9to5Mac⁠58%

Higher Apple prices look set to slow upgrade cycles ⁠85%

By Ben Lovejoy⁠70%

7/20/2026, 12:46:12 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Optimism Bias, and Slippery Slope, with Pessimism Bias as the most egregious example at 24.7% saturation with 95 hits. Analysis detected 665 faulty-reasoning hits from 385 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 76.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠85% (3,442 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 84.30% of the article peer group.

A poll of thousands of 9to5Mac readers suggests that higher Apple prices are likely to slow upgrade cycles, even among the most enthusiastic of customers. 
Upgrading less frequently was by far the most common response given by readers, while just 9% of respondents said that the price increases wouldn’t affect their purchasing behavior … 
As we’ve noticed previously, some of the price hikes exceeded 50%, with memory and storage upgrades literally doubling in some cases – and all the signs suggest that the situation isn’t likely to improve anytime soon. 
A subsequent analyst report suggested that there won’t be any improvement in supply-chain pricing before 2028, and even that will be limited in effect. 
It seems pretty clear that the far higher pricing in place today will last for years as a minimum, and quite possibly won’t ever be reverted. 
If anyone were likely to grit their teeth and continue buying Apple products at the same rate, you’d expect it to be 9to5Mac readers, but a poll on Friday suggests that there are limits even for this demographic. 
More than 90% of readers said that they would change their purchasing behavior in response to the higher prices, and well over a third said that they would upgrade less frequently. 
* Upgrade less frequently: 38% 
* Wait for sales: 14% 
* Drop one or more Apple products: 12% 
* Buy lower-end models: 9% 
* No effect: 9% 
One reader commented: 
I’ll still buy apple products. 
But, I might not upgrade my phone every year. 
I might not upgrade my computer every three years. 
I might decide to upgrade my phone every two or three years and my computer every five or six. 
Of course, it’s possible that new features might persuade people to change their mind, but it does at least raise the hope that Apple will see slowing sales and that this might potentially lead to at least some form of subsequent price reduction in order to protect demand. 
* Apple products on Amazon Renewed 
* Official Apple Store on Amazon 
* Discounted AirPods Pro 3 
* Wireless CarPlay adapter 
* AirTag holders and accessories 
* Mac Pro-style Mac mini casing 
* NordVPN – privacy-first VPN with no logs and independent audits to verify 
Photo: Apple 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.1%Ben Lovejoy: 5.4%9to5Mac: 2.7%Confirmation Bias8.1%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 1.8%9to5Mac: 2.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.4%Ben Lovejoy: 3.8%9to5Mac: 2.8%Availability Heuristic9.4%This article: 6.5%Ben Lovejoy: 1.9%9to5Mac: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic6.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.5%9to5Mac: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Ben Lovejoy: 3.7%9to5Mac: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 5.4%9to5Mac: 5.3%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 1.2%9to5Mac: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.8%9to5Mac: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 12.5%Ben Lovejoy: 4.0%9to5Mac: 3.4%Optimism Bias12.5%This article: 24.7%Ben Lovejoy: 3.6%9to5Mac: 1.9%Pessimism Bias24.7%This article: 7.5%Ben Lovejoy: 8.5%9to5Mac: 4.6%Negativity Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.6%9to5Mac: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 1.0%9to5Mac: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.1%9to5Mac: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 9.9%Ben Lovejoy: 0.6%9to5Mac: 0.3%In-Group Bias9.9%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.2%9to5Mac: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 2.5%9to5Mac: 3.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 2.3%9to5Mac: 1.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.3%9to5Mac: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.2%9to5Mac: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.2%9to5Mac: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.6%Ben Lovejoy: 5.5%9to5Mac: 3.6%Appeal to Authority9.6%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 1.7%9to5Mac: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 12.5%Ben Lovejoy: 0.8%9to5Mac: 0.6%Slippery Slope12.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.1%9to5Mac: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.5%Ben Lovejoy: 8.7%9to5Mac: 4.8%Hasty Generalization6.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 8.1%Ben Lovejoy: 2.2%9to5Mac: 0.8%Bandwagon8.1%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 3.1%9to5Mac: 2.2%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 6.8%Ben Lovejoy: 1.3%9to5Mac: 0.6%Begging the Question6.8%This article: 21.8%Ben Lovejoy: 2.2%9to5Mac: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)21.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 1.0%9to5Mac: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.1%9to5Mac: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.1%9to5Mac: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.8%Ben Lovejoy: 4.2%9to5Mac: 2.4%Anecdotal0.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.1%9to5Mac: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.9%Ben Lovejoy: 2.2%9to5Mac: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.9%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.2%9to5Mac: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.3%9to5Mac: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 4.5%9to5Mac: 2.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.4%9to5Mac: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 6.4%9to5Mac: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 3.7%9to5Mac: 2.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Lovejoy: 0.0%9to5Mac: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%Ben Lovejoy: 10.6%9to5Mac: 15.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…11.7%

385 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.