Apple cuts trade-in values for iPhones, Macs, iPads, and more

[Polycount]

In context: The process of upgrading a smartphone is always exciting. You get to enjoy the look, feel, features, and speed of a brand-new device, without the need to worry about degraded battery capacity, app bloat, our outdated hardware. However, there's always the question of what to do with your old phone. Do you trade it in to the manufacturer, or attempt to get a better deal by selling it to a third-party?

The decision is tough -- there are pros and cons associated with either choice. Trading your device in is fast, reliable, and convenient (usually), whereas haggling with the average Craigslist buyer is just the opposite. However, the cash amounts companies offer for used devices are often quite a bit lower than their street prices.

You might spend close to $1,000 on a new phone and only get a few hundred dollars back (if that) via an official trade-in. Still, some people are willing to take the hit if it saves them time and effort. If you're an Apple customer who falls into that camp, we may have some disappointing news for you today: as spotted by MacRumors on Friday, the already-rough trade-in values for Apple's devices just got a bit worse.

Several devices, from smartphones to tablets to MacBooks, have seen trade-in value reductions, and many (but not all) are quite noticeable. To name a more extreme example, the XS Max can now be sent to Apple for a maximum payout of $500, down from $600.

The standard iPhone XS has seen a similar value cut: it'll trade in for $420 instead of its previous $500. Then there's the iPhone XR, which is now worth up to $300 instead of $370. Other, older iPhones have received more modest value cutbacks (ranging from $20 to $50).

As we pointed out a moment ago, it's not just smartphones that Apple is offering less money for. The iMac Pro is worth $90 less now ($4150, down from $4240), and an iPad Pro trade-in will net you a maximum of $220, $70 less than its previous $290 value.

To be clear, we're not bashing Apple for this decision -- not too much, anyway. It might be unfortunate for consumers, but reducing trade-in values is a tidy (if controversial) way for Apple to squeeze in some extra quarterly savings with minimal effort. It's also worth noting that most of the devices mentioned above are a couple years old now, and smartphones depreciate in value just like most other products on the market.

Regardless, if you have any thoughts on this news, feel free to leave them in the comments below. Do you think Apple is right to reduce trade-in values over time, or should they have remained the same for a bit longer?

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/83509-apple-cuts-trade-values-iphones-macs-ipads-more.html

 

[VitalyT]

I'm still using Macbook Pro 15" top spec from Dec 2013, which works without any problem, and in perfect condition. And I was about to order the new Macbook Pro 16" yesterday, for 3,279 euro. But when Apple offered me 220 euro for my current one, I just could not swallow it, and cancelled the purchase. Back in the day I paid about 3,000 euro for it, and it never broke down. And 220 euro feels like throwing away a perfectly good premium product. Screw that!

 

[Uncle Al]

Just another great reason to buy others .... any others products!

 

[Lew Zealand]

I'm still using Macbook Pro 15" top spec from Dec 2013, which works without any problem, and in perfect condition. And I was about to order the new Macbook Pro 16" yesterday, for 3,279 euro. But when Apple offered me 220 euro for my current one, I just could not swallow it, and cancelled the purchase. Back in the day I paid about 3,000 euro for it, and it never broke down. And 220 euro feels like throwing away a perfectly good premium product. Screw that!

Yup, I use a 15" 2013 MacBook Pro and the value of that machine today, 6 years later, far exceeds 220 euros.

 

[Hardware Geek]

I'm still using Macbook Pro 15" top spec from Dec 2013, which works without any problem, and in perfect condition. And I was about to order the new Macbook Pro 16" yesterday, for 3,279 euro. But when Apple offered me 220 euro for my current one, I just could not swallow it, and cancelled the purchase. Back in the day I paid about 3,000 euro for it, and it never broke down. And 220 euro feels like throwing away a perfectly good premium product. Screw that!

They offer you less than you could get for it if you sold it on your own because they can get away with it. Consider it a convenience charge. Then they'll refurbish it, and by that I mean put it on the shelf the same way they found it, and maybe have deleted your data if you're lucky, for three times or more what you were given.

 

[onestepforward]

I'm still using Macbook Pro 15" top spec from Dec 2013, which works without any problem, and in perfect condition. And I was about to order the new Macbook Pro 16" yesterday, for 3,279 euro. But when Apple offered me 220 euro for my current one, I just could not swallow it, and cancelled the purchase. Back in the day I paid about 3,000 euro for it, and it never broke down. And 220 euro feels like throwing away a perfectly good premium product. Screw that!

You could have sold it privately for more and yet you chose not to do so. Seems like a bit of an unnecessary rant.

 

[captaincranky]

You could have sold it privately for more and yet you chose not to do so. Seems like a bit of an unnecessary rant.

That darned @VitalyT, imagine the nerve of that guy, wasting your precious time, nay verily all of our precious time, by making that superfluous, perhaps even off topic post. Shame on him!

But then again, after giving it "careful consideration", I'm thinking that if he hadn't made that post, it would have robbed you of the opportunity to talk down to him, or "condescend" over it.

One thing I did learn over the whole sordid affair, is the fact that "TS Booster", appears to be a euphemism for, "TS Staff". ? ? ?

 

[captaincranky]

OK Kidz, I know absolutely nothing about corporate finances or bookkeeping.

For example, I didn't know that you could lose money YoY, and still make a profit on every individual item you sell. It logically follows that the more cars you make a "profit" on selling, the more money you lose. (Yes, that's a hyperbole on my part, but not undeservingly so).But that's OK, because you sold each car at, "over the cost of building it"

Therewith endeth my confession of ignorance with regard to financial matters..

Moving on, Trump levied Tariffs on Chinese imports, the brunt of which he assured us, would be paid by China, (or so he says).

Now, Apple can't raise the prices on new merchandise, or it would be immediately apparent that the consumers were paying that fee.

Taking into account the corporate concept of, "taking money out of one pocket, and putting in another", it would seem that Apple has decided to pass the tariff onto its customers, on the back end of the sale.

In other words, the monies you would have had to put out additionally because of the tariff on the initial purchase, is now being accounted for, and deducted, at the time of trade in.. (And then some).

But yeah, I"m probably talking out of my back end.

 

[captaincranky]

I'm still using Macbook Pro 15" top spec from Dec 2013, which works without any problem, and in perfect condition. And I was about to order the new Macbook Pro 16" yesterday, for 3,279 euro. But when Apple offered me 220 euro for my current one, I just could not swallow it, and cancelled the purchase. ...[ ]...

However, due to extreme automation during fabrication, it follows that the cost of repairing an item, will far exceed the cost of building it in the first place.

Accordingly, the price threshold of what becomes "a throwaway item", increases year over year.

Consumers are bringing this on themselves, by constantly demanding, "thinner, lighter, more compact, and faster devices".

Unfortunately, by making those demands, you've given leave to Apple and others, to completely bypass "universal plug & play". Sic, "well you wanted "thinner, lighter, faster, and as a consequence, we had to solder the CPU and SSD, directly to the board.
To repair a device such as this, causes the repair cost to skyrocket, far in excess of any money you were offered as a trade in. The net result of which is a "fully operative write off".

Back in the day I paid about 3,000 euro for it, and it never broke down. And 220 euro feels like throwing away a perfectly good premium product. Screw that!...

As far as that goes, if the device will still do the job for which it was intended, in the amount of time allotted, there's no need to replace it at all.

Refusing the trade in offer, buying the new machine outright and keeping your current device as a backup, makes a whole lot more sense anyway, for any number of reasons.

Electronic devices, particularly computers, have the highest and fastest depreciation of virtually any technology on the planet. Next year's car won't be twice as fast, twice as safe, and twice as comfortable, but next year's computer might very well be, at least in some of those categories.

 

[VitalyT]

Actually, for me, that last straw for the camel was having to up memory from 16GB to 32GB, for 480 euro (533 USD), which is about 3.5 times what that memory is worth on the market.

 

[QuantumPhysics]

You'd be a fool to trade in to Apple. It's convenient to resell to Apple, but it's a waste of money. Trade on Ebay instead.

 

[OortCloud]

It seems that no matter how hard Apple shaft their loyal customers they just bend over a little further.

 

[captaincranky]

It seems that no matter how hard Apple shaft their loyal customers they just bend over a little further.

I still think this trade in price reduction, is intended to disguise any trade tariffs they might encounter.

I take your point though. Is this far enough? (Just kidding, I'm not, and never will be, an Apple customer).