| Cell phone devices prices will rise if advocates win There is plenty of competition. But one result of ending exclusivity deals would be everyone paying full price for cell phones. And the ones that would hurt the most are those users who can least afford to buy cell phones up front.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
| Maybe your argument would fly if we were talking about ending long-term contracts, which is what the phone subsidies are based on. But we are talking about exclusivity, which is a completely different thing. One only need to look at the large set of phones that are not in exclusive deals to see this.
In fact, ending exclusivity might result in lower-cost phones, as carriers differentiate by lowering the cost of the latest "hot" handset. |
|
|
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:There is plenty of competition. But one result of ending exclusivity deals would be everyone paying full price for cell phones. And the ones that would hurt the most are those users who can least afford to buy cell phones up front. Could you elaborate on that more please? When the blackberry and the razr broke exclusivity, they still had a subsidy, discounted price. I use to sell cellphones for a couple of years and I don't see anything like ending exclusivity bring UP the price on cell phones. The industry wouldn't be able to handle the backlash.
Ultimately, I think its a moot point anyways. Most people like going with the carrier for THE SERVICE not THE DEVICE. I've only rarely seen people leave their service for a phone (especially if they know their current service is superior) ie: leaving Verizon for Sprint because the latter has the new Palm Pre (which admittedly IS cool). |
|
1 edit | said by omegadangerdoom :said by fAcEtIOUs:There is plenty of competition. But one result of ending exclusivity deals would be everyone paying full price for cell phones. And the ones that would hurt the most are those users who can least afford to buy cell phones up front. Could you elaborate on that more please? When the blackberry and the razr broke exclusivity, they still had a subsidy, discounted price. The same advocates are also proposing that cell service providers NOT be allowed to subsidize cell phone purchases by tying the purchase to cell service contracts.
IOW, no exclusivity & no cell phone purchases subsidized by contracts. »techdirt.com/articles/20090305/1···12.shtml
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
 ·US Cellular
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
We'll pay full price one way or another!
Still my first response would be to leave the marketplace alone, but these guys are using our public airwaves, even if they (I mean we) pay for their usage. I don't like this exclusivity and would like more open systems.
Where we are located there is no AT&T, only Verizon and US Cellular. No iPhones for us. No Android phones for us. At least there are CDMA versions of Blackberrys... |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:There is plenty of competition. But one result of ending exclusivity deals would be everyone paying full price for cell phones. And the ones that would hurt the most are those users who can least afford to buy cell phones up front. First off, contracts are the reason new phones cost next to nothing or even free.
Second, who cares if they can't afford a cell phone since they are luxury items. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:But one result of ending exclusivity deals would be everyone paying full price for cell phones. And the ones that would hurt the most are those users who can least afford to buy cell phones up front. Then they will just have to live with a cheaper model or no phone at all.
I honestly believe that moving to a model where the customer pays the full, unsubsidized price for phones would be a step in the right direction.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
 jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN | reply to omegadangerdoom
said by omegadangerdoom :
Ultimately, I think its a moot point anyways. Most people like going with the carrier for THE SERVICE not THE DEVICE. I've only rarely seen people leave their service for a phone (especially if they know their current service is superior) Huh? So because you've rarely seen people leave their service for a phone you concluded that is a rare occurence? I suppose the potential millions of users that have switched to AT&T so they can have an iPhone don't count. |
|
| said by jhboricua:said by omegadangerdoom :
Ultimately, I think its a moot point anyways. Most people like going with the carrier for THE SERVICE not THE DEVICE. I've only rarely seen people leave their service for a phone (especially if they know their current service is superior) Huh? So because you've rarely seen people leave their service for a phone you concluded that is a rare occurence? I suppose the potential millions of users that have switched to AT&T so they can have an iPhone don't count. The "millions" of users who switched over to the iphone you mentioned mostly were ALREADY At&t customers (or cingular customers...same thing).
Yeah working with Verizon, I had to study and re-study things like churn rates and retention. I looked it up and followed up on it everyday. YES, they were a ridiculous number of people going over to At&t for the iphone but not as many as you think and a good number of them left after the 30 days to stay with their previous service. Some people even got the iphone just to bring them over to T-mobile (which, IMO, has GREAT customer service compared to At&t).
I'm getting off track here. Basically phones like the iphone, blackberry storm and the like are a niche product usually made to RETAIN customers. Rarely will customers who leave a service they like go over to another provider who may have inferior service (not saying that you WILL be met with a provider with inferior service). I just don't think this whole debate of exclusivity really matters. People like what they like. Your average customers (those who make the bulk of most cell phone service providers) don't care if another company has the hot phone. More likely than not if the subject comes up they ask their current provider if they have a phone that compares to the competition. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Oh my.... I disagree. I don't think ending exclusivity deals would result in everyone paying full price for cell phones. People buying iPhones may have to pay full price, other phones would still be sub'ed. |
|
| reply to omegadangerdoom
I know 10 people who went with at&t because of the iphone. I know 3 that want the iphone but won't leave their current carrier. The iphone kind breaks that theory. People really like it. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
I disagree. All phones should be compatible and interchangeable... or at least backwards compatible....
You could still have free deals or long term contracts with rebated costs--- it's just YOU pick which phone to use it on.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
| reply to moonpuppy
Huh? If you say this you're basically saying that all phones are luxury items...
Many people skip installing land lines in favor of cell phones. Are they still luxury items?
I would agree that if you have a land line AND a cell phone, then the cell phone is a luxury item. If one is using a cell phone exclusively for all interactions to the world, then it is not a luxury. |
|
| reply to NetAdmin1
I agreed with you. Then maybe we can get out of these stupid contracts. There are no guarantees in life. Cell phone companies should expect to keep customers by giving good service at a good price, not ETF... |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Apple should be able to sell the iPhone to whoever they like, phones being exclusive to one network is not only dumb but should be illegal.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
| said by Kearnstd:Apple should be able to sell the iPhone to whoever they like, phones being exclusive to one network is not only dumb but should be illegal. They had that option when they 1st starting selling the iPhone. No one forced them to sign an exclusive contract with AT&T. They did so because they determined that was the most lucrative deal for them.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 james
join:2001-02-26
CWCville USA | reply to Kearnstd
said by Kearnstd:Apple should be able to sell the iPhone to whoever they like, phones being exclusive to one network is not only dumb but should be illegal. What you're saying makes no sense, you're saying that Apple should be able to decide who to sell to, but that it should be illegal for them to decide to only sell to users of one network... |
|
| reply to jjeffeory
All phones are luxury items. You do not need one to live. |
|
| reply to jjeffeory
said by jjeffeory:Huh? If you say this you're basically saying that all phones are luxury items... Cell phones are luxury items.
said by jjeffeory:Many people skip installing land lines in favor of cell phones. Are they still luxury items? Yes, cell phones are still luxury items. Landlines have discount programs for those who cannot afford one.
said by jjeffeory:I would agree that if you have a land line AND a cell phone, then the cell phone is a luxury item. If one is using a cell phone exclusively for all interactions to the world, then it is not a luxury. Yes, it is. Most cell phone plans cost more per month than many landline plans. |
|
| reply to omegadangerdoom
quote:
Ultimately, I think its a moot point anyways. Most people like going with the carrier for THE SERVICE not THE DEVICE.
What planet are you on? A friend of mine paid the ETF on Verizon to get out of his contract and went with AT&T just for the iPhone. And just yesterday, I went with AT&T just for the iPhone, but I'm not going to use it as a phone, AT&T is basically getting $70/month for me for mobile internet access, I'm sticking with Nextel for day to day calling. I hate AT&T, I just really like the iPhone.
--
Don't Blame Me, I Voted For McCain
Welcome to The SSA, The Socialist States of Amerika, Lead By Your Dictator, Hussein Obama
Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, B. Hussein Obama
Obama = Terrorist |
|
