That's the limits of an allegory... No change in the love I have for my iPhone, just disappointment that it sold itself to me for more than it knew it was worth...
Well if it wasn't worth $600 to you when you bought it, then you shouldn't have bought it
The features, visual appeal, and functionality has not diminished. It just costs less now. The phone is easily worth $400 to me. If I buy one next week for $400, and the following week they start giving them away for free, I'd still have paid what I felt the phone was worth, and thusly wouldn't be upset with anyone.
Curious whether it's enforceable - (the $200 cancellation fee) - after all - you didn't receive condieration from ATT other than future service - since you could buy a phone and never hook it up - or cancel after a period of time and keep the phone with no penalty. More curious would be whether ATT's attorney's were smart enough to think through a scenario where everyone that paid $599 or $499 defected for cause. if they did hopefully, they got a make whole kicker from Apple - if not - a massive defection might have the (perverse) effect of pumping up Apple's revenue since upon defection from ATT there wouldn't be any remaining two year contractual obligation other than for regular warranty claims... maybe Mr. Jobs and his attorneys pulled one over on ATT as well...
Ok whatever, well then all the people bitching don't feel their iphone value is $599?.. now will you shut up?.
No, sorry.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
Doesn't matter what original value they attached to the phone, as of today, it's value is not $599. Stop with this silly point already.
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
I agree with Mr. H- price and value are not the same - let's not forget the story of the emperor's clothes!
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
I wonder if those who pay more than retail (sometimes astronomically so) on eBay for hot Holiday items feel ripped off and outraged for agreeing to a heightened price?
I wonder if those who pay more than retail (sometimes astronomically so) on eBay for hot Holiday items feel ripped off and outraged for agreeing to a heightened price?
Great question - of course, when doing so - they know what the price is - they have knowledge of the exact premium they are paying for immediate gratification.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
Hmmm, no flipflopping eh?. I guess it's illegal to change one view of the value of a product you bought. Watch out folks, MR H, the Value police, gonna arrest you if you suddenly perceive your iphone is worth less than you paid for it. In Mr H world, there is no such thing as fraud. I feel so much better.. i can now go out and defraud the ederly. Sell them insurance for $1 million that is not worth squat. When they complain, I'll just say "hey, if you think it was not worth 1 million, why did you buy it?". I applaud your efforts to defend apple. It must be an extremely streneous task lately with all the anti-apple post).
Apple could use you on their boards. I hear they deleted over 2000 messages in a day and still there were thousands pouring in. They had to take the board down. You can lend a hand over there. In the meantime, i gotta go.. gotta sell some ederly people worthless stuff cause they "value" it at the price i scammed them at. So much money to make, so little time.
Great question - of course, when doing so - they know what the price is - they have knowledge of the exact premium they are paying for immediate gratification.
Was anyone so naive as to believe they weren't already paying a significant premium when they dropped $600 on a phone?
Will those same angered buyers feel better about their purchases if iPhone supply becomes sparse this Christmas and scalpers are selling them on eBay for $599 again?
You may think so, but a lot of people will feel that way (price reduction encourages migration by compensating early termination fees).
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
That assumes that you can then turn around and sell the phone for $600.
You are judging the value of the iPhone on what you would get if you turned around and sold it. However, people are not buying iPhones to turn around and sell them. People are buying iPhones to use. Do you understand the distinction?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
If you cannot sell the phone for $600, how is it then a $600 phone being sold for $400?.
It's not. However, because it used to sell for $600, and people are aware of that, that makes its new price at $400 seem like a bargain to new customers or compensate them for $175 early termination fees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
The value of an object is what you can get on the market for it. You can't sell an iphone today for $600.. (maybe unlocked you could) so then what you are really getting is a $400 phone.
The value of an object is only what it sells for in the market if you are selling it in the market. I have an iPhone, am not selling it, and its value to me is more than $600. (of course, I'd rather pay less, but I'm just saying...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
Now for a real example of what you were thinking.. imagine getting a $40,000 bmw for $20,000. Is the car worth $20,000?.. no!!.. becuase you can immediately turn around and sell it for $40,000 (or at least more than $20,000). That is a true case of where you are getting incentive to buy a product at below value. The value of the iphone is $400. Doesn't matter how you feel about it. Value of an object is independent of feelings. It's dependent on what you can sell the object for immediately or what you would have to pay for that object if you wanted to buy in the open market.
People don't buy and sell iPhones like stock or even cars. It's not an investment, or a resale opportunity. It's all about what it is. Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
People don't buy and sell iPhones like stock or even cars. It's not an investment, or a resale opportunity. It's all about what it is. Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
Speak for yourself, have you visited ebay lately? The people that bought iphones to resell surely thought the value lay in what they can sell the product for in the open market. You go tell them about your cute definition of value.
Actually, i have a solution to our argument about value. MR H, you should find someone who paid $600 for the phone and offer that person $600 since you seem to value the phone that much otherwise, allow that person to revalue their phone and then bitch about it.
Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
Yep. If I make the leap, I'll be paying $600 just like the rest of the iPhone early adopters, only $200 of that will go to T-Mobile.
Speak for yourself, have you visited ebay lately? The people that bought iphones to resell surely thought the value lay in what they can sell the product for in the open market. You go tell them about your cute definition of value.
Who cares about them?
They're such a puny, tiny, insignificant, portion of iPhone buyers, they're not what we're talking about.
My "cute defination" applies to virtually 100% of users and everyone who's posted here. No one has complained about their iPhone ebay store.
Advocating a lawsuit? I'm simply suggesting that if we had the discipline, the folks who are out the net $200 could act together to refrain from making purchases to let apple feel our wrath. I'm also suggesting that the 2 year contract with ATT and Apple has been breached because of failed promises - shame on Apple for not being more clear about what they meant by feature enhancements - but there is no doubt in my mind that those publice statements were intended to induce people into purchasing iPhones. By the way - assuming you own one, how did you activate your iPhone - did you use iTunes? My guess is yet - if you did - Apple is in privity along with ATT with respect to your two year contract. Apple is even recognizing revenue related to the iPhone over the two year contract period because they understand they have contractual obligations over the period. Assuming someone did file a lawsuit - i'd be very surprised if Apple were able to sustain that the lawsuit were frivolous - in any US jurisdiction (UK a different matter).
Yes, advocate a lawsuit. That's exactly what you have been doing. Otherwise what is the point of your mentioning breach of contract or some other sort of silly claim--continuously.
Yes, I own an iPhone and bought the day it came out. Yes, I activated through iTunes. However, if that is the extent of your privity argument, again, I say good luck, Chief. Nonetheless, where in that 2 year contract does it mention these future feature enhancements that you have been talking about? There isn't anything to that effect. The 2 year contract pertains to the cell service, not continued support of the iPhone product, by means of additional enhancements.
You say that you would be very surprised if Apple could sustain that a lawsuit (containing the claims you envision) is frivolous? Yet, you are also surprised at Apple's recent price drop? Will the surprises for you ever end, or just keep coming because you have your head buried in the sand?
By the way, the $200 you have "lost" would be a lesser amount than most filing fees to simply file your complaint. Just keep the losses coming, huh?
Actually, i have a solution to our argument about value. MR H, you should find someone who paid $600 for the phone and offer that person $600 since you seem to value the phone that much otherwise, allow that person to revalue their phone and then bitch about it.
Either put up or shut up.
Are you being a moron on purpose?
Didn't I already tell you that the value of the iPhone to me is $0?
Of course no-one is now going to pay $599 for an iPhone when they can get one for $399. But if they value the iPhone more than that, they've got themselves a bargain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
Hmmm, no flipflopping eh?. I guess it's illegal to change one view of the value of a product you bought. Watch out folks, MR H, the Value police, gonna arrest you if you suddenly perceive your iphone is worth less than you paid for it. In Mr H world, there is no such thing as fraud. I feel so much better.. i can now go out and defraud the ederly. Sell them insurance for $1 million that is not worth squat.
In the meantime, i gotta go.. gotta sell some ederly people worthless stuff cause they "value" it at the price i scammed them at. So much money to make, so little time.
My arguments imply that I think there is no such thing as fraud? You are completely incapable of logical reasoning.
Your example of selling useless insurance is in no way a parallel of the iPhone situation. The value of insurance is in its "function" - that it pays out if something goes wrong. If the insurance will never actually pay out, its function has been misrepresented. The iPhone's function has not been misrepresented and is still able to perform all the functions it was able to on the day of purchase. No fraud has been perpetrated.
Didn't I already tell you that the value of the iPhone to me is $0?
Of course no-one is now going to pay $599 for an iPhone when they can get one for $399. But if they value the iPhone more than that, they've got themselves a bargain.
My arguments imply that I think there is no such thing as fraud? You are completely incapable of logical reasoning.
Your example of selling useless insurance is in no way a parallel of the iPhone situation. The value of insurance is in its "function" - that it pays out if something goes wrong. If the insurance will never actually pay out, its function has been misrepresented. The iPhone's function has not been misrepresented and is still able to perform all the functions it was able to on the day of purchase. No fraud has been perpetrated.
Oh really?. Gasoline has a simple function. If you put it in a car, it allows you to get from point A to B. So by your logic, Exxon can start selling gas for $10 a gallon. Actually by your logic, congress or no other authority should ever look into price gouging because if a consumer buys gas expecting his car to go from point A to B, then it is not fraud because Exxon did not force that person to pay $10. What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?. What if you took the train, would that make the value of gas $0?. What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
You are being idiotic for the sake of argument. Yes, we get it.. you support apple.. hooray for you!!.. lets give you a cookie.
BTW, i can sell the ederly 1 million insurance that is not worth a million because i will tell them exactly what they are buying in legalese and they will not understand what the hell i said (happens every day in America.. some prosecutors foolishly call it fraud.. i should let them contact you for a true definition of fraud).
Just because someone told you what you are buying and you bought it and it performed that function does not mean fraud was not involved. This is so basic, a 10 year old would get this. I can only surmise you are doing the following
1. Purposely being dense so as to continue the discussion
2. You really don't understand.
3. You are baiting
4. You didn't buy an iphone so this is all theoretical to you.. what do you care? you can say anything you want.. you are not the one holding a $399 iphone you paid $599 for.
Whatever, go on.. i promise this is my last reply to you.. go ahead, have your fun with the folks bitching (hey, you didn't get one so they really value your opinion).
Yes, advocate a lawsuit. That's exactly what you have been doing. Otherwise what is the point of your mentioning breach of contract or some other sort of silly claim--continuously.
Yes, I own an iPhone and bought the day it came out. Yes, I activated through iTunes. However, if that is the extent of your privity argument, again, I say good luck, Chief. Nonetheless, where in that 2 year contract does it mention these future feature enhancements that you have been talking about? There isn't anything to that effect. The 2 year contract pertains to the cell service, not continued support of the iPhone product, by means of additional enhancements.
You say that you would be very surprised if Apple could sustain that a lawsuit (containing the claims you envision) is frivolous? Yet, you are also surprised at Apple's recent price drop? Will the surprises for you ever end, or just keep coming because you have your head buried in the sand?
By the way, the $200 you have "lost" would be a lesser amount than most filing fees to simply file your complaint. Just keep the losses coming, huh?
if you want to get out of your contract - you have to have a basis for doing that to avoid the cancellation fee. I believe Apple and ATT's agreement on a sbustantial (33%) price cut and failure to meet promises they made related to quickly ehance the functionality of the phone provide an iPhone owner with a reasonable argument to void the contract and avoid any cancellation fee. who needs to file a complaint - just spend some time writing letters and having phone calls with ATT - not hard at all. People should stand up for themselves if they feel dissatisfied with how they are being treated by vendors they do business with. Incidentally, your suggestion that claims made against a contracting party are invalid if they relate to promises other than in a written contract is completely bogus in any jusridiction in the US. I believe you're also incorrect to think that Apple doesn't have any relation to the service contract.
What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?
That's called price fixing. It involves the anti-competive collusion of multiple parties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
Microsoft stock is an investment. Its value is determined by what people are willing to pay for it. The iPhone is a consumer electronics product, not an investment. You don't buy it hoping you will be able to sell it later for more money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
Yes, we get it.. you support apple
I support Apple in this instance not through blind loyalty but through a simple application of logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
BTW, i can sell the ederly 1 million insurance that is not worth a million because i will tell them exactly what they are buying in legalese and they will not understand what the hell i said (happens every day in America.. some prosecutors foolishly call it fraud.. i should let them contact you for a true definition of fraud).
Just because someone told you what you are buying and you bought it and it performed that function does not mean fraud was not involved. This is so basic, a 10 year old would get this.
Obviously you do not understand the part of my previous post where I state: "its function has been misrepresented".
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse
I can only surmise you are doing the following
1. Purposely being dense so as to continue the discussion
2. You really don't understand.
3. You are baiting
That's funny, I thought all the same things about you.
Oh really?. Gasoline has a simple function. If you put it in a car, it allows you to get from point A to B. So by your logic, Exxon can start selling gas for $10 a gallon. Actually by your logic, congress or no other authority should ever look into price gouging because if a consumer buys gas expecting his car to go from point A to B, then it is not fraud because Exxon did not force that person to pay $10. What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?. What if you took the train, would that make the value of gas $0?. What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
Um...there are infinite alternatives to spending $599 on a phone. Like, for instance, just keeping the one you already own. Or taking the one the service provider will give you for free with a new contract. Furthermore, a phone is a one-time purchase; gasoline is a weekly purchase for most people. Gasoline suddenly increasing to $10 a gallon would be like AT&T upping your cell phone bill to $200 a month, not like dropping the price of a $600 toy to $400.
Um...there are infinite alternatives to spending $599 on a phone. Like, for instance, just keeping the one you already own. Or taking the one the service provider will give you for free with a new contract. Furthermore, a phone is a one-time purchase; gasoline is a weekly purchase for most people. Gasoline suddenly increasing to $10 a gallon would be like AT&T upping your cell phone bill to $200 a month, not like dropping the price of a $600 toy to $400.
Why not move to today's thread on Jobs saying he's not paying refunds - more AI users will likely see posts
Comments
That's the limits of an allegory... No change in the love I have for my iPhone, just disappointment that it sold itself to me for more than it knew it was worth...
Well if it wasn't worth $600 to you when you bought it, then you shouldn't have bought it
The features, visual appeal, and functionality has not diminished. It just costs less now. The phone is easily worth $400 to me. If I buy one next week for $400, and the following week they start giving them away for free, I'd still have paid what I felt the phone was worth, and thusly wouldn't be upset with anyone.
Ok whatever, well then all the people bitching don't feel their iphone value is $599?.. now will you shut up?.
No, sorry.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
Doesn't matter what original value they attached to the phone, as of today, it's value is not $599. Stop with this silly point already.
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
No, sorry.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
I agree with Mr. H- price and value are not the same - let's not forget the story of the emperor's clothes!
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
I wonder if those who pay more than retail (sometimes astronomically so) on eBay for hot Holiday items feel ripped off and outraged for agreeing to a heightened price?
I wonder if those who pay more than retail (sometimes astronomically so) on eBay for hot Holiday items feel ripped off and outraged for agreeing to a heightened price?
Great question - of course, when doing so - they know what the price is - they have knowledge of the exact premium they are paying for immediate gratification.
No, sorry.
If they didn't or don't feel the iPhone as worth $599 to them, they shouldn't have paid $599 for it, should they?
What, the "silly point" that price and value are two totally different things? Sorry, but they are. Just because you do not understand that doesn't change it. The iPhone's price is $399. It's value is in the eye of the beholder. Those who feel it is worth $399 or more to them will buy it, those who feel it is worth less than $399 will not buy it.
Hmmm, no flipflopping eh?. I guess it's illegal to change one view of the value of a product you bought. Watch out folks, MR H, the Value police, gonna arrest you if you suddenly perceive your iphone is worth less than you paid for it. In Mr H world, there is no such thing as fraud. I feel so much better.. i can now go out and defraud the ederly. Sell them insurance for $1 million that is not worth squat. When they complain, I'll just say "hey, if you think it was not worth 1 million, why did you buy it?". I applaud your efforts to defend apple. It must be an extremely streneous task lately with all the anti-apple post).
Apple could use you on their boards. I hear they deleted over 2000 messages in a day and still there were thousands pouring in. They had to take the board down. You can lend a hand over there. In the meantime, i gotta go.. gotta sell some ederly people worthless stuff cause they "value" it at the price i scammed them at. So much money to make, so little time.
Great question - of course, when doing so - they know what the price is - they have knowledge of the exact premium they are paying for immediate gratification.
Was anyone so naive as to believe they weren't already paying a significant premium when they dropped $600 on a phone?
Will those same angered buyers feel better about their purchases if iPhone supply becomes sparse this Christmas and scalpers are selling them on eBay for $599 again?
That's a foolish way to feel.
You may think so, but a lot of people will feel that way (price reduction encourages migration by compensating early termination fees).
That assumes that you can then turn around and sell the phone for $600.
You are judging the value of the iPhone on what you would get if you turned around and sold it. However, people are not buying iPhones to turn around and sell them. People are buying iPhones to use. Do you understand the distinction?
If you cannot sell the phone for $600, how is it then a $600 phone being sold for $400?.
It's not. However, because it used to sell for $600, and people are aware of that, that makes its new price at $400 seem like a bargain to new customers or compensate them for $175 early termination fees.
The value of an object is what you can get on the market for it. You can't sell an iphone today for $600.. (maybe unlocked you could) so then what you are really getting is a $400 phone.
The value of an object is only what it sells for in the market if you are selling it in the market. I have an iPhone, am not selling it, and its value to me is more than $600. (of course, I'd rather pay less, but I'm just saying...)
Now for a real example of what you were thinking.. imagine getting a $40,000 bmw for $20,000. Is the car worth $20,000?.. no!!.. becuase you can immediately turn around and sell it for $40,000 (or at least more than $20,000). That is a true case of where you are getting incentive to buy a product at below value. The value of the iphone is $400. Doesn't matter how you feel about it. Value of an object is independent of feelings. It's dependent on what you can sell the object for immediately or what you would have to pay for that object if you wanted to buy in the open market.
People don't buy and sell iPhones like stock or even cars. It's not an investment, or a resale opportunity. It's all about what it is. Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
People don't buy and sell iPhones like stock or even cars. It's not an investment, or a resale opportunity. It's all about what it is. Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
Speak for yourself, have you visited ebay lately? The people that bought iphones to resell surely thought the value lay in what they can sell the product for in the open market. You go tell them about your cute definition of value.
Either put up or shut up.
Cory's post speaks for itself, and many people feel the same way. They may have been on the fence about buying an iPhone, and the lowered price will convert the sale and justifies an early termination fee for switching.
Yep. If I make the leap, I'll be paying $600 just like the rest of the iPhone early adopters, only $200 of that will go to T-Mobile.
Speak for yourself, have you visited ebay lately? The people that bought iphones to resell surely thought the value lay in what they can sell the product for in the open market. You go tell them about your cute definition of value.
Who cares about them?
They're such a puny, tiny, insignificant, portion of iPhone buyers, they're not what we're talking about.
My "cute defination" applies to virtually 100% of users and everyone who's posted here. No one has complained about their iPhone ebay store.
,
Advocating a lawsuit? I'm simply suggesting that if we had the discipline, the folks who are out the net $200 could act together to refrain from making purchases to let apple feel our wrath. I'm also suggesting that the 2 year contract with ATT and Apple has been breached because of failed promises - shame on Apple for not being more clear about what they meant by feature enhancements - but there is no doubt in my mind that those publice statements were intended to induce people into purchasing iPhones. By the way - assuming you own one, how did you activate your iPhone - did you use iTunes? My guess is yet - if you did - Apple is in privity along with ATT with respect to your two year contract. Apple is even recognizing revenue related to the iPhone over the two year contract period because they understand they have contractual obligations over the period. Assuming someone did file a lawsuit - i'd be very surprised if Apple were able to sustain that the lawsuit were frivolous - in any US jurisdiction (UK a different matter).
Yes, advocate a lawsuit. That's exactly what you have been doing. Otherwise what is the point of your mentioning breach of contract or some other sort of silly claim--continuously.
Yes, I own an iPhone and bought the day it came out. Yes, I activated through iTunes. However, if that is the extent of your privity argument, again, I say good luck, Chief. Nonetheless, where in that 2 year contract does it mention these future feature enhancements that you have been talking about? There isn't anything to that effect. The 2 year contract pertains to the cell service, not continued support of the iPhone product, by means of additional enhancements.
You say that you would be very surprised if Apple could sustain that a lawsuit (containing the claims you envision) is frivolous? Yet, you are also surprised at Apple's recent price drop? Will the surprises for you ever end, or just keep coming because you have your head buried in the sand?
By the way, the $200 you have "lost" would be a lesser amount than most filing fees to simply file your complaint. Just keep the losses coming, huh?
Actually, i have a solution to our argument about value. MR H, you should find someone who paid $600 for the phone and offer that person $600 since you seem to value the phone that much otherwise, allow that person to revalue their phone and then bitch about it.
Either put up or shut up.
Are you being a moron on purpose?
Didn't I already tell you that the value of the iPhone to me is $0?
Of course no-one is now going to pay $599 for an iPhone when they can get one for $399. But if they value the iPhone more than that, they've got themselves a bargain.
Hmmm, no flipflopping eh?. I guess it's illegal to change one view of the value of a product you bought. Watch out folks, MR H, the Value police, gonna arrest you if you suddenly perceive your iphone is worth less than you paid for it. In Mr H world, there is no such thing as fraud. I feel so much better.. i can now go out and defraud the ederly. Sell them insurance for $1 million that is not worth squat.
In the meantime, i gotta go.. gotta sell some ederly people worthless stuff cause they "value" it at the price i scammed them at. So much money to make, so little time.
My arguments imply that I think there is no such thing as fraud? You are completely incapable of logical reasoning.
Your example of selling useless insurance is in no way a parallel of the iPhone situation. The value of insurance is in its "function" - that it pays out if something goes wrong. If the insurance will never actually pay out, its function has been misrepresented. The iPhone's function has not been misrepresented and is still able to perform all the functions it was able to on the day of purchase. No fraud has been perpetrated.
Are you being a moron on purpose?
Didn't I already tell you that the value of the iPhone to me is $0?
Of course no-one is now going to pay $599 for an iPhone when they can get one for $399. But if they value the iPhone more than that, they've got themselves a bargain.
My arguments imply that I think there is no such thing as fraud? You are completely incapable of logical reasoning.
Your example of selling useless insurance is in no way a parallel of the iPhone situation. The value of insurance is in its "function" - that it pays out if something goes wrong. If the insurance will never actually pay out, its function has been misrepresented. The iPhone's function has not been misrepresented and is still able to perform all the functions it was able to on the day of purchase. No fraud has been perpetrated.
Oh really?. Gasoline has a simple function. If you put it in a car, it allows you to get from point A to B. So by your logic, Exxon can start selling gas for $10 a gallon. Actually by your logic, congress or no other authority should ever look into price gouging because if a consumer buys gas expecting his car to go from point A to B, then it is not fraud because Exxon did not force that person to pay $10. What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?. What if you took the train, would that make the value of gas $0?. What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
You are being idiotic for the sake of argument. Yes, we get it.. you support apple.. hooray for you!!.. lets give you a cookie.
BTW, i can sell the ederly 1 million insurance that is not worth a million because i will tell them exactly what they are buying in legalese and they will not understand what the hell i said (happens every day in America.. some prosecutors foolishly call it fraud.. i should let them contact you for a true definition of fraud).
Just because someone told you what you are buying and you bought it and it performed that function does not mean fraud was not involved. This is so basic, a 10 year old would get this. I can only surmise you are doing the following
1. Purposely being dense so as to continue the discussion
2. You really don't understand.
3. You are baiting
4. You didn't buy an iphone so this is all theoretical to you.. what do you care? you can say anything you want.. you are not the one holding a $399 iphone you paid $599 for.
Whatever, go on.. i promise this is my last reply to you.. go ahead, have your fun with the folks bitching (hey, you didn't get one so they really value your opinion).
Yes, advocate a lawsuit. That's exactly what you have been doing. Otherwise what is the point of your mentioning breach of contract or some other sort of silly claim--continuously.
Yes, I own an iPhone and bought the day it came out. Yes, I activated through iTunes. However, if that is the extent of your privity argument, again, I say good luck, Chief. Nonetheless, where in that 2 year contract does it mention these future feature enhancements that you have been talking about? There isn't anything to that effect. The 2 year contract pertains to the cell service, not continued support of the iPhone product, by means of additional enhancements.
You say that you would be very surprised if Apple could sustain that a lawsuit (containing the claims you envision) is frivolous? Yet, you are also surprised at Apple's recent price drop? Will the surprises for you ever end, or just keep coming because you have your head buried in the sand?
By the way, the $200 you have "lost" would be a lesser amount than most filing fees to simply file your complaint. Just keep the losses coming, huh?
if you want to get out of your contract - you have to have a basis for doing that to avoid the cancellation fee. I believe Apple and ATT's agreement on a sbustantial (33%) price cut and failure to meet promises they made related to quickly ehance the functionality of the phone provide an iPhone owner with a reasonable argument to void the contract and avoid any cancellation fee. who needs to file a complaint - just spend some time writing letters and having phone calls with ATT - not hard at all. People should stand up for themselves if they feel dissatisfied with how they are being treated by vendors they do business with. Incidentally, your suggestion that claims made against a contracting party are invalid if they relate to promises other than in a written contract is completely bogus in any jusridiction in the US. I believe you're also incorrect to think that Apple doesn't have any relation to the service contract.
What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?
That's called price fixing. It involves the anti-competive collusion of multiple parties.
What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
Microsoft stock is an investment. Its value is determined by what people are willing to pay for it. The iPhone is a consumer electronics product, not an investment. You don't buy it hoping you will be able to sell it later for more money.
Yes, we get it.. you support apple
I support Apple in this instance not through blind loyalty but through a simple application of logic.
BTW, i can sell the ederly 1 million insurance that is not worth a million because i will tell them exactly what they are buying in legalese and they will not understand what the hell i said (happens every day in America.. some prosecutors foolishly call it fraud.. i should let them contact you for a true definition of fraud).
Just because someone told you what you are buying and you bought it and it performed that function does not mean fraud was not involved. This is so basic, a 10 year old would get this.
Obviously you do not understand the part of my previous post where I state: "its function has been misrepresented".
I can only surmise you are doing the following
1. Purposely being dense so as to continue the discussion
2. You really don't understand.
3. You are baiting
That's funny, I thought all the same things about you.
Oh really?. Gasoline has a simple function. If you put it in a car, it allows you to get from point A to B. So by your logic, Exxon can start selling gas for $10 a gallon. Actually by your logic, congress or no other authority should ever look into price gouging because if a consumer buys gas expecting his car to go from point A to B, then it is not fraud because Exxon did not force that person to pay $10. What if every gas station started selling gas for $10 a gallon tomorrow?. Would that work for you too?. What if you took the train, would that make the value of gas $0?. What about the value of microsoft stock, is it too $0?.
Um...there are infinite alternatives to spending $599 on a phone. Like, for instance, just keeping the one you already own. Or taking the one the service provider will give you for free with a new contract. Furthermore, a phone is a one-time purchase; gasoline is a weekly purchase for most people. Gasoline suddenly increasing to $10 a gallon would be like AT&T upping your cell phone bill to $200 a month, not like dropping the price of a $600 toy to $400.
Um...there are infinite alternatives to spending $599 on a phone. Like, for instance, just keeping the one you already own. Or taking the one the service provider will give you for free with a new contract. Furthermore, a phone is a one-time purchase; gasoline is a weekly purchase for most people. Gasoline suddenly increasing to $10 a gallon would be like AT&T upping your cell phone bill to $200 a month, not like dropping the price of a $600 toy to $400.
Why not move to today's thread on Jobs saying he's not paying refunds - more AI users will likely see posts