Skip to main content

iPhone 5C Orders Slashed Due to Lowered Demand

Apple's move towards a "cheaper" iPhone has not proven as fruitful as it had hoped. The colorful blend of iPhone 5C models were supposed to be a more affordable version of the latest iPhone, but when they were launched back in September, the general hope for a low cost phone was dashed by the $550 non-subsidized price tag. Now Apple's hope has lost its color as it proceeded to announce plans to the supplier to cut orders, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The article claims that Pegatron and Foxconn were told to reduce their orders this quarter. Pegatron accounts for about two-thirds of all the iPhone 5C production, and was told to slice orders by "less than 20%." While Foxconn accounts for the remaining third of the production line, it received an almost 30 percent cut in expected orders.

While this information is certainly not good for Apple, it does come with the news that the expected orders for the iPhone 5S were increased above expectations, probably because the difference in features and performance between the iPhone 5C and 5S is well worth the $100 dollar margin that separates them. Do you think Apple was blindsided by their own enthusiasm for its "lower price margin" product, or could this trend be the beginning of something worse for Apple? Feel free to tell us what you think in the comments section below.

  • monsta
    Guess they could'nt find enough colorful people....
    Reply
  • JD88
    Does this really surprise anyone?

    $550 for specs that were low tier last year. Apple's usual model is to take last year's product and charge $100 less for it and call it a day. This year they did that, only made it even worse with plastic. Buying that would be moronic even for the typical iSheep.

    Reply
  • rwinches
    They are still selling a lot of 5Cs, the numbers are being held down because of existing stock of 5s, and the high figures for the 5Ss. I think 150k a day is still a lot of phones.
    I do think that the $100 differential was not enough, $150 or more would have been smarter, the target demo was China and there is no carrier discount so for $100 more you get the real thing.
    Reply
  • sean1357
    I like 5S better. New Apple A7 64bit dual-core 1.3Ghz is fastest chip for mobile on the market right now. Even better than Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 32bit quad-core 2.3Ghz chip. I thought Apple wants to stay away from ARM to go with FPGA chip? or maybe Intel?
    Reply
  • JD88
    11761835 said:
    I like 5S better. New Apple A7 64bit dual-core 1.3Ghz is fastest chip for mobile on the market right now. Even better than Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 32bit quad-core 2.3Ghz chip. I thought Apple wants to stay away from ARM to go with FPGA chip? or maybe Intel?

    Fastest running benchmarks on Apple hardware and iOS. It's not actually computing faster than the Snapdragon 800.

    Everyone forgets that the iPhone has a low resolution screen and iOS is optimized specifically for that chip.



    Reply
  • maddy143ded
    this proves that apple still went for higher margin on a low margin product. and fell flat on its face.it took last years Iphone 5, reduced its production costs further by going for cheaper plastic, and kept the price same...
    Reply
  • mrmez
    Apple "fell on its face"? LOL.

    20 days worth of 5c sales and Apple sees ~2.6 million units sold.
    If they net $50 profit per phone thats still $130 million profit in a fortnight.

    I wish I could fall on my face like that.

    "Lower than expected" is just that, it doesn't necessarily mean an unprofitable product.
    The fact Apple is selling MORE than expected 5s, which are obviously more profitable is great news for them.
    Reply
  • Leonardo L
    Wasn't that their purpose? By pricing them so close it was realistic to expect "reverse cannibalisation". When I saw the prices I immediately thought that 5c was a way for apple to protect the premium positioning of the 5s, by placing their cheaper version on the same level of the premium model of their competitors.
    Reply
  • halcyon
    I wonder what would have happened if they would have offered black and/or dark grey.
    Reply
  • killamike
    Wow, I expected more from Tom's... this is such pure fanbait. Apple supply chain rumours (and yes, they are rumours, no-one knows the exact details of Apple's supply chain except Apple) are firstly non-indicative of anything. Just because they cut orders from one supplier does not mean they didn't increase them from another. It could be a yield issue (one supplier providing better or worse yield than another).

    Another point is that with massively massive supply chain operations like this, these sorts of fluctuations are normal. Its normal for Apple to have high orders for the launch period of a device, when, naturally, the device sells the most units in a short time-space, then cut the order once the initial surge of sales passes.

    Yes, it "could" be due to lower than expected demand, but no-one outside of Apple management knows this, and to print it as a fact (in the headline no-less) is disingenuous at least and a flat out lie at the worst. This is not journalism, its yellow pages "my husband was shafted by Aliens" type of fanboi clickbait.

    All we know is that Apple sold millions of the things (hardly a fail) and all other phone manufacturers (except maybe Samsung) would only dream to have that kind of "lowered demand".
    Reply