The new red iPhone scrutinised
13.4.2017
Translation: machine translated
Video: Stephanie Tresch
Apple has released a new iPhone without much fanfare. The only difference to the iPhone 7 is that it is now red. But the product itself is only half the story. The question of the purpose of the charity supported by the iPhone will be exciting.
No keynote, no announcement, just a short media release. Voilà, new iPhone and new iPad. That was it. Just like that. Apple has undermined itself with its latest product release. Are the days of big keynotes with audience cheers over? Or are the men and women around Apple CEO Tim Cook struggling to reinvent themselves as public figures and presenters in the post-jobs era? Or are they simply trying to find an alternative to the now hackneyed phrase "best ever"? Was that the reason why no keynote or something similar was held?
Be that as it may, new Apple products. I'm just going to ignore the iPad as firmly as Apple does, because - if I simply go by the casualness of the release - the Cupertino-based company doesn't seem to care about its own tablet. Well, understandably, because tablets have not turned out to be the great revolution in personal computing that many a manufacturer had hoped for. That's why the device is no longer called "iPad Air" or "New iPad". But simply "iPad". Fine by me. But I'm sure it will deliver the usual Apple quality and be better than its predecessor. Just "best ever".
It gets more exciting when we look at the new iPhone. The iPhone (PRODUCT)RED. "Red" should be superscripted here, but our website can't do that yet. And anyway, if we wanted to add the obligatory ™ at the end, we would be two levels higher than text. So: "Product Red" in the rest of the article.
The opaque charity iPhone
The iPhone Product Red is a device that Apple has launched on the market for charitable purposes, among other things. With this smartphone, the company is supporting the AIDS relief organisation (RED). Again, superscript ™ or © or ®. Hence Red or Project Red in the following. It is interesting to note that nowhere is there a sentence such as "X francs of the proceeds from this iPhone will go to Red", regardless of the language in which I view the press release. Said press release, by the way, is a nightmare to read.
CUPERTINO, California - March 21, 2017 - Apple® today announced iPhone® 7 and iPhone 7 Plus (PRODUCT)RED Special Edition in a vibrant red aluminium finish, in recognition of more than 10 years of partnership between Apple and (RED). This gives customers an unprecedented way to contribute to the Global Fund and bring the world a step closer to an AIDS-free generation. The special edition (PRODUCT)RED iPhone will be available to order online worldwide and in stores beginning Friday, March 24 - Apple.com
Nobody can read that. In my training as a journalist, I was taught that there are reasons why we don't use proper spellings. And if we do, then only in extreme cases. Copyright notices and the like are also consistently ignored. Because otherwise you'll end up with a nightmare of brackets, capitalisation, single-spacing and other typographical nonsense. In the end, the most important thing about any text suffers: The reading flow. Authors always make sure that readers can easily find their way around the text. This is definitely not the case in the Apple press release above. I certainly don't want to slog through all the marketing rubbish.
But I did it anyway. For you, dear reader.
The sentence specifying the amount of charitable articles per iPhone sold is absent. Does Apple donate anything at all?
"Apple is the world's largest corporate donor to the Global Fund, contributing more than $130 million as part of its partnership with (RED)," said Deborah Dugan, (RED)'s CEO. "Combining the global reach of the world's most loved smartphone with our efforts to provide access to life-saving ARV medication in sub-Saharan Africa, customers now have a remarkable opportunity to make a difference and contribute to the Global Fund through the purchase of this new beautiful (PRODUCT)RED iPhone. - Apple.com
Good, so Apple has donated at least 130 million US dollars since Project Red was founded. Finally, a number. Before we do any maths, let's see who Project Red actually is. Because in Switzerland, Project Red is less well known. I don't need to explain Greenpeace or the WWF in this country, as these organisations have burned themselves into the consciousness of the Swiss. That's a good thing.
The young charity
(RED), or Project Red, was founded in 2006 by U2 singer Bono, the same band that uploaded an album to your iTunes library in 2014.
When Bono isn't singing for your nerves, he's taking on a role that can at best be described as an "environmental pain in the arse". He stands up for human and animal rights as well as environmental protection. He doesn't give in and annoys the rich and famous of this world. The only thing that might get on the nerves of normal citizens is that he doesn't stop being annoying. That's a good thing.
Red's concept is simple: they sell the naming rights to the term (PRODUCT)RED - superscript, of course - and in return pocket up to 50% of the profit made from the sale of the red product. The money is then used to fight Aids in Africa. The money goes to the "Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria", abbreviated to something like GFFATM, because the name is even worse than Product Red. This gives customers a red device and Red help in the fight against the virus. That's a good thing.
Among others, the following have taken part so far:
- Apple
- U2
- Beats by Dre, a subsidiary of Apple
- Nike
- Starbucks
- Canon
Also a good thing.
Caritative under fire
But Project Red is not without criticism. The U2 charity is mainly accused of spending far too much money on PR campaigns and giving comparatively little to the Global Fund. Every charitable organisation is confronted with this criticism sooner or later and every charity sooner or later has an argument against it that is valid and, if sometimes not logical, at least plausible.
More interesting, however, are the social criticisms that Project Red faces. Critics accuse Bono's aid organisation of neglecting the charitable idea. Jessica Wirgau, professor at the Virginia Politechnic Institute, voiced harsh criticism in 2010. While the products with Product Red have done good by channeling funds to those in need, they neglect to create understanding in the first world. There is no relationship between donor and recipient, the professor explains. Other researchers blow the same horn. Product Red betrays its own ideals and the purpose of a charitable organisation.
Red not only misses the opportunity to promote civic engagement among its audience, but... gives corporations the power to control donations and their amount. - Wirgau, Jessica (2010). "Is Business Discourse Colonising Philanthropy? A Critical Discourse Analysis of (PRODUCT) RED.". Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations.
Other points of criticism include the lack of sustainability of the sales model, too much money going to pharmaceutical companies who then sell their drugs, that Project Red as a whole is just a marketing gimmick. There is also the accusation that the donation level of 50% of profits is far too high.
So let's do some maths.
Let's calculate Apple's donation
It's difficult to say how much of Apple's profits go to Project Red. This is because the above quote only shows that Apple has donated a total of 130 million US dollars.
It is easier to find out how high Apple's net profit is. In a press release from October 2016, the company states that it generated a total profit of 9 billion dollars in the fourth quarter of the 2016 financial year. Incidentally, the total revenue is 46.9 billion dollars.
In the video, I made the rough calculation of 12 million per year, but I can be mathematically precise here. To talk about the same period, we need to calculate a quarterly donation from Apple, rounded to two decimal places.
130,000,000/11/4 = 2,954,545.45
And now a rule of three.
9,000,000,000 → 100%
2'954'545.45 → x
Let's solve for x:
x = 100/9'000'000'000*2'954'545.45 = 0.03
Therefore, if Apple's profits have been static at 9 billion per quarter for the past few years, they are donating 0.03% of profits, Product Red or not. My first thought with this figure, especially in the context of the announcement that up to 50% of profits from Product Red products go to Project Red, was "It's a bit measly."
But do the maths.
But let's do the maths. Firstly, I'm making a miscalculation. I'm taking Apple's total profit, not the profit that comes from Product Red products. If I only took Product Red into account, the percentage would probably be much higher.
On the other hand, a theoretical quarterly donation of 2,954,545.45 dollars, i.e. 11,818,181.80 dollars per year, is a considerable sum.
For comparison: the average Swiss salary in 2015 was the equivalent of 64,100 US dollars. How long would the average Swiss person have to work if they were to donate 100% of their salary to reach an annual donation of 11,818,181.80 dollars?
11,818,181.80/64,100 = 184.37
For whom the 184 years and 4 months of work are too much: A Swiss person would have to work 46 years, 32 days, 20 hours and 20 minutes to come up with the quarterly donation of $2,954,545.45.
.
The advantage of a static donation
But why does Apple shy away from statements like "x dollars per iPhone goes to Project Red", hiding key messages behind a wall of unreadable marketing speak and generally keeping a low profile? Perhaps because Apple has negotiated a deal with Red that gives the charitable organisation a fixed donation per year. In the case of a longer-term collaboration, such a donation would allow the charity to budget better and not be dependent on the buying mood of customers. For Apple, the 0.03% is a pittance, while a 1000 francs iPhone is a real expense for customers.
Furthermore, Jessica Wirgau's argument can also be turned around. How many people are there who either don't care about AIDS at all or are just preoccupied enough to say "Yes, it's bad" without considering a donation? But if these people now want a new iPhone and they like the look of the Product Red, then they can buy one and do some charity work at the same time. Then they may not give a damn about the charity, but they still help because they want their red iPhone.
About the iPhone Product Red: Let's take a closer look at the device.
The red iPhone
The best way to understand the iPhone Product Red is that it is an iPhone 7 or 7 Plus in which all metal parts are made of red metal. The front, which is made of plastic, is white. Opinions are divided on the design decision. The users who criticise the white front mainly want a black front. Youtuber JerryRigEverything has taken this wish to heart and built himself such an iPhone. He discovered a few pitfalls, especially when it comes to the home button. This must not be replaced under any circumstances, because if it is replaced, the button loses its functionality.
Technologically, the iPhone Product Red is identical to the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus presented in September. Even if the iPhone 7 has not caused a big stir in the tech scene, it is still a solid upgrade over the iPhone 6. Unlike the brand new models of spring 2017, the iPhone Product Red does not reinvent anything, but does everything as well as the iPhone 7 did on the day of its release. In other words: a good phone, just red at the back.
Questions about questions
In this article, I've raised a lot of questions. Some of them I asked Apple. I wanted to know why there was no keynote or anything similar for the product release. I also enquired about the nature of the collaboration between Apple and Red, especially on a financial level.
Andrea Brack, PR Manager at Apple Switzerland, replied within a short time:
Thank you for your enquiry. The iPhone (PRODUCT) RED is an extension of the iPhone 7 product line and was announced in a media release:
Apple.com
- The press release also includes information about Apple's commitment to the Global Fund, with every purchase of a (PRODUCT) RED, a portion of the sales proceeds will go to the fund. As you can see from the press release: "Apple is the world's largest donor to the Global Fund and has contributed over $130 million to date as part of its partnership with (RED)," says Deborah Dugan, CEO of (RED).
Apple is not communicating any further details, thank you for your understanding.
Journalist. Author. Hacker. A storyteller searching for boundaries, secrets and taboos – putting the world to paper. Not because I can but because I can’t not.
6 comments
later