the outright cost of the phone into a bond (say 7.5%) during that period, you will even get 3 months payment free and only pay for 21 out of those 24 months.
I had a friend who bought a new Mac every year, selling his old Mac. His calculation was that it was about the same price as keeping one Mac and upgrading every 5 years.
I'd consider leasing a Mac through this program. I priced one out, with the options I chose it's $8149, lease for $177 (6372 for 3yrs, 8496 for 4yrs).
Yes, at the end of those 3 years I don't have a mac, I have to keep paying, but I'd prefer a new Mac every 3yrs and it's just easier than trying to sell it for $1777. It doesn't seem like a bad deal to me, plenty of people lease cars. Plus, if you consider you can keep your moneny in interest earning account, then at 3% you'd end up with $2256
I'm not saying that makes it a good deal for you, but I personally like the idea of not paying out $8149 day one, especially for something I know has a shelf life. I'm on an 2021 M1 Mac. It works great. But I've also tried to run 70b LLMs and run out of memory (64g), so I think about upgrading to 128g which, being Apple, I can only do by buying a new mac.
This will definitely offset some of the loss they will get from people buying a lower model phone or laptop due to the price hikes, as thats exactly what it is designed to do.
Companies that require frequent hardware refreshes would benefit from this, though Apple already had has programs for those.
It’s not just a 1 year program.
The comment you replied to had numbers for the 4 year option.
Isn't it this:
>> His calculation was that it was about the same price as keeping one Mac and upgrading every 5 years.
I considered that at one point, and it would have made sense based on prices alone, but it didn't work at all once I factored in having to pay sales tax on a brand-new Mac each year, and the cut eBay takes on a sale, and the fact that the eBay buyer also has to pay sales tax.
If I lived in a state with no sales tax, and could rely on selling locally with Facebook Marketplace or something, then I'd totally do it just for the infinite warranty coverage alone!
Still bugs me that states charge sales tax even on used items. It just seems wrong.
Yes VAT is a better system.
Usually you'd find people asking for 4 to 6k$
Damn, this is the dealbreaker for me.
Leasing an unlocked iPhone and being able to use my current $25/mo MVNO of choice (US Mobile) may have actually tempted me (I currently buy outright and then tell myself I'll sell my current phone when I upgrade, but in reality I just have iPhone graveyard at home.)
"For iPhone only: In order to lease an iPhone, you must select an eligible carrier (but you cannot use a prepaid carrier plan). A leased iPhone is always unlocked, so you can switch carriers at any time, subject to your carrier’s terms."
So it... is unlocked? I am also on US Mobile and don't want to leave it
With hardware prices increasing, selling financially challenged people on 'cheap' monthly payments seem like one way to keep the stock price pumped at these levels.
I guess they are one of the good trillion corporations though?
https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/article/apple-tops-5-tr...
I feel like some people are ignoring the fact that "financially challenged people" have always been paying monthly payments for their phones via their carrier's lease programs, which are very popular and have been a thing since the first iPhone.
People need phones, this is a good program.
> I guess they are one of the good trillion corporations though?
This but unironically
They were probably using credit cards at 29% to buy the exact same phones that are now 0%
Net net it’s a win
I know a lot of people use postpaid, but I can't understand why. I'd challenge anyone to justify that decision, given that the phone "deals" are rarely even much of a subsidy as opposed to a financing scheme that acts as a contract, and the plans cost about triple what I pay every month, for fewer features and equivalent at best priority and speeds.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2023/06/15/apple-card-financing-sim-free...
I subscribe to /r/NoContract/ so I have a pretty good idea what's out there.
Visible+ is a comparable pre-paid plan, it's $29/mo but that's a teaser rate and to keep it past one year, you'd have to port out and port back in for whatever deal they have in one year. The normal price is $35/mo, so I'm beating that. (Visible would also mean managing 4 separate accounts since they have no multi-line plans.)
Total Wireless is a bit cheaper ($26/mo) but I keep reading terrifying customer service issues with them including most recently losing number during the porting process.
Aside, I briefly used US Mobile earlier this year to port a VoIP line to Google Voice (GV will only port-in mobile numbers). US Mobile's customer service is exceptional. Would recommend them heartily for pre-paid service. But they don't currently beat what I'm getting from Verizon post-paid. I'd consider them if I can't keep my loyalty discounts next year.
Another thing to note about Visible+ is that if you have an Apple Watch with cellular and want to use that with your plan there is absolutely no reason to consider Visible+.
Watch support can be added for $10/mo but that brings the total to the same as their highest level plan, Visible+ Pro, which includes watch support. That plan is $45/mo $450/year ($37.50/mo) and promotional discounts run out.
As far as I was able to tell, Visible+ Pro is the best or very close to the best deal for people who want Apple Watch support in the US and only want one line. You can get lower prices per line on postpaid plans with multiple lines but if you will only have one the postpaid plans are ridiculous (even before you add in watch support).
Important: Does this include taxes and the many "regulatory offset fees" or whatever they call them? My numbers do include everything.
Looks like that plan[1] offers 30GB of mobile hotspot. I get 50GB.
The Unlimited Plus throttles video by default to either 480p, unless you're in a UWB (mmWave?) tower you get 720p. You can get "up to 720p" even on "plain" 5G by adjusting a setting though. My plan does the same default as well, but when I adjust a setting, I get unthrottled video.
You get 50% off a data plan for a watch, which looks like is a $10 plan? So $5 add-on for a watch. My plan includes a watch for free.
It doesn't look like you get international roaming with Unlimited Plus. I get 20GB of roaming in 125 countries in my plan. I've used it, it works great.
And to get the rate you're talking about, you have to buy 4 lines. No problem for you, but it's notable that singletons pay $80 (with autopay) for that plan. Mine is $32.50 since I pay annually (actually it was less because I paid during a sale, but I don't want to make claims that aren't easily available anytime). I don't have to ever call and threaten them to stay at $32.50 because that's the full price.
Anyway, that's US Mobile as you may have guessed - and that's their best, Unlimited Premium plan.
Oh, I also pay an extra $10 a month to add a second eSim on a different network, a feature they offer. It uses your same allowances (for me, hotspot is the only thing that's metered anyway) but means that I can hop between AT&T and Verizon towers at will. You can also just port your main line to a different network at any time, if you just decide that you want to. They support all three US networks.
[1] https://www.verizon.com/support/unlimited-plus-faqs/
Yes. Breakdown per line:
I realize that there are pre-paid plans out there with various options some people find essential like Apple Watch or Hotspot or International roaming or whatever. I don't need any of that. You asked why anyone would choose post paid. For me it's because the pre-paid options aren't better for my needs and not really any cheaper.FWIW, for years I was a Verizon employee and had a 50% discount which is why I started post-paid. They also have the best service in my area. I'm no longer an employee so they treat me like any other customer and I'd pay full price but for the loyalty discounts.
But you don't need to be a former employee to get those. You just need to haggle with customer service once a year. Some years all I have to do is unlock the line and ask for the porting code and they immediately text me a discount.
Still, thanks for pointing it out.
It is hard to get eSIM to work, but they have good customer service (but you need accses to a phone to call them, so you should try something like textnow or Google Voice) which helped my friend set it up.
It is not a intruductory offers, AFIK.
I check with people that come around or in random stores if they can beat it, alas they cannot.
Two reasons: data caps and device cost.
People want iPhones but they cost $1000 outright which isn't a small amount of cash these days so they roll the cost of the device into their monthly bill. The average consumer also doesn't understand how mobile data versus 802.11 works - their kid doesn't activate Wi-Fi on their phone or download anything, they see a large number with "GB" on the end, and they pay whatever is necessary to keep the Instagram scrolling and Disney+ flowing.
Buying an iPhone outright, flipping the old one every few years (they hold their value well) and using a $30 a month 10GB plan is doable if you have money and are savvy enough to download podcasts and use your home's AP for data.
Carriers certainly aren't incentivized to educate consumers better since they'd rather make money on device installments and milk them for hundreds of dollars a month because they "have a large family and need a lot of data". Home broadband marketing is even worse - why a family of four "needs" 500 Mbps down is absolutely beyond me. In an ideal society this type of consumer literacy would be taught in school but I'm not holding my breath.
If you really can settle for 10GB though, you could do it for even less.
I can see how some people feel like the phone financing is something they need if they have cash flow problems and trouble accessing credit, but boy do those postpaid carriers make you pay for it, both in the payments themselves, AND in the plan itself costing more than twice as much what I pay even if you've finished paying off your phone payments.
> Financing available to qualified customers, subject to credit approval and credit limit, and requires you to select Citizens One Apple iPhone Payments or Apple Card Monthly Installments (ACMI) as your payment type at checkout at Apple. In order to buy an iPhone with ACMI, you must select one of the following carriers (but you cannot use a prepaid carrier plan): AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon. An iPhone purchased with ACMI is always unlocked, so you can switch carriers at any time, subject to your carrier’s terms.
They’re discontinuing this and replacing it with Apple Upgrade, which is structured as a lease. Apple owns the device and you make payments. You either return the device or buy it out at the end.
The distinction probably doesn’t matter much to the typical consumer, other than the final price differences. Some people have an emotional attachment to knowing they own the phone instead of leasing it (I’m emotionally attached to this position, however illogical) but in the end it comes down to having a device in your hand for a monthly payment.
Your monthly payments stopping and you own a device is a world apart from your ability to pay monthly ends, and, unless you can find $x hundred dollars, you need to roll onto a new monthly lease.
Mathematically there might not be much in it from a $in/out perspective, but for people who don’t have large disposable incomes the reality is they are vastly different
Instead of automatically owning the device after making all payments, you can choose return/upgrade/buy it at the end of the lease. The new program is backed by Klarna instead of Citizens Bank, uses a soft credit check, and no longer includes AppleCare+ by default.
The fact that the page is not particularly clear about any of this should tell you everything you need to know about this change.
On the one hand that gives users an option.
On the other hand, that is a way to hide a price increase. Also, those doing this are almost obliged to take AppleCare, as (https://www.apple.com/shop/apple-upgrade):
“What do I do if my device gets lost or is stolen?
If you have AppleCare+ Theft and Loss for your iPhone, iPad, or Apple Watch, you can file a claim at mysupport.apple.com/theftandloss.
If you don't have AppleCare+ Theft and Loss coverage and your device is stolen or lost, you'll need to close out your lease by paying the early termination fee or choose to pay the purchase option fee (plus any applicable taxes and fees). You can do that at an Apple Store, or through the Klarna app. You can then start a new lease with Apple Upgrade, finance with Apple, or buy your next device with a one-time payment.
You will continue to be charged your monthly lease payments until you either pay the early termination fee or purchase option fee. If you take no action, Klarna will continue to charge you your monthly lease payment through the extension period, and you will be charged the purchase option fee through Klarna.”
So if the target demographic, the person that does not have money to buy an iPhone outright, is mugged, they need to essentially buy the iPhone outright or they start racking up interest and fees.
(I don’t care if they say the target demographic is “people who upgrade every 2 years” instead. If that were really the case, you don’t need financing, just a buy-back program)
With this program, you can either pay a lump sum to cancel the lease early, or you can continue making monthly payments, but at the 24-month mark, since you can’t return the phone, you’ll still owe them $430.
Giving people the option to not buy insurance is not evil. It's just a seller giving a buyer options at different price points.
Also, no more leasing/renting cars, or really any kind of borrowing at all, as people should not have the option to become liable in the future, for anything. Because if a $1,000 to $2,000 lease puts them in a spiral of debt slavery, anything more than that surely will.
If they had the money to buy the phone outright, they would probably buy it outright.
Looks like a recession indicator to me.
You'll own nothing and you'll feel weird about it.
Permanent "leasers" swap devices every few years, stocking the company's second-hand options and increasing average lifetime value of the participating products.
You can stick that in your closet for one hell of an agent playground.
A standard $33 server has trash specs by comparison.
Esp if you can swing a battery replacement at 2 years
Even if you are upgrading every single year, it works out roughly the same to just buy every phone outright and then trade in last year's model -- you typically get ~half your purchase price back as trade-in value after a year anyway.
Why haven't I upgraded? Because there's no mini and all they make are phablets now.
It doesn’t look like Apple will be going back to something smaller than the 17e. Unless you count the upcoming foldable, which while shorter than the mini, however is also wider, thicker and heavier.
Getting very expensive Mac hardware leased is where the juice is. As well as normalising subscription revenue and you own nothing of course, but the interesting dynamic will be shifting 10k hardware to developers that wouldn’t have considered dropping 10k on their setup
Presumably this ability means that Klarna has a lower risk of nonpayment, and is willing to accept a smaller cut of the total price from Apple.
1: https://9to5mac.com/2026/07/21/ios-27-code-suggests-apple-co...
Reads to me like there’s code that could be that, but it’s not certain.
This is all a relative scale though. But if we're looking at smartphones specifically, I'd argue Apple has been the least force obsolescence of anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some smaller manufacturer niche cases that surpass it.
1. New customers: lower barrier to entry, try, or switch into the ecosystem.
2. Loyal customers: Upgrade propensity is increased as friction decreases.
3. Innovators: offers options for those who want to try a model, but might later change their minds for something that better suits them.
All this increases exposure and engagement to the brand, which translates to increasing sales and revenue.
They have Apple Card so presumably they are capable of providing financial services like loans on their own, why bring in a third party who will take a cut and force your consumers onto their app with a bad reputation?
Apple Card is the result of a co-branding deal between Apple and Goldman Sachs (which is currently in the process of exiting the deal and being replaced in that capacity by JPMorgan Chase). Apple provides the branding and some minor fintech features; Goldman (or in the future Chase) issues the card and is on the hook if people don't pay their credit card bill.
Presumably for this particular program using Klarna was cheaper because Klarna already specializes in precisely this kind of transaction.
I think Apple gets sweetheart deals so their partners often lose money. Klarna likely sees this as a marketing coup to have their predatory sussness promoted by the Apple halo brand.
If there was profit to be had, I'm sure Apple could buy a small bank and spin it off as a subsidiary with little drama, it's just not the best of their options.
https://www.apple.com/shop/apple-upgrade
It looks like this leasing program is just moving into a more generic/Apple-wide offering... not sure if the fine print changes.
[edit: from the comments, it sounds like the difference is it was previously 0% interest financing and no longer is]
Now it's just a normal lease product with a 0% money factor through Klarna, that also works across Apple.
What this does is gives Apple more "price flexibility" (aka, they can raise prices more easily, which was probably a lot of the driver for this), but also gives consumers more buying power flexibility since it's a simple product that works across the board rather than a bizarre iPhone specific optimized financial instrument.
1. Consider trying other brands
2. Pass on their existing (still quite capable) phone to a family member (taking him/her out of the purchasing loop)
3. Stick with the existing model for longer as they don't find a compelling reason to upgrade.
In any case, doesn't this sound like an insane contract for Klarna to have signed? It's freaking Apple. Mind blowing deal for a buy-now-pay-later company to sign. Imagine being in the chain for an Apple product. What a coup.
Does this replace that as well?
Ideally I think a reasonable price for a phone, for my use case, is around $200 (incl. my 25% VAT). That leave me with the option of getting a really shitty Android phone with an operating system from a company I have zero trust in or pay slight more than I'd like for a four year old and use iPhone with an operating system I trust ever so slightly more.
For people like me, who view a smart phone as a necessary annoyance there are very few options. The few apps I have and need aren't running on open source operating system and modern society has decided to make my life rather hard with out those apps.
Right now I'm using a 2nd generation iPhone SE, it solves the same problems that my iPhone 6 did and I don't see how an iPhone 17 would make parking, mobile payments or charging my car any easier. People keep talking about how good the cameras have become, yet they don't even bother switching to portrait mode when taking pictures of people close up. When we're out my photos are often then ones people ask for and use, because I actually spend a few minutes on it, yet my phone have the shittier camera!
Local prices around me always seem weirdly high - I sort ebay by cheapest price+shipping, match that, and that usually puts me cheaper than 90% of local listings and gets me plenty of interest.
TBH I'm not clear on why anybody outside of rural areas is selling on ebay for non-niche things.
1) Digital goods, so very little friction. 2) No liquidity locally so you go to the large market. 3) Selling large volume. 4) Some third party to verify payment when it's not cash.
There are more and more alternatives though.
[1] https://www.ifixit.com/News/94386/the-truth-about-apples-fre...
Think of it from Apple's perspective: You sell a phone for $1,100 and get a 37%[1] margin on it, so that's a $407 profit margin, and a $693 cost to make it.
That phone gets Apple $768 in lease payments according to their site.
Then they take the phone back from the user at 2 years old. EBay shows 2-year-old iPhone 15 Pros going for about $400 so let's assume the wholesale prices is $300.
So Apple has the old phone and can sell it for $300 pure profit before tax or $237 after 21% federal tax, but they know that its existence will displace a new iPhone sale somewhere. Or they can declare it as "too damaged to resell" and shred it, probably take a tax deduction (for the official residual of $332? I'm not sure) for that loss, offsetting $70 of taxes elsewhere, and (very very important point here) because they know they'll sell one incremental new phone, they can expect to have an additional $1100 of topline revenue to show, and another $407 gross profit that they get to book.
Sell it: $237 - $70 opportunity cost of tax deduction they don't get = +$167 to gross profit, Shred it: +$1100 topline, +$407 in gross profit, +$70 in EBITDA.
I'm not a real accountant so I'm sure a few of these figures are off, but I think my main point is valid: Since Apple's main motivation is to increase their stock price, they may benefit more from shrinking the aftermarket than they would from harvesting the value of the old iPhone.
This logic does depend on an additional working semi-late-model iPhone finding its way into the hand of a person, or there being a chain of people, at the end of which having someone who won't buy a brand new iPhone this year, but I think it's hard to argue it doesn't.
[1] https://axis-intelligence.com/apple-statistics/
[2] https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-17-pro?purchase...
Note that in your earlier link they are shredding non-working phones that need repair, so those residual values are closer to scrap value. That's different.
Unless you are happy with Apple or Google literally owning your phone and everything in it, the solution is to buy a Pixel, with cash, unlock the bootloader, and flash GrapheneOS.
[0] https://9to5mac.com/2023/09/01/csam-scanning-flaw/
My MacBook Pro was over $6,000 refurbished, and this was before Apple raised prices. There's not really a point in financing smaller purchases that you can just buy outright.
https://9to5mac.com/2026/07/21/ios-27-code-suggests-apple-co...
It will be curious to see if the first Klarna defaults will start triggering a future Restricted Mode on the phone and the parts get blacklisted from re-use.
I assume certain apps will get an entitlement from Apple to enable/disable this on the device.
edit: confirmed they aren't... yet.
https://www.theverge.com/tech/972063/apple-upgrade-program-n...
that's a bit of a deal-breaker for me, at least for the ipad.
Why would I tie up $1,200 upfront in a device that’s going to be obsolete in a couple of years when I can spread the cost over time, preserve cash flow, and (if it’s a legitimate business expense) deduct the lease payments?
Keeping $1,200 in my business earning a return is often worth more than prepaying for a depreciating asset.
People happily lease $80,000 vehicles for exactly these reasons. Applying the same logic to a $1,200 phone isn’t irrational, just the same financing decision at a much smaller scale.
There's no interest, no fees. The total lease price (if you buy out at the end) is the same as the retail price. There's no downside to it at all.
If you are someone who upgrades annually, you're now paying ~$599 split over 12 payments vs. ~$1199 up front and either trading in or trying to sell your last gen privately. It works out to about even on a trade-in->upgrade every year cycle, only you don't have to fork over the $600 up front.
I don't think anyone will ever excercise the buyout option since the phone will never be worth more than the buyout price. And like you're saying, this program does not make sense unless you are upgrading every single year.
I mean in any case, every option looks defensible once you've accepted the premise that you need a new phone every 12 months. Any minute differences in costs are just rounding errors. Like I really don't think someone upgrading every year is going to have a significantly different retirement income because they saved $1200 every year by not buying the iphone outright. It's really just a convenience thing, not a financial decision.
they literally say you will pay large fees in those cases. it’s basically self insuring.
Well, kinda. Various vehicles have fleet-only trim levels that are the cheapest models available. The reasons that you'd lease a $80k Ford F-150 Raptor are somewhat different than the reasons that you'd lease a $39k F-150 XL.
The entire point of the iPhone Upgrade Program was to make it painless to swap to the newest iPhone every year. Without that, there's no value proposition.
Especially if you're someone who upgrades every year. 12 month option on a 17PM works out to ~$599 for the year vs. $1199 each year. $599 is roughly what you'd pay for each years new model assuming you trade in your previous gen each time, so at worst it's even with what an annual upgrader was paying already, at best you might make out a little better (assuming you are just doing trade-ins and not private sale).
There's no interest or fees, and you get to buy it out at the end if you want to own it, and the lease price is the same as the retail price, I see no downside.
The iUP was better about giving the choice to just buy it out at the end. This one is more rigid:
>Terminating your Apple Upgrade Lease: Closing your lease and returning your device terminates your lease. You may incur substantial fees if you terminate your lease before the end of your initial lease term. You may have the option to upgrade to a new device by entering into a new lease agreement and returning your prior device. If you upgrade, your new monthly payments may be greater than your prior monthly payments. If you do not upgrade, terminate your lease, or purchase your device by the end of the initial lease term, the lease will convert to a month-to-month lease for up to six months. Your monthly payments may increase during the month-to-month periods. If you take no action at the end of your extension period, you will be charged the purchase fee under your lease. You will not own your device at the end of your lease, unless you pay the purchase fee. Insurance is not included in your lease, and you may incur damage fees if the device is lost, stolen, or not returned in the condition required by the lease.
Partnering with Klarna explains it quite a bit. They make money on penalties. This new plan has all sorts of sticks it will beat you with if you stray off the path, so it's perfect for them.
Pay $32/mo (so $770 total) to use an iPhone for two years and then give it back to Apple.
This is truly the most dystopian timeline.
At the end of your device lease term, you have an option to buy out your leased device. With the buy out cost being equal to the device sticker price minus the amount you had already paid on your lease.
This seems pretty fair to me tbh.
Why? Leasing has always been an option that some people and businesses prefer, depending on the circumstances. It’s commonly done with cars. In business situations leasing can be very common because it works well with your cash flow and doesn’t require taking more debt on your books.
You can buy out the item at the end of the lease term. Some people like this optionality because they get to defer the purchase decision into the future and benefit from any new information, like whether or not a new iPhone is worth upgrading to or how the battery is holding up.
> Radio Rentals was the largest television rental group in the UK and claimed that at its peak it had more than two million customers, more than 500 shops, 3,600 technicians, 2,700 skilled installers and a large ancillary staff. It had sales and service locations across the UK; the Radio Rentals logo being a common sight on many High Streets.
Until the 1980s almost all telephones in the US were rented from the phone company.
Renting isn’t some strange uncharted territory — owning a phone is the new concept.
Also calling the latest iPhone “basic consumer electronics” is out of touch. The budget options are older generation iPhones or other phones, not one of the most expensive brands on the market.
The way things are going, in the future I can see device makers deciding that a lease-only model might be preferable, both for recurring revenue and deeper control. If you don’t own your device, you can’t complain too loudly about right to repair, device restrictions, or software end-of-life.
A lease model would also prevent resale, so devices could be “verified” as belonging to a particular person for their entire lifetime. This simplifies the various verified identity schemes.
A lease model means that your lease could be revoked and your device bricked if you violate the terms. To “ensure good behavior”.
> While our customers have loved the iPhone Upgrade Program, we’re always looking for ways to give them more flexibility, better value, and a more seamless experience.
If I were malicious dictator for life, there would be a special section in my gulags for the people who write copy that entails telling customers it's raining while pissing on them.