A decade ago, the launch of a new iPhone was a showy live event, with enthusiastic crowds and popular music acts. But in recent years, the fall product launch has been a more low-key marketing showcase, with most product demonstrations done in recorded videos.
Now, Ternus faces the tricky task of restoring some of that pizazz, after inheriting a company that has faced years of criticism that it has lost its touch as an innovator, and that its products have become stale.
“The company has done incredibly well, but at the end of the day, they haven’t created new categories” of products, said Bob O’Donnell, the founder of TECHnalysis Research, a research firm. A foldable iPhone, he added, would show “a side of Apple that we haven’t seen in a long time”.
Apple declined to comment on the event. Multiple news publications have reported on Apple’s work on a foldable iPhone, including Bloomberg.
Foldables’ failure to fire
Apple typically is not the first with a new product idea. But when it does something, its fans say, it creates a gadget with more polish, better marketing and a nearly unmatched ability to deliver millions of that product in a hurry. A foldable iPhone – even with its expected price of at least $2000 (NZ$3415) – could be another example of that.
Some of the earliest foldable smartphones were expensive and had software and durability problems. In 2019, Samsung introduced the Galaxy Fold, which folded vertically like a book. In 2020, Motorola introduced the Razr, which folded horizontally like a clam.
In recent years, more consumer electronics companies have started selling them. In 2023, for example, Google introduced the Pixel Fold.
Still, consumer interest has been light. Last year, consumer electronics companies shipped nearly 20 million foldables – or less than 2% of all smartphone shipments – according to Counterpoint Research, which tracks smartphone markets.
Next year, Apple is expected to ship more than 12 million foldables – or 5% of all iPhone shipments – according to Counterpoint.
‘A wallet issue’
The base version of Apple’s device is likely to cost at least $2000 because its components will be more complex and more expensive, said David Vogt, an analyst at the investment bank UBS. That would make it nearly twice as expensive as the current high-end iPhone, the 17 Pro, which starts at $1099.
Normally, when Apple launches a new iPhone, the company benefits from “a halo effect”, which occurs when a consumer goes to an Apple Store for an iPhone and then buys AirPods or an Apple Watch in the process, Vogt said. But that may not happen with a foldable iPhone, with a price tag that could pose “a wallet issue”, he added.
The price of a foldable iPhone – and any other devices introduced at the event on Wednesday, like other iPhones or a new Apple Watch – could also be pushed up by a memory chip shortage created by the artificial intelligence boom. In June, Apple raised the prices of its Macs and iPads, citing the soaring costs of memory and storage chips.
Apple has taken steps to keep consumers buying its devices even as they become more expensive. In July, the company introduced a programme that allows consumers to lease iPhones and other devices by making monthly payments.
A foldable iPhone could also reveal how much consumers still care about new features in their devices. Last year, about two-thirds of people who bought iPhones said they had done so because their phones no longer worked or were broken, lost or stolen, according to a survey by Consumer Intelligence Research Partners, a technology research firm. Only 14% said they had bought an iPhone for its features.
“Foldables haven’t made that much of a difference” for other companies that make them, said Michael Levin, a partner at Consumer Intelligence Research Partners. So it’s possible that consumers view the foldable iPhone as “gimmicky” or “niche”, he added.
The question for Apple, Levin said, is: “Why is foldability the feature that makes people want to upgrade?”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Written by: Kalley Huang
Photograph by: Lexi Parra
©2026 THE NEW YORK TIMES
