Ross Gerber, co-founder and CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth & Investment Management, advised consumers to purchase the iPhone 17 immediately, citing robust sales despite higher prices across Apple’s hardware lineup. Gerber noted that while current iPhone 17 pricing remains unchanged, costs are expected to rise with the launch of new models in September.

Pricing Pressure and Cost Estimates

The potential price increase stems from soaring memory costs affecting Apple’s supply chain. TrendForce estimates that the bill of materials for the 256GB iPhone 18 Pro could rise about 38% compared to the comparable iPhone 17 Pro, with memory costs driving much of the increase. Deepwater Asset Management Managing Partner Gene Munster separately predicted that Apple could raise iPhone prices by roughly $125, or 15%.

Apple has already increased prices on several other products, including MacBooks, iPads, HomePod, and Apple TV, while keeping iPhone pricing stable. The company previously warned that surging DRAM and storage costs are pressuring margins. Apple could absorb some of the increase through lower margins to limit the impact on consumers.

Current Pricing Structure

The iPhone 17 currently starts at $799 for the 256GB model in the U.S. The higher-tier models carry significant premiums.

Revenue Performance

Apple’s fiscal third-quarter results highlighted continued strength in its primary revenue driver. iPhone revenue reached $54.25 billion, up from $44.58 billion a year earlier. This growth occurred even as the company navigated rising component costs and adjusted pricing on non-iPhone hardware.

What the Numbers Show

The divergence between rising component costs and stable iPhone pricing suggests Apple is prioritizing volume retention over margin preservation for its core device. With iPhone revenue growing significantly year-over-year to $54.25 billion, the strategy appears to be sustaining demand despite the broader hardware lineup facing price hikes due to memory supply constraints.

Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) has moved to force settlement negotiations with Epic Games, filing a motion Thursday to compel a court-ordered conference before Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero. The move aims to resolve remaining disputes over App Store rules and fees without further litigation.

The filing comes after the US Supreme Court rejected Apple's request to pause lower-court proceedings while it considers an appeal against a contempt finding by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. That finding stemmed from Apple's failure to comply with a 2021 injunction requiring the company to allow developers to direct users to external payment systems.

Commission Dispute Details

Apple had previously sought to impose a 27% commission on purchases made through external payment systems, triggering the contempt dispute. Separately, the company submitted a proposal outlining a framework where it could collect commissions of up to 15% on transactions processed through alternative payment systems in the US.

Epic immediately objected to this proposal, arguing that the proposed fees exceed what the Ninth Circuit has indicated Apple can charge for external purchases. The current settlement motion is distinct from the commission proposal; it does not present a specific offer but asks the court to facilitate confidential negotiations between the two sides.

What the Numbers Show

The divergence in commission proposals highlights the core friction point: Apple's proposed 15% fee for external transactions versus Epic's stance that such rates violate Ninth Circuit guidance. This gap underscores the difficulty of reconciling Apple's revenue model for alternative payment processing with judicial limits on platform fees, suggesting that any settlement will require significant compromise on the effective take rate for third-party transactions.

The case originates from Epic’s 2020 lawsuit challenging Apple’s control over iOS in-app payments. While Apple largely won the underlying case, the subsequent injunction mandated changes to its payment policies. Apple and Epic attorneys discussed the proposed settlement conference on August 11, but Epic had not agreed to the request prior to the filing.