Our readers would rather not pay more than $1000 for a new smartphone

Google Pixel 6 Pro Coming Soon Nyc Display Unit Gold Close
Google Pixel 6 Pro Coming Soon Nyc Display Unit Gold Close (Image credit: Michael Fisher / Android Central)

What you need to know

  • Of more than 1700 poll participants, most would be willing to pay between $600 to $1000 for a smartphone.
  • The $300 to $600 range was also popular amongst our readers.
  • Unsurprisingly, not many were willing to pay more than $1000.

The Google Pixel 6 launch approaches, and with recent leaks hinting at the retail price for the device, it got us thinking about how much we're actually willing to pay for a new smartphone.

The past several years have seen smartphone flagship prices skyrocket while affordable lower-end models are becoming more capable. Our poll responses give us a pretty wide range but show us that with the right features, consumers are willing to spend more on a new smartphone, with nearly 40% of our more than 1700 poll participants selecting the $600-$1000 price range.

That's followed closely by the $300-$600 range, which falls under the best budget Android phones. For that price, phones like the Pixel 5a offer great value with amazing battery life, great cameras, and 5G connectivity. Unsurprisingly, fewer readers are willing to shell out more than $1000 for a new phone.

Smartphone Price Poll

Source: Android Central (Image credit: Source: Android Central)

One response on Twitter notes how companies are seemingly removing more features that used to be standard while charging more for their phones:

See more

Another says that they'd be willing to pay more because smartphones are doing more and replacing several devices:

See more

One reader, HSTPH, comments that they aren't as willing to shell out the dough for a new phone:

In my experience, the majority of people that I personally know generally use their phones for 3-4 things...calls, text messages, checking emails or social media, and for taking silly pictures of food, pets, and children...all of which can be done quite nicely on a $200 - $300 phone.In my opinion, it's insane to pay anywhere close to $1,000 for a phone with planned obsolescence built-in.

Many of our Facebook responses also agreed that cheaper phones are plenty capable for most uses.

Poll Response Smartphone Pricing Facebook

Source: Android Central (Image credit: Source: Android Central)

The poll may be closed, but the conversation around smartphone pricing continues, especially as the Pixel 6 nears its official launch, where we should finally get full details on price and availability.

Derrek Lee
News Editor

Derrek is a long-time Nokia and LG fanboy who loves astronomy, videography, and sci-fi movies. When he's not working, he's most likely working out or smoldering at the camera.

6 Comments
  • I have zero issues lol, they have options at different price points and buy accordingly. People complain if they make cheaper and cut feature. If it’s expensive and flagship then also they will complain. Basically it’s a no win and there will always be some subset of users who will be unhappy and complain.
  • Exactly! Couldn't have said it better! The market dictates the price and there are plenty of people willing to spend 1k+ on a phone. Maybe not a google phone but Samsung and Apple always have healthy sales each year.
  • I hear R&D, marketing, salary, and more are usually factored into the price of the phone. Are they fairly priced though 🤔? How does a company determine the amount that will be added to the BoM (Bill of materials) to account for the R&D, marketing etc.? They do this per device. It's not as if the knowledge that was gained during R&D was applicable to just one device. Maybe that's why people feel like they are getting screwed with these prices.
  • These forums skew to the manic buyer who upgrades often. If you buy a flagship phone, it is so unnecessary to upgrade often. If I can't get at least four years out of my Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra, then shame on me, I've succumb to the power of marketing and micro upgrades. I was annoyed at the loss of the headphone jack, but you can buy an adapter to run your cord through the power connection. That said, wireless headphones are amazing, and no, I can't tell the difference in audio quality. I encourage others to google the NPR digital audio sound test where you try to select the highest bitrate recording. Absolute must haves on an upgraded flagship phone is the best screen, big screen, expandable storage, faster storage, faster chips, at least 256GB internal storage (512 preferred), fastest recharging, and a next generation, significant camera upgrade. I'll never be interested in year over year upgrades. Mid tier phones are fine, and represent about five year old top of the line specs. Nobody can argue that mid tier phones don't get the job done.... And you are dumb if always upgrading mid tier phones like Google offers, VS buying a Samsung flagship. It is amazing at what flagship phones can do these days... Camera and video editing, the Google suit of productivity apps, banking, desktop online performance, news and social media content, and amazing gaming... Everything a laptop can do... Although there is a place for minimum 10 inch top line tablets. I hardly use my Surface laptop... Zoom meetings, spreadsheets, maybe the bigger screen is nice researching new vehicles... But I don't require a laptop for work... So I probably should not have bought one. I really don't get those folks who buy new phones all the time... You can't drive a phone, nor can you live in one.... Constantly paying monthly fees years on end sounds rather crazy to me. I'm in the never foldable camp... I don't want the extra step to fold open a phone, and they are too fragile.
  • PC can be used more than 5 years, and upgrade by yourself, how did consumers allow smartphone be like this.
  • I'm personally not spending $1k on any smartphone, even if I have the money. I'd rather pay off my bills.
    I would sleep way better being debt free.
    Many people don't mind spending money they don't have.