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 3

post #81 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.

We will see...this will be answered in the next few weeks....
If T-Mobile raises their plan prices to match the rest of the telecoms.....they will lose customer......people choose T-Mobile/Sprint because their plans are cheaper and they have unlimited data plans.

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 #82 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerman2000 View Post

The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.

I sell both these and iPhone 4's.

The iPhone 4 still outsells it.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #83 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

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.

Other companies being AT&T and Verizon.

Quote:
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)

Ultimately the end would be about the same. Other than T-Mobile customers being forced to search for new service.


Quote:
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


The point of the contract is that you get a cheaper phone. Not a cheaper phone bill.
post #84 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

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.

If I understand this correctly. You are saying that Canada has 10 mobile phone providers and there still is no competition.

Quote:
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.).

Ultimately for this happen would require government regulation. This is certainly the wrong political climate for that.
post #85 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

We will see...this will be answered in the next few weeks….

The ETF price raise goes into effect exactly one month and one day before the rumored iPhone 5 launch.

It's answered. It's GOING to happen.

Quote:
If T-Mobile raises their plan prices to match the rest of the telecoms…

That's the price they'll pay to start playing with the big boys.

Quote:
..they will lose customer....

TO WHO?!

All four telecoms are going to have identical prices when they all have the iPhone. There will be no "losing customers" over price because there will be no price differences. There's nowhere to go and it will cost $350 to leave ANY of them. It's OVER.

Quote:
people choose T-Mobile/Sprint because their plans are cheaper and they have unlimited data plans.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet a brand new iPhone 5 and the cost of two years of service that all hints of "unlimited" plans will be GONE on ALL carriers by 1/1/12. That's how sure I am that they're not going to be around much longer.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #86 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The ETF price raise goes into effect exactly one month and one day before the rumored iPhone 5 launch.

It's answered. It's GOING to happen.



That's the price they'll pay to start playing with the big boys.



TO WHO?!

All four telecoms are going to have identical prices when they all have the iPhone. There will be no "losing customers" over price because there will be no price differences. There's nowhere to go and it will cost $350 to leave ANY of them. It's OVER.



If I were a betting man, I'd bet a brand new iPhone 5 and the cost of two years of service that all hints of "unlimited" plans will be GONE on ALL carriers by 1/1/12. That's how sure I am that they're not going to be around much longer.

so says you......people are leaving Sprint in droves...why because their service sucks. People brag about having T-Mobile...why...because their plans are cheaper not beacuse they like their service. Most will not leave only to pay an ETF but when or if the their contract is up they will leave the low cost carriers (if all pricing and plans are the same) because their call quality is below that of other carriers.
All this will play out very soon and we will see......

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 #87 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I sell both these and iPhone 4's.

The iPhone 4 still outsells it.

Cool! So you're making money no matter the fanboy camp.

Quick question tho, and I know it would only be a personal opinion. Do you think the Galaxy 2 looks like the iPhone4, or more just a passing resemblance?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #88 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Ultimately for this happen would require government regulation. This is certainly the wrong political climate for that.

understatement of the century. lol
post #89 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

If I were a betting man, I'd bet a brand new iPhone 5 and the cost of two years of service that all hints of "unlimited" plans will be GONE on ALL carriers by 1/1/12. That's how sure I am that they're not going to be around much longer.

* nod * I would not take that bet. Am I ill for being happy that the main carriers in the U.S. will soon have the same iPhone and in 2012/2013 LTE will make them even more the same so there will be apples to apples competition (pardon the pun). They have to compete on price, packages (bundle with TV, phone, cloud services, etc), wireless service quality and customer service. Now if we can just get the consumer to not buy into the $199.00 phone that really costs them $700.00 over time, we can break the backs of these contracts. I'd take a discount on my monthly for buying the phone outright and have the freedom to tell a provider where they can stick it.

Cheers to Apple (and Google for riding along) for turning the wireless carriers into just another pipe and LTE for being a transport they can all agree on. Damn, do I hope Apple can do the same with the Cable TV business.
post #90 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

Except with the patent stick.


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.

read his whole comment. he's talking specifically about specs and features. not sales and no idea what that patent stick comment had to do with anything.

Hate it or not the Galaxy S2 is a nice phone.
post #91 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

he's talking specifically about specs and features.

And I'm talking specifically that those don't matter at all. People couldn't care less.

They want a user experience. Which is what Apple gives them.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #92 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

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.

You must have missed the point where I said that we'd be better off with wireless networking as a commodity. Your description isn't that of a company's behavior in a commodity market.

Quote:
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.

You can certainly claim this all you want but that doesn't make it true. Cite some peer reviewed econ journal articles and I'll read them.

In my own experience I can think of a number of industries where privatization has been a good thing.

In the previous city I lived in city waste management services were privatized and costs have dropped drastically while service improved enormously. I can literally put anything out and they'll take it, because I could just pick from one of the 5 other providers in the region.

In Pittsburgh we have strong broadband competition between the cable company, fiber to the home, and 4g. Prices have been dropping and service speeds have been improving dramatically in the past three years.

Quote:
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.

This isn't really a great analogy as wireless towers aren't really the same as water, electricity, roads, or wires. I'm already covered by towers from four major carriers, plus I'd be happy to lease out my WiFi in a commodity setting.

Quote:
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),

Dude, government /is/ bad in America because every 4-12 years some idiot is in charge, and we generally don't get to have a vote of no confidence and get new elections.

Quote:
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.

I'm sure that you can pick out specific instances where this is the case, but I doubt that it's something you can make such a blanket statement about.
post #93 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

read his whole comment. he's talking specifically about specs and features. not sales and no idea what that patent stick comment had to do with anything.

You're saying you don't think apple is going to beat the Galaxy 2 with its patent stick?
post #94 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I sell both these and iPhone 4's.

The iPhone 4 still outsells it.



Galaxy S 2 handsets have yet to be released on any carriers in the U.S.

where do you live?
post #95 of 134
Quote:
The government believes the $39 billion deal with "substantially lessen competition" in the wireless market, according to Bloomberg. The U.S. Justice Department filed the complaint in federal court on Wednesday in Washington.

Is it too much to ask that journalists actually write a complete sentence? I doubt the DOJ released a press statement with the express intent to release a fragmented statement.
post #96 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.....

The government released plenty of spectrum and T-Mobile's parent let them go nuts when they spent > $13 Billion for a certain portion of spectrum several years back, and yes AT&T wants it.
post #97 of 134
Early today it was leaked that AT&T is guaranteeing the DoJ that it will create 5,000 new domestic jobs if the deal is approved.

Talk about a bribery.
post #98 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Early today it was leaked that AT&T is guaranteeing the DoJ that it will create 5,000 new domestic jobs if the deal is approved.

Talk about a bribery.

So they not only will retain jobs in a merger environment where jobs are typically lost, but they will hire another 5k.

OMG is the middle class getting crapped on by corporations!
post #99 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?!

$60 a month at 1Mbs. Good luck.
post #100 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Early today it was leaked that AT&T is guaranteeing the DoJ that it will create 5,000 new domestic jobs if the deal is approved.

Talk about a bribery.

I don't understand the bribery angle. splain?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...77U0M620110831
post #101 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

read his whole comment. he's talking specifically about specs and features. not sales and no idea what that patent stick comment had to do with anything.

Hate it or not the Galaxy S2 is a nice phone.

Exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And I'm talking specifically that those don't matter at all. People couldn't care less.

They want a user experience. Which is what Apple gives them.



While I'll agree that specs can be and often are oversold, it does not appear that you have experience with any other OS besides IOS.

The next year is going to be very interesting across the board.
post #102 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jukes View Post

You're saying you don't think apple is going to beat the Galaxy 2 with its patent stick?

considering they already are and it doesn't seem to be going in their favor...no I don't.
post #103 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And I'm talking specifically that those don't matter at all. People couldn't care less.

They want a user experience. Which is what Apple gives them.

and there is a UX Android and more specifically Samsung gives you. is it as fluid as iOS? no but to many people it offers more. he obviously has this mystical ability to appreciate both OSes and can thus judge on specs and features.
post #104 of 134
AT&T does't have to show any of that. All it has to do is show how it 1) benefits consumers, and 2) doesn't decrease competition.

With that said, the buy out would harm consumers, the economy, innovations, and the list goes on.

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.
post #105 of 134
Creating $5, 000 new jobs does not mean a net gain of jobs if AT&T gets rid of more old jobs, which will be the case. There is no way AT&T is going to keep the thousands of T-Mobile employees in areas such as the T-Mobile stores.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

So they not only will retain jobs in a merger environment where jobs are typically lost, but they will hire another 5k.

OMG is the middle class getting crapped on by corporations!
post #106 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Creating $5, 000 new jobs does not mean a net gain of jobs if AT&T gets rid of more old jobs, which will be the case. There is no way AT&T is going to keep the thousands of T-Mobile employees in areas such as the T-Mobile stores.

That's assuming they don't actually grow the business and decide to stop making a profit.
post #107 of 134
This is BS. People are leaving Sprint because Sprint doesn't have competitive phones because Verizon and AT&T have to date have had the lock on such phones. Bring the iPhone to Sprint and the tide will reverse. Same with T-Mobile. I have an unlocked iPhone on T-Mobile not only because of the competive plan prices but because I have had horrible customer service experiences with AT&T and Verizon. I also get better reception with the iPhone then my friends on AT&T (although I understand reception is an area specific issue).

Further, T-Mobile has consistently ranked top in customer satisfaction. Recently T-Moble and Sprint tied for best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

so says you......people are leaving Sprint in droves...why because their service sucks. People brag about having T-Mobile...why...because their plans are cheaper not beacuse they like their service. Most will not leave only to pay an ETF but when or if the their contract is up they will leave the low cost carriers (if all pricing and plans are the same) because their call quality is below that of other carriers.
All this will play out very soon and we will see......
post #108 of 134
BS. It is about AT&T wasting the spectrum it does have. You don't see Verizon, Sprint, or T-Mobile complaining about Spectrum. Do a Google search, there are plenty of articles out there that says companies like AT&T are hoarding spectrum. AT&T is actually wanting to buy T-Mobile to try to pressure more T-Mobile customers into higher priced data plans whereby the sale can subsidize the price of even more spectrum. There are also articles that suggest AT&T can buy the spectrum if it needed it without buying T-Mobile.

AT&T wants T-Mobile's customers to milk them for higher priced data plans. Currently, AT&T requires users of certain smart phones to have a data plan. T-Mobile has no such requirement. I have no data plan for my iPhone. With wi-fi, and a PDS app like Navigon, I don't need a data plan. I save several hundred dollars a year by avoiding a data plan I don't' want or need.

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.....
post #109 of 134
Not doing well is relative. T-Mobile is profitable, making billions in profit yearly. T-Mobile's problem is it doesn't have access to desirable phones. If the iPhone was on T-Mobile it wouldn't' be losing subscribers. If you are going to be stuck with a phone for two years on contract, you want one you like.

AT&T and Verizon currently have a lock on some of the most desirable phones, including the iPhone.

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?
post #110 of 134
Boy I would like to be ailing like T-Mobile. Give me that profit. T-Mobile is losing subscribers for the same reason Sprint is losing subscribers. AT&T and Verizon have the most desirable phones. Bring the iPhone to T-Mobile and it will be easier to grow subscribers.

T-Mobile is willing to sell itself to AT&T because AT&T is willing to overpay knowing it will recoup the cost from raising prices for the T-Mobile customers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I don't think you understand that Deutsche Telekom itself offered to sell T-Mobile to AT&T. Because T-Mobile is an ailing company.

Deutsche Telekom Quarterly Profit Declines on T-Mobile USA





What then happens to T-Mobile's customers?
post #111 of 134
T-Mobile played by this same game to their benefit when the had the Danger Sidekick and would not allow any one else to have it. For a brief time the Sidekick was one of the most desirable phones you speak of and T-Mobile had it all to themselves.

AT&T took a chance with the iPhone and Apple's stringent rules for control over the iPhone ecosystem in a way that no other mobile phone provider would have done at the time. That gamble has paid off and AT&T has been rewarded for its faith in Apple.

No one else can be blamed for T-Mobile or Sprint's business decisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Not doing well is relative. T-Mobile is profitable, making billions in profit yearly. T-Mobile's problem is it doesn't have access to desirable phones. If the iPhone was on T-Mobile it wouldn't' be losing subscribers. If you are going to be stuck with a phone for two years on contract, you want one you like.

AT&T and Verizon currently have a lock on some of the most desirable phones, including the iPhone.
post #112 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

This is BS. People are leaving Sprint because Sprint doesn't have competitive phones because Verizon and AT&T have to date have had the lock on such phones. Bring the iPhone to Sprint and the tide will reverse. Same with T-Mobile. I have an unlocked iPhone on T-Mobile not only because of the competive plan prices but because I have had horrible customer service experiences with AT&T and Verizon. I also get better reception with the iPhone then my friends on AT&T (although I understand reception is an area specific issue).

Further, T-Mobile has consistently ranked top in customer satisfaction. Recently T-Moble and Sprint tied for best.

Go back and read the thread again...people already posted facts that contradict what you said. Sprint has the #3 selling phone:
http://www.cultofmac.com/the-iphone-...-report/109849
the EVO is 3rd behind iPhone 3Gs and IP4......If T-Mobile is so good then why is the parent company shopping them around to everyone that will listen to them? Beacuse they are losing money! You even posted this fact on posts #12 and #22! If they were great then they would not be losing money....plain and simple...... Your call reception/experience with T-Mobile might not be indictitive of the rest of the country. Verizon and AT&T continue to add customers at the expense of Sprint and T-Mobile....
EDIT:
The link you refenced says NOTHING about call quality. It centered around BUYING experiences...not whether they were happy with the call quality or service.

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 #113 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Is it too much to ask that journalists actually write a complete sentence? I doubt the DOJ released a press statement with the express intent to release a fragmented statement.

A journalist would have no problem writing a complete sentence. Unfortunately, most of them have been replaced with reporters...

   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 #114 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post

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.

apple???
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #115 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

apple???

or Google...I think Google has expressed interest in such a deal...

I do however think Apple would handle it better....but I feel Google would be a better fit as far as prices and the fact that Google would be more inclined to share the spectrum.

Then again I really don't know how these things would work.
post #116 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

or Google...I think Google has expressed interest in such a deal...

I do however think Apple would handle it better....but I feel Google would be a better fit as far as prices and the fact that Google would be more inclined to share the spectrum.

"Share the spectrum?" Google's history seems more inclined to share what belongs to others than sharing out what they themselves own.

Let's see how Google handles the intricacies of a hardware company first, before we let the little darlings that can't cook their own meals try to run a wireless company.

   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 #117 of 134
You act like the playing field is level. I am not blaming AT&T for its deal with Apple. It hardly took a chance though. It had a five year lock in, which wouldn't hurt AT&T if the phone flopped. Apple bore the cost for bringing the phone to the market. Further, I do not know about Sprint, but T-Mobile also fought for the iPhone. It lost out because AT&T had the larger Network, and Jobs knew AT&T's CEO personally. Trying to land the iPhone doesn't seem like a bad business decision to me.

Moreover, you miss the point. Just because T-Mobile is playing the game, doesn't mean the game is fair or more importantly benefits consumers. The benefitting consumers should be a priority since it is our airwaves the companies are using.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

T-Mobile played by this same game to their benefit when the had the

Danger Sidekick and would not allow any one else to have it. For a brief time the Sidekick was one of the most desirable phones you speak of and T-Mobile had it all to themselves.

AT&T took a chance with the iPhone and Apple's stringent rules for control over the iPhone ecosystem in a way that no other mobile phone provider would have done at the time. That gamble has paid off and AT&T has been rewarded for its faith in Apple.

No one else can be blamed for T-Mobile or Sprint's business decisions.
post #118 of 134
I haven't read anything that suggests T-Mobile was shopping itself around before the AT&T deal. Further, T-Mobile is NOT losing money. It is profitable. It's revenue is declining, which in the future could point to profitability problems. However, T-Mobile even says the bulk of its problem has to do with not having the iPhone. It also says it is profitable.


Further, saying Sprint has the top third best selling phone is meaningless without numbers. HP currently has the second best selling Tablet, yet it is losing millions and its sales are close to a percentage point of Apple's iPad total sales. However, saying you have the second best selling Tablet sounds impressive doesn't it?

The article linked to 1) doesn't give the total number of phone sales, and 2) the break down of who won those sales. If fifty phones were sold, and Apple won 40 of those sales, and the Sprint sold HTC EVO won 5 sales, and everybody else shared five sales, that would make the Sprint HTC EVO the second best selling phone. That also doesn't really seem very impressive either. In my example, 40 of those 50 people likely aren't even considering Sprint or T-Mobile because of the lack of iPhone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

Go back and read the thread again...people already posted facts that contradict what you said. Sprint has the #3 selling phone:
http://www.cultofmac.com/the-iphone-...-report/109849
the EVO is 3rd behind iPhone 3Gs and IP4......If T-Mobile is so good then why is the parent company shopping them around to everyone that will listen to them? Beacuse they are losing money! You even posted this fact on posts #12 and #22! If they were great then they would not be losing money....plain and simple...... Your call reception/experience with T-Mobile might not be indictitive of the rest of the country. Verizon and AT&T continue to add customers at the expense of Sprint and T-Mobile....
EDIT:
The link you refenced says NOTHING about call quality. It centered around BUYING experiences...not whether they were happy with the call quality or service.
post #119 of 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

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

Actually, there's one carrier that has plans exactly like what you want. Once the $15 payments have paid off the price of the phone, your bill goes down by $15. If you bring your own phone, your bill is $15 less off the bat. Can you guess which carrier this might be?

Yup, T-Mobile. Get one of their plans locked in now, before AT&T shuts them off.
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
post #120 of 134
That option is bullshit.

When you buy a phone on contract, a portion of your monthly bill goes to pay for the phone... suposedly.

If that's the case, then why is it when you buy a phone out of contract, your monthly rates aren't reduced since you aren't receiving the subsidy?

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.

Over all you've only complained about what you don't like about the US. You did not at all describe what so better about Europe.

The two are so very different situations it can be difficult to compare.
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