Actually I would say the biggest fail apple’s had in the last decade or so was probably the iPhone 5C. However, even that didn’t wind up losing them money I don’t think. They just overestimated how many people would pay for a lower end new phone vs choosing a previous version at the same price point.
The Apple iPhone 5c was not a failure except in the minds of some idiotic analysts who claimed that the second best selling smartphone in the world could possibly be a failure. In the year they were being sold, the best selling single model of smartphone in the world was the Apple iPhone 5s, followed by the Apple iPhone 5c, the Samsung S5 was third and then the Apple iPhone 4s was fourth best selling smartphone. That is no way a failure.
Even in the first weekend of sales, The analysts who were claiming that were expecting Apple to offer the 5c as a very low cost iPhone, under $250 or even lower. When they didn't, pricing it only $100 less than the 5s, these analysts pronounced it a failure for not meeting their desired goal of becoming the number one seller. They were convinced that Apple could seize humungous market share if only they would compete on price. . . and they hung their hopes on the "low cost" iPhone 5c being the market grabber. It was only a failure for NOT beine the market share grabbing iPhone they wanted it to be, even though outselling every other smartphone except the iPhone 5s.
Earlier in the week, I posted an article about the possibility that Apple was shifting its primary sales focus away from per device profit, and more toward grabbing more marketshare with devices that generate less revenue per sale. In hindsight after Apple’s big reveal, I was dead wrong. It was just a theory, and one that seemed to make sense at the time. It was an opinion that many other tech bloggers and pundits shared. But that doesn’t make it any less wrong.The short version of what I thought would happen was that Apple would release a colorful new iPhone that would sell for much less than usual for an iOS device off contract. This phone would be more competitive in the rest of the developed world, as well as China and India, where the majority of users pay full price for unlocked phones. I wasn’t predicting a “cheap” iPhone, mind you. I knew it would be a high quality, well made device that would just have fewer features and cost less. In short, I was thinking of an iPhone that would replace the iPhone 4S at the low end of the line, while Apple would sell the iPhone 5 in the middle, and the new 5S at the high end.
As we now know, Apple had something very different in mind. The iPhone 5C is obviously not about marketshare. It is actually about taking Apple’s current profit per device strategy even further. The 5C actually ended up replacing the 5 in the middle of the lineup, $100 cheaper than the 5S with a two year contract, and priced at a higher than expected $549 off contract for the 16 GB model. This news was a big letdown to a lot of people anxious for a more affordable iPhone, but I believe that Apple will make a killing off the 5C in the end. Here are the reasons why — SOURCE:iSource— The iPhone 5C isn’t about marketshare after all — James Rogers — September 16, 2013
In the first quarter the iPhone 5s and 5c were available, the 5s sold 16.5 million and the 5c sold 11.6 million. Again, that is not the sign of a failure.
The Apple iPhone 5C is still being sold on the Apple Store and also in many 3rd world countries. That is not the sign of a failed model.