or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › US government files antitrust suit to block AT&T purchase of T-Mobile
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

US government files antitrust suit to block AT&T purchase of T-Mobile - Page 2

post #41 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Like ATT is trying to do with T-Mobile USA?

So what you are saying is all ATT has to do is wait?!

Besides, I thought Deutsche Telekom was selling off their non profitable American division as a means of severing a hemorrhaging money losing appendage (operation).
/
/
/


That could be apple's introduction into the telecom industry. Call it iNet or iSky...OR Skynet!
post #42 of 134
this really isn't about T-mobile
its the Govnt NOT releasing enough spectrum for telecos to use
ATT wants T-mobile's spectrum
how can we have competition and improved customer support with out MORE SPECTRUM
this just allows the established few to keep prices high
gee its all data, why pay for voice, data, sms separately (ok i know the answer) and these huge etf's

we need more competition (well some solution with sms with imessage, chaton, facebook sms) but really.....
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #43 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

That's for sure. AT&T are already running expensive ads in prime time about the acquisition!

Yes. Instead of fixing their overloaded infrastructure. Grrrr....
post #44 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaag View Post

What are you all smoking? Pretty much ALL mobile operators in the US are together in a cartel.

This is why in the US of A, we have the worst packages of any other country.

Even a small country like The Netherlands, with a faction of the US population, offers a 10 Euro per week unlimited internet package, and that's for prepaid customers!! I mean COME ON?!

That's because they're below sea level... don't need so many towers.

Oh, and because they're socialists.

post #45 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

T-Mobile as a company is not doing well and if they simply go out of business, how is that any better for the consumer?

If they go bust the wireless spectrum and all of T-Mobile's infrastructure would be sold to a new company who hopefully will do a better job and shake up the market.
post #46 of 134
Seriously thinking about paying the ETF at AT&T and heading to T-Mobile.

If the Iphone(5) underwhelms..

The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.
post #47 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

If they keep their prices consistent, AND, get the iphone, i think you will see a mad dash from ATT/Verizon to tmobile.

I know the same was said when Verizon got the iphone, but the issue there was the plans were more or less the same. Not so with t-mobie.

And somehow the belief is tha tMobile won't adjust their plans the same way Verizon did? Scrap the unlimited shortly after launch? It's my belief that tMobile would charge more if it could keep its customers and grow their market in the process just like T and V did, do, will do. People want the product. It costs what it costs. tMobile isn't competitive without the bandwidth hog iPhone because they aren't charging what it costs to provide the service. The iPhone isn't the savior - if it was wouldn't it have made more sense for tMobile to have been courting Apple instead of Verizon? It would have been much cheaper for Apple to push out a version with just a different antenae.
post #48 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.

Except with the patent stick.
post #49 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.

Except by all the people who will buy the iPhone because a TWO YEAR OLD iPhone still sells better than any Android phone.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #50 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

Seriously thinking about paying the ETF at AT&T and heading to T-Mobile.

If the Iphone(5) underwhelms..

The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.

Aaaaaand here we go!
post #51 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


The real answer is having the government provide and control the infrastructure, and have the cell providers provide the service in an open market with competition. This will never fly in places like the USA of course for ideological reasons (evil socialism etc.).

Well I think the phone system was built by the government, and so they still have some say over that to force competition. If great recession happened earlier maybe we would have had a bunch of people building out the cell tower network or maybe we could have had people laying fiber instead of Quantitative easing.

In either case I think the # of carriers is more of a bandwidth problem than dersire to compete.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #52 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Exactly.

I didn't want to be the one to say it but I'm glad someone did. The time for the Government to step in is not when the market consists of two identical giants with matching (ridiculously high) prices and one pipsqueak without a hope in hell of ever being one of the big guys.

We have a similar situation in Canada. There are five big players who all collude on high prices and plans. All the plans are essentially the same and the costs are essentially the same. Then there are five or so "little fish" who offer decent prices and alternatives, but they are all locked out by the big five because they have different frequencies and can't operate on the big five's towers even if they decided to let them. So you can go for cheap, but only if you want to give up any kind of cool new phone like the iPhone and anything approaching decent coverage. If you go for any of the big five, you are basically getting the same bad deal everywhere.

The US situation is not a healthy market and while what the government has done is admirable, it's really far too little and far too late. I bet they even lose their case or are somehow "convinced" down the road that AT&T is right.

Certainly this is nothing to jump for joy over.

The real answer is having the government provide and control the infrastructure, and have the cell providers provide the service in an open market with competition. This will never fly in places like the USA of course for ideological reasons (evil socialism etc.).

Five big carriers? My count is three. Rogers, Bell and Telus. Who are the other 2?

Totally agree on the collusive nature of their 'competition'.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #53 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

If they keep their prices consistent, AND, get the iphone, i think you will see a mad dash from ATT/Verizon to tmobile.

I know the same was said when Verizon got the iphone, but the issue there was the plans were more or less the same. Not so with t-mobie.

You have a very good point there.... But IF they get the iPhone....that is not guaranteed at this point. It is only speculation and rumor. But when the iPhone comes out I think you will see more Verizon customers buying it. They waited because a new iPhone was coming out shorty after getting the iPhone4. Also if T-Mobile/Sprint does NOT get the iPhone 5 then you could see some customer migration to AT&T and Verizon from T-Mobile/Sprint. BUT if T-Mobile does get the iPhone and sell their plans at their current price it still does not make them more profitable. They are losing money selling subscription plans at their current prices.

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #54 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Except by all the people who will buy the iPhone… because a TWO YEAR OLD iPhone still sells better than any Android phone.

Do you have numbers to support that the iPhone 3Gs out sells any Android model?
the iPhone 4 is not 2 years old...yet.
iPhone 4 from wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_4

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #55 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

Well I think the phone system was built by the government,

If we're talking U.S., Big Brother didn't even have a hand in financing it.
post #56 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

Do you have numbers to support that the iPhone 3Gs out sells any Android model?
the iPhone 4 is not 2 years old...yet.

9 days old; hope that's current enough.

http://www.cultofmac.com/the-iphone-...-report/109849

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #57 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

If they keep their prices consistent, AND, get the iphone, i think you will see a mad dash from ATT/Verizon to tmobile.

I know the same was said when Verizon got the iphone, but the issue there was the plans were more or less the same. Not so with t-mobie.

But see that is the point...they are getting to a point where they CAN'T keep their prices consistent already, add a $400-$450 subsidy per iPhone to the mix (yes, the carriers actually pay very close to Apple's retail cost for the phones). Sprint will have the same problem when they get the iPhone - they are already losing hundreds of millions of dollars every year - add the liability of an extremely high phone subsidy on a popular device (not to mention a reboot and billions of wasted dollars on their 4G network).
post #58 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

The real answer is having the government provide and control the infrastructure, and have the cell providers provide the service in an open market with competition. This will never fly in places like the USA of course for ideological reasons (evil socialism etc.).

Actually the real answer is probably to commoditize wireless networking, rather than to nationalize it. This would allow boundary devices like the iPhone to dynamically select the cheapest (or most reliable, or fastest, or whatever) carrier per bit in realtime, regardless of what network/protocol it's using. The government's main job in that model is to ensure that "rural" access is available and reasonable.

Probably won't happen in my lifetime though... could require networking protocols to carry real-time pricing information... etc. We can always hope though.
post #59 of 134
OT: LOL at the sad state of Android tablets. I'm still waiting for them to mature but wow at the HTC Jetstream. Aside from a stupid name and the still meh Android 3.x its 699 WITH a 2 year contract on AT&T.

it's almost like they're not even trying to sell these things.

this is why if I decide to get a tablet the iPad is still the only choice. Maybe Google should go vertical with tablets at least.
post #60 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Except by all the people who will buy the iPhone because a TWO YEAR OLD iPhone still sells better than any Android phone.

I don't own stock in either company.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

Except with the patent stick.

In the past, Apple has blocked functionality on Samsung devices coming to ATT. It's annoying.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

Aaaaaand here we go!

On any other forum, my comments would be seen as reasonable. Here? of course not. So yeah, here we go....

I support T-mobile. I'm anxiously waiting for the Ip5. The Galaxy S 2 line is killer.
post #61 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

9 days old; hope that's current enough.

http://www.cultofmac.com/the-iphone-...-report/109849

Thanks according to that report you are correct..... I wasn't disputing...just curious what you were basing that statement from.

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #62 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

Thanks according to that report you are correct..... I wasn't disputing...just curious what you were basing that statement from.

It IS difficult to believe, isn't it?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #63 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

... be seen as reasonable. Here? of course not. So yeah, here we go....

I support T-mobile. I'm anxiously waiting for the Ip5. The Galaxy S 2 line is killer.

You support them how? You've stated that you aren't a customer of theirs which is probably the support they need to get out of the hole. I used to be a customer of their nationwide wifi package until they sold that off and now i get it and use of the rest of AT&T's hotspots as well and save $30.00 a month. I tried them as a wireless carrier for a while after doing a stint in Europe but the service in my region is almost as bad as verizon's.

I support them doing what they think best for their stockholders. Profit = jobs

Oh, and my "here we go" was in anticipation of the "mine is bigger" back and forth that I expected to follow. Not meant as a comment about your product preeferences. I know little about the Galaxy line.
post #64 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaag View Post

Even a small country like The Netherlands, with a faction of the US population, offers a 10 Euro per week unlimited internet package, and that's for prepaid customers!! I mean COME ON?!

At current exchange rates, that's $750US a year. Maybe it's a deal if you watch movies nonstop and prop your eyelids open with toothpicks. Otherwise ....

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #65 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

You support them how? You've stated that you aren't a customer of theirs which is probably the support they need to get out of the hole. I used to be a customer of their nationwide wifi package until they sold that off and now i get it and use of the rest of AT&T's hotspots as well and save $30.00 a month. I tried them as a wireless carrier for a while after doing a stint in Europe but the service in my region is almost as bad as verizon's.

I support them doing what they think best for their stockholders. Profit = jobs

Oh, and my "here we go" was in anticipation of the "mine is bigger" back and forth that I expected to follow. Not meant as a comment about your product preeferences. I know little about the Galaxy line.

I said that I plan on switching - especially given the news today. That will be my financial my support. My vocal support is here and other forums. Sadly, AT&T still hurts in many parts of the city. Was waiting for the ip5 release but makes little difference as both devices are coming to Tmo.
post #66 of 134
ATT has released a statement on the Governments action today. Seems they were blindsided according to the report.

"We are surprised and disappointed by today's action, particularly since we have met repeatedly with the Department of Justice and there was no indication from the DOJ that this action was being contemplated. We plan to ask for an expedited hearing so the enormous benefits of this merger can be fully reviewed. The DOJ has the burden of proving alleged anti-competitive affects and we intend to vigorously contest this matter in court. At the end of the day, we believe facts will guide any final decision and the facts are clear. This merger will:

· Help solve our nation's spectrum exhaust situation and improve wireless service for millions.
· Allow AT&T to expand 4G LTE mobile broadband to another 55 million Americans, or 97% of the population;
· Result in billions of additional investment and tens of thousands of jobs, at a time when our nation needs them most.

We remain confident that this merger is in the best interest of consumers and our country, and the facts will prevail in court."
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #67 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

this really isn't about T-mobile
its the Govnt NOT releasing enough spectrum for telecos to use
ATT wants T-mobile's spectrum
how can we have competition and improved customer support with out MORE SPECTRUM
this just allows the established few to keep prices high
gee its all data, why pay for voice, data, sms separately (ok i know the answer) and these huge etf's

we need more competition (well some solution with sms with imessage, chaton, facebook sms) but really.....

Where were you when this happened? http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireles...bile-all.shtml

Everybody has plenty of spectrum.
post #68 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Applecation View Post

For this to be accepted, AT&T would need to show how this will improve service to its customers, lower costs to the customers, and create jobs (no layoffs). Otherwise, no deal.

I agree. And so far ATT's actions are showing just the opposite - no more unlimited plans (with limited options like I can't keep unlimited and buy tethering) , changing their text messaging plans (and still making over $1,000.00 per meg of text messaging apparently if you chose the pay per use option), throttling speeds when you hit a certain limit etc.
post #69 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AT&T

... "We are surprised and disappointed by today's action, particularly since we have met repeatedly with the Department of Justice and there was no indication from the DOJ that this action was being contemplated.

Translation: "We thought we had an inside deal."
(Note: the DOJ not only has no obligation to "indicate" what their actions are going to be there are actually provisions to keep them secret)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AT&T

... We plan to ask for an expedited hearing so the enormous benefits of this merger can be fully reviewed.

Translation: "We still think we should get some special treatment here."
Quote:
Originally Posted by AT&T

...The DOJ has the burden of proving alleged anti-competitive affects and we intend to vigorously contest this matter in court.

Translation: "Well fuck them! We'll fight them with every dirty trick we can think of!
post #70 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

Actually the real answer is probably to commoditize wireless networking, rather than to nationalize it. This would allow boundary devices like the iPhone to dynamically select the cheapest (or most reliable, or fastest, or whatever) carrier per bit in realtime, regardless of what network/protocol it's using. The government's main job in that model is to ensure that "rural" access is available and reasonable.

Probably won't happen in my lifetime though... could require networking protocols to carry real-time pricing information... etc. We can always hope though.

Nope. As long as the building of the actual infrastructure is left to private companies, the infrastructure will suck and the private companies will rape the consumers to get their costs (along with ridiculously huge levels of profit) back.

History shows that with any basic infrastructure (or anything that through technological advancement *becomes* basic or necessary infrastructure), that private ownership always leaves the consumer holding the shitty end of the stick. Costs go out of control, waste is 70 to 80 percent of the costs, and all kinds of other nightmarish things.

When it comes to things like providing water, electricity, roads, and wires it's always far more efficient for the government (which is the people after all) to provide it. The US power grid is another prime example of this kind of nonsense at work.

Americans are conditioned by their ideology to think of government as "bad" so it will of course never happen (or at least not very soon), but there are mountains of evidence that private ownership (and the sort of "fake competition" used to justify it), in these cases is really the prime cause of most of the problems.
post #71 of 134
This merger will still go through. I see at&t offering to divest itself of the landline/DSL/u-verse segments or a combination thereof. Upper management thinks mobile is the future. So while this lawsuit may delay the inevitable it will happen. If you take the time to read the details the government is telling at&t it is wide open to suggestions from at&t on how to resolve the alleged issues. This lawsuit is simply a negotiating tool and if you don't realize that then your hatred of at&t is clouding your logic.

Bottom line, haters, don't get your hopes up just yet. Remember the same thing happened to Google not too long ago over its purchase of an airline search company.
post #72 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

*APPLAUSE*

Our government still works! A little!


You might want to wait for the actual judgment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

My question about this is the fact that T-Mobile Germany wants to sell its American company.

T-Mobile as a company is not doing well and if they simply go out of business, how is that any better for the consumer?

If they just go out of business, it really isn't any different for the consumers. The best they might get is a deadline for when their service will be shut off automatically with no penalties since the company is the one cutting the contract. But they would still have to find another service.

Then the towers etc would go up for some kind of auction where the other carriers could bid on buying them all or chunks of them.

There's a part of me that feels like this would be the better way to go, rather than letting one company buy the towers and the contracts (which is probably the real point of contention for Sprint and the little guys)


Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

You don't have to sign a contract. The point of the contract is to buy a new phone for a cheaper price. You have the option to pay full price with no contract.

But we are still getting screwed. How? Because supposedly part of what we pay each month on that contract is to pay back the $400 that the carrier pitched in for the iPhone, yes. so assuming one stays the whole 24 months, approx $16.50 is 'device cost recovery' yes. So then at the end of 24 months I get $16.50 dropped off my bill because I paid off my phone, right. Or if I walk in with a full price phone I pay $16.50 less than the guy on contract, right. WRONG. I pay the same amount no matter what. Free money for the carriers. And it's totally legal. If the US Gov't really carried about consumers they would change the rules that allow such pricing


Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

If they keep their prices consistent, AND, get the iphone, i think you will see a mad dash from ATT/Verizon to tmobile.

Or not. US laws don't allow T- Mobile to operate on the correct spectrum for 3g, which is why all those unlocked iPhones only get Edge. Even if T-Mobile could hold out for LTE iPhones, they would still be forced to fall back on Edge in the areas where they don't have LTE coverage. No one is going to want to buy an iPhone under those conditions. And T-Mobile is basically already broke so they likely don't have the money for the move to LTE anyway (on their own towers or 'renting' them). This is why DT is wanting to sell off T-Mobile US. They aren't likely to start negotiations to get the iPhone given the circumstances about service coverage.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #73 of 134
This:

Quote:
AT&T’s elimination of T-Mobile as an independent, low- priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market.

But not this:

Quote:
Verizon's elimination of Alltel as an independent, low- priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market.

WTF?

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #74 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

And somehow the belief is tha tMobile won't adjust their plans the same way Verizon did? Scrap the unlimited shortly after launch?

The same way ATT did eventually.

Heck T-Mobile could drop their peach plans right when the iPhone launches instead of teasing folks with a month or two of great prices and then drop it. Plus they could refuse to grandfather contracts once the current period ends (legally they have that right)

Quote:
It would have been much cheaper for Apple to push out a version with just a different antenae.

Maybe, maybe not. It was worth it to create a Verizon version because of the massive number of potential sales. With T-Mobile's much lower numbers it might not make as much sense

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #75 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

And somehow the belief is tha tMobile won't adjust their plans the same way Verizon did? Scrap the unlimited shortly after launch? It's my belief that tMobile would charge more if it could keep its customers and grow their market in the process just like T and V did, do, will do. People want the product. It costs what it costs. tMobile isn't competitive without the bandwidth hog iPhone because they aren't charging what it costs to provide the service. The iPhone isn't the savior - if it was wouldn't it have made more sense for tMobile to have been courting Apple instead of Verizon? It would have been much cheaper for Apple to push out a version with just a different antenae.

We don't know why Apple didn't go with T mobile first or second. Since we don't know what financials, demands... folks were asking for, we don't know what made more sense.

IF, all four carriers had the iphone and ALL four carriers had similar coverage in your general area, who would you sign up with...I'm guessing whoever offers the most for the least. So either all four carriers will have similar prices or one will be the cheapest.

If T-mobile wants to attract customers and they get the iphone, they're not gonna raise prices...no incentive for folks to switch to their network. BUT, if they come in $20 or so cheaper, or offer more for the same price as ATT, then folks may switch.
post #76 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

IF, all four carriers had the iphone and ALL four carriers had similar coverage in your general area, who would you sign up with...I'm guessing whoever offers the most for the least. So either all four carriers will have similar prices or one will be the cheapest.

None will be the cheapest. None will be the most expensive.

Sprint just had internal documents released that they're upping their ETF to $350. Just like everyone else. So they're getting the iPhone. All that's left is to see that they're getting rid of the unlimited data plan and moving their prices to be identical to everyone else's.

It's pretty simple.

Quote:
If T-mobile wants to attract customers and they get the iphone, they're not gonna raise prices...no incentive for folks to switch to their network. BUT, if they come in $20 or so cheaper, or offer more for the same price as ATT, then folks may switch.

All prices on all carriers will be the same once they get the iPhone.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #77 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

You have a very good point there.... But IF they get the iPhone....that is not guaranteed at this point. It is only speculation and rumor. But when the iPhone comes out I think you will see more Verizon customers buying it. They waited because a new iPhone was coming out shorty after getting the iPhone4. Also if T-Mobile/Sprint does NOT get the iPhone 5 then you could see some customer migration to AT&T and Verizon from T-Mobile/Sprint. BUT if T-Mobile does get the iPhone and sell their plans at their current price it still does not make them more profitable. They are losing money selling subscription plans at their current prices.

Are they less profitable because they lack a crowd pleaser like the iphone? Folks really aren't jumping carriers for androids. But, if you get the iphone, on a good network in your area and at a competitive price(T-mobiles current offerings), then the influx of switchers could propel them to greater profitability.
post #78 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckdutter View Post

But see that is the point...they are getting to a point where they CAN'T keep their prices consistent already, add a $400-$450 subsidy per iPhone to the mix (yes, the carriers actually pay very close to Apple's retail cost for the phones). Sprint will have the same problem when they get the iPhone - they are already losing hundreds of millions of dollars every year - add the liability of an extremely high phone subsidy on a popular device (not to mention a reboot and billions of wasted dollars on their 4G network).

They pay subs for android devices also...almost comparable to what they pay apple. They're losing money BECAUSE they're losing high paying post paid customers. It's not the subsidies, it's consumer hemorrhaging(high churn rate)

Once they get the iphone, they may experience some growing pain, but they'll be retaining customers
post #79 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

None will be the cheapest. None will be the most expensive.

Sprint just had internal documents released that they're upping their ETF to $350. Just like everyone else. So they're getting the iPhone. All that's left is to see that they're getting rid of the unlimited data plan and moving their prices to be identical to everyone else's.

It's pretty simple.



All prices on all carriers will be the same once they get the iPhone.

Low man on the totem pole needs to attract customers. There's only two ways to do it.

Offer better products for less: iphone is same price across the board, or, offer offer better services for less. T-mobile NEEDS to keep there plans cheaper than the other three if they want to attract more customers(assuming all networks are avail to you)
post #80 of 134
What is the government thinking? The government exists to protect corporations from being hampered by the American people!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › US government files antitrust suit to block AT&T purchase of T-Mobile