AfterDawn: Tech news

Rich? Buy the iPhone 3GS Supreme for $3 million

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 27 Nov 2009 12:21 User comments (39)

Rich? Buy the iPhone 3GS Supreme for $3 million Goldstriker's Stuart Hughes has showed off the most expensive phone ever created today, the iPhone 3GS Supreme, with a value of $3.2 million USD.
The mobile took 10 months to create and was commissioned by an "Australian gold mining magnate" who clearly had a lot of money on hand now that the value of gold has reached new all-time highs.

The Supreme has 22K solid gold casing, and the front bezel is studded with 136 diamonds. Hughes adds that the "rear logo has 53 flawless diamonds and the front navigation button is home to a very rare diamond at 7.1 cts."

Previous Next  

39 user comments

127.11.2009 12:42

ugly as hell

227.11.2009 12:58

Ahh, just another douche that wipes his arse with dollar bills!

327.11.2009 13:08

Now its just a fancy case for cheap asian sourced parts. Yipee.

427.11.2009 13:15
WierdName
Inactive

The question is if the firmware is opened or anything.

527.11.2009 13:21

What a waste...

627.11.2009 13:43

I guess this voids his warranty... ---Chikn

727.11.2009 13:57

If he one of the guys have a seat in the new arc for 2012

827.11.2009 14:52

This is a little over the top... I knew they made gold plated iphones when commissioned, not apple some other company, but this is just ridiculous.

927.11.2009 15:16

Woo I have a 3 million dollar iphone and I am still a slave to steve jobs. The guy that did this probably had to personally feed steve jobs twice a day for 3 months straight just to get the ability to modify his iphone legally. And guess what it still looks like shit at 3 million dollars.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Nov 2009 @ 11:19

1027.11.2009 15:33

what a joke kids starving in the world and this muppet is spending thats type ofmoney on a phone idiot

1127.11.2009 16:48

Question is, is there even coverage in his area for an iPhone? haha

1227.11.2009 19:04

Figures whats new for people not waiting in the food help line.

1327.11.2009 19:06

Someone needs to punch this guy in the face. 3 million better ways to spend that kind of money. Hope he drops it in the toilet.

1428.11.2009 0:31
boldboy
Inactive

iam austrlia and i hope he goes to a busy shopping centre with it and some one picks his pockets if he had that much money to throw around he could have donated to the cancer research centre.

1528.11.2009 3:05

if i had 3 million to spend i'd probably buy 6houses and rent them out for $400 a week each.plus a sports car and gifts for my family.I own a nokia 6070 which was given to me and the only think i use it for is texting and talking to people.I dont even believe in the need for an expensive mobile phone so theres no way i'd spent 3million on a phone even if i had that kind of money.


custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

1628.11.2009 4:54

Wow! $3 million for a phone that is ten months out of date, and was never a good phone to begin with.

Then again, I bet it does not overheat as bad with all that gold to disipate the heat.

I wonder if he has commisioned a Platinum Droid yet...

1728.11.2009 6:47

Look at me everyone I have a $3M iphone,

Ah I dropped it and It's useless.

What an idiot

1828.11.2009 7:57

Ill take it after he drops it and we will see how useless it is

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Nov 2009 @ 8:00

1928.11.2009 11:19

If 3M is like 300 bucks to you you are not rich......

2028.11.2009 14:01

Is it just me or does the guy in the pic look like Mike Myers in costume?

2128.11.2009 18:22

This a a real uber rich faggot's toy if ever I saw one.

2228.11.2009 18:56
scum101
Inactive

I don't think being a "faggot" has anything to do with how rich tossers decide to squander their wealth.

nasty term.. generally used by inbred rednecks ;)


2328.11.2009 20:16

Originally posted by Zoner:
Is it just me or does the guy in the pic look like Mike Myers in costume?
It is. It's him as Goldmember from the 3rd Austin Powers movie. "Can I paint his yoohoo gold?"

2429.11.2009 20:54

I'd rather by a Bugatti Veyron Convertible for 2.2 million, then use the rest to buy like 70 Toyota's or something

2529.11.2009 23:47
mebjolz
Inactive

..........

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 05 Jan 2011 @ 5:33

2630.11.2009 0:41

Originally posted by domie:
This a a real uber rich faggot's toy if ever I saw one.
IF you think that the guy from the picture looks like a homosexual, you should know that is an actor playing a part that was intended to seem "fabulously gay"...this is not the person who bought the phone...they just used that picture because he looks like a gold-crazy billionaire. The article does not say who bought the phone. Stuart Hughes is a company, specializing in making terrible phones into terribly overpriced phones. Stuart Hughes the person also has a business buying $10,000 pants and adding $10,000 zippers and buttons, then selling them for $30,000.
http://stuarthughes.com

272.12.2009 1:39
BaconBIt
Inactive

This guy could have easily upgraded bunches of regular Iphones and resold them to make more money than just throw away 3 million. He's a doucher.

282.12.2009 3:18

Quote:
further argument for the mass culling of the mega wealthy minority...even those who do give to charity offer only a pathetic fraction of their overall wealth and expect to be lauded as a saint for doing so...hollywood stars especially.
if a celebrity gives $100000 to charity it doesnt matter whether they have $1million or $100million.they still took $100000 and gave it away why shoudn't they be hailed as a saint.Most normal people dont give that much in a lifetime and they spend more than that in their lifetime.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

292.12.2009 3:59
chris4160
Inactive

Originally posted by BaconBIt:
This guy could have easily upgraded bunches of regular Iphones and resold them to make more money than just throw away 3 million. He's a doucher.
Umm he's a gold mining magnate... have you seens the size of some of the mines over here in Australia? He probably make 3m in a day.

I wonder if the guy who bought this is that guy who bought the Gold Coast soccer team? Clive Palmer I think his name was.

302.12.2009 5:20

Originally posted by chris4160:
Originally posted by BaconBIt:
This guy could have easily upgraded bunches of regular Iphones and resold them to make more money than just throw away 3 million. He's a doucher.
Umm he's a gold mining magnate... have you seens the size of some of the mines over here in Australia? He probably make 3m in a day.

I wonder if the guy who bought this is that guy who bought the Gold Coast soccer team? Clive Palmer I think his name was.
I should take a dump and have it gold-plated, I bet this guy would buy a piece of s**t if it was gold-plated, oh wait...this article says he already did.


312.12.2009 13:55
WierdName
Inactive

Originally posted by KillerBug:
I should take a dump and have it gold-plated, I bet this guy would buy a piece of s**t if it was gold-plated, oh wait...this article says he already did.
[In Sheldon Cooper tone]Bazinga.

322.12.2009 18:41

I guess after he is done with it he could sell the diamonds and melt the gold down. So its not a huge waste of money but more of a silly place to invest some cash.

332.12.2009 20:57
mebjolz
Inactive

if a celebrity gives $100000 to charity it doesnt matter whether they have $1million or $100million.they still took $100000 and gave it away why shoudn't they be hailed as a saint.Most normal people dont give that much in a lifetime and they spend more than that in their lifetime.

Most normal people as you say, might spend that much in a lifetime but that would be spent on the general cost of living eg rent, food, education etc and many of those people still give what they can to charity, some even more than they can comfortably afford. These celebrities dont. They could give so much more and dont...still think they ought to be considered saintly? What about Angelina Jolie, a perfect example here...the woman could afford to help out an entire african nation with her wealth rather than just buying a baby and pretending she did so to give the child a better life...instead of buying a child she could have built an orphanage or schools whatever and improved the lives of many...maybe she already has but who gives a shit. Her bank balance would still be ridiculously high, more than anyone would ever need without leading a life of gross extravagence so why shouldnt these people be expected to forfeit part of that income which, in one way or another we all provide, to assist in the overcoming of certain troubles plagueing humanity...the point is she could do much more and chooses not to...what is so f**king good about that?
Celebrities spray a drop of piss into an ocean of problems then say look at me everybody Im making waves not ripples...

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 02 Dec 2009 @ 21:05

342.12.2009 21:39
WierdName
Inactive

Ok, two things. One, celebrities' money is just that; theirs. So they don't have to give a dime if they don't want. Moving to point two however, just because they throw a small percentage of their wealth towards charity doesn't mean they should be hailed for it. Every day people drop off stuff at Goodwill, drop a buck or two off in those Salvation Army cans, etc. These people aren't hailed. It's charity, not publicity. Although, that's what it's been made into. Back to the other side though, it is their wealth and they can do with it what they please. This 'spread the wealth' crap needs to stop. When you work for your money, however easy it may have been for you to, it's your money. Nobody is entitled to your money just because you have more. But that doesn't mean you don't have a moral obligation to do something when you have quite so much disposable wealth.
So really, if this guy wants to throw money at what is mostly considered pointless, that's his deal. And for that matter, the article doesn't name who it was so for all you know they already gave $30 million to various charity works. But somehow I doubt that...


Doesnt expecting the unexpected make the unexpected expected and therefore mean youre expecting the expected which was the unexpected until you expected it?
"Opinions are immunities to being told were wrong." - Relient K

353.12.2009 1:11

Originally posted by WierdName:
Ok, two things. One, celebrities' money is just that; theirs. So they don't have to give a dime if they don't want. Moving to point two however, just because they throw a small percentage of their wealth towards charity doesn't mean they should be hailed for it. Every day people drop off stuff at Goodwill, drop a buck or two off in those Salvation Army cans, etc. These people aren't hailed. It's charity, not publicity. Although, that's what it's been made into. Back to the other side though, it is their wealth and they can do with it what they please. This 'spread the wealth' crap needs to stop. When you work for your money, however easy it may have been for you to, it's your money. Nobody is entitled to your money just because you have more. But that doesn't mean you don't have a moral obligation to do something when you have quite so much disposable wealth.
So really, if this guy wants to throw money at what is mostly considered pointless, that's his deal. And for that matter, the article doesn't name who it was so for all you know they already gave $30 million to various charity works. But somehow I doubt that...
Agreed...if someone wants to blow $3million on a cell phone, more power to them. He probably gave a few people jobs by doing so. Yeah, it is a waist of money, but at least the money didn't go to some bank account, where it would do nothing for anybody...it went into the market, and by the time all was said and done, there were a lot of companies who made money from this sale. It would be great if this guy was spending his money on building hospitals and schools in third world countries (and he would probably be a happier person)...but it would be terrible if he was forced to do so.


363.12.2009 18:33

Rich = More money than you have
Wealth = enough money to live in their chosen lifestyle and to actually earn money by investing.

If a person who has "Wealth" gives it away, then they no longer have "wealth".

While I agree that the idea of a $3mil Iphone is stupid, it's hardly a "waste of money".
Neither the Gold, nor the diamonds are likely to depreciate and so in 10 years when the Iphone no longer even works it will most likely be worth many times what he paid for it.
How is that a waste of money?

373.12.2009 18:41

Originally posted by ThePastor:
Rich = More money than you have
Wealth = enough money to live in their chosen lifestyle and to actually earn money by investing.

If a person who has "Wealth" gives it away, then they no longer have "wealth".

While I agree that the idea of a $3mil Iphone is stupid, it's hardly a "waste of money".
Neither the Gold, nor the diamonds are likely to depreciate and so in 10 years when the Iphone no longer even works it will most likely be worth many times what he paid for it.
How is that a waste of money?
More like
Rich:enough money to live in their chosen lifestyle.
Gods:More money than gods.

384.12.2009 9:01

The epitome of the word "DOUCHEBAG" !!!!!!

397.7.2010 1:22
New user69
Unverified new user

Wow...
I bet whoever bought that phone is PISSED now that the iphone 4 came out..haha

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive