A conversation about the cell phone industry is not the same as saying that AT&T and Apple are conspiring to gouge "loyal customers" with outrageous charges.
I have no issue with anyone campaigning for lower cell plan rates, or more transparency from any kind of service provider, or less lock-in or more freedom or fewer hidden fees etc.
But discovering this all embracing cause right at the point of sale of a particular fun new consumer bauble that you want a particular deal on doesn't strike me as particularly noble. And pointing that out hardly makes me some kind of corporate apologist.
As stated I think the contracts favor AT&T too much - for upgrades cost (125 ETF vs. 200 UPGRADE), for rollover minutes, for minute overage charges. That is my *opinion.* Your opinion differs. Let's agree to disagree.
Let's leave it at that.
Ok, but you're the one who brought this up in the thread.
A conversation about the cell phone industry is not the same as saying that AT&T and Apple are conspiring to gouge "loyal customers" with outrageous charges.
I have no issue with anyone campaigning for lower cell plan rates, or more transparency from any kind of service provider, or less lock-in or more freedom or fewer hidden fees etc.
But discovering this all embracing cause right at the point of sale of a particular fun new consumer bauble that you want a particular deal on doesn't strike me as particularly noble. And pointing that out hardly makes me some kind of corporate apologist.
I think this boils it down the best. I don't like how byzantine contracts are these days (the contracts might even be an insult to the Byzantine empire), but if you sign it, you shouldn't be surprised when you're actually held to it. Complaining about learning contract provisions a year after you've signed it is a bit much, in my opinion. Especially when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
I think this boils it down the best. I don't like how byzantine contracts are these days (the contracts might even be an insult to the Byzantine empire), but if you sign it, you shouldn't be surprised when you're actually held to it. Complaining about learning contract provisions a year after you've signed it is a bit much, in my opinion. Especially when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
But I'm a loyal customer, they shouldn't treat me this way. I’m going to make an online partition and tell my friends not get an iPhone now. How can they do this to me?
The mobile phone industry does have some unfair practices, but no this is not one of them. AT&T agreed to heavily subsidize an expensive phone in exchange for a two year contract. You want AT&T to heavily subsidize a new expensive phone in the middle of your two year contract, simply because you want the "new hotness" and you don't want to pay for it. You want to have things both ways and that's simply not reasonable.
The lesson to be learned from this is if you want to buy new phones every year, don't take the subsidized deal. Pay full price and you won't be locked into a contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomhayes
We seem to have an fairly large consensus on this thread, from all sides , that the cell phone industries practices are unfair.
And because a company is making money with an unfair, BUT LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, why should we not voice our displeasure? Companies are in business to make money - and they can make a lot more money with unfair contracts -ala the company store, or payday loans.
"Don't sign. Don't complain. Unfairness is only caused by complaining.If I complain then it's my fault. Take a look in the mirror before you try to change the world. I would have told you this if I was your friend."
I read this forum occasionally and so wandered over to see what everyone thinks about the new iPhone. Wow....all that I can say is that I can't believe how worked up some are over having to wait three extra weeks to get their hands on this phone. If I was so unhappy I'd probably vote with my feet....and walk away from the company.
Oh well, we have the original iPhones with no subsidy for $400 each. We skipped the 3G as it got lousy reviews as far as coverage in our area goes. People I know who upgraded last year said that they wished that they had kept the original phone.
The network is now much better and now with voice and a video camera we're getting the new ones next week. Pre-ordered two 32Gs....
The lesson to be learned from this is if you want to buy new phones every year, don't take the subsidized deal. Pay full price and you won't be locked into a contract.
Assuming we can expect yearly updates, which is about how long I keep a phone for before updating anyway, I?d like to see a 12-month contract in place.
I read this forum occasionally and so wandered over to see what everyone thinks about the new iPhone. Wow....all that I can say is that I can't believe how worked up some are over having to wait three extra weeks to get their hands on this phone.
In all fairness, you didn't notice that for a lot of people it's an extra six months.
I think a large part of the issue here is that the cell phone carrier industry as a whole operates more like car dealerships - I've never seen so much back room deals/discussions and "let me talk to the manager" moments. So much so that I've come to expect it as the norm and not the exception. No doubt that there are binding contracts etc. but much of the language in the contracts and policies are vague (like the upgrade rules), and in my experience it is common practice to negotiate, with the outcomes almost entirely dependent on who you happen to catch that day. It's this type of setting that works to aggravate issues like the current one - because the carriers themselves have made a practice of circumventing their own contracts/policies.
I don't usually get excited about these things but I think ATT is missing a great opportunity here. While they are within their rights to enforce the contract agreements that customers signed last year with the subsidized phones, if they just take moment to "listen" to their customers, they have a chance to build customer loyalty and attract new customers just as Apple is doing with pricing on their new OS (Snow Leopard). Its just smart business and a great PR move. Sacrifice a bit of profit for long term gain. Think outside the box! Isn't making 40 million users happy worth it? Apple "sees the light" with a cheaper OS and lower pricing for its new hardware, why not ATT?
I don't usually get excited about these things but I think ATT is missing a great opportunity here. While they are within their rights to enforce the contract agreements that customers signed last year with the subsidized phones, if they just take moment to "listen" to their customers, they have a chance to build customer loyalty and attract new customers just as Apple is doing with pricing on their new OS (Snow Leopard). Its just smart business and a great PR move. Sacrifice a bit of profit for long term gain. Think outside the box! Isn't making 40 million users happy worth it? Apple "sees the light" with a cheaper OS and lower pricing for its new hardware, why not ATT?
How is it "long term gain" when, if they offer undue discounts on this round of upgrades, the complainers here will demand it again when the next phone comes out?
There is nothing new that a cell phone company wants you to wait out your contract before subsidizing a new piece of hardware.
The 3G owners who are under contract need to either suck it up and pay the price for new hardware or just wait until they are eligible again. It's that simple and I have no sympathy for them.
I could agree that selling the iPhone for $299/$399 on an 18 month contract would be realistic and reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Assuming we can expect yearly updates, which is about how long I keep a phone for before updating anyway, I?d like to see a 12-month contract in place.
when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
Apple wants you to upgrade year after year - that's why they stage these hoopla events in the first place.
AT&T has got Apple by the balls on this one but Apple should give the break, not AT&T.
But I'm a loyal customer, they shouldn't treat me this way. I?m going to make an online partition and tell my friends not get an iPhone now. How can they do this to me?
Your whining comes so natural to you. Who do you mean by they?
Obviously you cannot read. I NEVER said I agreed with PayDay loans! Just like I never agreed with AT&T. Apparently you do not understand. I am stating reality, you know, that thing that exists that we all wake up to every morning?
I was stating that the PayDay loan places are corrupt and charge an abnoxious amount of money. That doesn't sound like agreeing with them to me. I was explaining how to fight them and how not to fight them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomhayes
If you think PayDay loans are a-ok then we shall *never* agree on this issue. Let's agree to disagree and be done with it.
Because you are not being treated unfairly. You are only being asked to honor the agreement that you signed.
That's why it's whining.
I honestly do not believe if it were as simple as honoring the 2 year contract it would not be causing this much turmoil.
Respectfully, while you may agree or disagree whether any one has a "right" to complain, this particular churning has largely been fueled by two factors.
1. The precedent that was set when 2G owners were allowed to buy 3Gs and simply sign a new 2 year contract last year. This set up the expection they would be able to do it again this year with the 3gs.
2. The fact that some account that some people (based reportedly on some unpublished spending formula) who signed the 2 year contract are not being held to its terms and others are.
1) As stated numerous times on here, the 2G phone was not subsidized. AT&T made $0 and lost $0 on those who purchased it. The customer paid the full cost of the phone. When these people upgraded EARLY when the new 3G came out, they did not pay full price and AT&T subsidized the hundreds of dollars difference. = no right to complain
2) I think the point being missed in this entire thread is that upgrading your phone is a privilege not a right. TO ALL WHO BOUGHT THE IPHONE 3G: You signed a 2 year contract with AT&T. They agreed to sell you the 3G for $199/$299 (subsidized) and they agreed to pay the remainder of the phones cost and provide you with service. They do this with the comittment from you that you are going to retain service for 24 months. Period. End of story. If they let you upgrade at 12/18 month's time, you should feel privileged and appreciative.
I think what has happened is that we have all come to expect these upgrades, but in reality they are not a guarantee. This is why they are not in the contract and the policy is not public. You cannot argue that point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgunther
I honestly do not believe if it were as simple as honoring the 2 year contract it would not be causing this much turmoil.
Respectfully, while you may agree or disagree whether any one has a "right" to complain, this particular churning has largely been fueled by two factors.
1. The precedent that was set when 2G owners were allowed to buy 3Gs and simply sign a new 2 year contract last year. This set up the expection they would be able to do it again this year with the 3gs.
2. The fact that some account that some people (based reportedly on some unpublished spending formula) who signed the 2 year contract are not being held to its terms and others are.
Comments
I have no issue with anyone campaigning for lower cell plan rates, or more transparency from any kind of service provider, or less lock-in or more freedom or fewer hidden fees etc.
But discovering this all embracing cause right at the point of sale of a particular fun new consumer bauble that you want a particular deal on doesn't strike me as particularly noble. And pointing that out hardly makes me some kind of corporate apologist.
.
As stated I think the contracts favor AT&T too much - for upgrades cost (125 ETF vs. 200 UPGRADE), for rollover minutes, for minute overage charges. That is my *opinion.* Your opinion differs. Let's agree to disagree.
Let's leave it at that.
Ok, but you're the one who brought this up in the thread.
A conversation about the cell phone industry is not the same as saying that AT&T and Apple are conspiring to gouge "loyal customers" with outrageous charges.
I have no issue with anyone campaigning for lower cell plan rates, or more transparency from any kind of service provider, or less lock-in or more freedom or fewer hidden fees etc.
But discovering this all embracing cause right at the point of sale of a particular fun new consumer bauble that you want a particular deal on doesn't strike me as particularly noble. And pointing that out hardly makes me some kind of corporate apologist.
I think this boils it down the best. I don't like how byzantine contracts are these days (the contracts might even be an insult to the Byzantine empire), but if you sign it, you shouldn't be surprised when you're actually held to it. Complaining about learning contract provisions a year after you've signed it is a bit much, in my opinion. Especially when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
I think this boils it down the best. I don't like how byzantine contracts are these days (the contracts might even be an insult to the Byzantine empire), but if you sign it, you shouldn't be surprised when you're actually held to it. Complaining about learning contract provisions a year after you've signed it is a bit much, in my opinion. Especially when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
But I'm a loyal customer, they shouldn't treat me this way. I’m going to make an online partition and tell my friends not get an iPhone now. How can they do this to me?
The lesson to be learned from this is if you want to buy new phones every year, don't take the subsidized deal. Pay full price and you won't be locked into a contract.
We seem to have an fairly large consensus on this thread, from all sides , that the cell phone industries practices are unfair.
And because a company is making money with an unfair, BUT LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, why should we not voice our displeasure? Companies are in business to make money - and they can make a lot more money with unfair contracts -ala the company store, or payday loans.
"Don't sign. Don't complain. Unfairness is only caused by complaining.If I complain then it's my fault. Take a look in the mirror before you try to change the world. I would have told you this if I was your friend."
Did I sumamrize your points for you?
Oh well, we have the original iPhones with no subsidy for $400 each. We skipped the 3G as it got lousy reviews as far as coverage in our area goes. People I know who upgraded last year said that they wished that they had kept the original phone.
The network is now much better and now with voice and a video camera we're getting the new ones next week. Pre-ordered two 32Gs....
The lesson to be learned from this is if you want to buy new phones every year, don't take the subsidized deal. Pay full price and you won't be locked into a contract.
Assuming we can expect yearly updates, which is about how long I keep a phone for before updating anyway, I?d like to see a 12-month contract in place.
I read this forum occasionally and so wandered over to see what everyone thinks about the new iPhone. Wow....all that I can say is that I can't believe how worked up some are over having to wait three extra weeks to get their hands on this phone.
In all fairness, you didn't notice that for a lot of people it's an extra six months.
Why is it WHINING if someone voices the opinion that they are being treated UNFAIRLY?
That's my beef.
Because you are not being treated unfairly. You are only being asked to honor the agreement that you signed.
That's why it's whining.
I don't usually get excited about these things but I think ATT is missing a great opportunity here. While they are within their rights to enforce the contract agreements that customers signed last year with the subsidized phones, if they just take moment to "listen" to their customers, they have a chance to build customer loyalty and attract new customers just as Apple is doing with pricing on their new OS (Snow Leopard). Its just smart business and a great PR move. Sacrifice a bit of profit for long term gain. Think outside the box! Isn't making 40 million users happy worth it? Apple "sees the light" with a cheaper OS and lower pricing for its new hardware, why not ATT?
How is it "long term gain" when, if they offer undue discounts on this round of upgrades, the complainers here will demand it again when the next phone comes out?
There is nothing new that a cell phone company wants you to wait out your contract before subsidizing a new piece of hardware.
The 3G owners who are under contract need to either suck it up and pay the price for new hardware or just wait until they are eligible again. It's that simple and I have no sympathy for them.
Assuming we can expect yearly updates, which is about how long I keep a phone for before updating anyway, I?d like to see a 12-month contract in place.
No cell phone carrier is going to provide reception for everyone, every place, all of the time. Not even Verizon. If you want that, get a land line.
Wrong- Verizon has complete coverage in continental US and is able to better provide it due to CDMA technology.
Originally Posted by JeffDM
when you're trying to replace your super expensive phone only a year after you've bought your previous one. Replacing electronic devices every year is crazy consumeristic, in my opinion.
Apple wants you to upgrade year after year - that's why they stage these hoopla events in the first place.
AT&T has got Apple by the balls on this one but Apple should give the break, not AT&T.
But I'm a loyal customer, they shouldn't treat me this way. I?m going to make an online partition and tell my friends not get an iPhone now. How can they do this to me?
Your whining comes so natural to you. Who do you mean by they?
Wrong- Verizon has complete coverage in continental US and is able to better provide it due to CDMA technology.
I was stating that the PayDay loan places are corrupt and charge an abnoxious amount of money. That doesn't sound like agreeing with them to me. I was explaining how to fight them and how not to fight them.
If you think PayDay loans are a-ok then we shall *never* agree on this issue. Let's agree to disagree and be done with it.
Because you are not being treated unfairly. You are only being asked to honor the agreement that you signed.
That's why it's whining.
I honestly do not believe if it were as simple as honoring the 2 year contract it would not be causing this much turmoil.
Respectfully, while you may agree or disagree whether any one has a "right" to complain, this particular churning has largely been fueled by two factors.
1. The precedent that was set when 2G owners were allowed to buy 3Gs and simply sign a new 2 year contract last year. This set up the expection they would be able to do it again this year with the 3gs.
2. The fact that some account that some people (based reportedly on some unpublished spending formula) who signed the 2 year contract are not being held to its terms and others are.
2) I think the point being missed in this entire thread is that upgrading your phone is a privilege not a right. TO ALL WHO BOUGHT THE IPHONE 3G: You signed a 2 year contract with AT&T. They agreed to sell you the 3G for $199/$299 (subsidized) and they agreed to pay the remainder of the phones cost and provide you with service. They do this with the comittment from you that you are going to retain service for 24 months. Period. End of story. If they let you upgrade at 12/18 month's time, you should feel privileged and appreciative.
I think what has happened is that we have all come to expect these upgrades, but in reality they are not a guarantee. This is why they are not in the contract and the policy is not public. You cannot argue that point.
I honestly do not believe if it were as simple as honoring the 2 year contract it would not be causing this much turmoil.
Respectfully, while you may agree or disagree whether any one has a "right" to complain, this particular churning has largely been fueled by two factors.
1. The precedent that was set when 2G owners were allowed to buy 3Gs and simply sign a new 2 year contract last year. This set up the expection they would be able to do it again this year with the 3gs.
2. The fact that some account that some people (based reportedly on some unpublished spending formula) who signed the 2 year contract are not being held to its terms and others are.