Add answers. I will choose the most specific true answer. Closes before the announcement. If nothing is launched, will be extended.
Update 2025-02-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Main Announcement: The resolution will be based on the product that is clearly the primary focus of Apple's announcement, specifically the one teased in their tweet.
Multiple Launches: If Apple launches more than one product, the one that receives the primary emphasis in the announcement will be considered.
Ambiguity Resolution: If it is impossible to clearly determine which announcement is the main one, the outcome may be marked as N/A.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ866 | |
| 2 | Ṁ713 | |
| 3 | Ṁ263 | |
| 4 | Ṁ135 | |
| 5 | Ṁ105 |
@JonathanMannhart Good point. I will go by whatever is the "main" announcement, the one they teased in the tweet. If that's impossible to conclusively figure out I might N/A.
MKBHD (the world's biggest tech reviewer) uploaded his review of the iPhone 16e and cuts to the last generation iPhone SE when he talks about “the last one":
Link with timestamp: https://youtu.be/qF4vZxbSmjo?si=rnxeLx100zclE8nj&t=218
This is a false resolution @FranekZak @mods. The iPhone 16e isn't "other".
Please resolve to “iPhone SE" (the 16e is the new name of the iPhone SE), or resolve to N/A.
Citing the resolution criteria:
"Ambiguity Resolution: If it is impossible to clearly determine which announcement is the main one, the outcome may be marked as N/A."
This seems clearly like a broken promise to me. I would have bet differently if this wouldn't have been in the resolution criteria of this market.
@JonathanMannhart the clarification was I regagds to multiple announcements. Other then that I've said all I have to say on this.
@FranekZak You wrote this as two separate points.
If your intention was to write that the second point is conditional on the first point, then you could have posted this as one conditional.
It's clearly stated though in the criteria that if Apple launches more than one product then___, and as a separate point if it is impossible to clearly determine then____.
I don't think it's fair to claim that my interpretation is unreasonable. It‘s clearly what one could/would interpret your statement to mean. If you meant to communicate something else, I'm happy to believe this, but it's not what is in the resolution criteria.
Update: I now think with saying that these are clearly two separate points I was wrong.
“which one is the main announcement" is related in a clear enough way to there being confusion about there being multiple announcements that it doesn't imply "if it's unclear what the announcement is I am committing to resolving this market N/A".
So I think that was unfair criticism on my part (& I'm retracting that one).
I still think my general point remains true, and that this shouldn't change the outcome in any way. It's generally accepted on this platform (& should be) that if something like this is unclear that the resolution should definitely be N/A. There really shouldn't be any question surrounding this.
If the intention of the market creator differs from this, that's okay as well, but then this has to be communicated beforehand.
So I'm not accusing the creator of dishonesty. Just of resolving this incorrectly. (But imo dishonestly would be way worse, so this is a relevant distinction.)
@JonathanMannhart you are quoting the ai summary, there is no distinction in my original comment. Thank you for retracting though, I appreciate it. Unfortunately at this point I don't think I can objectively evaluate this market anymore, since I do feel bad that you feel so strongly it was incorrect, but I don't want that to influence me to change my decision. Any change in resolution would have to come from the mods.
@FranekZak Excuse me, what?
This is clearly what everybody was thinking of what the “iPhone SE“ was going to be, with all the rumors agreeing. Naming is always a bit of a challenge (you don't know beforehand what Apple calls a product. But the class of product was obvious here.)
https://www.macrumors.com/guide/iphone-se-4/
https://www.theverge.com/news/608210/iphone-se-rumors-release-date-price-specs-face-id-camera-notch
I bet on your “iPhone SE“ option knowing that it would probably be called iPhone 16E!
If you really think that it's not what you meant by iPhone SE (although I would guess that everybody betting on this market expected an iPhone SE or 16E under that option), then resolve it N/A please.
It's quite undeniable that the iPhone 16E is the next gen of the iPhone SE. All the marketing materials compare it to “the previous gen, the iPhone SE (3rd gen).
I'm okay with N/A (but that would still be kind of wrong), but not okay with “other“.
All the rumors agreed that it was one product, either called “SE“ or “16E“. But it was always going to be a 6.1“ one camera phone with notch for a low price, in Apple's long history of offering a model at a lower price point. If I wanted to bet on your market that they'd announce that, the only option I had was the one you named “iPhone SE“.
If you think the iPhone 16E isn't really an “iPhone SE“ and people expecting the 16E should not have bet on “iPhone SE“ (even though that's what the community expected under that label), then “other“ does also not fit. The 16E isn't clearly “other“ than an iPhone SE, since it fits literally all the attributes that the iPhone SE was expected to have.
“Other“ is simply a false resolution.
If “none of the options fit“, as you said, then you do N/A. Not “other“.
@JonathanMannhart I will do some thinking on this and consider a re-resolution. I thought that the size being quite a bit above the SE meant it was not that. But if the expectations of the predictors were contrary to that, it's not my intention to misresolve.
@JonathanMannhart but also, I think if none of the options fit, and it was possible for everyone to add options, resolving to Other is the correct solution. If someone added an option like "a cheaper iphone not called SE" I would resolve to that.
@FranekZak “SE” was never about it being a small phone, if Apple cared about that there would still be Minis.
The SE line was about taking an older design that could now be cheaply made with a newer processor. 16e is an iPhone 14 with a new cpu. The real question is, does this mean there will be a 17e and 18e? That would make this a real change in strategy, but we won’t know for a year.
I bet on SE. I’m honestly not sure if you resolved this correctly or not!
The SE was always a parts-bin phone, the low-end model. Not necessarily the “small“ phone (the Mini was smaller during its time). It was just the case that phones had gotten continuously bigger since the iPhone 4, so previous cases had been smaller as well. The new one is based on the iPhone 12-14, which wasn't smaller.
I think it's very fair to say that predictors would have bet on “iPhone SE“ meaning the phone that was rumoured for a long time. There are hundreds of articles on this, all calling it the SE or possibly 16 SE or 16E. Names are often something that rumors can't get perfectly right, because that can be changed last minute by Apple (while the hardware can't.) Same with pricing, that's something that Apple doesn't have to lock in months before.
I would have bet on an 16e if it were available, but I think it's fair to assume that most betters would have assumed “iPhone SE“ meant the rumoured low-end iPhone. Which is what we got.
I didn't add that as an option because I thought it was clear to everybody that “iPhone SE“ is that rumoured model, in the spirit of the question. Everybody (in the rumour reporting bubble) knew beforehand that the size would be 6.1“ and that the name might change.
It would have been pretty unfair to add all the potential other names (16E, 16e, 16 SE, SE, 15 SE, 14 SE, etc) and then people who originally bet on “iPhone SE“, thinking it would turn out to be the successor (which it did), would have lost their Mana.
The rumours (about the “SE/16e) had everything right. The 6.1“ size, the new cell modem by Apple, only one camera, the notch, the chip, USB-C, etc. The only surprise was the lack of MagSafe (and the U1 chip).
The first low-end parts-bin iPhone wasn't called “SE“ either, it was called iPhone 5c, based on the 5. That was kind of the predecessor before they made an SE out of the 5s.
Apple changes names in weird ways from time to time, i.e. iPhone X → iPhone XS → iPhone 11 Pro. But that's still the same line of phones. One would have called the iPhone 11 Pro the “new iPhone Xs“ at the time. Same with the iPhone Xr → iPhone 11 → iPhone 12, etc.
This is a bad (quite clearly false) resolution. If we could do something about this, please? (If @FranekZak isn't willing to.)
N/A is fine for me, but still meh, as “what has been rumoured and called “iPhone SE“ got launched. And quite obviously, if one reads at least one article on the rumours before the event. The rumours turned out to be true. If people did bet on them being right, they should also be right in this market.
“Other“ is just plainly false. (Which is why I'm reporting this market.)
So, to me it seems:
“other“ is false
“iPhone SE“ would be correct
“N/A“ is ok, if there is no agreement that the rumours about the iPhone SE were all correct. (And exact naming is generally not something rumours will have info on beforehand.)
@JonathanMannhart I think I just disagree. I'm sorry, but this iphone is not called SE. There was no clarification that would allow me to bend this to be SE. I said I would select the most specific, true answer. In my considered opinion, that is "Other". If mods think I'm wrong, I'm okay with them changing the resolution.
@JonathanMannhart and to your point that rumours don't cover naming -- that's fine, but it was possible to add answer that would cover that possibilty. No one chose to do that, and while I'm sympathethic to your arguments, I think I'm bound to a generally literal understanding of the question and answers, not bending it such that the most bettors are correct.
@JonathanMannhart it would be different thing all together if anyone asked for clarification ahead of time, and we could either add an answer or agree that SE is a broader scope than naming. But that did not happen.
The problem I have with this that what you say is just not actionable.
The reason I didn‘t ask “for clarification“ is that it‘s mostly not needed if it‘s a market like this. In markets like these, the understanding is (mostly) that a name refers to a certain concept, not just to that specific name. If the name of the concept changes, then N/A is possible. If everybody agrees that the name changed, but the concept didn’t, then the reasonable way is to go with the concept instead of the name. (As a market creator you can differ from this if you want, but you should communicate this beforehand.)
Everybody (and I mean literally everybody) in the rumour community was calling the upcoming phone (with a 6.1“ screen, one camera, notch, etc) the new “iPhone SE“, because that‘s the best placeholder name for it. That name is by definition a placeholder, nobody actually knows the name. Your market wasn‘t “what will the new budget iPhone be called“. The common understanding of this market is that if I bet on the “iPhone SE“ as a placeholder name, that if that exact phone (the new budget iPhone that people meant) gets released, the person betting on that phone gets credit.
Your counterarguments (apologies) aren’t very good, I believe:
Your (very!) literal interpretation of a market isn‘t actionable. Because I can‘t actually add all the possible names that this phone might have.
I can‘t realistically add all the possible names! “iPhone SE“, “iPhone SE 2“, “new iPhone SE“, “iPhone SE 16“, “iPhone 16 SE“, “iPhone E16“, “iPhone 16E“, “iPhone 16e“, “iPhone 16se“, “iPhone 16SE“, iPhone Se“, “iPhone 16 se“.
“iPhone 15e“, “iPhone 15 SE“, “iPhone 16A“, “iPhone 16 a“, … how?? Nobody knows the actual name!
That doesn‘t make sense! And it also wouldn’t help anybody. That‘s not how a market like this can contribute to the common good. Do you want a market like this to contribute to the common good? I assume so! That is at least why I am on Manifold, personally.
A 100% literal definition isn‘t actionable because you as the market creator have to draw that line. Beforehand. E.g. where does the literal interpretation then stop? Does capitalisation matter? What if it was se instead of SE? What about spaces between the number and the letter? 16e or 16 E? What if the phone has “new“ in the name? (The iPad had that once!)
If you don‘t provide specifics (and you didn’t!), then betters will (have to) assume that you are operating under commonly understood heuristics, like “the thing we all think of if we call it “iPhone SE“ is what I‘m betting on here“. That‘s how markets like this (mostly) work. That‘s a reasonable assumption! They have to! That‘s the only way a platform like this can actually work!
If you‘re not happy with the way betters on here behave if they see a market like this, that’s fine. But it‘s on you to communicate that beforehand. You didn‘t provide any info or even indication on you resolving this differently than what people would commonly assume.
It‘s ofc possible that I‘m wrong here and that >90% of people on here involved in tech markets just disagree with me that “this is the new iPhone SE under a new name“. In that case, apologies!
But I‘m really quite informed in this bubble, and the whole tech press (again, literally, I haven‘t seen one post or article or podcast or tweet to the contrary) treats this as “the new iPhone SE, the one we were talking about for months“. I‘m happy to bet hundreds of dollars on this, actually. So I very strongly suspect I‘m not wrong here and that >90% of people would bet on the “iPhone SE“ option here if they wanted to bet on a 6.1“ one-camera notch phone being released at that particular date.
I feel quite strongly about this (again, if I‘m right, and this market is not operating under the common interpretation of what is meant by the iPhone SE option here), and I think it‘s just plainly false and misleading.
It‘s really bad to have markets resolve wrongly (for >90% of how betters interpret the options, again, if I‘m right). That just hurts the whole platform and makes it not work.
This is a community, and it works only if there are common understandings that people agree on (like using common language and common definitions of a certain field, like Apple tech reporting and a placeholder name like “iPhone SE“). And it‘s fine if you use other language, other definitions, and other understandings, but then it‘s on you to flag that.
So I‘m again tagging the @mods as this is a problem for the community if markets don‘t work as they should, according to the guidelines.
TLDR:
I‘m >90% sure that for >90% of betters (or people active in the Apple reporting/rumour community) the option “iPhone SE“ is interpreted as a placeholder name, because literally >500 articles, reports, posts, podcasts etc. talked about this product under this name. And they all agree (afaict) that the rumours were correct, and that this product was the one that got released. People talk about the new phone as “the new iPhone SE“, and that it has a new name. Again, this has happened many many times in Apple‘s history before. (The iPhone 11 Pro was the new iPhone Xs).
If we have strong (reasonable) disagreements about this on Manifold (fine, happens!) then this market should resolve N/A, because the market creator didn‘t communicate beforehand how they‘d be resolving the options differently than the common understanding.
If we don‘t have a reasonable disagreement and it‘s just “I‘m the creator and I can resolve it this way if I want to, even if it goes against how people would commonly interpret that concept“ and neither the market creator nor the mods can help, then I‘m happy quitting Manifold. Because that‘s actually bad. Then the community here doesn‘t really work.
@mods, help?
Again, I’m totally fine with N/A!
That you‘re not happy to go with N/A is confusing to me, that‘s usually what would (& should!) be done if there is chaos like this.
But the 16e isn‘t different from the SE in literally anything else, other than the name. Which was (as is the common understanding) not something one knows beforehand or a market like this is about. This market wasn‘t “what will the name be“. It was about the concept behind the name.
“Other“ is wrong. The iPhone 11 Pro isn‘t “other“ to “the new iPhone Xs“.
That‘s like… literally and objectively true. I‘m happy to die on this hill. I find it extremely confusing that anybody could disagree with this.
N/A is fine. (Just only moderately wrong, but tolerably.)
“Other“ is definitely and egregiously wrong.
@JonathanMannhart Good point. I will go by whatever is the "main" announcement, the one they teased in the tweet. If that's impossible to conclusively figure out I might N/A.