Is the Fairphone 2 price justified?

Maybe it is - at least when you address people personally and you don’t know the person. One example: I know someone who needs to take medicine regularly with severe side-effects. It may happen that he says something to you and in the middle of the sentence he fells asleep. He might not be able to read through the posts of this discussion and find the information he is looking for. Nevertheless he would be able to use a Fairphone. Should someone like him not be allowed to ask the question he is interested in?

So instead of addressing someone (or someone’s post) directly I would write something like: “Some of the questions in this discussion were already answered in a previous post. So please read this discussion before asking your question”.

Back to the topic: I have a Fairphone 2 myself and I think the Fairphone 2 price is justified. But it is also a lot of money, and not everyone who is interested in a FP2 can afford it. So I am hoping that in the future they will be able to sell more Fairphones which can then be produced and sold at a cheaper price.


I’m sorry for sounding harsh and accusing you for not taking interest, @h_heiko! I hope that you can forgive me.

In any case, the camera module is discussed here:

Sailfish OS installation instructions can be found here:

PS.: I’m not working at Fairphone. I’m a community member just like you and I get happy when others want to participate in this forum. Part of participating is also informing myself, in my opinion.

@_Chris Yes, some people unfortunately are handicapped and in this case I would ask for clarification so that the other forum users can adapt to the situation.


I think the price is ok since the production is aimed to be fair. Something I’m easily paying for. However I thin one can’t discuss the repair options as these are really needed, given how often this thing malfunctions and how bad the support is.

I agree.
I bought FP2 a year ago…in terms of performance equivalent to a 200-250€ chinese unfair product…able to run any app/soft really decently
in mid2017…a 250€ unfair-phone (i.e. Ssg A5) will crush FP2…photos/battery life/screen/size/etc…FP2 looks really "out of date"
for 500€, now, you can get a Ssg S7 edge…don t even try to compare :fearful:

2 years after release date, FP2 is still the same price which is this specific business area is not normal.
Lot of people look my FP2 with interest but I am not able to convince anyone anymore :weary:

Yes, the price is a bit high for the mainboard features of the FP2. The price would not be high if the road map would tell us that there will be a new mainboard for the regular price with updated features…


And this.

I’ve returned a defective display module in the past, and now I’ve had to return the entire phone because it no longer charges, having recently purchased two new batteries to replace the rapidly deteriorating original. Using Navigation with GPS often resets the phone too. With the Fairphone 2 I feel I’ll always need a backup phone, because it just hasn’t been reliable for me. I’m currently on the lookout for a cheap backup phone from one of the main Android phone manufacturers, and I’m very doubtful I’ll invest in FP3 when it becomes available. Sorry guys :frowning:

Better take a used high end phone. Better support in the long run, chances for Lineage OS in the future.

1 Like

Competitive price? Definitely not, if one looks at hardware specs only. It is easy to find a better (or equal) phone on the market at half the price or less. If you don’t care about fairness, that is.

Justifiable? Much more difficult. If you care about fairness (raw materials, workers’ conditions, environmental impact), the cost breakdown is not that informative. I can see that €2,31 of the price for each phone goes to a workers’ welfare fund. Another €5,29 (1,20+4,09) goes to something called Value Chain which I guess has something to do with environmental responsibility. That’s just about 1,5% of the total price.

The price for fair raw materials is probably higher than the lowest market price. But how much higher? 5%? 10%? 20%? I haven’t got a clue. Say that the cost for materials is 20% higher than for “unfair” phones, that’s €45.

If my calculation (guesswork) is correct, it means that a FP2 minus the fair bits would cost €480, which still in my opinion is a terribly high price considering the specs.

OK, you may want to allow for developing costs for the modular design. But even if I can see that modular design could be a good thing in principle (reducing e-waste, facilitating reparability), I’m not sure that it makes a difference in practice. FP is, after all, a very small actor with limited resources, and the end of the FP1 saga does not convince me that FP will be able to procure spare parts in the future.

Justifiable price? A matter of opinion, of course. Simply keeping the FP project alive is also worth something. However, if the price isn’t also reasonably competitive, the FP will remain a niche product with relatively small numbers produced, which in turn may create support/spares problems in a not too distant future.


As - most likely - has already been posted.
Fairphone can not be compared to global players producing phones by the million items a year. They not only can negotiate cheaper prices due to the ordering of larger quantities but they do have much more market power to get what they want.
That has to be taken into account, not just the higher prices for fairer materials.



On the other hand, it would be interesting to see the costs for upgrading the main module. For example, imagine a new, modern SoC with known support for Android N and O, 64bit, 3 to 4GB of RAM. How much higher could the cost be? Then add a better camera module. This could make the FP2 even more expensive, but the bump in specs could make it comparable to top smartphones of this season again.


This topic was automatically closed after 180 days. New replies are no longer allowed.