iPhone 5C's pricing

Nearly everybody was expecting a less expensive iPhone. Instead we got a replacement for the iPhone 5... Wall Street isn’t happy. Investors and analysts think Apple is missing a huge opportunity to gain traction in China, India and other emerging markets where price is a major issue. In fact, the iPhone 5c will cost over $700 off contract in China. That’s a huge sum of money to the average consumer in that country.
— iMore
Source: Apple.com

Source: Apple.com

iPhone 5C was supposed to be a lower cost iPhone and not a low cost iPhone. But if we try to trace back to the first of the articles that started detailing the iPhone as a low cost phone, I am sure it would have been from one of those so called "Analysts". These market analysts can only look at information as piece of data and cannot interpret it in any meaningful manner. We have seen this multiple times, for example with our favorite Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster who is obsessed with an Apple TV (not the hockey puck, but an actual TV) for a very long time. I am not saying that Apple will never release a real TV some time in the future, but Apple releasing a full fledged connected TV solution or Apple TV 2.0 makes more sense, at least in the immediate future. But coming back on the point at hand, I think it was the Wall Street analysts who created this pent up rumor mill for a low cost iPhone so much so that everyone on the internet accepted it without challenging it much and boy did Apple surprise us.

To be honest, I share this concern. But I realize that Apple knows more about how to price and market its stuff than I do. Same goes for pretty much any professional analyst or money manager out there. Very few of them know anywhere near as much about sales and marketing as Apple.
— iMore

So the more I think and follow the Apple stock and the Wall Street's perception of the stock, the lesser I seem to understand the whole system. I agree that I am no expert in Investment and Finance, but it just feels fake to me. The whole analyst perception about a company seems to be based on what they know from historic companies' performance. For example just because Microsoft made money by selling 'good enough' software products at cheaper prices and made money on volume than profits, Apple does not have to follow the same path to be successful. In fact Apple has repeatedly shown everyone that they don't care about market share and what matters is the profit share. After all it was Apple who showed us that you can be the most valuable company in the world without having the majority market share in any of the categories you compete in (except the iPad). I like this comment on this article the most. 

He (Silicon Valley entrepreneur and former Apple Chief Evangelist Guy Kawasaki) talked about defining success and failure as an entrepreneur. He asked if Porsche is a failure because it only has a tiny sliver of the car market. Are they? Of course not. They’re massively successful within the market they go after.
— iMore

The article also mentions what I posted yesterday on the iPhone 5C, "Just because Apple didn’t launch a much lower cost iPhone this year doesn’t mean it will never happen." - iMore. 

Looks like Apple is going the iPod direction with its multiple models (and an array of different colors) with the iPhone lineup. When everyone was expecting an iPod Shuffle’s equivalent iPhone 5C, Apple just released an iPod Nano’s equivalent iPhone 5C (does that mean an iPod Shuffle’s equivalent iPhone XX is on the way?)
— The Frustum