Why the iPhone 16 Pro Max actually costs $200,000

Here’s an interesting article I read in French, translated in English by Safari.

Written by Nicolas Bérubé

Every week, I talk about finance here using words like “millionaire”, and I give examples of investments that may seem light years away from the reality of many people who are just trying to pay their credit card balance on time.

Sometimes, I put myself in the place of a young or old reader, who says to himself: "OK, but what does that mean to me? How does that speak to me? "

The answer is that it doesn’t speak to him at all, to this reader. Reading about money when you start from zero, or near zero, is a bit like looking into binoculars through the big end: what you can distinguish seems tiny and impossible to grasp.

That’s why this week, I would like to talk to you about the iPhone 16 Pro Max.

I have nothing against the iPhone 16 Pro Max. It seems to be a great phone.

I just want to say how much it costs, because it’s not written on the label.

The iPhone 16 Pro Max costs more than $200,000.

How do I get to this amount?

Let’s imagine that a young 20-year-old adult decides this week that he needs an iPhone 16 Pro Max (does it seem that I like to write iPhone 16 Pro Max?).

This young adult, let’s call him Yves, works hard. He doesn’t have much luxury in his life. So having a good phone seems to be the thing to do.

On Bell’s website, Yves will see that the iPhone 16 Pro Max, bought to be replaced every two years, with the cheapest package, costs $127 per month plus taxes, but let’s ignore the taxes in this example.

“I earn a lot more than $127 a month, even while I’m in school,” he said. It’s an expense I can afford. "

Yves decides to get started. Every two years, he changes his phone to have a new one.

How much does all this cost him? Probably a thousand and a few dollars a year, says Yves. In fact, he doesn’t really know. It’s just a phone.

Now imagine a 20-year-old young adult a little more curious, let’s say Nina. Nina understood that her silver inputs are valuable.

By digging a little, she realizes that she can buy a refurbished iPhone 13 on eBay or Marketplace for $400.

She also finds a plan at Public mobile at $23 per month for 6 gigabytes, with unlimited texting and calls.

By changing her phone every four years, Nina realizes that it costs her a total of $376 per year, or $31 per month.

So $127 per month for Yves, and $31 per month for Nina. Let’s round the difference between Yves and Nina to $100 per month.

We are talking here about two adults who could be colleagues, friends. Their level of happiness will vary. But their phone will not contribute very positively or negatively to their satisfaction with life.

Studies on the subject are clear: our possessions do not give us happiness in a lasting way because we get used to them and they stop fascinating us. Researchers have a term for this: hedonic adaptation.

In short, the difference is that Nina will have $100 per month in her pockets that Yves will no longer have.

Nina knows that the best way to invest is to put it on autopilot. It therefore schedules a transfer every 1st of the month from its bank account to its TELI account in an investment platform such as Wealthsimple, for example. His $100 is automatically invested in a “growth” fund with a modest management fee, such as BMO’s ZGRO funds, BlackRock’s XGRO, or Vanguard’s VGRO.

One hundred dollars per month invested from the age of 20 to 65 years gives more than $200,000 in investments if we assume a 5% annual return – not at all assured, but the stock markets have experienced an annualized growth of more than 7% for several generations. And it takes inflation into account, because prices will increase, but the savings gap between Yves and Nina for the phone will also increase.

But this is just the beginning.

As the majority of people will live together, and combine their finances, we can double the amounts in this example.

So a couple could have more than $400,000 in non-taxable investments in their TFSALs on the eve of retirement. All this for having found a better price for his phone, and having learned the simple basics of investment.

The idea is not to make anyone feel guilty, but to understand. Understand where our money goes. Understand how money makes money. Understand that you don’t get rich by renting your hours. Even at a high price. Even when you are a lawyer or doctor.

We get rich by investing.

As actor Frederick Matthias Alexander once said: "People don’t decide their future. They decide their habits, and their habits decide their future. "

We are all born financially illiterate. Our task is to eliminate this condition. Our parents, friends, university professors, our employer or the kind employee of the Apple store will not eliminate him for us.

My example is a simple phone. I’m not talking about the hundreds of other decisions and habits, such as choosing a vehicle, the size of the house, living near or far from work, favoring the bike, solo or public transport, going to a restaurant three times a month or three times a week, spending Saturday at the mall, the park or the library…

And so I ask you the question: if we found $200,000 in the phone, how much would we find in all this?

3 Likes

This is the same argument as getting a cup of coffee everyday, just changing up the “luxury” item. This goes for literally everything in life. It’s not a bad argument, and is good advice for many people, but it also goes a little too far in my opinion.

You would never buy anything if you thought this way (but if that works for you, great). Save and invest first. Buy the fun stuff with what is left over. Of course that doesn’t work for a large portion of the population, but phones are only part of the problem,

My young neighbors, who were obviously not very well off, used to get food ordered in every day. I always wanted to tell them that maybe they could have some nice things if they stopped wasting their money. :slight_smile:

7 Likes

TLDR; Be smart with your money. Prioritize saving as early on as possible.

On the other hand, don’t die with a huge bank balance and few luxuries.

And -1 for using the iPhone as clickbait.

6 Likes

I upgrade when the phone needs it, which is ually 5 years. If it’s 5 years my phone costs €1700 so that’s €28 a month.

I hate these types of articles that make calculations based on insane turnover of devices.

4 Likes

This is one example of long term investing. I didn’t get serious about investing until I was nearly 40. If I had started 10 years sooner I would likely have 2X the amount saved.

Not bad advice, IMO.

1 Like

That last statement isn’t necessarily even true. It’s not guaranteed to be true or untrue, but somebody that’s still going to be running an iPhone 13 when the iPhone 20 is rolling out is almost certainly missing out on at least some features and functionality that might be legitimate benefits to them.

Hedonic adaptation is definitely a thing, but it doesn’t mean that better stuff never improves our lives - it means that our “baseline” tends to adjust to our current condition. The trick isn’t to become an ascetic and ditch all of the shiny new stuff because “it won’t make us happy,” but rather to learn to appreciate what we have.

Also, just to nitpick…the title would more accurately be:

“Why the iPhone 16 Pro Max, iPhone 18 Pro Max, iPhone 20 Pro Max, iPhone 22 Pro Max, iPhone 24 Pro Max, iPhone 26 Pro Max, iPhone 28 Pro Max, iPhone 30 Pro Max, iPhone 32 Pro Max, iPhone 34 Pro Max, iPhone 36 Pro Max, iPhone 38 Pro Max, iPhone 40 Pro Max, iPhone 42 Pro Max, iPhone 44 Pro Max, iPhone 46 Pro Max, iPhone 48 Pro Max, iPhone 50 Pro Max, iPhone 52 Pro Max, iPhone 54 Pro Max, iPhone 56 Pro Max, iPhone 58 Pro Max, & iPhone 60 Pro Max collectively cost over $200,000”

:smiley:

2 Likes

I can honestly say that I’ve not found one reason to replace my iPhone 11. Even the battery is good for 24 - 30+ hours.

Phone is now something not totally material because you have more and more content creation like taking photos, writing and note taking. Replacing your phone with the latest model may enhance its experience and meaning.

But now the phone has become more mature so the latest model has become less appealing and I believe people will change their phones less and less often.

2 Likes

I had my 11 until I got my 15. I’m a heavy user of podcasts/music, so the battery would run down much faster than I would prefer. The 15 is much better for my use case.

I figure 3-4 years is a perfectly-fine upgrade timeframe.

1 Like

I can’t tolerate this fashion for ridiculous clickbait headlines - they nearly always head some smarmy “if only everyone was as smart as me” copy. As in this case.

2 Likes

It was the actual title of the newspaper article, and it correctly reflects its content. The journalist explains how he came to that amount. I don’t see how it is deceptive or misleading. So I don’t believe its clickbait.

1 Like

An iPhone does not cost $200000.

Assume an iPhone costs $2000, then one would have to buy 100 to spend $200K. Buying a new iPhone every two years would thus take one 200 years to spend that much on iPhones.

Thus the title is click bait.

A more accurate title, along the lines of spend wisely and start saving early, would methinks not have generated as many clicks.

Thus while the underlying premise is a good one, and even using a smartphone as a concrete example was sound, the title was selected for maximum clicks.

And not because it accurately reflects the price of the iPhone.

3 Likes

It a poor article to say the least and rolls out a worst case scenario using certain assumptions. It’s also using two discrete ideas in an area which isn’t common. 1) new phones cost more than refurbs, and 2) If you invest early you get significant benefits long term.

If the Article headline was “Choosing an iPhone 16 could cost you $1200 more a year a refurbished iPhone 13” very few would read it. The headline used is the very definition of clickbait. An overblown statement which tempts people to read the article.

The same article could be made for many things people regularly buy which they don’t “need” e.g. Coffee shop coffee, fast food, overpowered cars (you can only drive 70MPH legally in the UK, why do you need a car that goes 150MPH). But Apple and iPhones draw attention.

In all, the article should have been “If you save $100 a month and invest it, in 40 years you could have $200,000” But that’s not interesting enough to generate people opening the article. He even pretty much admits at the bottom of the article that the iPhone is incidental.

What is not mentioned is the human cost for those who work in mines and other places to obtain the metals used in all mobile phones not just Apple iPhones.

1 Like

Find me someone who actually spend $200K on a 16 pro max and I’ll agree with you. But you won’t.

2 Likes

Sounds good to me. I listen to podcasts & music too, but usually at home using my MBA or iPad, so my phone is mainly my communicator/organizer.

What’s with the vitriolic turn in this thread? It’s an old tactic to teach young people compound returns by telling them how much money they could make by saving now by cutting back. Surely you all have encountered it before in personal finance education.

Some other analogies I’ve liked:

  • investing the cost of a McChicken gets you a steak later
  • invest the cost of your soda and you can have a free case every day from dividends/own the machine/etc.
  • small apartment/house now is a free house later (okay, this one’s less believable in the last 10-20 years…)

I do not see how valid criticisms of how it was presented are “vitriolic”. But of course text is a low bandwidth medium when it comes to intent and emotion.

2 Likes

I thought “clickbait”, “poor article to say the least”, and “find me [deliberate misunderstanding], but you won’t” were kind of rude.

Curious, as I found then to be accurate criticisms.

2 Likes