One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
Wow, that's pretty emphatic - care to back up your statement with some proof?
I mean for someone who is stating their opinion so emphatically, you should have something pretty good.
Quote:
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
Huh? I'm sure they are governed by what they think they can charge. Their data plans are EXACTLY in line with what Sprint and Verizon charge. I have personal experience with Sprint - I paid $30 a month for data, but the phone was so crappy (Windows Mobile Treo) I hardly ever used the Internet. With the iPhone I use the Internet constantly.
Who's ripping off who here??? Who's providing better value?
AT&T's voice plans are pretty comparable to the other carries - with one big difference - minutes roll over! I already have lots of roll over minutes - so much so that the 450 a month isn't even an issue for me.
Quote:
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
Pure baseless speculation unless you cite a source. Would love to see you do so.
Quote:
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
Why would they love to lower prices? Aside from the typical rumor/fear mongering in the "press" and "analysts" I haven't seen sales statements from AT&T or Apple. Same groups that have been continually wrong when it comes to forecasting. Whenever AT&T has commented publicly on the iPhone, they have been very, very bullish.
in the UK on O2 unlimited web browsing is called a bolt on which can be had for £7.50 a month, so you can pick any tariff you like and add unlimited data for that price.
Then you have an issue with O2, surely? Or maybe evil Apple also managed to extort unreasonable upfront costs from O2 so they are obliged to charge more, even though they really, really want to be able to charge less.
Nobody is getting the point that some of us are trying to make. You keep saying that its AT&T thats greedy etc.
If apple sold an unlocked iPhone then I could take that phone where I wanted. I could choose to not do data if I so wished or buy whatever plan the company was offering including T-Mobile's cheaper plans on EDGE with 50 or 100MB cap. Being involved with the T-Mobile community on Tmonews I know exactly how many people do buy unlocked phones in the US, and in Europe its even bigger. This is something exactly that APPLE can do and has NOTHING to do with AT&T or any other carrier.
Then you have an issue with O2, surely? Or maybe evil Apple also managed to extort unreasonable upfront costs from O2 so they are obliged to charge more, even though they really, really want to be able to charge less.
in the original negotiations for the iPhone contract. O2 weren't even mentioned.
All the talk was of Orange or Vodafone.
O2 offered 40%...yes thats right 40% of all 'gathered usage revenue' to Apple to secure the deal.
fair?
I think not....someone has to pay that, it isn't apple or the carrier. Its the end user paying thru the nose .... to be what...cool??
work the figures out..staggering...!!
typical o2 plan £35 (x18) = £630 (40%) = £252
and thats on top of the cost that o2 paid Apple for the handset (£300) ??
so in essence yes...I'm sure o2 would love to do something on price.
Not good enough to be a true business class phone but too advanced and too pricey to be a consumer grade handset.
It has sold well due to hype, marketing and the millions of Jobs' worshippers out there.
the data plans are crazily priced and the build quality is suspect.
once you get past the fanboys (as with lots of 'cool' products) the demand is limited.
... none of what Citi is saying can be a shock to anyone surely.
In short it is a product that is not nearly worth the money (overall) you have to shell out.
Right Apple has managed to sell all those iphones because of hype, marketing, and Jobs worshipers for a device that is absolute garbage, you gotta love the internet.
This always bothers me - why are people astonished that there is a data rate and prone to call the cell phone companies greedy?
Data requires infrastructure. It requires either seperate transmitters or more capacity in existing transmitters. It requires infrastructure to get data to and from the cell towers and then to the Internet.
Infrastructure costs, and companies are in business to make money - not provide a bunch of expensive services for free.
If it's too expensive for you, fine. But to whine because you can't get everything you want in life handed on a silver platter for free is just silly.
true but there is a line between return on investment and outright exploitation.
Except here in Canada it's $104/month. Minimum 3 year contract.
For that price, not in this lifetime. Rogers is smoking crack.
That's not the price, I have the iphone on fido. I just got it on Saturday and I'll be paying 80 dollars a month, but then I'm trying out the data plan, if I see a need for it I'll keep it, if not I'll take it off and pay 55 dollars a month. I get 350 daytime minutes, evenings and weekends free, unlimited text, voicemail, call forwarding with my plan.
Wow, that's pretty emphatic - care to back up your statement with some proof?
I mean for someone who is stating their opinion so emphatically, you should have something pretty good.
Huh? I'm sure they are governed by what they think they can charge. Their data plans are EXACTLY in line with what Sprint and Verizon charge. I have personal experience with Sprint - I paid $30 a month for data, but the phone was so crappy (Windows Mobile Treo) I hardly ever used the Internet. With the iPhone I use the Internet constantly.
Who's ripping off who here??? Who's providing better value?
AT&T's voice plans are pretty comparable to the other carries - with one big difference - minutes roll over! I already have lots of roll over minutes - so much so that the 450 a month isn't even an issue for me.
Pure baseless speculation unless you cite a source. Would love to see you do so.
Why would they love to lower prices? Aside from the typical rumor/fear mongering in the "press" and "analysts" I haven't seen sales statements from AT&T or Apple. Same groups that have been continually wrong when it comes to forecasting. Whenever AT&T has commented publicly on the iPhone, they have been very, very bullish.
There's no story like a negative story
Dude don't you know Apple sets the prices that AT&T charges the iphone, it's all Apple, big old evil Apple, they sure are greedy.
Consumers want a better speakerphone, high resolution camera/flash, keyboard, interchangable battery.
consumers never know what they really want. i think apple has proved that time and time again. looking at that rendering, i hope they continue as they are. that thing sucks.
in the original negotiations for the iPhone contract. O2 weren't even mentioned.
All the talk was of Orange or Vodafone.
O2 offered 40%...yes thats right 40% of all 'gathered usage revenue' to Apple to secure the deal.
fair?
I think not....someone has to pay that, it isn't apple or the carrier. Its the end user paying thru the nose .... to be what...cool??
work the figures out..staggering...!!
typical o2 plan £35 (x18) = £630 (40%) = £252
and thats on top of the cost that o2 paid Apple for the handset (£300) ??
so in essence yes...I'm sure o2 would love to do something on price.
What about what O2 pays in rent for it's buildings? Do you get bitter that the owners of the property that O2 rents don't lower their rent, because O2 just passes that cost onto you? Or the electric company, surely they should lower their prices to O2 because YOU don't have the money to pay for an iPhone that you have the RIGHT to own, correct? And what about the exorbitant cost of the airwaves licenses! Surely since YOU as a member of the public OWN those airwaves, O2 has no right to pass that cost on to you, right?
That Citi is selling off it's Investment division to Morgan Stanley, and that Citi was given 46 Billion dollars in the federal bailout..... Take their stance with a grain of salt.
This is competely untrue. Apple does not set AT&T's tariff charges.
With the original iPhone AT&T charged less for unlimited EDGE than it charged for data plans on all other phones.
With the iPhone 3G AT&T charges the same for data all it charges for all other phones.
Its completely ridiculous to say AT&T wants to "lower" its prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archipellago
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
I can understand the need to launch on one carrier, but almost 2 years on is crazy. The only reason this doesn't exist outside the US is because #1 carriers had the balls to refuse to pay the crazy deal Apple wanted with the first iPhone (which is now gone shockingly with the 3G) and #2 because of stricter laws especially in the EU (which can be thanked for GSM).
Actually its been reported that carriers pay Apple more money for subsidizing iPhone than they did for revenue sharing.
I'm guessing you don't actually have an iPhone 3G, because your analysis makes no sense. I've taken my iPhone 3G on car trips, into NYC, and elsewhere. The GPS (which isn't in the old iPhone) is great and the coverage is good. Yes, sometimes you fall down to EDGE in the country which is fine to get Google Maps (without satellite imagery) on the move and do email. I had full bars and 3G everywhere except the subway on my visit to NYC.
And users don't really care about interchangeable battery or whether the SDK has full access to the phone. A better camera would be nice, but the iPhone is already the most popular phone on Flickr, so apparently a lot of folks are making due. A keyboard? Removable battery? Not if it changes the form factor, which is perfect for the pocket. Yes, copy & paste... you have one valid point which has been reiterated everywhere. Alternate carriers? The only other GSM in the US is T-Mobile and the US is their biggest market, so that's probably not really having any effect.
In short, Apple needs to continue down the same path they've been on, add a few features, and drive down costs.
yes i have a iphone 3g, but i actually didn't think GPS was a massive upgrade, apart from that addition, and a couple other items, the iphone and iphone 3g are ridiculously similar and only a gradual evolution instead of a major leap. most of the big upgrade was a software one where the App store came into reality.
i think alot of us want
1- physical keyboard
2- better camera
3- swapable battery
4- better software handling of third party applications. so they are not crippled. ie allowing instant messenger or other app's the ability to run in the background until something comes in. ie an IM or who knows.... skype phone call.
and yes i stand by that i think the speakerphone is a bit underpowered. i don't want to be in a crowded room with it blaring, but it could use about 25% stronger sound.
and don't get me started on over priced ringtones. especially on songs you may already own. but now that itunes is mainly DRM free, i can see people finally enabled to do it themselves.
and yes AT&T's 3G network leaves alot to want, its coverage isn't that great and slips to edge tons, and i live in LA. sorry but it just into full coverage. if you are also in the car, it is hard to have a phone call switch between towers, lots more dropped calls than on edge solely. but it does get better over time, just not nearly as decent coverage as their older network. and i stand by my thoughts that it is expensive carriage. if say Apple allowed a dual band model, and Sprint could work with iphone, they have a $99 plan that actually includes almost everything, unlimited voice and data. not like ATT's plan, $99 unlimited voice, and you have to pay an extra $30 a month for data. and even more for other extras.
Comments
nope the others have more realistic pricing.
price fixing..??? absolutely!
there is too much money to be made!!!
Go invent your own phone and give it away for less than you have to. Otherwise, screw.
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
Wow, that's pretty emphatic - care to back up your statement with some proof?
I mean for someone who is stating their opinion so emphatically, you should have something pretty good.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
Huh? I'm sure they are governed by what they think they can charge. Their data plans are EXACTLY in line with what Sprint and Verizon charge. I have personal experience with Sprint - I paid $30 a month for data, but the phone was so crappy (Windows Mobile Treo) I hardly ever used the Internet. With the iPhone I use the Internet constantly.
Who's ripping off who here??? Who's providing better value?
AT&T's voice plans are pretty comparable to the other carries - with one big difference - minutes roll over! I already have lots of roll over minutes - so much so that the 450 a month isn't even an issue for me.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
Pure baseless speculation unless you cite a source. Would love to see you do so.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
Why would they love to lower prices? Aside from the typical rumor/fear mongering in the "press" and "analysts" I haven't seen sales statements from AT&T or Apple. Same groups that have been continually wrong when it comes to forecasting. Whenever AT&T has commented publicly on the iPhone, they have been very, very bullish.
There's no story like a negative story
absolutely...
in the UK on O2 unlimited web browsing is called a bolt on which can be had for £7.50 a month, so you can pick any tariff you like and add unlimited data for that price.
Then you have an issue with O2, surely? Or maybe evil Apple also managed to extort unreasonable upfront costs from O2 so they are obliged to charge more, even though they really, really want to be able to charge less.
If apple sold an unlocked iPhone then I could take that phone where I wanted. I could choose to not do data if I so wished or buy whatever plan the company was offering including T-Mobile's cheaper plans on EDGE with 50 or 100MB cap. Being involved with the T-Mobile community on Tmonews I know exactly how many people do buy unlocked phones in the US, and in Europe its even bigger. This is something exactly that APPLE can do and has NOTHING to do with AT&T or any other carrier.
If Apple continues to only sell one iPhone model (ignoring memory configs) then they'll continue to see sales go up and down like Oprah's weight.
Then you have an issue with O2, surely? Or maybe evil Apple also managed to extort unreasonable upfront costs from O2 so they are obliged to charge more, even though they really, really want to be able to charge less.
in the original negotiations for the iPhone contract. O2 weren't even mentioned.
All the talk was of Orange or Vodafone.
O2 offered 40%...yes thats right 40% of all 'gathered usage revenue' to Apple to secure the deal.
fair?
I think not....someone has to pay that, it isn't apple or the carrier. Its the end user paying thru the nose .... to be what...cool??
work the figures out..staggering...!!
typical o2 plan £35 (x18) = £630 (40%) = £252
and thats on top of the cost that o2 paid Apple for the handset (£300) ??
so in essence yes...I'm sure o2 would love to do something on price.
its a luxury product.
Not good enough to be a true business class phone but too advanced and too pricey to be a consumer grade handset.
It has sold well due to hype, marketing and the millions of Jobs' worshippers out there.
the data plans are crazily priced and the build quality is suspect.
once you get past the fanboys (as with lots of 'cool' products) the demand is limited.
... none of what Citi is saying can be a shock to anyone surely.
In short it is a product that is not nearly worth the money (overall) you have to shell out.
Right Apple has managed to sell all those iphones because of hype, marketing, and Jobs worshipers for a device that is absolute garbage, you gotta love the internet.
This always bothers me - why are people astonished that there is a data rate and prone to call the cell phone companies greedy?
Data requires infrastructure. It requires either seperate transmitters or more capacity in existing transmitters. It requires infrastructure to get data to and from the cell towers and then to the Internet.
Infrastructure costs, and companies are in business to make money - not provide a bunch of expensive services for free.
If it's too expensive for you, fine. But to whine because you can't get everything you want in life handed on a silver platter for free is just silly.
true but there is a line between return on investment and outright exploitation.
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
I was being sarcastic.
Bingo!
Except here in Canada it's $104/month. Minimum 3 year contract.
For that price, not in this lifetime. Rogers is smoking crack.
That's not the price, I have the iphone on fido. I just got it on Saturday and I'll be paying 80 dollars a month, but then I'm trying out the data plan, if I see a need for it I'll keep it, if not I'll take it off and pay 55 dollars a month. I get 350 daytime minutes, evenings and weekends free, unlimited text, voicemail, call forwarding with my plan.
Wow, that's pretty emphatic - care to back up your statement with some proof?
I mean for someone who is stating their opinion so emphatically, you should have something pretty good.
Huh? I'm sure they are governed by what they think they can charge. Their data plans are EXACTLY in line with what Sprint and Verizon charge. I have personal experience with Sprint - I paid $30 a month for data, but the phone was so crappy (Windows Mobile Treo) I hardly ever used the Internet. With the iPhone I use the Internet constantly.
Who's ripping off who here??? Who's providing better value?
AT&T's voice plans are pretty comparable to the other carries - with one big difference - minutes roll over! I already have lots of roll over minutes - so much so that the 450 a month isn't even an issue for me.
Pure baseless speculation unless you cite a source. Would love to see you do so.
Why would they love to lower prices? Aside from the typical rumor/fear mongering in the "press" and "analysts" I haven't seen sales statements from AT&T or Apple. Same groups that have been continually wrong when it comes to forecasting. Whenever AT&T has commented publicly on the iPhone, they have been very, very bullish.
There's no story like a negative story
Dude don't you know Apple sets the prices that AT&T charges the iphone, it's all Apple, big old evil Apple, they sure are greedy.
true but there is a line between return on investment and outright exploitation.
Where's the line?
Will you go to your boss tomorrow and tell him to cut your pay by 20%?
in the original negotiations for the iPhone contract. O2 weren't even mentioned.
All the talk was of Orange or Vodafone.
O2 offered 40%...yes thats right 40% of all 'gathered usage revenue' to Apple to secure the deal.
fair?
I think not....someone has to pay that, it isn't apple or the carrier. Its the end user paying thru the nose .... to be what...cool??
work the figures out..staggering...!!
typical o2 plan £35 (x18) = £630 (40%) = £252
and thats on top of the cost that o2 paid Apple for the handset (£300) ?
so in essence yes...I'm sure o2 would love to do something on price.
Yes, but how does that £35 for 600 talk minutes and unlimited wifi and data compare to what O2 is getting for other data plans?
Consumers want a better speakerphone, high resolution camera/flash, keyboard, interchangable battery.
consumers never know what they really want. i think apple has proved that time and time again. looking at that rendering, i hope they continue as they are. that thing sucks.
in the original negotiations for the iPhone contract. O2 weren't even mentioned.
All the talk was of Orange or Vodafone.
O2 offered 40%...yes thats right 40% of all 'gathered usage revenue' to Apple to secure the deal.
fair?
I think not....someone has to pay that, it isn't apple or the carrier. Its the end user paying thru the nose .... to be what...cool??
work the figures out..staggering...!!
typical o2 plan £35 (x18) = £630 (40%) = £252
and thats on top of the cost that o2 paid Apple for the handset (£300) ??
so in essence yes...I'm sure o2 would love to do something on price.
What about what O2 pays in rent for it's buildings? Do you get bitter that the owners of the property that O2 rents don't lower their rent, because O2 just passes that cost onto you? Or the electric company, surely they should lower their prices to O2 because YOU don't have the money to pay for an iPhone that you have the RIGHT to own, correct? And what about the exorbitant cost of the airwaves licenses! Surely since YOU as a member of the public OWN those airwaves, O2 has no right to pass that cost on to you, right?
What an idiot.
With the original iPhone AT&T charged less for unlimited EDGE than it charged for data plans on all other phones.
With the iPhone 3G AT&T charges the same for data all it charges for all other phones.
Its completely ridiculous to say AT&T wants to "lower" its prices.
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
I can understand the need to launch on one carrier, but almost 2 years on is crazy. The only reason this doesn't exist outside the US is because #1 carriers had the balls to refuse to pay the crazy deal Apple wanted with the first iPhone (which is now gone shockingly with the 3G) and #2 because of stricter laws especially in the EU (which can be thanked for GSM).
Actually its been reported that carriers pay Apple more money for subsidizing iPhone than they did for revenue sharing.
I'm guessing you don't actually have an iPhone 3G, because your analysis makes no sense. I've taken my iPhone 3G on car trips, into NYC, and elsewhere. The GPS (which isn't in the old iPhone) is great and the coverage is good. Yes, sometimes you fall down to EDGE in the country which is fine to get Google Maps (without satellite imagery) on the move and do email. I had full bars and 3G everywhere except the subway on my visit to NYC.
And users don't really care about interchangeable battery or whether the SDK has full access to the phone. A better camera would be nice, but the iPhone is already the most popular phone on Flickr, so apparently a lot of folks are making due. A keyboard? Removable battery? Not if it changes the form factor, which is perfect for the pocket. Yes, copy & paste... you have one valid point which has been reiterated everywhere. Alternate carriers? The only other GSM in the US is T-Mobile and the US is their biggest market, so that's probably not really having any effect.
In short, Apple needs to continue down the same path they've been on, add a few features, and drive down costs.
yes i have a iphone 3g, but i actually didn't think GPS was a massive upgrade, apart from that addition, and a couple other items, the iphone and iphone 3g are ridiculously similar and only a gradual evolution instead of a major leap. most of the big upgrade was a software one where the App store came into reality.
i think alot of us want
1- physical keyboard
2- better camera
3- swapable battery
4- better software handling of third party applications. so they are not crippled. ie allowing instant messenger or other app's the ability to run in the background until something comes in. ie an IM or who knows.... skype phone call.
and yes i stand by that i think the speakerphone is a bit underpowered. i don't want to be in a crowded room with it blaring, but it could use about 25% stronger sound.
and don't get me started on over priced ringtones. especially on songs you may already own. but now that itunes is mainly DRM free, i can see people finally enabled to do it themselves.
and yes AT&T's 3G network leaves alot to want, its coverage isn't that great and slips to edge tons, and i live in LA. sorry but it just into full coverage. if you are also in the car, it is hard to have a phone call switch between towers, lots more dropped calls than on edge solely. but it does get better over time, just not nearly as decent coverage as their older network. and i stand by my thoughts that it is expensive carriage. if say Apple allowed a dual band model, and Sprint could work with iphone, they have a $99 plan that actually includes almost everything, unlimited voice and data. not like ATT's plan, $99 unlimited voice, and you have to pay an extra $30 a month for data. and even more for other extras.