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.
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."
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.
... "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!
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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......
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?
Comments
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.
"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."
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.
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.
... "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)
... 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."
...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!
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.
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.
*APPLAUSE*
Our government still works! A little!
You might want to wait for the actual judgment.
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)
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
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.
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:
Verizon's elimination of Alltel as an independent, low- priced rival would remove a significant competitive force from the market.
WTF?
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)
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
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.
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.
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.
The Galaxy S 2 is gonna be hard to beat.
I sell both these and iPhone 4's.
The iPhone 4 still outsells it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
..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.
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.
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......
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?
Ultimately for this happen would require government regulation. This is certainly the wrong political climate for that.
understatement of the century. lol