Pixel 11 price hikes look confirmed, as Google exec warns Pixel 10a could be next 82%

By Stephen Schenck64%

7/24/2026, 8:23:15 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Pessimism Bias, and Unattributed Quote, with Loss Aversion as the most egregious example at 25.3% saturation with 93 hits. Analysis detected 759 faulty-reasoning hits from 368 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.3% and a BS Rank of 82% (4,064 of 21,807 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 81.40% of the article peer group.

With Samsung Unpacked now officially behind us, we are staring straight ahead at the Made By Google event coming up on August 12 where we expect to meet the new Pixel 11 series. 
These phones have already leaked six ways from Sunday, and that’s included an early look at pricing. 
If you haven’t been happy about the idea of the most affordable phone starting at $899 instead of the $799 we saw with Pixel 10 devices, we’ve got bad news from you. 
Shakil Barkat is Google’s Vice President of Devices and Services, and 9to5Google recently spoke with him about Pixel hardware, including what we should expect in terms of pricing. 
While Barkat isn’t sharing any specific figures, he confirms that Google’s been struggling to absorb recent spikes in memory prices, and warns that this simply isn’t a situation that’s going to last. 
Ultimately, “adjustments” are coming to Pixel pricing, and “will be rolled out dynamically to match supply realities.” 
And that’s going to affect Pixel 11 phones. 
More than that, Barkat also gives us a heads-up that “in-market Pixel phones” will eventually see an impact, as well, hinting that the Pixel 10a’s $499 base price may not last for much longer. 
While that’s obviously going to sting, Barkat is also clear that Google’s not about to abandon its approach to incentivizing device purchases through trade-ins, promos, and bundle deals, offering shoppers at least something to make them feel like they’re getting a good value. 
The other silver lining here is that Google’s apparently working hard to try and lessen the impact of RAM price fluctuations, by just making Android much more memory efficient. 
That’s certainly going to be a lot easier said than done, but anything Google can do to stretch our now very-expensive RAM even further can only hope to improve the Android experience for everyone. 
Are you thinking twice about getting a new Pixel this year in the light of this pricing situation? 
Maybe try and catch a deal on an old-stock Pixel 10 instead, or wait for a sale in a few months? 
Share your strategy down in the comments. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.1%Stephen Schenck: 3.1%Android Authority: 4.4%Confirmation Bias4.1%This article: 14.4%Stephen Schenck: 4.5%Android Authority: 2.3%Anchoring Bias14.4%This article: 4.6%Stephen Schenck: 3.5%Android Authority: 3.7%Availability Heuristic4.6%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 2.3%Android Authority: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 1.2%Android Authority: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 4.1%Android Authority: 3.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%Stephen Schenck: 6.4%Android Authority: 5.6%Framing Effect11.7%This article: 25.3%Stephen Schenck: 1.3%Android Authority: 1.3%Loss Aversion25.3%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.1%Android Authority: 1.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.3%Android Authority: 0.4%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 19.6%Stephen Schenck: 14.1%Android Authority: 7.0%Optimism Bias19.6%This article: 17.9%Stephen Schenck: 2.0%Android Authority: 1.9%Pessimism Bias17.9%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 3.4%Android Authority: 6.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.3%Android Authority: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.5%Android Authority: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 1.7%Android Authority: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 4.3%Android Authority: 4.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 3.7%Android Authority: 2.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.5%Android Authority: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.5%Android Authority: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.6%Stephen Schenck: 4.9%Android Authority: 2.8%Appeal to Authority7.6%This article: 5.7%Stephen Schenck: 1.6%Android Authority: 2.0%False Dilemma5.7%This article: 13.9%Stephen Schenck: 0.6%Android Authority: 0.4%Slippery Slope13.9%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.6%Stephen Schenck: 6.8%Android Authority: 8.7%Hasty Generalization4.6%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.9%Android Authority: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 1.0%Android Authority: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.9%Stephen Schenck: 5.7%Android Authority: 3.1%Appeal to Emotion4.9%This article: 4.1%Stephen Schenck: 0.9%Android Authority: 0.9%Begging the Question4.1%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 1.3%Android Authority: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.6%Android Authority: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.2%Android Authority: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.9%Stephen Schenck: 1.7%Android Authority: 6.1%Anecdotal7.9%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.1%Android Authority: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.7%Stephen Schenck: 3.1%Android Authority: 3.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.7%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.2%Stephen Schenck: 0.2%Android Authority: 0.2%Middle Ground9.2%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 17.9%Stephen Schenck: 2.7%Android Authority: 2.1%Unattributed Quote17.9%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.5%Android Authority: 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 7.6%Stephen Schenck: 19.1%Android Authority: 12.4%Biased Writer Voice7.6%This article: 4.9%Stephen Schenck: 1.7%Android Authority: 2.5%Indoctrination4.9%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Stephen Schenck: 0.0%Android Authority: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%Stephen Schenck: 12.0%Android Authority: 7.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…11.7%

368 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.7%attributed speech336writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageShakil Barkat • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Shakil Barkat

100%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words100% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+89.9 ptsWriter: 10.1%Shakil Barkat: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -12.8 ptsWriter: 12.8%Shakil Barkat: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.3 ptsWriter: 8.3%Shakil Barkat: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%Shakil Barkat: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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