I finally pulled the trigger on a pre-paid Android smartphone last week, and now there's talk of a cheap / pre-paid iPhone? Well, they'll have to get it down to $25 a month to get me really upset, I guess. Otherwise, I'm good with my unlimited data plan and 300 minutes.
You don't want to pay for the data plan because the data plan pays for the ~$500 subsidy. As long as contract-free iPhones cost more than twice than equivalent iPod touches, the data plan itself is only part of the problem, the bigger problem might be the huge subsidy these data plans are financing.
You're right. In the long run, the data plans merely make up the cost of the subsidy. Unfortunately, until I'm more financially stable, I can't justify the extra cost.
As for the size of the subsidy... Well, I don't know enough to comment on that.
The reason I don't own a cell phone is the monthly fees are ridiculous. I have no problem with the cost of the phone itself but I just don't want to pay high monthly fees when I barely have a need for a cell phone.
An ipod touch with just a 3G data plan like you can get on an ipad would be perfect for me.
In Germany you can get a data plan starting at ?4/month, this only includes 100 MB/month and zero minutes (keep in mind receiving calls is free in Germany), and you can start and stop this every month (like the iPad plans in the US). And if you go to ?10/month, you get 1 GB/month instead.
In a competitive market, the data plans are not the problem, the handset price is (which is not that competitive almost everywhere because the carrier subsidies hide the true price to most consumers).
Apple products are priced fine ... I am not rich, and own a bunch of Apple products.
I would however like to ask why AT&T charges so much for their service. They have an inferior network, inferior 3G coverage, inferior support and their network is prone to drop phone calls ... for a company who invented communications, they need to get their act together.
If Cook is ever going to run the company, he's going to have to learn the Jobsian art of saying very very little. He's already said too much. Does he imply that Apple products have been only for the rich up until now? If so I strongly disagree. Me and my friends are some of the least wealthy people I know, while still having jobs in a major city. We all have Apple gear, and we don't consider the money spent on it "disposable". I think he's falling prey to the negative rhetoric by defending that which requires no explanation. Jobs wold have said it differently, if at all.
Apple products cost more because they are better. period. If they make a lower priced product, it will be inferior, purposefully so. Maybe not in quality (certainly not), but in features and performance.
Well, no. The iPhone 3 GS is €519 (post-taxes) in Europe and probably $450 in the US (pre-taxes), the cell phone provider is just giving you a $400 loan, to be re-paid over two years.
In Germany, some providers go as far and state the loan part explicitly on your bill. Thus, I paid €10/month for a data modem contract + 5€/month to re-pay the loan (for getting the modem at a reduced price) and after two years, the loan was re-paid and I did not have to pay the €5/month extra anymore. Forcing the carriers to be explicit about the loan re-payment part of the monthly bill and forcing them to limit the time period over which the loan was re-paid would make the cell phone business much more open and more competitive.
Well, I think the price difference between an iPhone 4 and an iPod touch clearly shows that the iPhone is for those with disposable income and looser wallets and the iPod touch is for the more budget-minded customer.
Prices in Germany, in Apple's own online store (include 19% VAT, prices similar elsewhere in Europe):
- iPhone 4 32 GB, contract-free, unlocked: ?739
- iPod touch 32 GB: ?299
Yes, the iPhone has a better screen (viewing angle), a cellphone radio and more expensive case but this is Apple clearly segmenting the market and offering similar products to different audiences.
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
Please do a wifi only iPhone. I would gladly pay the full price.
$15/$25/$30 a month for a whole year is a lot of money in the long run.
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
The whole American centric conversation is getting tiresome. If Apple are going after the PAYG market they are going after China, and Africa, and some of the rest of the world.
A PAYG plan does what it says on the tin . Pay $10 ( or equivalent) and you get $10 worth of data, voice and texts and you control your own usage. As you get lower the phone alerts you ( or your carrier when you are on a call with a beeping sound) and to get online again you top up online, or go to a shop - a newsagent - and get a plastic voucher like an iTunes voucher. Theres a number, you type it in.
So common was this before the iPhone in Europe that it was the most common excuse for missing calls, or not answering. "I was out of credit, or I am running out of credit" - I have to hang up. Running out of credit was more common than battery. But it saved money overall.
Thats a budget plan - it doesnt work with a $600 phone.
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
- Top-Android phones are not much cheaper than the iPhone, they do however sell in smaller numbers (per individual model), thus they make less profit for their manufacturers.
- Android phones usually get cheaper towards the end of their life-cycle (buy one get one free), iPhones do not, yet another reason Apple makes more profit.
- Still, the fact that most customers do not see the full handset price leads to less direct price competition between different Android smartphones compared for example to the MP3-player market.
So in short, most smartphones are a money-maker for their manufacturers, at least those selling in large numbers (Palm might simply not have a high-enough volume to make much money with them) and thus smartphones still are partially targeted at those with a high-enough disposable income.
So common was this before the iPhone in Europe that it was the most common excuse for missing calls, or not answering. "I was out of credit, or I am running out of credit" - I have to hang up. Running out of credit was more common than battery. But it saved money overall.
Thats a budget plan - it doesnt work with a $600 phone.
Completely agree, though I think you can still receive calls for a limited period (several months) even when your credit is zero or very low (and receiving calls does not cost you any credit).
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
How about the ability to make phone calls when not in wifi areas. His point/my ppoint is that there are a lot of people that need to make calls from anywhere but don't need to surf the web from anywhere. For these people a wifi only iPhone is is what we want.
Also, there is a group that wants a 3g iTouch. They want/need web access everywhere but don't need a phone. And they want the form factor of the touch.
My point: stop because so shortsighted/self absorbed. People need devices for different reasons.
Apple products are priced fine ... I am not rich, and own a bunch of Apple products.
I would however like to ask why AT&T charges so much for their service. They have an inferior network, inferior 3G coverage, inferior support and their network is prone to drop phone calls ... for a company who invented communications, they need to get their act together.
It's the phone, not the network. I've been saying it for years. I've gone through verizon and AT&T for more than a decade and never had serious issues with either.
Then the iphone comes along and people start blaming the network but never give a thought to the phone.
All cell phones are not created equal and they will have different reception quality.
A number of years ago 4 of us were at the beach, all with AT&T. 4 different phones. 3 of us had no service and one of us had full strength with an old brick of a phone.
At work on break we sit around a table, most with non smart phones and no one has any issues except for the guy on the iphone.
Now my wife has a cheap 4 year old phone with a pre pay plan that gets better reception and quality than any iphone.
I've seen that scenerio played out again and again over the years. They put so much smart into the thing they tend to forget about the phone.
How about the ability to make phone calls when not in wifi areas. His point/my ppoint is that there are a lot of people that need to make calls from anywhere but don't need to surf the web from anywhere. For these people a wifi only iPhone is a dream.
?
How would it make calls when not if wifi areas if it is wifi only.
You want, basically, a 1G phone. Or some such. A phone which can only do voice off wifi. Thats not wifi only.
Quote:
My point: stop because so shortsighted/self absorbed. People need devices for different reasons.
He was asking a reasonable question. An iPod touch is a wifi only iPhone.
Apple already do lower price iPhone options. Right now you get the 8gb iPhone 3GS and when the new iPhone comes out there will be a cheaper version of the iPhone 4.
Anything cheaper would cannibalise iPod touch sales.
Apple already do lower price iPhone options. Right now you get the 8gb iPhone 3GS and when the new iPhone comes out there will be a cheaper version of the iPhone 4.
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
I believe they're talking about an iPhone where any data must be retrieved over WiFi. In the case of Verizon, there would still be a CDMA radio for phone calls. I don't believe they're talking about an iPod Touch w/VOIP, where you'd have to have a WiFi connection to retrieve data AND make a phone call.
Comments
You don't want to pay for the data plan because the data plan pays for the ~$500 subsidy. As long as contract-free iPhones cost more than twice than equivalent iPod touches, the data plan itself is only part of the problem, the bigger problem might be the huge subsidy these data plans are financing.
You're right. In the long run, the data plans merely make up the cost of the subsidy. Unfortunately, until I'm more financially stable, I can't justify the extra cost.
As for the size of the subsidy... Well, I don't know enough to comment on that.
The reason I don't own a cell phone is the monthly fees are ridiculous. I have no problem with the cost of the phone itself but I just don't want to pay high monthly fees when I barely have a need for a cell phone.
An ipod touch with just a 3G data plan like you can get on an ipad would be perfect for me.
In Germany you can get a data plan starting at ?4/month, this only includes 100 MB/month and zero minutes (keep in mind receiving calls is free in Germany), and you can start and stop this every month (like the iPad plans in the US). And if you go to ?10/month, you get 1 GB/month instead.
In a competitive market, the data plans are not the problem, the handset price is (which is not that competitive almost everywhere because the carrier subsidies hide the true price to most consumers).
I would however like to ask why AT&T charges so much for their service. They have an inferior network, inferior 3G coverage, inferior support and their network is prone to drop phone calls ... for a company who invented communications, they need to get their act together.
Apple products cost more because they are better. period. If they make a lower priced product, it will be inferior, purposefully so. Maybe not in quality (certainly not), but in features and performance.
Apple has a cheap iPhone. The 3GS is $49.00.
Well, no. The iPhone 3 GS is €519 (post-taxes) in Europe and probably $450 in the US (pre-taxes), the cell phone provider is just giving you a $400 loan, to be re-paid over two years.
In Germany, some providers go as far and state the loan part explicitly on your bill. Thus, I paid €10/month for a data modem contract + 5€/month to re-pay the loan (for getting the modem at a reduced price) and after two years, the loan was re-paid and I did not have to pay the €5/month extra anymore. Forcing the carriers to be explicit about the loan re-payment part of the monthly bill and forcing them to limit the time period over which the loan was re-paid would make the cell phone business much more open and more competitive.
Well, I think the price difference between an iPhone 4 and an iPod touch clearly shows that the iPhone is for those with disposable income and looser wallets and the iPod touch is for the more budget-minded customer.
Prices in Germany, in Apple's own online store (include 19% VAT, prices similar elsewhere in Europe):
- iPhone 4 32 GB, contract-free, unlocked: ?739
- iPod touch 32 GB: ?299
Yes, the iPhone has a better screen (viewing angle), a cellphone radio and more expensive case but this is Apple clearly segmenting the market and offering similar products to different audiences.
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
$15/$25/$30 a month for a whole year is a lot of money in the long run.
Please do a wifi only iPhone. I would gladly pay the full price.
$15/$25/$30 a month for a whole year is a lot of money in the long run.
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
The whole American centric conversation is getting tiresome. If Apple are going after the PAYG market they are going after China, and Africa, and some of the rest of the world.
A PAYG plan does what it says on the tin . Pay $10 ( or equivalent) and you get $10 worth of data, voice and texts and you control your own usage. As you get lower the phone alerts you ( or your carrier when you are on a call with a beeping sound) and to get online again you top up online, or go to a shop - a newsagent - and get a plastic voucher like an iTunes voucher. Theres a number, you type it in.
So common was this before the iPhone in Europe that it was the most common excuse for missing calls, or not answering. "I was out of credit, or I am running out of credit" - I have to hang up. Running out of credit was more common than battery. But it saved money overall.
Thats a budget plan - it doesnt work with a $600 phone.
How is it that disposable income comes into play when a consumer has a choice between an iPhone and another smartphone like the Droid? I mean, it's still more expensive data plans compared to non-smartphone plans.
- Top-Android phones are not much cheaper than the iPhone, they do however sell in smaller numbers (per individual model), thus they make less profit for their manufacturers.
- Android phones usually get cheaper towards the end of their life-cycle (buy one get one free), iPhones do not, yet another reason Apple makes more profit.
- Still, the fact that most customers do not see the full handset price leads to less direct price competition between different Android smartphones compared for example to the MP3-player market.
So in short, most smartphones are a money-maker for their manufacturers, at least those selling in large numbers (Palm might simply not have a high-enough volume to make much money with them) and thus smartphones still are partially targeted at those with a high-enough disposable income.
So common was this before the iPhone in Europe that it was the most common excuse for missing calls, or not answering. "I was out of credit, or I am running out of credit" - I have to hang up. Running out of credit was more common than battery. But it saved money overall.
Thats a budget plan - it doesnt work with a $600 phone.
Completely agree, though I think you can still receive calls for a limited period (several months) even when your credit is zero or very low (and receiving calls does not cost you any credit).
Apple has a cheap iPhone. The 3GS is $49.00.
Unlocked???
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
How about the ability to make phone calls when not in wifi areas. His point/my ppoint is that there are a lot of people that need to make calls from anywhere but don't need to surf the web from anywhere. For these people a wifi only iPhone is is what we want.
Also, there is a group that wants a 3g iTouch. They want/need web access everywhere but don't need a phone. And they want the form factor of the touch.
My point: stop because so shortsighted/self absorbed. People need devices for different reasons.
Apple products are priced fine ... I am not rich, and own a bunch of Apple products.
I would however like to ask why AT&T charges so much for their service. They have an inferior network, inferior 3G coverage, inferior support and their network is prone to drop phone calls ... for a company who invented communications, they need to get their act together.
It's the phone, not the network. I've been saying it for years. I've gone through verizon and AT&T for more than a decade and never had serious issues with either.
Then the iphone comes along and people start blaming the network but never give a thought to the phone.
All cell phones are not created equal and they will have different reception quality.
A number of years ago 4 of us were at the beach, all with AT&T. 4 different phones. 3 of us had no service and one of us had full strength with an old brick of a phone.
At work on break we sit around a table, most with non smart phones and no one has any issues except for the guy on the iphone.
Now my wife has a cheap 4 year old phone with a pre pay plan that gets better reception and quality than any iphone.
I've seen that scenerio played out again and again over the years. They put so much smart into the thing they tend to forget about the phone.
How about the ability to make phone calls when not in wifi areas. His point/my ppoint is that there are a lot of people that need to make calls from anywhere but don't need to surf the web from anywhere. For these people a wifi only iPhone is a dream.
?
How would it make calls when not if wifi areas if it is wifi only.
You want, basically, a 1G phone. Or some such. A phone which can only do voice off wifi. Thats not wifi only.
My point: stop because so shortsighted/self absorbed. People need devices for different reasons.
He was asking a reasonable question. An iPod touch is a wifi only iPhone.
Anything cheaper would cannibalise iPod touch sales.
Apple already do lower price iPhone options. Right now you get the 8gb iPhone 3GS and when the new iPhone comes out there will be a cheaper version of the iPhone 4.
not cheap enough off contract.
In what way would the current iPod touch not qualify as WiFi-only iPhone in your eyes. What would Apple have to add to it for you to consider it a WiFi-only iPhone and thus buy it?
I believe they're talking about an iPhone where any data must be retrieved over WiFi. In the case of Verizon, there would still be a CDMA radio for phone calls. I don't believe they're talking about an iPod Touch w/VOIP, where you'd have to have a WiFi connection to retrieve data AND make a phone call.