$1,400 for the Galaxy S20 Ultra: yay or nay?

$1,400 for the Galaxy S20 Ultra: yay or nay?
So, a new rumor dropped today and we allegedly know the prices of the upcoming Galaxy S20 phones. These will be $999 for the S20, $1,199 for the S20+ and — wait for it — $1,399 for the Galaxy S20 Ultra. This is all for the 5G variants and, allegedly, there will be no 4G models released in the US. So, basically, these are the Galaxy S20 phones, period.

Now, we did expect the S20 Ultra to be on the expensive side — it's rumored to be a beast of a phone with a ton of improvements, especially when it comes to its cameras and battery life. But is $1,400 pushing it?

For comparison's sake, the Galaxy Note 10+ 512 GB variant started at $1,199, the Galaxy Note 10+ 5G edition was $1,299. In other words, it seems Samsung is not done with the price inflations — not yet. When will it end? Probably when customers push back.

That said, are you getting ready to cough up $1,400 for the big, bad Galaxy S20 Ultra or are you already planning to settle for less?

Willing to pay $1,400 for the Galaxy S20 Ultra?

Yeah, if it's everything it's rumored to be!
Naw, that's getting way up there.



63. klenz

Posts: 2; Member since: 4 days ago

image paying $1400 for a phone in the year 2020 and only getting to use it in 1080p. (which is what you'll do b/c you want 120hz right? one of the big points of buying this over MUCH cheaper phones would be that refresh rate which is only available in 1080p mode. )

55. raky_b

Posts: 471; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

If I remember it correctly, last year's (and a year before) rumour about prices was little bit higher than phones was actually priced. It's like Samsung is checking a pulse of a market to see how far can they go....or like they come out with that rumour just to bring overpricing phones for little bit less money, so it actually feels like it it could be even worse, so we should be lucky to pay $1300 instead $1400

49. Chuck007

Posts: 1423; Member since: Mar 02, 2014

A little on the expensive side, and this coming from a Note 10+ user. Sure 108MP, 10x zoom is great and it'll sure be a low light marvel, but phones like the upcoming Xperia 5 Plus has 5x zoom (more than enough for most users) and 64MP sensor. Will it be worth the price premium?

46. MaxNix

Posts: 7; Member since: Sep 16, 2019

NFW! Too much for features I will only use intermittently. Especially when the phone will be obsolete within a release or two of an SOC with integrated 5G.

45. cevon3239

Posts: 259; Member since: Jan 01, 2020

Well if you have no problem paying Apple's high price for less, this shouldn't be a problem right? And that is only $58 added to a phone bill over 24 months. And VZW offers 36 on more expensive 5G options, so the price is even less of 36 months. For that $1400 look what you get. 45W charger, 6.9" 1440p display, the phone will change from 0 to 100 in less than 60 mins. The storage on the Ultra will likely be 512GB. 16GB RAM, a cameras that has 10x optical zoom and 100 digital zoom allowing for viewing things as far away as the moon. That display along makes the Note 10+ as great as it is, seem like old news. All that new tech isnt gonna be free. It's amazing how Samsung phones are always roasted for being expensive when they offer more, but Apple gets a free pass on high price with only minor improvements.

56. raky_b

Posts: 471; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

When did you ever hear that people say Apple prices are good!? Even the biggest fans are saying that it is on a high side, but since they are in Apple system, they do not have a choice

41. kingkoopa765

Posts: 35; Member since: Oct 22, 2011

Personally I'm tired of spec chasing to get the latest and greatest, there's always going to be one model faster processor around the corner. So if I was going to spend $1400 on a phone at this point it wouldn't be for the S20 ultra, but maybe the Galaxy Flip because at least its new and different. How often am I going to use 100x zoom?

38. Pureviewuser1

Posts: 172; Member since: Mar 28, 2016

£1400? Cmon that's way too much might as well wait for Xiaom Mi 10 pro which will be half the price or just over £700 and save a lot of money and still have a great phone.

33. Orion78

Posts: 241; Member since: Mar 27, 2014

Just wait for sales and price drops. Lol people panicking here.

32. yalokiy

Posts: 1164; Member since: Aug 01, 2016

The device packs much more tech than iPhone 11 pro max 512gb, that apple asks $1450 for. I say the device is worth it. For the rest the base S20 is still a better buy than iPhone 11 pro.

57. hjl2345

Posts: 129; Member since: Aug 11, 2018

Yeah, but iPhones are worth that price because 1. The value for selling it used is higher compared to Galaxy flagships 2. iPhones get longer updates and support from Apple. If this is the year where Samsung promises 3 years of Major OS updates, I might think that the price is justified, but I doubt it.

31. hjl2345

Posts: 129; Member since: Aug 11, 2018

If we get more than 2 years of major OS updates from Samsung, I might change my mind.

29. Elvis358

Posts: 307; Member since: Mar 25, 2018

I will wait 6 months till the price will drop.

28. TheNane

Posts: 3; Member since: Nov 26, 2019

No way, especially since it will be on sale within 6 months after it's release. Will happily keep my note 10+

27. Rocket

Posts: 750; Member since: Feb 24, 2014

$1400? wow! I still remember the day that i paid only $599 for the galaxy s2 and that was considered expensive back then.

36. domfonusr

Posts: 1106; Member since: Jan 17, 2014

I remember the days when mainstream flagships, that carriers in the US offered, topped out at about $350 to $450. Those were the early days... when Nokia's 9300 sold for $399 on Cingular, and HTC's pocket PC's sold in the same general range. And, of course, the phones were usually subsidized, so they actually only cost you about $200 to $300 out-of-pocket for the top-of-the-line devices. The Nokia N95 was a big surprise when it made its debut above $500 outright - that was a big shock at the time, and it was only available unlocked from Nokia because none of the carriers wanted to sell something that was so expensive, despite its high ratings in Consumer Reports, and considerable global popularity in spite of the high launch price... I used to be an early adopter, but that trend has lost its luster with me in recent years. It is simply too expensive and wasteful to be on the cutting-edge these days...


Posts: 19; Member since: Nov 10, 2014

Google pixel 3a here we come.

24. perry1234

Posts: 655; Member since: Aug 14, 2012

It has to be MIND-BLOWING with at-leat 3 years of Android OS and 4 years of security updates, plus a bunch of cloud storage. All this, apart from the other pillars that make a flagship phone amazing. Else, it deserves to be passed upon.

37. Blazers

Posts: 796; Member since: Dec 05, 2011

Agreed. For that price, Samsung needs to support this device for double the time. At least 4 updates.

21. newbey123

Posts: 707; Member since: Mar 19, 2012

Will wait for the inevitable price drop and then pick one up under $1,000.

19. sleepypandaeyes

Posts: 436; Member since: Apr 12, 2015

Looks like I'll be waiting a few months in hope the price drops!!!

18. TerryD

Posts: 566; Member since: May 09, 2017

Sorry but no. Its been a couple of years since any mobile phone has really excited me. That also coincides with the first $1000 phones which end up being £1000 in the UK. I'm going SIM only next and will probably upgrade in a years time to an old flagship.

17. jellmoo

Posts: 2716; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

No, it just really doesn't do anything that I need my phone to do for the price. We've hit the point of diminishing returns with flagships. Great midrangers do everything I need and are going for less than 1/3 the price.

16. Guseingulievi

Posts: 21; Member since: Feb 28, 2019

in a year nobody will need this device, as today with 10 +

15. RoryBreaker

Posts: 331; Member since: Oct 11, 2015

$1200 for the Ultra would be more realistic

14. superguy

Posts: 496; Member since: Jul 15, 2011

Not only nay, but hell nay.

13. Whitedot

Posts: 908; Member since: Sep 26, 2017

It's just a phone. Cameras won't be ground breaking, yes they will be improved. Screen will be just as good , phone will be snappy just like last iteration. It is drunk's man madness. No phone should be charged more than $800.

53. vgking9699

Posts: 260; Member since: Mar 01, 2019

Lol no Just a phone lmao It’s more than just a phone, it’s your full digital photo and video camera, as well as video viewer for online videos as well as stored movies and tv shows and an entire pocket computer and handheld gaming device duh

54. Whitedot

Posts: 908; Member since: Sep 26, 2017

So my $200 phone does that at the fraction of the price. Yet it's just a phone. Not a rocket science.

62. cevon3239

Posts: 259; Member since: Jan 01, 2020

No your $200 phone can't do all the things a $1000 can. Just stop it! If you want to say no phone is worth $1000, then just say that and stick to it. But to claim your $200 phone can do everything a $1000 one can it totally false and you know it. If a $200 phone could do what a $1000 one did, then they would t cost $1000 to begin with. You're basically claiming a dingo can outrun a thoroughbred horse. It cant....

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless