iPhone 17 prices likely higher than iPhone 16, launch expected on this date: Details inside
And with Trump's new policy slapping a 20 per cent tariff on iPhones imported from China and none on those from India, Apple's global supply chain strategy suddenly matters more than ever.That's where Tim Cook comes in. The Apple chief recently made a rare appearance at a White House press conference alongside Trump, announcing a mammoth $100 billion investment to shift more of Apple's production and supply operations onto American soil. This massive move has reportedly won the tech giant partial relief from the new tariff regime. And while that might shield some models from the full brunt of import duties, it also raises the stakes for Apple's manufacturing footprint in India, which has grown dramatically in recent years.Not too long ago, India's contribution to Apple's iPhone production was barely a blip on the radar. Today, it accounts for about 14 per cent of flagship model output, a figure Cook proudly cited earlier this year. In fact, between April and June, most iPhones sold in the US were made in India. If you're wondering why that matters, here's the simple takeaway: the more Apple shifts production to India, the more models it can import tariff-free into the American market, and that could be the difference between a modest price hike and a serious dent in your wallet.advertisementEven so, don't expect Apple to hold the line entirely. A leak from Chinese tipster Instant Digital claims prices will climb by around $50 across the range. If those whispers are accurate, the entry-level iPhone 17 would launch at $849 in the US, roughly Rs 89,900 for buyers in India. The ultra-slim iPhone 17 Air could come in at $949 (about Rs 99,900), while the iPhone 17 Pro might demand $1,199 (around Rs 1,45,900). Sitting proudly at the top of the heap, the iPhone 17 Pro Max could command $1,249 (an eye-watering Rs 1,64,900). For perspective, that's the sort of money you could also spend on a top-tier laptop, a city break in Europe, or a very nice sofa, but let's be honest, a shiny new iPhone tends to win out.iPhone 17 series to launch next monthPricing aside, the launch schedule looks set to follow Apple's tried-and-true playbook. If tradition holds, the company will fire out media invites in the first week of September, sending the tech press into a frenzy of live-blog prep and headline drafts. The big reveal will then be followed by a short but intense pre-order window, opening just days after the curtain lifts. If you're already pencilling dates into your diary, the smart money is on new iPhones hitting shop shelves on either September 12 or 19, both Thursdays, naturally, because Apple likes to keep things predictable.In short, the iPhone 17 launch has all the ingredients for another classic Apple spectacle: a slick presentation, a devoted audience hanging on to every word, and just enough political drama to make the pricing story as intriguing as the tech itself. Whether you're in it for the gadget lust, the bragging rights, or simply to see what colour options will spark the next trend, next month's unveiling promises to be one of the year's headline moments in the world of consumer tech. And who knows, with iOS 26 in the mix, the biggest surprise might not be the price tag at all, but what these new devices can actually do.- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Complaint against qcom players: Distributors submit additional info to CCI
Distributors of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) have furnished additional information to the competition regulator to substantiate their allegations against quick-commerce players. According to sources in the know, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), the regulatory watchdog, has asked quick-commerce players to submit answers to the allegations. Distributors, through the All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation (AICPDF), have said Blinkit owns the highest share of the market with 40-45 per cent, followed by Zepto with 25-30 per cent, and Swiggy Instamart with 20-25 per cent, according to documents seen by Business Standard. 'The dominance of these OPs (opposing parties; in this case, it is quick commerce companies), particularly Blinkit, creates a significant market power imbalance, enabling practices that contravene Section 4 of the Act (abuse of dominance) and predatory pricing.' The additional information said quick-commerce companies had arrangements by which they had bundled delivery service with loyalty programmes or subscription models, which encouraged customers to purchase additional services to access discounts or priority delivery. They cited the examples of Swiggy Instamart offering discounts through Swiggy One membership and Zomato giving promotions through its Zomato Gold membership. They also alleged quick-commerce companies had contracts with suppliers, and such deals often included prioritising stock allocations to their dark stores and reducing supplies to traditional trade. They also complained quick-commerce companies used location-based pricing, by which consumers would get different prices for the same product, depending on where they lived. And, according to them, consumers ordering through an iPhone are charged higher than android users. Frequent buyers are allegedly offered lower discounts whereas new customers get higher. Blinkit and Zepto, they said, offered discounts of 35-50 per cent, pricing products below what distributors offer. The AICPDF had filed a complaint with the CCI on behalf of its president, Dhairyashil Patil, against Blinkit, Zepto, and Instamart in March. A source had earlier told Business Standard the CCI had asked the distributors' body for details on the relevant market share of each of the quick-commerce players in the FMCG sector. It had also sought clarity on whether the FMCG companies had any exclusive agreement for distribution. The CCI, once it receives a formal complaint, can order an investigation if it is satisfied with the information shared. It also has the option to seek comments from the parties named in the complaint or the informant who has filed the complaint before ordering an investigation. Last year, distributors' body wrote to the Ministry of Finance on fund utilisation and fund accumulation by quick-commerce companies and the deep discounting of goods on their platforms. In October last year, it had first written to the CCI on issues the traditional supply chain was facing owing to the rapid growth of quick commerce. The appointment of these platforms as direct distributors of FMCG items by several companies was one of the complaints. The federation had written to the Food Safety & Standards Authority of India, which asked ecommerce and quick-commerce operators in the food business to ensure a minimum shelf life of 45 days before the expiry of products at the time of delivery to consumers.
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
How mining, manufacturing & power sectors weighed on India's industrial output since January 2024
A similar story played out for the power sector which saw sporadic contractions during this period, the most significant in May 2025 (-4.7 percent), suggesting overcapacity, misaligned demand, or temporary disruptions such as fuel shortages. Sectoral data shows the mining sector saw negative growth four times since January 2024—August (2024), April (2025), May (2025) and June (2025). New Delhi: The mining and power sectors have been weighing on India's industrial output, an analysis by ThePrint of industrial growth data of the period between January 2024 and June 2025 shows. Mining, for instance, saw sharp contractions during this period, from 10.3 percent growth in June 2024 to -8.7 percent growth in June this year. These were among the factors that weighed heavily on India's industrial output growth as it saw a 10-month low in June 2025, data from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) showed. It also pointed out that the Index of Industrial Production (IIP) grew by a mere 1.5 percent in the month of June 2025, as against 1.9 percent the previous month—marking a decline for the third consecutive month. The IIP broadly tracks three key sectors: mining, manufacturing, and electricity. The monthly report, compiled by the Central Statistics Office (CSO), pegged the deceleration principally on poor performance in the mining and power sectors, both affected by the early onset of monsoon. In June 2025, mining output fell by a steep 8.7 percent, while electricity output fell by 2.6 percent compared to the previous month. Also Read: Smartphones, gems, pharma: Which Indian exports will be worst hit by Trump tariffs, which will be spared January 2024 to January 2025 Since January 2024, India's industrial output has been on a tumultuous terrain. It peaked in May 2024 when the industrial growth rate touched 6.3 percent before falling steeply to 4.9 percent the very next month. The fall in output was a result of contraction in manufacturing and power sectors. Compared to the previous month, manufacturing growth declined from 5.1 percent to 3.5 percent in June 2024, while growth in the power sector declined from 13.7 percent to 8.6 percent during the same period. Growth in the mining sector, on the other hand, went up from 6.6 percent in May 2024 to 10.3 percent in June of the same year. In August 2024, India noted a contraction of 0.1 percent in industrial output growth, marking the first such year-on-year contraction after October 2022. This was a result of negative growth in the power (-3.7 percent) and mining (-4.3 percent) sectors, and a slowdown in manufacturing to 1.2 percent from 4.7 percent the previous month. Industrial growth, however, picked up in November 2024, with IIP again touching the 5 percent threshold. After a minor hiccup in December 2024, industrial growth touched 5.2 percent in January 2025. While there isn't any universally agreed-upon 'ideal' IIP benchmark, a 3-5 percent annual growth rate is seen as healthy and sustainable. Return to path of decline Following the recovery in January, industrial growth once again embarked on a path of decline from February 2025 (2.7 percent), ultimately reaching a 10-month low in June 2025. It was 3.9 percent in March, 2.6 percent in April and 1.9 percent in May. Though the mining sector grew rapidly in the first half of 2024, registering 8.1 percent growth in February 2024 and 10.3 percent growth in June 2024, by August 2024, it had declined to 4.3 percent. This trajectory continued till June this year when the mining sector contracted by 8.7 percent. These fluctuations in the industry were caused by issues like domestic weather disruptions or mining-specific regulations, as well as external commodity pricing difficulties. Manufacturing has recovered more steadily than mining, despite its slow-paced growth. The sector hit a peak of 5.8 percent in January 2025 after plunging to a low of 3.6 percent in January 2024. Following a brief decline to 2.8 percent in February 2025, manufacturing growth was 4 percent in March 2025. But, this was short-lived. After falling to 3.1 percent in April 2025, it rose slowly until June 2025, when it averaged roughly 3.9 percent. This indicates the sector's capacity for adaptation and recovery and is possibly the result of supply chain support, government stimulus, and the post-pandemic normalisation of demand. However, the recovery's sluggish pace underlines persistent demand from weak export markets and widespread supply chain concerns. With notable double-digit growth in May 2024 (13.7 percent), the electricity sector dominated the growth charts for the majority of the time. These spikes frequently corresponded with the push for infrastructure and seasonal demand. The IIP data from January 2024 to June 2025 depicts the volatile state of the country's industrial sector, with major sectors seeing fast growth, abrupt decrease, and resilience. (Edited by Tony Rai) Also Read: GDP to IIP—Indian statistical systems have bigger problems than 'underestimating' population
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
The difficult path for Trump's ‘one big budget bet'
The most debated government downsizing reform that has been implemented in recent history has been the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative under the Donald Trump administration in its second term. The initiative aims to reduce U.S. federal spending, deficit, debt and interest burden, streamline government operations, and enhance government efficiency. The initiative was much in the news with the appointment of Elon Musk, to advise and guide the government on the initiative, and his declaration that the overall goal is to achieve a leaner government by cutting the deficit and reducing the number of federal agencies from over 400 to 99. Root cause of deficit and debt The need for a smaller government was felt by the Trump administration due to enormous government spending and deficits. The size of the U.S. government, measured by public expenditure as a percentage of GDP, on average, was 36.49% from 2001 to 2024. Surprisingly, this was the smallest among the seven major advanced economies (MAE). France (56.53%) had the largest government, followed by Italy (49.81%), Germany (46.64%), Canada (41.24%), the United Kingdom (41.09%), and Japan (37.56%). The size of the government in the U.S. has remained the smallest among the MAE for most of the last 25 years. Yet, overall fiscal balance and government debt have been higher in the U.S. when compared to the MAE. In the triennium ending (TE) 2024, the U.S. had a fiscal balance and debt burden of (-)6.0% and 119.5% of GDP, respectively, compared to the figures of (-)4.1% and 108.6%, respectively, for the MAE. The underlying reason is the lower revenue collection in the U.S. The total revenue of the U.S. government as a percentage of GDP on an average was the lowest (30.55%) during the period 2001–2022 compared to France (51.48%), Italy (45.93%), Germany (44.93%), Canada (39.92%), and the U.K. (36.63%). Between 2001 and 2022, the U.S. has clocked the lowest tax-GDP ratio of 19.27% as against 28.59% for Italy, 28.12% for France, 27.99% for Canada, 26.89% for the U.K., 22.70% for Germany, and 32.74% for OECD countries. Initiatives and outcomes The several expenditure reforms the DOGE has implemented are the termination of unused federal government office space leases, cancellation of wasteful contracts, recovery of misallocated funds, federal workforce optimisation involving initiatives such as hiring restrictions, workforce reduction, and offering voluntary buyouts, deregulatory measures aimed at ensuring lawful governance and reducing red tape. There is also Artificial Intelligence-based monitoring of federal employee activity, productivity assessment, and detection of inefficiencies, identifying and consolidating overlapping functions across departments, and cutting down overseas humanitarian and development spending. DOGE follows a transparent communication strategy by publicly sharing updates (on X or DOGE's portal) on the outcomes. The total estimated expenditure savings from contract/lease cancellations and renegotiations, grant cancellations, fraud and improper payment detection and elimination, asset sales, employee reductions and regulatory changes have been $190 billion, which amounts to $1,180 per taxpayer. DOGE has made the distribution of government grants transparent through a payments portal, which allows citizens to see recipient-wise payments of federal grants. DOGE's Workforce Portal provides information on the agency-wise size of the U.S. government civilian workforce. To streamline layoffs, it has implemented the 'Workforce Reshaping Tool', a modernised version of the Pentagon's Automated Reduction in Force (AutoRIF) software, which assists in terminating federal employees based on criteria such as seniority and performance. So far, approximately 2,60,000 federal employees have been laid off, retired early, or accepted buyouts. Several federal regulations were repealed and modified, with a cost savings of $30.1 billion due to reduced regulatory compliance; also, 1.8 million words have been deleted from the rules of several Federal regulations. DOGE publishes a unique unconstitutionality index (UI) measuring the extent of bureaucracy's role in shaping federal policy. As per UI, for every law passed by Congress in 2024, there were about 19 rules created by the bureaucracy. The path ahead However, DOGE's journey has seen an unexpected turn after Elon Musk publicly disagreed with U.S. President Donald Trump over the provision incorporated in the much-debated One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) for removing tax credits offered to purchase electric vehicles. The OBBB is a legislative extension of the DOGE reform, as it aims to embed multiple fiscal priorities and DOGE-style government efficiency reforms into a single federal law. Ironically, by opposing OBBB, Mr. Musk contradicted his initiatives as an adviser to DOGE. However, the bigger challenge facing the DOGE initiative is that its extended form, the OBBB, is unlikely to resolve the U.S.'s deficit and debt problem, as the tax cuts proposed in the OBBB far exceed the spending cuts, leading to an addition of $3.2 trillion to the U.S. national debt over the next decade. Currently, the U.S. has the lowest and below-OECD-average corporate tax rates among the MAE, lower effective tax rates on the rich, and tighter secrecy laws that enable tax evasion by wealthy individuals and corporations. Therefore, unless efforts are made to boost government revenues, Mr. Trump's 'One Big Budget Bet' of reducing America's deficit and debt through DOGE-style expenditure reforms is unlikely to pay off. Sthanu R Nair teaches Economics and Public Policy at the Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode, Kerala. Pratik Sinha is a consultant for a multinational firm. He was an Assistant Director, Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India
