SpamSandwich wrote: »
I don't. I assume it would be better overall.
old-wiz wrote: »
Verizon will only allow you to have a phone if you buy it from them or from the Apple store. You cannot bring your own phone.
Except a decent OS and usable screen.
I think that post is a SPAM post. It makes no sense at all and doesn't have anything do with the conversation with this article.
'Their only goal is to charge customers more one way or another'
But that's what we all want, right? (Sorry couldn't resist the SJ quote)
You are right though. They are a business and their goal is to make money. The market demographic has changed. A little over 5 years ago the majority of people didn't have smart phones and there was a huge sea of people flocking to them that needed networks. It made a lot of sense for carriers to say "Join my network and I'll give you this super fancy phone for cheap or free even!" Once one did it, they all had to or they wouldn't get customers.
The demographic has changed. The market isn't growing like crazy, and most people that want a smartphone already have one. They are not going to stop being smartphone users because the carrier stops dangling a "free" phone in front of them.
Verizon is still subsidizing so the market should speak. It may be that Apple and high end Samsung users flock to Verizon since AT&T stopped giving expensive phones away for cheap. Verizon will have to increase its rates to support the subsidies. The users that don't use the fancy phones are more likely to flee Verizon for T-mobiles and AT&T's less expensive options.
The change makes good business sense for AT&T as long as subscribers don't leave because of it. AT&T doesn't have to offer their services cheaply unfortunately, they just have to be slightly cheaper than the limited competition in the carrier field.
Stop using words when you don’t know what they mean.
The vast majority of consumers feels that this is fair pricing. VAST majority. They justify it because people pay it and WANT to pay it.
No, you’re utterly wrong.
Money = monopoly? Profit = monopoly?
Finally something on which we can agree.
I can see how this would hurt Apple, but t's hard to see how this would benefit AT&T. They would certainly make less money off of people like me--I'm grandfathered into the unlimited data plan, and have kept it even though I don't typically use all that much data, and I also don't get a new phone as soon as I qualify. If they forced me to get a pay-as-you-go plan, I would definitely pay less, since the unlimited plan costs more than the current offerings. If I wait until the next release to replace my 4S, I'll pay AT&T for a year of subsidy, without receiving that subsidy (and I've already started to do that as of October). If they stop subsidizing handsets they will have to drop their prices to compete with T-Mobile, but this would force the apples-to-apples comparisons that T-Mobile is probably hoping for.
of course it would be better but with as we know with any technology
take the digital camera or the LCD tv prices always fall even when the technology gets better
of course u have 4k Tvs which cost shitload but most ppl wont buy into them until they become cheaper
of course there will be curves phones which will cost alot more but they will be niche.
its great for consumers the get great tech for cheap
Phone subsidies are the carrot that carriers used to get people to sign 2 year contracts. The advantage of the 2 year contract is that it makes it more difficult to jump ship to another carrier. Without any subsidies, there is little reason to sign a contract, and carriers will see far more churn when that happens. The cost of signing up a new customer is far greater than the cost of maintaining a customer.
Since the majority of people actually do switch devices every couple years, the net result to the carrier is going to be minimal change. However, it's easier to market your calling plans as cheaper, with a monthly phone price tacked on, making the subsidy completely transparent. However, the carrier will now lose the bonus profit for those that don't upgrade immediately when they are eligible, as their bill will then decrease.
Higher end phone manufacturers will lose out, as the cost of the phone is now more apparent, and people will be less likely to want to pay that amount for the phone. When it's buried into the cost of the plan, people will gravitate towards higher end devices.
With this change, you'll see a race towards cheaper phones, which does not generally equate to a better product.
People that aren't happy with AT&T or any other carrier stop moaning and change carriers. There are 4 major and dozens more pre-paid options to choose from from at every price under the sun. My best friend recently switched from AT&T to Ting and is saving around $45 a month over what he used to pay. He is using an iPhone 4s on Ting by the way. So there are choices out there so vote with your wallet and not with comments on a forum AT&T will never read if you are unhappy.
Even if they go this route- AT&T direct service is still expensive. What about the breakup roaming deal with T-Mobile? Do you basically get the AT&T network for free with T-Mobile? T
i only pay 40 a month tax included with everything unlimited but slower speed after 1GB most ppl on contracts pay 100+.
it good to have gsm phone and a google voice number then u can change monthly until u r satisfied and u know the price is only going down.
I am so glad tmo didnt merge with att more competition is great for consumers.
and now u can get top of the line unlocked phone for only 350 from google. google is forcing the prices lower coz it doesnt depend on sales for its profit i am sure some companies must be pretty mad about that
AT&T is the Microsoft of cell carriers.
Couldn't be happier with T-Mobile.
Ah, no. Did you see this from another article? "Wireless customers who bring their own device, buy a handset without a subsidy, or have their current contract expire will see their monthly data share bill drop by an average of $15 per month, AT&T announced on Thursday."
They're dropping current prices, then adding a 24-month payment plan on top for subsidized phones.
Obviously the scheme is a win for AT&T, but it's not the total ripoff you make it out to be.
I did. I'd been living abroad the past couple of years, and went with T-mobile when I got back this time around. I bought my own handset from the Apple Store, and signed on to T-mobile's $60 a month tier.
$60. That's the price, that's what I pay. Period. Not like AT&T's so-called $60 a month service, which is just a $60 *base price*, PLUS $3 more for this, and $5 more for that, and oh, $18 more for fees, taxes, and by the time you're done you're actually paying something like $90 for that "$60 tier" (which includes a pathetic amount of data, so you're almost guaranteed to pay overages or upgrade to a more expensive tier). Most people I know are paying $120 to $150 to AT&T for their iPhone service, and not really getting a whole lot more from it than I do for $60 at T-mobile.
I did the math as well. I bought a 64GB iPhone 5s up front for $850. I'll probably use it for 3 years (my previous two iPhones lasted at least that long), and then flip it to a new model. Based on history, I'll get about $200 back for my current handset (5s) on resale. So my actual cost is more like $80 a month factoring in the cost of the handset. ($60 for service + about $20/month for the handset over 3 years). Beats the $120 a month I was paying to AT&T for less service/data previously. A 33% savings!
I agree. I was with AT&T before and switched to Sprint and also couldn't be happier with the service and especially my bill. Unlimited LTE not to mention unlimited texts and calls for $50 a month is fantastic.