Mass-market luxury is sort of an oxymoron.

The exclusive nature is part of what supports the luxury brand. One case study: how ray ban managed to recover their "luxury" status by removing low cost, high volume items from their catalogs.

https://fortune.com/2016/01/27/ray-ban-luxottica-retooled/

I think just the difference in the "mass" part of "mass-market."

That was part of my question. Those fashion brands are also "mass".

I'm not talking exclusive to rich people Armani's here, I'm talking all the mass market luxury brands. Heck, even Nike's $200+ sneakers...

Apple’s market cap is 15 times bigger than Nike’s. That’s all I meant.

Sure, but the quote:

"they managed to do something that was previously unimaginable in business theory - create a mass-market luxury good."

Is not about that. It is about the (perceived) impossibility of a mass-market luxury good.

But "mass-market" is a term for broad appeal/sales (dictionary: "the market for goods that are produced in large quantities"), not for over-the-top revenues.

And as for that, more people have Nike shoes than have an iPhone. But even if 1/15 as many had, it would still a mass-market good, with luxury price / appeal.