Independent reporting on American politics
STATE BEACON

Apple skips base iPhone 18, lifts iPhone 17 and 16 prices by $100 amid component shortages

At its September 9, 2026 “Surprise and shine” event Apple omitted the entry‑level iPhone 18 and raised the price of the iPhone 17 and the still‑selling iPhone 16 by $100 each, a move analysts tie to ongoing memory and chip constraints.

By State Beacon·
iPhone 18 Pro displayed on the stage at Apple’s September 2026 “Surprise and shine” event

Apple Inc. omitted the base iPhone 18 at its September 9, 2026 “Surprise and shine” event and announced a $100 price increase for both the iPhone 17 lineup and the still‑available iPhone 16, according to The Verge.

Event details and pricing changes

The Cupertino‑based company unveiled only the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max, plus a new foldable iPhone Duo. The base iPhone 18 was a “no‑show,” confirming rumors that the model would be delayed to the following spring. In the same announcement Apple said the existing iPhone 17 models would cost $100 more than before, and the iPhone 16 – which had been selling for $699 the week prior – would return to a $799 starting price, also a $100 rise.

Price changes announced at Apple’s September 2026 event
Model Previous Price (USD) New Price (USD) Change
iPhone 17 Varies Varies + $100 +$100
iPhone 16 $699 (previous week) $799 +$100

Source: The Verge.

Shortage backdrop

The Verge notes that “memory and chip shortages likely contributed to the base iPhone 18 delay, putting pressure on pricing and forcing Apple to prioritize higher‑priced iPhone models that have larger profit margins.” The wording is presented as analyst commentary, not a direct Apple statement, and no alternative explanation is offered in the packet.

Financial context

Apple’s most recent SEC filing – a Form 10‑Q for the quarter ended June 27, 2026 – shows net income of $101.464 billion for fiscal year 2026 and shareholders’ equity of $107.520 billion as of the same date. Total assets stood at $383.266 billion, and the company reported 14.6089 billion shares outstanding. These figures, filed on July 31, 2026, provide a snapshot of the firm’s balance sheet as it implements the pricing shift.

For reference, the packet also includes a 2018 Form 10‑K showing revenue of $265.595 billion for fiscal year 2018. While the two periods are not directly comparable, the data illustrate Apple’s long‑term scale and the magnitude of any pricing adjustment on a multi‑billion‑dollar revenue base.

Sector implications

Skipping the entry‑level iPhone 18 and raising prices on older models is a departure from Apple’s typical full‑range launches, where a base model anchors the low‑end of the price ladder. Analysts watching the smartphone sector see two immediate consequences:

  • Premium‑only positioning. By offering only Pro‑tier devices, Apple may be nudging consumers toward higher‑margin products, a strategy that could boost average selling price (ASP) if demand holds.
  • Competitive pressure. Rival Android manufacturers that continue to sell sub‑$500 flagships may capture price‑sensitive buyers who are now faced with a $799 entry point for Apple’s newest non‑Pro phone.

The price hikes also affect existing inventory. Retailers who stocked iPhone 16 units at $699 will need to adjust pricing or risk margin erosion. The $100 increase brings the iPhone 16 back to its original launch price, potentially resetting consumer expectations for the model’s value proposition.

Outlook and unanswered questions

Apple has not disclosed when the base iPhone 18 will be released, only that a “new iPhone Air and more affordable iPhone 18E are rumored to launch in the first quarter of next year.” The timing and pricing of those future models remain unknown.

Similarly, the packet does not contain Apple’s own commentary on the component‑shortage narrative, nor does it provide data on how the $100 hikes compare to prior price adjustments. Without that baseline, the impact on ASP and revenue per unit can only be inferred.

Investors will watch Apple’s next earnings release for clues about whether the premium‑only launch translates into higher margins or whether the price sensitivity of the broader market forces a corrective shift later in the year.