I wish they would do away with the contracts or at least cut them down to a year.
They have done away with contracts, you pay full price. As for the year thing, I'd be okay with that being buyer's choice.
But what I really want and think there needs to be is the subsidy being a separate line item. The carriers claim that part of your bill is paying them back yes. But what if they didn't pay anything because you did buy full price. Why are you paying the same as someone that got $450 off in subsidy. You shouldn't be based on what they are saying. So that line should be zero.
as for those that do get a subsidy, that line should be 1/12th or 1/24th based on which option you picked. And next to it should be your remaining balance so you can see exactly what your ETF is if you want to upgrade early, unlock your phone etc. So for example if you choose a 24 month contract (iPhone 4s with a $450 subsidy) and you are have finished month five then your balance is $450 - 5(450/24) or $356.25. Right now they only credit you like $10 a month you have finished or $50 off at that point.
AND THEN when you finish your 24 months and don't upgrade for another 3-4 months like all the folks that bought their 3gs at launch (in June/July) and waited for the 4s in Oct, you are 'paying back' some $18.75 you don't actually owe because the rate is the same. If it was a separate line you would have zero'd out by then and your bill would be cheaper.
It's funny to me that the DOJ hasn't looked into this over charging by the carriers but they are overly concerned with trying to push this notion that Apple came up with their agency model for ibooks in conjunction with the publishers to raise prices on books above the 'appropriate' pricing (which apparently the DOJ is authorized to determine) etc.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by xRCx
I wish they would do away with the contracts or at least cut them down to a year.
They have done away with contracts, you pay full price. As for the year thing, I'd be okay with that being buyer's choice.
But what I really want and think there needs to be is the subsidy being a separate line item. The carriers claim that part of your bill is paying them back yes. But what if they didn't pay anything because you did buy full price. Why are you paying the same as someone that got $450 off in subsidy. You shouldn't be based on what they are saying. So that line should be zero.
as for those that do get a subsidy, that line should be 1/12th or 1/24th based on which option you picked. And next to it should be your remaining balance so you can see exactly what your ETF is if you want to upgrade early, unlock your phone etc. So for example if you choose a 24 month contract (iPhone 4s with a $450 subsidy) and you are have finished month five then your balance is $450 - 5(450/24) or $356.25. Right now they only credit you like $10 a month you have finished or $50 off at that point.
AND THEN when you finish your 24 months and don't upgrade for another 3-4 months like all the folks that bought their 3gs at launch (in June/July) and waited for the 4s in Oct, you are 'paying back' some $18.75 you don't actually owe because the rate is the same. If it was a separate line you would have zero'd out by then and your bill would be cheaper.
It's funny to me that the DOJ hasn't looked into this over charging by the carriers but they are overly concerned with trying to push this notion that Apple came up with their agency model for ibooks in conjunction with the publishers to raise prices on books above the 'appropriate' pricing (which apparently the DOJ is authorized to determine) etc.
Best Buy...Amazon's showroom.