On March 11, Samsung released their Galaxy A55 smartphone, the latest midranger in their hugely popular A-series lineup. Following up the critically acclaimed Galaxy A54, which many reviewers said provided an experience that rivaled much pricier flagships, this phone was sure to sell. However, Samsung decided to skip the US when launching this phone, deciding only to launch it in certain areas internationally. At first glance, this just seems like leaving money on the table. After all, Samsung always seems to want to offer you a smartphone at whatever price point you can afford. Due to the lack of explanation provided by Samsung, though, we are left to speculate: perhaps the phone skipped the US just because it would provide the biggest competition to their own S24 flagship lineup?

Budget phones, especially on the Android side, resemble their flagship siblings more and more with each coming year. Many have adopted “premium” features such as high refresh rate displays, hole punch cutouts, high resolution cameras, and bezel-less displays. Holding the aforementioned Galaxy A54 ($449) in your hand, it could be hard to distinguish from the Galaxy S23 (the flagship released in the same cycle). Raw performance numbers certainly couldn’t keep up with the S23 on paper, however in most day-to-day activities it was perfectly fine. Even the camera, a weak spot on many budget devices, held its own against the flagship. Prominent tech YouTuber Marques Brownlee declared the A54 “78% of the flagship” through a series of categories in his video where he pitted it against the S23 Ultra, which is impressive considering the A54 is just 1/3 the price. Long story short, the A54 was praised by reviewers and sold pretty well. And, as we know now, perhaps a little too well for Samsung’s liking.

The A55 improves upon a couple key weak spots of its predecessor. It jumps from 6 to 8 gigabytes of memory on the most widely available model, opts for a larger, more desirable 6.6” display, and receives a nice performance bump with the new Exynos 1480 chipset. (Of course, the fact that it is still Exynos may be a deal breaker for some. That subject could merit its own article.) The A54 was already adequate for most smartphone users, this just makes it even better while keeping a great price point. Put simply, Samsung won’t sell this phone in the US because they made it too good. Jumping from $450 to $800 (the cost of an S24), a nearly two times price difference for a marginally better phone, is just not worth it for many, so they buy from the A-series. This would cut into their flagship lineup, which has higher profit margins, so they don’t sell it in the US. It’s still a viable option in other, lower-income countries, because people may not be able to afford the pricey flagships, however Samsung has decided Americans have enough money to spend on their higher-end phones.

Samsung isn’t the only company in the midrange space. If you ask many people in the Android world what the best phone for $500 or less is, they’ll tell you the Google Pixel A-series. With the release of the Pixel 8a, Google has arguably put themselves into an even bigger lineup conundrum than Samsung. If you look at the spec sheet for the 8a, it matches the $200 more expensive Pixel 8 nearly line for line. Both have the same Tensor G3 chip (notably the same one used in the $999 Pixel 8 Pro), 8gb RAM, and finally a near-identical 120hz display (a first for the Pixel A-series lineup.) The only differences are minor: for example, the 8a is rated IP67 whereas the 8 is rated IP68, the 8a only charges at 18 watts wired whereas the 8 charges at 27, etc. Despite some differences, the stunning similarity between these two devices has sent the Pixel into an identity crisis. Why would someone spend $699 for the Pixel 8 when they get everything but a couple minor details for just $499? Some may be quick to point out that because the Pixel 8a launches well after the Pixel 8 does that by the time it comes out you can find heavy discounts on the 8. For example, the base Pixel 8 is just $544 on Amazon at the time of writing. This, however, only further complicates things. If you can buy a Pixel 8 for nearly the same as a Pixel 8a, why does the 8a exist? It’s even worse for the average buyer who is not poring over the spec sheets. Many may just buy the Pixel 8 because they assume it’s $200 better when they would have been better off saving some money with the 8a instead.

Sometimes it feels like midrange phones are a well-kept secret of the smartphone industry. People that get their entry-level flagship phone upgraded every two years through their carrier just assume it’s what they need, that a budget device couldn’t possibly meet their needs. Maybe at one point this was true, but some might be shocked at how similar of an experience they could get these days for cheaper. I personally daily drive a Moto G Power 5G 2023, a phone that MSRPs for just $300. This phone is even more of a budget device than phones like the A54 or Pixel 8a, yet I still have been very pleased with it. Performance is solid (a word often thrown around in reviews for devices at this price point), I like the 120hz display, and the camera is passable. While I realize that I could get a device that solves any complaints I have with more money, I’m happy with what I have for what I spent. This satisfaction I feel with spending less is exactly what Samsung was worried about when they launched the A55: consumers would get more savvy and decide to spend less, leading to lower profit margins. I suppose my bottom line is that people shouldn’t feel obligated to make their next phone another $800+ flagship. A little more research and consideration of Android’s fantastic midrange category would do consumers a lot of good, despite how Samsung might feel about it. However, if I were in Samsung’s position, I wouldn’t think that making my devices too good of a value is a bad problem to have. Sure, it may take a little restructuring of their product portfolio, business plan, whatever, but I think a phone as great as the A55 could very well have a home in their US lineup.