I've started a Whitehouse.gov petition to fix the cell phone subsidy problems. The cost of early termination fees are out of control compared to the wholesale and retail cost of phones and I'd like to see the phone subsidy (or financing) billed separately from the service cost. This would make it extremely clear to all (even those who don't currently understand subsidies) how much the phones are truly costing them and hopefully improve pricing on the big carriers.
We need 150 signatures to get this to a public state where anyone can view it on the site. I'm requesting help from everyone to get these signatures to 150 and beyond. Please post on your Facebook and Google+ to get your friends and family to help out too.
Go here to view the Whitehouse.gov petition: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/require-fair-and-clear-pricing-wireless-services-and-wireless-devices/wf5hYdxd?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl
The petition is as follows:
The federally permitted duopoly of AT&T and Verizon Wireless has severely hurt competition and driven up prices in the wireless services industry. This has occurred while wireless service prices elsewhere have plummeted due to technological improvements reducing the cost to deliver service. A 3 point approach is required to protect consumers:
1. Require separation of the true cost to the consumer for the phone hardware and wireless service so that they are billed separately.
2. Prohibit early termination fees that exceed the remaining balance of the fair market value of the subsidized or financed wireless hardware.
3. Require all carriers to offer wireless service without any financial penatly or increased cost of service for using a customer owned device.
Now before anyone tells me to own my cell phone service, please note that I already have with a Nexus 4 (previously G'nex) and Straight Talk, SIMple Mobile, and Solavei. I'm pushing this petition for everyone who doesn't yet "own" their service and to improve the future market overall.
While I agree with you about how you feel about contract services, I'm not sure how I feel about needing this to be legally policed.
The thing with the phones being subsidized is that I don't see this as being a perfectly cookie-cutter direct relation to the monthly contract price. Why is it wrong for a business to offer an incentive for a customer to sign a contract ? People need to do research and have willpower - why should people have to be legally protected from making bad choices ? Casinos, liquor, and cigarettes are legal, after all.
The problem I see with point 2 is that it's not just about the hardware - it's about trying to leave a contract that you agreed to before the end of the term. Would you rather they take people to court over it ? It's like signing any contract and people should take it seriously instead of expecting to just get out of it if they want to - if you stop making car or rent payments the contract-holder isn't going to just say, "o, that's okay, I'll let you off free this time because you seem so nice". If you sign a non-disclosure or non-compete agreement, they aren't going to say, "o, you sound so nice over the phone and you're having a bad time, just go right on ahead and break the contract we won't pursue it".
The real "solution" here isn't legal action, it's public awareness. Awareness that a contract is a serious agreement - and that they have options and need to think about if a contract is best for them or not.
The solution is educating people on their other options - if people talk with their money, the companies will hear it (and at this point, they're already starting to listen).
You're preaching to the choir. A two year contract is a real commitment and shouldn't be taken lightly.
However, think about it in a little bit different light. The carriers are a legalized duopoly. This has significant benefits to us - remember when we only had regional carriers and we had to pay exorbitant per minute roaming rates? Now virtually every carrier includes roaming free, because they each have such a far reach with their existing network. We also have near seamless coverage wherever we're driving.
Despite these benefits of having only a couple major carriers, keep in mind that the carriers use public assets to provide service. Their spectrum is leased, not owned, and the spectrum is public property. Furthermore, they are in a unique position to take advantage of us, and they do. Think of the utilities that we use for our homes. You usually only have one choice for electricity and one choice for natural gas service to your home. Because if that, the utilities are regulated to protect the consumer. But, it really only makes sense to have one of each of these utilities in any area due to the high cost of the infrastructure.
I see cell carriers in the same way. Allow them to provide the benefits that they provide with their massive, high quality networks, but protect the consumer from abuse.
Let's take a look at typical discrepancies on a high end android phone subsidy.
Retail cost of phone: $500-600
Likely wholesale cost of phone to the carrier: $300-400
Cost to the consumer on contract: $200-300
Maximum amount of money to be recouped by the carrier due to subsidy: $200
Now lets look at the cost of the subsidy of two years:
Monthly contract cost: $90
Two year contract cost: $2160
Monthly prepaid plan (being conservative, they're typically lower): $55
Two year prepaid plan: $1320
You can't possibly look me in the eye and tell me that a $350 ETF is right or ethical. The carriers are recouping over over $800 to cover the cost of the phone in this scenario, and I'm erring on the low side. Remember when the ETF used to be $125-175? The carriers tell us that advanced devices cost more than feature phones did, but that's a pure lie. In the day of lower ETFs, feature phones had the same high retail pricing that smart phones do today.
You may or may not be surprised to know how many people I talk to about cell phones who don't understand phone subsidies. It's unfortunate, but not everyone understands it.
I'm on a personal mission the take as many people as possibly away from the major carriers and I've been very successful. Many people don't realize the prepaid options they have. But, we unfortunately need regulatory intervention to truly fix the problem.
I hate the fact that I don't have options right now because I'm locked into a contract until December. When I truly looked at how much I'd save over the two years, it made me sick.
If everyone just did a little bit of simple math they would leave Verizon and ATT. I am leaving to go to straight talk when my contract is up.
I think most people want what they want though. And that is the latest and fastest tech out there that's available to them and when they're offered it 5 to 6 months before they're contract is up at a "discount", then they jump at it. But we all know that in two years, your new tech will be way out dated and you will have paid twice what it's worth. It's rent-a-center for smartphones. It just doesn't make financial sense.
That's just my two cents.
Sent from my Droid X2 using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added at 06:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:07 AM ----------
But I will have to disagree with you that we need regulatory measures. You would be taking away one's freedom to make choices. No one is forced to sign the contract just as no one is forced to buy a home or car that they can't afford to keep up. People need to be educated on how to live within their means by keeping a budget and sticking to it and learning to say no to themselves sometimes. Just because something is available to us or that we can afford the monthly payments, doesn't always mean we should buy it.
People no longer ask whether or not they should or shouldn't do this or buy that. They do everything they can to acquire the latest tech, gadget or possession thinking it will satisfy their unending desires. The problem is, they don't satisfy us.
Why do you think people are obsessed with rooting and constantly flashing roms? Because we get bored with our current os or how our phone looks and feels, so we think by flashing a different rom or mod, it will keep us happy and satisfied.
The only reason I'm saying this is because I'm just as guilty, but am learning how to be content with what I have. The moment I start becoming discontented with what I have, is when I buy into the lie that I just need to upgrade my phone and sign another contract to make me happy.
But to say that I need the government to tell me that I can't takes away freedoms and personal responsibility. Sometimes we need to make mistakes to realize that the decisions we made weren't so beneficial after all.
Sent from my Eclipsed Droid X2 using Tapatalk 2
If you read the petition, it's actually a pretty reasonable request. As a business owner myself, I am generally anti regulation.
My proposed regulations merely require separate billing of the subsidy and service and prohibits the carrier from recouping more than the value of the subsidized equipment in the event that you decide to end your contract early. It is my hope that showing people exactly how much the contract costs them might encourage people to make the right choice. I don't want the government telling people what they have to do, but I do want them to ensure that people are not lied to.
But I fully agree with you that people have lost the common sense to live within their means. I think it's particularly clear as a result of our economic crash related to the housing industry.
On the note of your contract through December, do the math. You may break even quicker than you think. I left Verizon in August, 11 months into my contract. I had a 6 month break even period, so it was a win in the end. I keep telling everyone that I know about the ROI of switching, and I've had pretty good success with friends and coworkers.
If my wife and I were to end our contracts right now, we'd save $90/month switching to straight talk. A couple of problems. The up front cost of early termination fees and buying GSM phones when both of ours are cdma only usable on Verizon. Pretty sure we'd more than break even over the course of the next 10 to 11 months. We don't have enough saved to pay up front. My wife loves her iPhone 4 and she could probably find someone on Craigslist who would trade a GSM for her cdma. I have a dx2 and could probably get 50-75 for mine. To buy a comparable GSM phone would cost me atleast 200. This all is off the top of my head. Any pointers or tips on the cheapest and best way to do this?
Sent from my Eclipsed Droid X2 using Tapatalk 2
Juice3250 said:
If my wife and I were to end our contracts right now, we'd save $90/month switching to straight talk. A couple of problems. The up front cost of early termination fees and buying GSM phones when both of ours are cdma only usable on Verizon. Pretty sure we'd more than break even over the course of the next 10 to 11 months. We don't have enough saved to pay up front. My wife loves her iPhone 4 and she could probably find someone on Craigslist who would trade a GSM for her cdma. I have a dx2 and could probably get 50-75 for mine. To buy a comparable GSM phone would cost me atleast 200. This all is off the top of my head. Any pointers or tips on the cheapest and best way to do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The aspect of having the financial resources to buy out your contract is a very common issue. Sometimes waiting out the contract is the best thing to do and obviously only you can ultimately make the right decision for your finanaces. If you make enough money, consider setting aside an extra amount of money every paycheck to get to the point where you can buy out your contracts. Maybe you can stop going out to eat for a month? Maybe you can skip the big trip with the kids over spring break? There's often a place to cut your budget if you feel it's the right priority.
I know that the Verizon iPhone 4 devices have GSM built in and it might even be unlocked already. However, unless jailbroken, I don't believe you can access the APN settings to use a different carrier. I'm not an iPhone expert, I'm all Android. I do think it's possible, and Verizon will likely give you a SIM unlock code if you need it and ask for it, just ask for the unlock code before you terminate your service.
I purchased a GSM Galaxy Nexus, unlocked when I switched. Then I bought a Nexus 4. Those are your best bets for going contract free, however there are other options. But the Nexus phones have the right bands to work with T-Mobile or AT&T, allowing you to hop MVNOs to chase the best price.
Start by reading this thread to get an understanding of prepaid smartphone service: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1455014
If you can't afford a Nexus phone, read this article for some ideas: http://androidandme.com/2012/12/reviews/best-unlocked-android-phone-for-any-budget-december-2012/
A great domestic source for a plethora of unlock phones: http://www.gsmnation.com/
Also, Amazon.com is a great source for unlocked phones.
Remember, you're paying less for service because you're not getting a phone subsidy. Expect to pay an exorbitant amount for your phone, but you will be rewarded by crazy cheap service!
Related
I was checking up on GSMArena and found this article and almost had an heart attack when I saw the title. It's interesting how much hell the iPhone has caused WinMo. Now I hope more than ever that MS gets things done with WinMo7. Read on fellow WinMo lovers and US AT&T customers!
only really an issue for people who buy phones over contract though
but it bodes unwell for wm
guess they should saddle up with wm7 and windows7 too as it seems
companys dont feel vista offer them anything xp dident well not enough to
change anyway
Damn, I hope that doesn't happen.
If they actually drop windows mobile they will loose a lot of device diversity and thus loose out on lots of potential customers, regular and businesses alike. windows mobile is a staple in the business arena along side the blackberry and for them to stop supplying windows mobile devices they would be kissing all those profits goodbye. phone companies don't make money on the devices (they actually loose money on them), but they make money on the contracts, especially 2year contracts:
**the average american spends $90 a month (voice, data, sms)
1) Phone company buys phone at $500 each. Gives customer $100 rebate while selling the phone for $500 (they "loose" $100 because now customer buys phone for 400).
**but this is where they make back any money lost and more**
2) customer signs up for a 2 year contract paying $90 month; 24months multiply by $90monthly = $2160
3) now subtract that $500 they originally paid for the phone from the manufactures: $2160 -$500 = $1660, hmmm so they tripled they're original cost.....but its not done yet
4) remember customer had to pay $400 upfront to actually get the phone, so add that money back to their $1660 = $2060
so they're making roughly $2000 an any customer who's paying $90 dollars a month for 2 years. (this not taking into account equipment cost such as cellular towers/data towers, employees, etc).
businesses pays less on each device, but the fact they buy in quantities both device and contract the phone companies more than make back the difference.
if I'm wrong someone correct me.
So for them to stop selling a variety of phones especially winMo devices, then they basically stop supporting a huge part of their revenue stream. i doubt they would really do that, because that would be a really stupid move.
master athlon said:
I was checking up on GSMArena and found this article and almost had an heart attack when I saw the title. It's interesting how much hell the iPhone has caused WinMo. Now I hope more than ever that MS gets things done with WinMo7. Read on fellow WinMo lovers and US AT&T customers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like all the other articles, it says ATT branded phones will probably all be symbian, but all the rest of the OSes will still be in the lineup. Right now, ATT Wireless customer service has to support regular phones, WinMo, symbian, etc. Apple supports the iPhone. If you've ever called ATT Wireless CS, you'd know this decision could be a very good thing. The outsourced CS techs would only have to know one OS (hopefully better than they do now, spread over several OSes), while the hansets running any other OS would be supported by the handset manufacturers. Since Symbian is the longterm OS of choice anywhere outside the US, this makes sense.
I think so and I'm about to explain why.
I switched to Verizon's HTC thunderbolt from AT&T (out of contract) and being that I pay a month up front, figured AT&T would owe me for a partial month of service. I was surprised to receive a bill for $67 from AT&T that was for 10 days of service. At the time I was busy and didn't call right away. The next month I received a bill for $403!
I called today and they stated it was $300 in ETF fees. I asked why I owed $67 for 10 days of service and got a response that if I switched service I would have to pay for a full month's of service regardless of how many days I used. I told them the FCC has guidelines to prevent big companies from doing things like that and I would not be paying them for service I didn't use. This is when they began to backpedal and say well as a courtesy we will only charge you for 10 days!?! lol, what a courtesy to actually get charged for what I used.
After an hour long conversation with the customer service manager my bill was reduced down to less than $30. I have experienced this similar type of situation with Verizon in the past after not getting good reception where they tried to charge me for a full month of service after porting over my number as well as unjustified ETF fees.
I didn't have a contract with AT&T yet for some reason they were trying to justify these hefty ETF fees that took even the manager in the customer service department an hour to fix.
I think these big cell phone companies try to bully around the consumer rather than win them over. Then claim they are doing you a favor by treating you fairly!
Hearing about the T-mobile merger I'm really starting to wonder what is going to come of the future of mobile services. I have had T-mobile service for 5 years in the past and never have I experienced these kinds of problems, the big 2 have given me.
Once T-mobile is bought out where will the checks and balances of competition be observed? I would have signed up for T-mobile service but they don't have nice phones nor the data connection speed I was looking for.
Hence the dilema, as these companies get larger they gain more power over the consumer and the manufacturer of the devices. We as the consumer have very little say in what occurs other than to sit on the phone and hope the person on the other end can "work it out" in their system.
Large corporations abusing their customers... what else is new?
I've heard these horror stories from both sides of the fence (Verizon + ATT). Just like almost every other business sector in America, customer service is going down with last night's dinner. Instead of "The customer is always right," corporations have now moved to "Get them to a position where they can't say 'no'" leaving consumers no choice but to bend over and take it or band together and sue. Pretty soon instead of labor unions we'll have consumer unions...
/rant
dbisch said:
Large corporations abusing their customers... what else is new?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the better question is how can I let the government know what happened in my situation and allow them to understand what this means for the consumer?
Or are they just getting paid copious amounts of money to justify the anti-trust situation and there is nothing we as the consumer can do to stop them?
Is there no forum for this other than BBB?
I feel like the FCC should know that both AT&T and Verizon are telling customers they have to pay for service they never receive and then when called out they back down acting like I'm getting one over on them.
Don't know what it is worth.... but...
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list
azwildfire said:
Don't know what it is worth.... but...
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I'll look into it
Well both companies have crappy service, I was a Tmo customer and hated every minute I had them. Couldnt drive home from work without loosing my call 3 or 4 times.
To tell you the truth "customer service" varies just like people are. Depends who you get, and what kind of problem you have. I have had friends that try and twist the system and complain poor customer service because they don't get their way. I have seen people with legitimate problems who don't get help because at times reps don't have the authority to fix the problem. A lot of people don't have patience like they used to have. Sometimes how you present yourself dictates the kind of service you get.
On the subject at hand... I don't think it honestly matters... Consumers have been giving up power for many years... If it bothered you that much about pricing then why bother getting service and paying for it. If people stuck to their guns instead of paying for it then prices would change faster than everyone paying for service.
BEFORE anyone cries and say they need blah blah blah for "emergencies"
ANY phone land line or cellular can dial 911 regardless if it has service or not as required BY LAW... So that's a VERY MOOT point.
If it was an emergency then what are you going to do? Text 911, or look up on the internet how to dial 911 and report an emergency?
At some point with the way things are going choices will be gone... The government will soon be telling us what we can and can't do, what services to get, and everything else imaginable... We are almost there anyway with the way people cry about this and that instead of putting their money where their mouth is.
The big American telecos have always been pretty high up on my list of evil corporations, so I wasn't exactly surprised to hear that Verizon – perhaps the worst offender of them all – is making the consumer bear the brunt of another frivolous fee. From now on Verizon subscribers will have to pay a $30 fee every time they upgrade their phones. While we've all gotten used to carriers inventing bogus fees literally out of thin air, it is important to take a step back and understand exactly how Verizon, AT&T and the rest are shamelessly ripping us off with every monthly statement.
For years now, wireless providers have been luring consumers in with top-quality phones at reduced prices in exchange for a two-year commitment. You get to keep the phone, while the carrier has the pleasure of charging you a hefty monthly sum for the service. Seems like a fair enough deal, right? At least, that's what the carriers would like to have you believe. The reality, however, is much more sketchy and sneaky as is often the case with companies that have a quasi-monopoly over any given product or service.
If you actually sit down and do the math, you end up paying the carrier back way more than just the price of the phone. But that's not the story the carriers are selling to the media. In fact, based on the decrease in profits carriers are complaining about how much money they are losing on subsidized phones. So in an attempt to allegedly compensate for providing us with phones at subsidized prices, US carriers have systematically introduced a so-called “upgrade fee” on top of all the existing charges lurking underneath the surface of your cell phone bill.
What may look like a relatively small fee will actually bring Verizon an extra $1 billion a year in terms of profit. And now that they've jumped on the “upgrade fee” bandwagon consumers are left with no choice but to shake their fists at the telcos and shell out an extra $30.
And get this, according to Verizon, this new fee is meant to “help continue to provide customers with the level of service and support they have come to expect”. If by that they mean that we've all become used to the fact that Verizon is one money-thirsty leech of a company with terrible customer service – then, yes, we agree.
As Americans we've become addicted to two-year contracts and subsidized phones, but my recommendation to you would be to use your Internet browsing skills and buy your Android phones at full price. Thankfully, there are plenty of good deals to be had on eBay and online discount stores. Don't let the Big Three bleed you to death with fees, fines and small print. Just keep one thing in mind: with these telecos it's always the consumer that gets the short end of the stick.
This is not only an issue in America but other parts of world too. I urge all consumers to band together & resist this kind of extortion. Vote with you money. Hurt evil monopolies where it will hurt them the most.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Have you no consumer protection lobbies in the US?
Over here for instance, I've got a HTC Sensation, free on O2 for £32 a month giving me 600 minutes, unlimited texts and 500MB a month along with free access to BT Openzone and O2 wifi hot spots. I also get a discount on my home broadband.
It's a 24 month contract but I can change after 21 months as I'm a valued customer.
So in total it's going to cost me £672.
At the time the Sensation without contract was around the £450 mark from reputable retailers (not ebay where you have very little come back if something goes wrong), even now it's £350.
So the contract actually cost me £222 which is under £11 a month. Even at £350 for the handset it'd be £15 a month.
Now looking at O2's sim only contracts, the same would be £21.50 a month, so it's cheaper to get a free phone on contract.
Even running the whole 24 months it works out at less than £17.50 a month if you take the free phone. To break even you'd need to buy a Sensation for £252 which means second hand.
Having looked at prices on US provider's websites and complaints posted on here, you guys seriously need to get the industry regulated to protect consumers from being ripped off.
How is it a rip off if I was going to buy that smart phone anyway and use that carrier? If I pick all the options I want carrier with phone and they are willing to subsidize the phone how is that ripping me off? I'd be using that phone and that carrier anyway so why not take the subsidy?
the_main_app said:
How is it a rip off if I was going to buy that smart phone anyway and use that carrier? If I pick all the options I want carrier with phone and they are willing to subsidize the phone how is that ripping me off? I'd be using that phone and that carrier anyway so why not take the subsidy?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good example is tmobile Monthly 4g plan is $70.00 flats fee for unlimited everything talk and text and 5 gigs data. This plan is non contract can leave when you want and comes up to $1680.00 after two years.
Classic plan for tmobile for the same features are 59.99 for talk and text. 35.00 dollars for 5 gig data. $94.99 let's add taxes and fees after. Which is around 11.00 extra which brings you to $105.99 note this is without $8.00 insurance added on. Two years on this plan is $ 2543.76.
Tmobile value plan is for the same features are $74.99 with taxes its $85.99 a month. Again without the insurance. You bring your phone and your also locked in a contract. You get no subsidize phones on this plan. Two years this plan is $2063.76
Classic vs value you save $480 dollars on value plan.
Classic vs monthly 4g you save $863.76. On the monthly 4g non contract plan
Value plan vs monthly 4g you save. $383.76 on the monthly 4g.
When you are on contract you wind up paying more for the phone then what's its worth on the contract. As you can see the savings alone can easily let you buy a phone off contract.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
You guys still have it better with 2 year plans, and we are stuck in "3rd world " like stage with 3 year contracts....
Regardless of the phone cost, you're still shelling out decent amounts of money for your cell service, if you want to be up in arms, do it about your monthly bill costs.
the_main_app said:
How is it a rip off if I was going to buy that smart phone anyway and use that carrier? If I pick all the options I want carrier with phone and they are willing to subsidize the phone how is that ripping me off? I'd be using that phone and that carrier anyway so why not take the subsidy?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't see that its a rip off, then you are as much the problem.
It's all about cash flow to be honest. I bought my phone outright thinking it would be cheaper but if you want data then you end up paying over £20 in any case and if think about it only saves you around 30-50, for paying £500 upfront...
Killbynature said:
Good example is tmobile Monthly 4g plan is $70.00 flats fee for unlimited everything talk and text and 5 gigs data. This plan is non contract can leave when you want and comes up to $1680.00 after two years.
Classic plan for tmobile for the same features are 59.99 for talk and text. 35.00 dollars for 5 gig data. $94.99 let's add taxes and fees after. Which is around 11.00 extra which brings you to $105.99 note this is without $8.00 insurance added on. Two years on this plan is $ 2543.76.
Tmobile value plan is for the same features are $74.99 with taxes its $85.99 a month. Again without the insurance. You bring your phone and your also locked in a contract. You get no subsidize phones on this plan. Two years this plan is $2063.76
Classic vs value you save $480 dollars on value plan.
Classic vs monthly 4g you save $863.76. On the monthly 4g non contract plan
Value plan vs monthly 4g you save. $383.76 on the monthly 4g.
When you are on contract you wind up paying more for the phone then what's its worth on the contract. As you can see the savings alone can easily let you buy a phone off contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Crikey those tariffs are steep!
Would I be right in thinking that the phones offered on the tariff are not free but only subsidised? So you're still forking out $150-250 for a handset?
ACtually it's not the subsidised phone that's a ripoff but the plan itself.
Keep in mind that the price of the plan is the same regardless of you getting a new phone with or not. There's no cheaper plan options for people opting out of the phone. Or any kind of saving.
The phone itself is basically an added benefit to you the user. Compare about the atrocious data and smd plans instead.
I got my samsung gio with a vodafone prepaid card + 5 Euro free to use prepaid money, the whole package cost me 112 Euros while in my country the cheapest GIO without a simlock (mine is simlocked) costs around 155 Euros.
I pay 30ct per MB though if I purchase a one month internet bundle via my prepaid money I pay 7ct per MB. I can also buy MB's that are usable for a day which will cost me 10ct per MB. Though the amount of MB's you buy are locked, I am pretty happy with my prepaid phone.
I also agree you should refrain from sticking to multi year contracts, who knows what happens in two years, or even one year.
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/18626772.jpg
xaccers said:
Crikey those tariffs are steep!
Would I be right in thinking that the phones offered on the tariff are not free but only subsidised? So you're still forking out $150-250 for a handset?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah pretty much you can buy a phone from any other place cheaper. I don't know where you live but a free phone in the USA. Isn't free. You have upgrade $30 or $18 just to update. Staying off contract would still be cheaper and you can just sell your old phone and the savings alone would make it cheaper. Another benefit is that you aren't worrying about your carrier for updates. Buy the original phone and it will be updated better than a carrier branded version of the phone.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
shardnet said:
ACtually it's not the subsidised phone that's a ripoff but the plan itself.
Keep in mind that the price of the plan is the same regardless of you getting a new phone with or not. There's no cheaper plan options for people opting out of the phone. Or any kind of saving.
The phone itself is basically an added benefit to you the user. Compare about the atrocious data and smd plans instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually in most cases, the big carriers do charge you the same price on the plan regardless of whether you bought the phone subsidized or not. But they are not the only companies you can get a plan with. You can always go the prepaid route and you can get the same mobile and data service as the big carriers as many of the prepaid plans are MVNOs. F0or example I bought an International Galaxy Note recently and put it on Straight Talk's Unlimited Everything plan for $45/month. Over 2 years it will cost me $1080. Add in the cost of the phone, I will have paid $1665 over 2 years. Buy the phone from AT&T for $250 and $100/month on service ($40 for voice, $20 Text unlimited, $30 for 3GB data, and taxes), $2650 total over 2 years. I would have saved almost $1000 over the 2 years AND not tied to a contract.
shardnet said:
ACtually it's not the subsidised phone that's a ripoff but the plan itself.
Keep in mind that the price of the plan is the same regardless of you getting a new phone with or not. There's no cheaper plan options for people opting out of the phone. Or any kind of saving.
The phone itself is basically an added benefit to you the user. Compare about the atrocious data and smd plans instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said it's different in the USA. Our plans pretty much make us pay for the full price + extra. All phones have a 1 year warranty. Even then using tmobile insurance it will cost you an extra $120 every two years. They also charge you a fee for delivering a replacement now. I think it's $5 om insurance and 20 dollars without.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I fail to see the point. Yes Verizon is spendy but they are the best. But if you want a cheaper phone and plan there are options. I pay $25 bucks a month for my virgin mobile plan and I paid $240 for my epic touch that I modded to run on virgin mobile USA. I will probably keep this plan for as long as I can. If I need to use more minutes that's what internet calling is for. It may not be as dependable as Verizon or at&t but it gets the job done.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA
Killbynature said:
Yeah pretty much you can buy a phone from any other place cheaper. I don't know where you live but a free phone in the USA. Isn't free. You have upgrade $30 or $18 just to update. Staying off contract would still be cheaper and you can just sell your old phone and the savings alone would make it cheaper. Another benefit is that you aren't worrying about your carrier for updates. Buy the original phone and it will be updated better than a carrier branded version of the phone.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Over here in the UK, phones are generally what is used by providers to snag customers.
So people pick the phone they want then search the providers for the best deal offering that phone, either for free (normally a higher monthly cost) or at a reduced price.
We also have various organisations keeping charges low.
I personally feel the opposite of the OP. How exactly is a subsidized phone a ripoff? The PLAN is going to be the same whether you bring your own phone or get one from the carrier. If you know you aren't going to be sticking around for 2 years then buying your phone outright might be the way to go. Otherwise I'd say save some money.
edit wrong thread.
Sprint always find a way to nickel and dime people. Also I can tell you now that you won't be getting updates when Google puts them out. It's going to be just like the Galaxy Nexus all over again.
DevilStrider said:
Sprint always find a way to nickel and dime people. Also I can tell you now that you won't be getting updates when Google puts them out. It's going to be just like the Galaxy Nexus all over again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sprint is charging $100 more for the same N5 that can be bought from the Play Store.........BECAUSE THEY CAN! There are always legions of buyers who just don't know that they can get it cheaper elsewhere and fall for the Sprint hype. T-Mobile charged $150 more for the Nexus 4 last year. Carriers will continue to $crew their customers as long as ignorance reigns in the cell phone world.
Because every carrier is looking to make a profit from stocking/marketing/servicing the devices they sell. Google sells the phone because of LG; Google isn't a cellular carrier so when they sell the phone, they're not making much money off it at all because it's a) unlocked and b) unsubsidized.
Because carriers like Sprint and the others know the Nexus 5 (and all Nexus smartphones) are unlocked from the factory that means if they sell you a Nexus 5 at the same price you can typically get it for from Google directly, you're not going to have any real incentive to stay with them after the purchase since you can use it with any provider (more or less).
The only way a company like Sprint is going to make their typical profits or even close to it is marking up the price over what the manufacturer/designer is selling the device for hence the higher cost.
Does it suck when this happens? You're damned right it does, but that's business for you.
Just think of how many scumbucket bastards are out there that have been buying the Nexus 5 in somewhat large quantities since Friday only for the express purpose of putting them on eBay/craigslist and taking advantage of people by snatching up all the inventory then selling it back to you at a serious markup as there are literally thousands upon thousands of them.
I see ads on craigslist right now for the 32GB models for $550+ and the people selling them don't even have them for actual sale yet because they're not going to get them for several days (after Nov 8th) - talk about bottom of the barrel crap, I swear.
If you want the device, and you have to get it "now" then carriers are the only option since it appears Google still has inventory but the shipping times are 3-4 weeks now, then you end up paying whatever someone else is charging.
Supply and demand, run by scumbuckets.
br0adband said:
Because every carrier is looking to make a profit from stocking/marketing/servicing the devices they sell. Google sells the phone because of LG; Google isn't a cellular carrier so when they sell the phone, they're not making much money off it at all because it's a) unlocked and b) unsubsidized.
Because carriers like Sprint and the others know the Nexus 5 (and all Nexus smartphones) are unlocked from the factory that means if they sell you a Nexus 5 at the same price you can typically get it for from Google directly, you're not going to have any real incentive to stay with them after the purchase since you can use it with any provider (more or less).
The only way a company like Sprint is going to make their typical profits or even close to it is marking up the price over what the manufacturer/designer is selling the device for hence the higher cost.
Does it suck when this happens? You're damned right it does, but that's business for you.
Just think of how many scumbucket bastards are out there that have been buying the Nexus 5 in somewhat large quantities since Friday only for the express purpose of putting them on eBay/craigslist and taking advantage of people by snatching up all the inventory then selling it back to you at a serious markup as there are literally thousands upon thousands of them.
I see ads on craigslist right now for the 32GB models for $550+ and the people selling them don't even have them for actual sale yet because they're not going to get them for several days (after Nov 8th) - talk about bottom of the barrel crap, I swear.
If you want the device, and you have to get it "now" then carriers are the only option since it appears Google still has inventory but the shipping times are 3-4 weeks now, then you end up paying whatever someone else is charging.
Supply and demand, run by scumbuckets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn that's crazy.
ubbeate for
I'm hoping the reasoning is that Google is charging Sprint the same amount for the phones that they are charging us. Unlikely but it would be neat.
Why not just but it from the play store instead? Wait a couple weeks to get it. Unless the extra money is worth it to go buy it in store.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Moto G, Verizon Droids Coming to Carriers, But Not Moto X
"If you want the new Moto X Style when it comes to market in September, you're going to have to buy it unlocked. Otherwise, you might want to wait a month or two for some Verizon Droid announcements.
The $399 Moto X Style is one of very few phones that can be used on all four major U.S. carriers. So far in the U.S., only the Google Nexus 6 and the Apple iPhone 6 and 6 Plus have that ability. It'll work just fine with AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, or Verizon SIM cards, said Motorola senior vice president of software engineering Seang Chau.
"You buy it once, and you can switch carriers all you want," he said.
But the Moto X Style won't be sold in carrier stores..."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking forward to this release. If that camera has really improved, bye bye Samsung S5!
I'm looking at the X Style for a couple reasons. UNLOCKED from a carrier, means I don't have to jump through hoops.
Rooting isn't an issue for me. My current 1 year old Huawei Mate2 isn't unlocked either. For work purposes, the camera
has to be a good one, the mate2 13mp is fantastic, coupled with the Camera FV-5 app. More megapixels does not always
equate with a better photograph, but, if DONE RIGHT it will, so, once it gets in the wild and feedback starts coming in,
I'll know. It's a bit smaller than my current device, which comes in with a 6.1" screen. It has a 4,100mAH battery, which
can easily last 2 days. As long as the Moto, can get me 10 hours of usage, it wouldn't matter to me to lose just a bit
of screen size or battery life.
They also say "Screw Canada".
They also say screw anyone who would prefer to pay less than $400 for a phone and are willing to take a contract to do so.
sternum_boy said:
They also say screw anyone who would prefer to pay less than $400 for a phone and are willing to take a contract to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You still end up paying the $400. However best buy and Motorola have very decent finance options. I would rather do that than end up in a contract.
The route I take is I always sell my old phone on swappa before its price drops too low so I'm never paying more and $200 for a new phone. Most of the time it's an even trade.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
orcsbane13 said:
You still end up paying the $400. However best buy and Motorola have very decent finance options. I would rather do that than end up in a contract.
The route I take is I always sell my old phone on swappa before its price drops too low so I'm never paying more and $200 for a new phone. Most of the time it's an even trade.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, you don't end up paying the $400. I am with Sprint and they still offer subsidized upgrades with a 2 year contract. The contract free plans are not at a cheaper monthly rate than my legacy plan (my plan works out to about $60 per line with unlimited data). I typically pay between $0 and $150 for a phone at retail, get a 2 year contract, and then sell my old phone for $50-$100.
orcsbane13 said:
You still end up paying the $400. However best buy and Motorola have very decent finance options. I would rather do that than end up in a contract.
The route I take is I always sell my old phone on swappa before its price drops too low so I'm never paying more and $200 for a new phone. Most of the time it's an even trade.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How? My bill doesn't go up or down when I subsidies a phone. If I pay 200, I pay 200..
They offered unlocked and carrier versions before. They will probably have carrier versions in time.
But with unlocked, you have the freedom to play carriers for the lowest rate and MVNOs too.
Ultimately unlocked is cheaper over time. If you are in an area where you can play the field. I hope more carriers go unlocked.
I just need T-Moble to open up their WiFi calling app to devices like this. But the savings and features outweigh getting a T-Mobile Nexus with WiFi calling IMHO.
Biz!
I hope it's worth it.
They scream screw 1+ lol
Sent from my SM-G920T
Apple
If all the manufactures would do this, you would see the iphone have trouble selling their icrap for $700-800. Of course, the isheep would pay any price for their two year technology. I think it is a simple phone for simple people.
Verizon just announced "no more contracts". AT&T has been offering it for a while. To get those "low" device prices with a contract, you're buying the subsidy. On AT&T you spend $600 over 2 years for the subsidy. Then if you buy the phone for $200 on contract, you've really spent $800 dollars for it. This is the AT&T example, but others are similar. Contacts are not a good deal.
I've been off contract for more than a year now. Bought all my phones outright. The majority of the 9 are MotoG, an original MotoX, and a couple old Galaxy S3. We all share 15GB of data and have unlimited talk and text for about $27 / month / line. But we do buy our phones.
As contracts and subsidies become a thing of the past, and people realize the "true" cost of their phones, the days of $700 - $1000 phones are numbers. I applaud Moto for their pricing and for freeing us from the carrier imposed constraints and bloatware. It all started with the original MotoG and MotoX under Google ownership, and I'm glad to see they continue with this approach under the current ownership.
jswclw said:
Verizon just announced "no more contracts". AT&T has been offering it for a while. To get those "low" device prices with a contract, you're buying the subsidy. On AT&T you spend $600 over 2 years for the subsidy. Then if you buy the phone for $200 on contract, you've really spent $800 dollars for it. This is the AT&T example, but others are similar. Contacts are not a good deal.
I've been off contract for more than a year now. Bought all my phones outright. The majority of the 9 are MotoG, an original MotoX, and a couple old Galaxy S3. We all share 15GB of data and have unlimited talk and text for about $27 / month / line. But we do buy our phones.
As contracts and subsidies become a thing of the past, and people realize the "true" cost of their phones, the days of $700 - $1000 phones are numbers. I applaud Moto for their pricing and for freeing us from the carrier imposed constraints and bloatware. It all started with the original MotoG and MotoX under Google ownership, and I'm glad to see they continue with this approach under the current ownership.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny that Moto decided to do this right before Verizon drops subsidized phones. I have to say this phone is way more attractive looking to me. I was thinking of waiting to see what the new droid line had. However the cost will be 200-300 more than this phone. I think this will be a game changer in the way OEMs build and price their phones.
sent from "my kungfu is stronger then yours" XT1080
I'm glad to see moto going this route with these phones. Hopefully it starts dropping the prices of other phones.
I am curious to see how Iphone sales go with no contracts. How many people are willing to spend the big bucks for 64gb and higher iphones. I am ditching my S5 once I can get my hands on these newer moto phones and see if the Moto Pure is too big for my hands or not
[bman123] said:
I'm glad to see moto going this route with these phones. Hopefully it starts dropping the prices of other phones.
I am curious to see how Iphone sales go with no contracts. How many people are willing to spend the big bucks for 64gb and higher iphones. I am ditching my S5 once I can get my hands on these newer moto phones and see if the Moto Pure is too big for my hands or not
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently Verizon is keeping subsidized phones for current customers if I read the articles right.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
DaleGriggs said:
If all the manufactures would do this, you would see the iphone have trouble selling their icrap for $700-800. Of course, the isheep would pay any price for their two year technology. I think it is a simple phone for simple people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really hope Apple starts to lower their prices. With more and more carriers no longer doing 2 year contracts, many customers now have to see the full price of the phone, and either pay for it up front or know they are spending $800 over the course of a 2 year phone loan.
The phones are worth whatever customers will pay for them. I could see iPhone prices declining some, but probably not that much.
Macs still sell pretty well, even though there are better, cheaper alternatives...
I'm really looking forward to this phone. I just hope it gets a lot of developer love.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
geoff5093 said:
I really hope Apple starts to lower their prices. With more and more carriers no longer doing 2 year contracts, many customers now have to see the full price of the phone, and either pay for it up front or know they are spending $800 over the course of a 2 year phone loan.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While there may be some correction to improved yields and manufacturing improvements don't count on any substantial price drops (unless they come out with a lower end phone but that will still be pricey). People who like iPhones will have no issues paying for them. I went from a subsidized phones (4 on our account) to non-subsidized (payments over 24 mo.) and my overall phone bill went down. Particularly for iPhones you used to be limited to higher cost plans with subsidized phones. BUT once you had "paid" off your phone at two years you were still stuck with a higher cost plan. I haven't been under contract for many years and never again will be.
I'm waiting to see if the Moto's will bootloader unlockable and see what the new Nexus phones bring to the table then I'll make up my mind, but the Moto X is high on my list.