Radio Shack slashes iPhone prices by $50, offering iPhone 4 for $25 with 3GS trade-in

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 79
    benicebenice Posts: 382member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Your post came across as if this is an Apple/iPhone-only issue when it predates the iPhone by many years, maybe decades.



    Personally, I think these initial out of pocket prices — even on teaser posters — should include the minimum total cost the customer will pay for the item throughout the contract, but that is something that requires legislation.



    Definitely not an Apple issue alone that's for sure and in retrospect I accept my post probably looks like its all about Apple. I hear all the phone manufacturers do it, as well as other for other services like airline flights where pricing is rarely fully expressed up front.



    As to total cost of ownership numbers being published on advertising I certainly agree. Operators could, and should, take the initiative to publish it themselves but if they don't legislation would be a fix.
  • Reply 22 of 79
    All this waiting for the white iPhone 4...

    and now they're discounting the iP4 already?



    Okay then,

    I'm sticking it out with my iPhone 3G until iPhone 5
  • Reply 23 of 79
    cubertcubert Posts: 728member
    HOLY CRAP!!!



    <putting on clothes and running out the door>
  • Reply 24 of 79
    enohpienohpi Posts: 103member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    So Apple is misleading consumers?



    What about all those FREE PHONE (with contract) deals out there? Or the 'BUY ONE GET ONE FREE" (with contract) deals out there?





    I think that it is sad to see Apple stooping down to this level just to try to stay competitive. They should just wait out Android - it is poised to implode into a sea of fragmentation. There really is no reason to copy Android and be giving away iPhones for free.
  • Reply 25 of 79
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,832member
    At least when interrogating my AT&T account, Radio Shack's info on upgrade status is different (deferred 8 months later -- i.e. not currently possible) than when I go into an AT&T store, where I could've upgraded last June when the iPhone 4 came out. So I don't see how a person can trade in a 3GS with upgrade pricing. It makes for big "news" though! I pity the fool who waits in a long line at the store, only to find out they can't get upgrade pricing. Check on-line first!
  • Reply 26 of 79
    I wonder if its possible to trade in a 3G for a new 3GS + $25 Gift Card and then go to another store and trade in the 3GS + $25 Gift Card for $150 16GB iPhone 4. But i'm not sure if the upgrade is part of this, meaning once you trade in for the 3GS, you can't trade in again for the iPhone 4. If you could trade in twice that would be awesome because you wouldn't have to spend any extra money.
  • Reply 27 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kube View Post


    I bought my iphone 4 at a Radio Shack last august and traded in my 2-year-old iphone 3G for $100 credit. Very smooth operation.



    You were extremely lucky.



    From my experience, the average cell phone transaction at a Radio Shack takes the entire staff at least an hour. This includes multiple help calls to support and other stores.



    Radio Shack is in NO position to be boosting their wireless awareness, they can't handle the business they have. A lot of people are going to be leaving the stores disgusted and empty-handed.
  • Reply 28 of 79
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by enohpI View Post


    I think that it is sad to see Apple stooping down to this level just to try to stay competitive. They should just wait out Android - it is poised to implode into a sea of fragmentation. There really is no reason to copy Android and be giving away iPhones for free.



    Now that comment is totally clueless. There are NO Apple BOGO offers out there because it's a superior product commanding a premium price. In the message you cited, the reference was to all the cheapo non-Apple competing smart phones by other manufacturers being offered in BOGO plans by Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and other lesser carriers.
  • Reply 29 of 79
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Luckily, they state it’s subject to contract, as you’ve noted, and this practice is so common that it seems improbable that anyone of sound mind would think they could walk into one of these stores and expect to get an iPhone 4 for $199 without having to sign a contract.



    As a final stop gate, they make you sign the contract in the store and ask you what plan you wish to get so it would be impossible for a person in their right mind to end up with a contract they didn’t want. If, for some reason/any reason, they change their mind they have 30 days to return the item without any restocking fee or penalties. Only the time they’ve spent on the carrier’s network and activation fee is charged.



    The practice of mingling the phone payment with the service contract may not be exactly misleading but it isn't exactly transparent either. If you asked anyone who "bought" an iPhone 4 for $199 plus contract, I doubt you will find one of those saying they actually paid the true cost of $600 or $700 for it.



    When the 2 year contract is signed is it disclosed to the purchaser how much the carrier is giving back to Apple for the cost of the phone? I am unable to find any reference to it in the ATT contract. If the intent is not to mislead then let's at least have full and clear disclosure with carrier contracts, shall we?
  • Reply 30 of 79
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    . . .
  • Reply 31 of 79
    bagmanbagman Posts: 349member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by enohpI View Post


    I think that it is sad to see Apple stooping down to this level just to try to stay competitive. They should just wait out Android - it is poised to implode into a sea of fragmentation. There really is no reason to copy Android and be giving away iPhones for free.



    I'm not sure you realize that Apple has nothing to do with this pricing - they get their contractual (full) price from Radio Shack/ATT, or whoever, regardless of the "deals" the retailers advertise to sell to the public. Radio Shack is (rightly) concerned that no one knows they carry Apple phones (I sure didn't, and I practice right next to the store -never look at the ads in the windows, and almost never shop there, so never crossed my mind, particularly since the premium ATT store in the Valley is two blocks away, and is very professional and well-stocked).
  • Reply 32 of 79
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Your post came across as if this is an Apple/iPhone-only issue when it predates the iPhone by many years, maybe decades.



    Personally, I think these initial out of pocket prices ? even on teaser posters ? should include the minimum total cost the customer will pay for the item throughout the contract, but that is something that requires legislation.



    So Apple, in trying to sell its product, should have to be held accountable and punished for ATT's prices? Ridiculous. Since when do consumers need to be treated like 8 year olds? If you're too dumb to figure out that buying a phone does not give you the right to use ATT's service for two years for free, well that's natural selection.



    Should buying a car also require adding in the TCO including gas and repairs?



    Should light bulbs have to include the price of the electricity they will burn?
  • Reply 33 of 79
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sippincider View Post


    You were extremely lucky.



    From my experience, the average cell phone transaction at a Radio Shack takes the entire staff at least an hour. This includes multiple help calls to support and other stores.



    Radio Shack is in NO position to be boosting their wireless awareness, they can't handle the business they have. A lot of people are going to be leaving the stores disgusted and empty-handed.



    Not to mention that they totally ignore everyone else in the store while they do a wireless transaction. Radioshack is a MISERABLE place to buy anything.
  • Reply 34 of 79
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    You know what is more hideous. That the carriers are not required to prorate th ETF at the actual 1/contract months. And they are not required to track repayment separate from your monthly bill. So if you go beyond your contract you are still paying the same monthly amoun, part of which was supposed to be for th device you have now paid off. And if you buy a full pric devic, you pay the same amount as someone on contract, who is ayin off their device with part of that money (allegedly)
  • Reply 35 of 79
    Just upgraded my iPhone 3G 8GB. They gave the full $75 and applied it immediately to the discounted iPhone 4 16GB. So with tax came to $77.



    To get the full amount, it can't have any cracks and must have the charger and cable. They didn't care about the headphones or packaging.



    They said they would wipe it but I did a remote wipe via Mobile Me after they verified that it worked.



    The whole process took about 1hr.
  • Reply 36 of 79
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    So Apple, in trying to sell its product, should have to be held accountable and punished for ATT's prices? Ridiculous. Since when do consumers need to be treated like 8 year olds? If you're too dumb to figure out that buying a phone does not give you the right to use ATT's service for two years for free, well that's natural selection.



    Should buying a car also require adding in the TCO including gas and repairs?



    Should light bulbs have to include the price of the electricity they will burn?



    1) Nothing else you listed has a contract associated with the example, which makes them irrelevant.



    2) There is nothing ridiculous about disclosing the minimum cost for an financed or subsidized products. Note that both are contractual, where you pay little up front.



    3) I never mentioned TCO, in fact, I clearly minimum total cost. The use of ?minimum? is key. It means what is the very least amount a customer could possibly pay for this product by the end of the contract, sans taxes.



    3) I have absolutely no idea how you turned this in an Apple being punished reply.
  • Reply 37 of 79
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    1) Nothing else you listed has a contract associated with the example, which makes them irrelevant.



    2) There is nothing ridiculous about disclosing the minimum cost for an financed or subsidized products. Note that both are contractual, where you pay little up front.



    3) I never mentioned TCO, in fact, I clearly minimum total cost. The use of “minimum” is key. It means what is the very least amount a customer could possibly pay for this product by the end of the contract, sans taxes.



    3) I have absolutely no idea how you turned this in an Apple being punished reply.



    Apple would be punished because it would be forced to *warn* customers of its product about the prices charged by another, unrelated company. Just who do you think would be punished when you warn a buyer about that?



    Just because you think having a contract makes it different doesn't make it so. That's an arbitrary line. Cars come with long term costs that, while not fixed, are extremely predictable over a sample. Light bulbs, just the same. Government getting involved in the marketing of products is a VERY bad idea. Or did you not think that's what this was?



    Consumers are smart enough to figure out what they have to pay for things. Thankfully, that's why none of these complaints resonate outside the world of hand-wringing forum posters.
  • Reply 38 of 79
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cameronj View Post


    Apple would be punished because it would be forced to *warn* customers of its product about the prices charged by another, unrelated company. Just who do you think would be punished when you warn a buyer about that?



    Just because you think having a contract makes it different doesn't make it so. That's an arbitrary line. Consumers are smart enough to figure out what they have to pay for things. Thankfully, that's why none of these complaints ever resonate outside the world of hand-wringing forum posters.



    1) You say Apple would be punished, yet you imply that all "consumers are smart enough to figure out? the total minimum cost, which contradicts your first comment.



    2) There are several countries that have enacted such laws thus your second paragraph is also invalidated.



    3) My personal feelings on having more transparency of contracts is not the arcane or foolhardy endeavor you are trying to make it. I clearly stated that legislation would need to be altered to get this enacted. I made no such claims as it?s a companies moral responsibility to make contracts more transparent, but that those that wish it to be more transparent have a method by which they can change it. You may have felt the Nutrition Facts Label on food products is equally foolish and that consumer should know kinds of foods aren?t good for you, but it exists because of legislation.
  • Reply 39 of 79
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,615member
    Saw this note this morning and decided to go check it out. Went to a brick and mortar Radio Shack, and asked them about it. I have an upgrade eligible 8gb iPhone 3G. Asked them if they could do a upgrade to iPhone 4 16gb. Sales rep said they didn't have any 16gb, and "final price" on the 32gb iPhone 4 would be $249. She explained all iPhones come from a central warehouse, and since they didn't have any, no other radio shack stores in the area would have them.



    She cited the $249 as the final price with trade in of my 3G. It whole thng seemed to take her by surprise. I didn't want to spend $249 so I left. In retrospect, I probably should have pressed her a bit more on the trade in, as I think she was just telling what showed up on her screen, and hadn't done any trade in deals yet.



    More reason why I detest radio shack. Asshats got me into one of their stores with essentially a bait and switch. Place always remind me of pawn shops.



    Anyone here do one of these deals? I'll be the transaction start to finish takes nearly an hour; the sales reps generally untrained.
  • Reply 40 of 79
    As an employee of radio shack, I approve of this . Anyone who can come to Stamford Target Mobile (which is radioshack in target). If you're from the forums I'll see if i can throw anything extra your way
Sign In or Register to comment.