This was not the discussion point.
What transpired was Apple made lots of profit. I am saying without subsidies price plan, Apple will not be able to sell that many phones (and thus lower profit). Look at most countries in Europe without phone subsidies scheme, Apple only has small market share. Most Joe Bloggs will not pay $600+ for a phone upfront (whether iphone or galaxy). Apple can sell in volume because of the enticing $199 upfront (with the rest of the cost hidden in much higher monthly fees which you have no say)
That is precisely the point.
All I am trying to say is that more sales of cheaper phones doesn't necessarily mean more profits. It just means more phones sold. And if you are barely breaking even on each phone sold this way, 1 billion phones sold at zero profit each is still zero profit.
Could Apple sell more phones if it slashed the prices of its iPhones? Possibly. Would this allow it to earn more profits as a result? I doubt it. Apple's business model has allowed it to capture the market segment which truly matters - people who appreciate a great user experience and don't hesitate to pay for it. That small market share accounts for 86% of the industry's profits, not to mention the higher app store and iTunes content revenue.
As a counterargument, Samsung sold loads of cheaper, low-end smartphones and fewer high-end flagship phones. It's profit ended up dropping by 60%. Conversely, Apple's average selling price for its iPhone increased (the 6+ costs more, plus Apple is clearly trying to push everyone from the 16gb to the 64gb model) and more people are buying the iPhone, not less.
----------
The primary reason why the Apple TV is still a hobby is the same as why NFC took so long to come to market. Apple is presumably still toiling behind the scenes to work out the content deals with cable providers that will allow it to provide the user experience the way Apple envisions it (and which will allow it to differentiate its offering against other alternatives which are essentially souped-up media receivers).
That's the difference between Apple and the rest of the competition. The latter just throw their product out there and leave it to sink or swim on its own without making an effort to expand its usefulness through strategic partnerships. That's why Google wallet never got much traction in all its 3 years.
Conversely, Apple consistently works behind the scenes to make arrangements and partnerships with other companies to ensure their features will have wide support and implementation right out of the gate. That's why you see companies actually falling over themselves to offer support to Apple Pay. Who else offers you money to use said service at their stores?
The way Apple does things is precisely why iTunes and the iPod went on to become the number one seller of music in the US. They don't sell you a product; they sell you an integrated solution which works right out of the box. If you keep insisting otherwise blindly, all I can say is that you don't understand Apple, or business in general.
