No I don't agree with this at all. You'd have to be a "dumbass" to not understand $199/$299 were not the full price of the iPhone when the previous iPhone cost twice as much.
AT&T lists in its information the fact that you mostly likely won't qualify for a new subsidized phone in the middle of your contract. This ill will comes from people who did not pay attention to what they were agreeing to. Also a sense of unrealistic entitlement.
This is not a change in upgrade policy, this has always been the policy.
The advertised price is with subsidy. In your AT&T contract it states that you may not be eligible for upgrade in the middle of your contract. If you do not understand this concept its not the fault of AT&T or Apple.
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
Expecting to get a new phone as if you don't still have a year left on the contract is a bit much. They never did promise that you would get the lowest price every year.
Just maybe, if enough people get huffy,
One thing is for sure, these dummies sure do know how to get huffy.
I will gladly pay the extra $200 if it means that these pathetic whiners don't get what they're crying for.
You are a grown adult. Its not AT&T's responsibility to make you an informed consumer. With a little bit of research all of this information was easily accessible.
I got my Iphone for my anniversary on May 22, 2009. At that time neither the people at Cingular, nor my husbands' friend who works for AT&T knew they were going to have a new phone. We all new about the upgrade, but thought that was it. Or I would have waited for the new phone. This really pisses my off. They should have let us know in advance. How much will I have to pay to take my phone back, get refund and rebuy the new phone? Will they even let us do that? Or will they say that you already redid your contract and are SOL.
Jesus christ what's the world coming to. Do people know how to do ANYTHING but complain?
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
It was sold cheaper due to the subsidy. If you purchased the original iPhone you were able to walk in and out with signing a contract. if you bought the iPhone 3G you had to sign a contract where the monthly fees and requirements were explained to you and written out on the contract. This is how all US carriers sell phones. This exists outside of AT&T, outside of the US and long before the iPhone came to pass.
Quote:
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
They advertised the purchase price. The price you pay at checkout, not the TCO. To think that the 2-year contract or monthly fees meant nothing to AT&T is silly. Did you really think that it costs under $200 with profit for the iPhone?
Quote:
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
What part of 2-year contract is hard to understand? Why would you be signing a contract that you didn?t read or be signing a contract at all if you thought you had already paid for the device free and clear.
Quote:
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
The point of a contract is to legally bind you to an agreement. You purchased a $700 item at $200, which AT&T pays Apple for each month, and AT&T wanted to be relatively certain that they get their money. There is nothing atypical or underhanded about it.
BTW, each Apple Store had an AT&T rep to finalize your account if you did not set yourself up at home before going to the store.
Quote:
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
AT&T chose not to sell the device as unsubsidized, like they do most of their devices. They chose only to sell it as a subsidized device requiring a 2-year agreement. One which you admittedly signed. There is no skullduggery, just a life lesson to lesson to be learned about being aware of business decisions.
The original IPhone wasn?t subsidized. AT&T paid Apple each month for each month you had service with them. If you were new to AT&T because of the iPhone then Apple got a little more each month. This was profit sharing, something that AT&T liked but most carriers did not. It allows the carrier to pay nothing up front and requires the cellphone vendor to keep their device as useful as possible, especially old ones, as a canceled plan or switch to another device means no more monthly payouts. This is great for the consumer for takes away a lot of control from the carriers who have grown accustomed to strong arming vendors. It?s rumored that AT&T made Apple agree to another year of exclusivity to get rid of the failed worldwide profit sharing model. I wish it has stuck as this wouldn?t be discussed, though your initial HW price would likely be higher.
Quote:
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
Enthusiasm does mean that we should be to ignore our legally binding contracts. I also don?t see how someone can be loyal if they are trying to skate on their signed commitment. A new customer has no debt to AT&T, the same way that people who were with AT&T under contracts with any other phone were not able to get either iPhone at the "new customer/upgrade eligible? price when you signed on.
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
Its not my intent to particularly call you a name. But its quite disappointing that people cannot grasp basic concepts of how these things work.
Quote:
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
The advertising was true. You did pay a lower upfront fee. It was reported everywhere that the iPhone 3G was subsidized. The rules for how carriers subsidize phones are standard and have been used for years now.
Quote:
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
No company lists the full rules or details of its sales agreements. Its up to the consumer to do research and be informed of what you are getting yourself into. If you don't bother to look further than the marketing materials, its your fault, you cannot blame the company for not being proactive in informing you of everything.
Quote:
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
There is a contract to read. Its what you signed and agreed to, the same as most people you just didn't read it.
Its not a "gotcha", these are the rules of subsidized phones for all carriers. No carrier is going to allow subscribers to continually jump from subsidized phone to subsidized phone in the middle of their contract.
Quote:
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
Did you inquire into the option of buying the phone at full price? Its true AT&T did not initially offer this option, eventually they did.
You are disappointed because you do not understand the point or the system of how phone subsidization works. The price at which you bought the phone last year was the price AT&T offers to people who are new to the iPhone.
Also what you don't understand is that if you pay the $399/$499 upgrade price AT&T is still subsidizing $200 off of the full price of the phone. They are simply not giving you the introductory subsidy.
Quote:
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
You are not getting the price of a new customer, because you are not a new customer. Its quite simple to understand.
While I get your and can appreciate your analogy, it is fatally flawed in one important point.
Last year when the New BMW came out I was able to buy the new one at the advertised price with no extra premium surcharges. This year, however, when I went came in to purchase the latest model, they changed the policy and I have to wait 6 more months than someone that hasn't been a loyal customer.
Yours is the one that's flawed because you're not taking continuing revenue into account that the dealership would lose in his concept. Yours is a straight purchase which wouldn't be different for new or old customers, except that you might get a better deal for a trade-in for your older car, which would bring the price for the new one down.
Yours is the one that's flawed because you're not taking continuing revenue into account that the dealership would lose in his concept. Yours is a straight purchase which wouldn't be different for new or old customers, except that you might get a better deal for a trade-in for your older car, which would bring the price for the new one down.
All analogies are flawed. That's what makes them analogies.
Thankfully, this situation is so obvious only an idiot is confused by it. Unfortunately, even the best analogy can't fix that.
And oddly there is no Beetlejuice leading the pack. He may had exhausted himself complaining too much yesterday.
Don't say it too loudly, but he's making some noise as if he agrees with us on this one. On another forum. Of course it always come back to some snide comment about ATT. If only ATT had forums! He'd never come here!
I'm going to start using the "fiercely loyal customer" idea in all my transactions.
"Hello, cable guys? I've had your overpriced service for years, I demand you give me a couple months free! To do less would be OUTRAGEOUS!"
"Hello auto leasing company? I know I'm only a year into my three year lease, but I just saw some new shiny and I want that, and I want it without any of your "early termination" mumbo jumbo, chop chop. OH YEAH? I'VE LEASED FROM YOU BEFORE AND NEW CARS ARE EXPENSIVE THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!"
"Dear landlord: I've been living in this apartment for 4 whole years and I always pay my rent so goddamn damn cut me a check. It's the least you can do. Or I'll just skip paying the rent this month, whaddya say? WHAT DO YOU MEAN EVICTION NOTICE THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!"
"Hi Best Buy! I'm a halfwit with a bizarre sense of entitlement who has bought a lot of shit here, over the years! And don't think that I haven't noticed that you pretty much suck, so I was doing yo a favor! So hand over the flat screen for half price or I will FREAK THE **** OUT!!!!!"
EDIT: Ok, we get it, but please watch the language
Really?? Excellent!!!! I'm on 1st gen iPhone too... I'm so glad I waited....
People be strong!! Only few days left!!!!!!
So is that means, having a 1st gen iphone can let me get the new iphone 3GS for $199 without changing my monthly plan which is $60/month, or do I need to sign for 2 more years and paying $80/month for the plan.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
Whether or not AT&T is uniformly applying their upgrade standards is an entirely different issue from demanding that they simply throw out their subsidy eligibility policies across the board as some kind of unprecedented gesture of goodwill.
You shouldn't be surprised at snide comments if your expectations are wildly out of line with what most people understand to be absolutely normal, prevalent and standard business practices, particularly if you insist on casting such normal, prevalent and standard business practices as some kind of dire assault on decency.
Their are various reasons why, but one simple concept is the fact that a person who pays $120 a month for AT&T service will pay back the subsidy faster than a person who pays $70 a month. The person who pays more will become eligible earlier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgunther
All the ugliness and snide comments aside.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
maybe these accounts are premier accounts?
it's AT&T's business. unless they are charging people based on race, sex and a few other prohibited under the law classifications it's their business. companies negotiate different prices for the same products all the time
Their are various reasons why, but one simple concept is the fact that a person who pays $120 a month for AT&T service will pay back the subsidy faster than a person who pays $70 a month. The person who pays more will become eligible earlier.
This entire thread has made me glad I have waited to buy an iPhone until now (I reserved one yesterday), I didn't really need a phone so I just bought an iTouch and used it's happy fun fuzzy goodness until now, ... I win.
Comments
No I don't agree with this at all. You'd have to be a "dumbass" to not understand $199/$299 were not the full price of the iPhone when the previous iPhone cost twice as much.
AT&T lists in its information the fact that you mostly likely won't qualify for a new subsidized phone in the middle of your contract. This ill will comes from people who did not pay attention to what they were agreeing to. Also a sense of unrealistic entitlement.
This is not a change in upgrade policy, this has always been the policy.
The advertised price is with subsidy. In your AT&T contract it states that you may not be eligible for upgrade in the middle of your contract. If you do not understand this concept its not the fault of AT&T or Apple.
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
Expecting to get a new phone as if you don't still have a year left on the contract is a bit much. They never did promise that you would get the lowest price every year.
Just maybe, if enough people get huffy,
One thing is for sure, these dummies sure do know how to get huffy.
I will gladly pay the extra $200 if it means that these pathetic whiners don't get what they're crying for.
You are a grown adult. Its not AT&T's responsibility to make you an informed consumer. With a little bit of research all of this information was easily accessible.
There's no chance lilgunther is a grown adult.
I got my Iphone for my anniversary on May 22, 2009. At that time neither the people at Cingular, nor my husbands' friend who works for AT&T knew they were going to have a new phone. We all new about the upgrade, but thought that was it. Or I would have waited for the new phone. This really pisses my off. They should have let us know in advance. How much will I have to pay to take my phone back, get refund and rebuy the new phone? Will they even let us do that? Or will they say that you already redid your contract and are SOL.
Jesus christ what's the world coming to. Do people know how to do ANYTHING but complain?
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
It was sold cheaper due to the subsidy. If you purchased the original iPhone you were able to walk in and out with signing a contract. if you bought the iPhone 3G you had to sign a contract where the monthly fees and requirements were explained to you and written out on the contract. This is how all US carriers sell phones. This exists outside of AT&T, outside of the US and long before the iPhone came to pass.
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
They advertised the purchase price. The price you pay at checkout, not the TCO. To think that the 2-year contract or monthly fees meant nothing to AT&T is silly. Did you really think that it costs under $200 with profit for the iPhone?
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
What part of 2-year contract is hard to understand? Why would you be signing a contract that you didn?t read or be signing a contract at all if you thought you had already paid for the device free and clear.
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
The point of a contract is to legally bind you to an agreement. You purchased a $700 item at $200, which AT&T pays Apple for each month, and AT&T wanted to be relatively certain that they get their money. There is nothing atypical or underhanded about it.
BTW, each Apple Store had an AT&T rep to finalize your account if you did not set yourself up at home before going to the store.
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
AT&T chose not to sell the device as unsubsidized, like they do most of their devices. They chose only to sell it as a subsidized device requiring a 2-year agreement. One which you admittedly signed. There is no skullduggery, just a life lesson to lesson to be learned about being aware of business decisions.
The original IPhone wasn?t subsidized. AT&T paid Apple each month for each month you had service with them. If you were new to AT&T because of the iPhone then Apple got a little more each month. This was profit sharing, something that AT&T liked but most carriers did not. It allows the carrier to pay nothing up front and requires the cellphone vendor to keep their device as useful as possible, especially old ones, as a canceled plan or switch to another device means no more monthly payouts. This is great for the consumer for takes away a lot of control from the carriers who have grown accustomed to strong arming vendors. It?s rumored that AT&T made Apple agree to another year of exclusivity to get rid of the failed worldwide profit sharing model. I wish it has stuck as this wouldn?t be discussed, though your initial HW price would likely be higher.
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
Enthusiasm does mean that we should be to ignore our legally binding contracts. I also don?t see how someone can be loyal if they are trying to skate on their signed commitment. A new customer has no debt to AT&T, the same way that people who were with AT&T under contracts with any other phone were not able to get either iPhone at the "new customer/upgrade eligible? price when you signed on.
As an adult, I have the ability to refrain from lowering myself to name calling and keep this to an honorable respectful response and simply state that I agree that, after they lowered initial price from the intial price of $599 to $399 the 3G was released at a cheaper price than the 2G.
Its not my intent to particularly call you a name. But its quite disappointing that people cannot grasp basic concepts of how these things work.
This fact was widely advertised in global marketing that the new 3G did more for less $. Perhaps you recall that this was one of their big sales campaigns? I do not recall a single add that said, thanks the new price was due to AT&T deciding to subsidize the phone. They simply advertised a lower price.
The advertising was true. You did pay a lower upfront fee. It was reported everywhere that the iPhone 3G was subsidized. The rules for how carriers subsidize phones are standard and have been used for years now.
While there may have been information buried in fine print if you dug around, it was not promoted in any advertisements I saw, nor was it clearly obvious in the store. In fact when I purchased mine, they simply said sign here on their handy little pad for a new 2 year contract which would be same as you had before.
No company lists the full rules or details of its sales agreements. Its up to the consumer to do research and be informed of what you are getting yourself into. If you don't bother to look further than the marketing materials, its your fault, you cannot blame the company for not being proactive in informing you of everything.
There wasn't any big contract to read. Granted, as an adult, it is my responsibility to read fully investigate and understand any contract I am signing. I generally do take the time to read and in the future will do the same with Apple. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of having a higher trust level with Apple, and honestly did not expect a fine print Gotcha. And you can pin it on AT&T or Apple, but I purchased it at the Apple store and only dealt with Apple representatives.
There is a contract to read. Its what you signed and agreed to, the same as most people you just didn't read it.
Its not a "gotcha", these are the rules of subsidized phones for all carriers. No carrier is going to allow subscribers to continually jump from subsidized phone to subsidized phone in the middle of their contract.
To be clear, I never saw a "full unsubsizided price" comparison at that time. They did not offer the option to buy one with out subsidy, only that it was this price. I do not feel I should get something for free, I am just very dissappointed that this year, instead of just purchasing the phone and signing the new 2 year contract like I did last year, I have to wait 6 months or pay extra. Seems to me, I already did that by being in line for the first one and paying more for it than the rest of the public did 2 months later.
Did you inquire into the option of buying the phone at full price? Its true AT&T did not initially offer this option, eventually they did.
You are disappointed because you do not understand the point or the system of how phone subsidization works. The price at which you bought the phone last year was the price AT&T offers to people who are new to the iPhone.
Also what you don't understand is that if you pay the $399/$499 upgrade price AT&T is still subsidizing $200 off of the full price of the phone. They are simply not giving you the introductory subsidy.
I am simply very dissappointed that, as a fiercely loyal frequent buyer, my genuine enthusiasm for their new product finds me having to wait 6 months to pay the price a new customer gets.
You are not getting the price of a new customer, because you are not a new customer. Its quite simple to understand.
While I get your and can appreciate your analogy, it is fatally flawed in one important point.
Last year when the New BMW came out I was able to buy the new one at the advertised price with no extra premium surcharges. This year, however, when I went came in to purchase the latest model, they changed the policy and I have to wait 6 more months than someone that hasn't been a loyal customer.
Yours is the one that's flawed because you're not taking continuing revenue into account that the dealership would lose in his concept. Yours is a straight purchase which wouldn't be different for new or old customers, except that you might get a better deal for a trade-in for your older car, which would bring the price for the new one down.
Jesus christ what's the world coming to. Do people know how to do ANYTHING but complain?
And oddly there is no Beetlejuice leading the pack. He may had exhausted himself complaining too much yesterday.
Yours is the one that's flawed because you're not taking continuing revenue into account that the dealership would lose in his concept. Yours is a straight purchase which wouldn't be different for new or old customers, except that you might get a better deal for a trade-in for your older car, which would bring the price for the new one down.
All analogies are flawed. That's what makes them analogies.
Thankfully, this situation is so obvious only an idiot is confused by it. Unfortunately, even the best analogy can't fix that.
And oddly there is no Beetlejuice leading the pack. He may had exhausted himself complaining too much yesterday.
Don't say it too loudly, but he's making some noise as if he agrees with us on this one. On another forum. Of course it always come back to some snide comment about ATT. If only ATT had forums! He'd never come here!
"Hello, cable guys? I've had your overpriced service for years, I demand you give me a couple months free! To do less would be OUTRAGEOUS!"
"Hello auto leasing company? I know I'm only a year into my three year lease, but I just saw some new shiny and I want that, and I want it without any of your "early termination" mumbo jumbo, chop chop. OH YEAH? I'VE LEASED FROM YOU BEFORE AND NEW CARS ARE EXPENSIVE THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!"
"Dear landlord: I've been living in this apartment for 4 whole years and I always pay my rent so goddamn damn cut me a check. It's the least you can do. Or I'll just skip paying the rent this month, whaddya say? WHAT DO YOU MEAN EVICTION NOTICE THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!"
"Hi Best Buy! I'm a halfwit with a bizarre sense of entitlement who has bought a lot of shit here, over the years! And don't think that I haven't noticed that you pretty much suck, so I was doing yo a favor! So hand over the flat screen for half price or I will FREAK THE **** OUT!!!!!"
EDIT: Ok, we get it, but please watch the language
Really?? Excellent!!!! I'm on 1st gen iPhone too... I'm so glad I waited....
People be strong!! Only few days left!!!!!!
So is that means, having a 1st gen iphone can let me get the new iphone 3GS for $199 without changing my monthly plan which is $60/month, or do I need to sign for 2 more years and paying $80/month for the plan.
When I log into OLAM at AT&T I can check my upgrade status and they eventually take me to the list of phones but only the 3G is there, not the 3GS.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
And oddly there is no Beetlejuice leading the pack. He may had exhausted himself complaining too much yesterday.
Au contraire- I have not complained at all. Love it all.
In fact , it is I who have been putting the AT&T complainers in their place.
All the ugliness and snide comments aside.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
Whether or not AT&T is uniformly applying their upgrade standards is an entirely different issue from demanding that they simply throw out their subsidy eligibility policies across the board as some kind of unprecedented gesture of goodwill.
You shouldn't be surprised at snide comments if your expectations are wildly out of line with what most people understand to be absolutely normal, prevalent and standard business practices, particularly if you insist on casting such normal, prevalent and standard business practices as some kind of dire assault on decency.
All the ugliness and snide comments aside.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
All the ugliness and snide comments aside.
If there is this "18 month" upgrade rule as part of the contract from last year why are some 3G owners getting the new customer price and others are paying the extra upgrade fee?
If indeed this is the rule, why is it not being uniformly applied?
maybe these accounts are premier accounts?
it's AT&T's business. unless they are charging people based on race, sex and a few other prohibited under the law classifications it's their business. companies negotiate different prices for the same products all the time
Their are various reasons why, but one simple concept is the fact that a person who pays $120 a month for AT&T service will pay back the subsidy faster than a person who pays $70 a month. The person who pays more will become eligible earlier.
That's right.