| The consumer can't afford cell phones Because of exclusivity deals subsidizing phones, the average consumer can't afford good phones.
All they do is remove any competition outside of getting contracts with carriers. And with most people getting phones with contracts a retail market for phones doesn't really exist. Phones basically carry supper high retail prices to make it seem like there is value in an exclusivity contract.
Cell carriers should be banned from interfering with the retail phone market. That way people can afford goods phones without having to sign a contract. |
|
1 edit | said by insomniac84:Cell carriers should be banned from interfering with the retail phone market. That way people can afford goods phones without having to sign a contract. That is the way it is in the EU. And there smartphones run $500 to $800 each. The US way is better for a lot of people where the phone is amortized & subsidized by the cell service provider thru the use of 2 year contracts. And now that ETFs are prorated, there isn't even a big disincentive not to switch carriers.
Not that I think consumers wouldn't be smarter to avoid paying for costly smartphones & expensive data plans if they can't afford it. But that is the American way. Spend more than you can afford. But whose fault is that but their own.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to insomniac84
said by insomniac84:Because of exclusivity deals subsidizing phones, the average consumer can't afford good phones. SIGH.... thats totally incorrect. The carrier subsidies are actually the only thing that DOES allow people to afford cell phones. What most people (that live in the US) dont understand is that non-subsidized phones, even the most basic ones, cost a few hundred dollars. "Smart" phones (such as Blackberries and iPhones) have retail prices of up to $1000.
said by insomniac84:All they do is remove any competition outside of getting contracts with carriers. And with most people getting phones with contracts a retail market for phones doesn't really exist. Phones basically carry supper high retail prices to make it seem like there is value in an exclusivity contract. The retail market for 'unlocked' cell phones doesnt really exist in the US because consumers dont want it to. The only reason every Tom, Dick, and Harry out there has an iPhone is because they were able to pick one up for $199. Look at Europe, most people pay full price for thier phones and (shockingly) pay full retail value. I have no problem with paying full retail for a locked phone, or even paying full retail just so I dont need to renew my contract that ended in 2005. Most people dont want that however, and this is the issue. If some law is put in place requiring people to buy thier phones at full retail price, Smart phone will disappear from the "average" consumers hands. 'Joe Smith' and friends will all start using the only phones they can afford (unsubsidized), which will be the cheapo, non 3G, candybar phone that might or might not have color screens.
said by insomniac84:Cell carriers should be banned from interfering with the retail phone market. That way people can afford goods phones without having to sign a contract. Good luck telling the average person to drop almost a half months' salary on a cell phone then.......
--
"The only morality they recognize, is what will further their cause"
-Ronald Reagan-
|
|
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Ok first off, you're grossly overestimating the price of high quality phones in the EU.
The technology in cell phones in the EU and Asia are a generation ahead of the US. As in, they already have camera phones capable of recording HD video at 720p, and capable of taking 12 MP pictures. *Those* are the high-end phones that cost several hundred dollars, but not so high as $800. The "retail" price of cell phones in America are grossly overstated. This is one of the reasons the iPhone hasn't sold particularly well in Japan.
Secondly, nothing stops EU carriers from offering contracts, at least as long as it doesn't go beyond a year. What consumer groups want is to ban *exclusivity* of phones.
Thirdly, the monthly cost of voice and data plans in the EU and Asia are *vastly* cheaper than in America. As in South Korea, basic plans start at $10/month, and voice + data plans for the entire *family* max out at $60/month. In fact, while we're on the topic of overpriced telephony, a super-fast internet connection + TV + phone service all costs a typical home $30-$40/month.
Finally, blaming consumers for spending money that "they can't afford" is the most idiotic criticism a person can make. Who are you to say they can or can't afford it? And how do you know they don't really need the wireless lines, and are simply overspending on a luxury? If they had a choice they'd obviously go for cheaper competition. Too bad *there is none*! |
|
2 edits | reply to wifi4milez
You know, you provide me with such joy sometimes. Right now I'm just in the mood to bash someone's posts.
"Smart" phones (such as Blackberries and iPhones) have retail prices of up to $1000.
Um..hm...well let's see. An absolute top of the line Samsung M8910 Pixon12 will retail for 639 euro, which comes out to $900. We're talking about a 12 MP camera phone capable of recording HD video at 30fps, with a 28mm wide-angle lens and Xenon flash for high-quality indoor shots. Of course it has WiFi and HSPA 3G, along with Bluetooth 2.1 and micro-USB (no proprietary garbage). This is the sort of thing the richest of the rich buy. The phones that are sold in the US don't hold a candle to EU phones, and wouldn't even make the display case in the shops.
"Good luck telling the average person to drop almost a half months' salary on a cell phone then......."
People in the US drop much more than that on their voice and data monthly charges, which happen to be much higher than in the EU and Asia.
"The retail market for 'unlocked' cell phones doesnt really exist in the US because consumers dont want it to."
That's like saying super high-speed broadband doesn't exist in most of the US because no one wants it. It's pure conjecture on your part, and is based on the assumption that US consumers are well-informed and have actively decided the EU and Asian way is misguided. The fact is they've never had the choice.
"If some law is put in place requiring people to buy thier phones at full retail price, Smart phone will disappear from the "average" consumers hands."
Well that's odd, considering the immense popularity of smartphones in the EU and Asia. Hmm, could it be that you're making false conjectures? Probably. |
|
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:Ok first off, you're grossly overestimating the price of high quality phones in the EU. Am I??
Couple examples:
UK 3g 8 GB iPhone(NOT the 3GS) = 350 GBP = $572
»www.amazon.co.uk/Apple-iphone-3G···8&sr=1-2
»www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi
UK 3gs 32 GB iPhone = 570 GBP = $932
»www.amazon.co.uk/APPLE-IPHONE-32···9&sr=1-1
HTC Smartphone P6500 = 545 GBP = $890
»www.amazon.co.uk/HTC-P6500-Windo···8&sr=1-2
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
|
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin:Um..hm...well let's see. An absolute top of the line Samsung M8910 Pixon12 will retail for 639 euro, which comes out to $900. We're talking about a 12 MP camera phone capable of recording HD video at 30fps, with a 28mm wide-angle lens and Xenon flash for high-quality indoor shots. Of course it has WiFi and HSPA 3G, along with Bluetooth 2.1 and micro-USB (no proprietary garbage). This is the sort of thing the richest of the rich buy. The phones that are sold in the US don't hold a candle to EU phones, and wouldn't even make the display case in the shops. I am glad you decided to reply, as you will surely crawl away with you tail between your legs on this one. To begin, the phone you just mentioned is by no means the 'top of the line' phone. Lets just look at the humble iPhone shall we? An unlocked iPhone 3GS is available for a retail price of $1100 and $1300.
»www.expansys-usa.com/smartphone/apple-iphone
Furthermore, if you think a Samsung camera phone is what the "richest of the rich" buy then you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Have you ever heard of Vertu? Obviously you have not, so let me explain. They are a high end 'retail only' company that sells unlocked phones that START at around $5k. In fact, their prices go up to a few hundred thousand dollars. Below is a link to one of their phones for around $25k.
»www.plemix.com/phone-vertu-signature-phone
»www.vertu.com/
said by sonicmerlin:People in the US drop much more than that on their voice and data monthly charges, which happen to be much higher than in the EU and Asia. People in this country do not spend half their monthly salaries on voice and data via their wireless providers, thats ridiculous.
said by sonicmerlin:That's like saying super high-speed broadband doesn't exist in most of the US because no one wants it. It's pure conjecture on your part, and is based on the assumption that US consumers are well-informed and have actively decided the EU and Asian way is misguided. The fact is they've never had the choice. No, people in the US dont want to spend $1000 on cell phones and thats really the end of it. Its not like you go to Europe and all the high end unlocked phones are $50.
said by sonicmerlin:Well that's odd, considering the immense popularity of smartphones in the EU and Asia. Hmm, could it be that you're making false conjectures? Probably. No, people are just used to paying full price in other countries. People in the US would freak out if you told them their new phone will cost $600, 'we' expect everything for free.
--
"The only morality they recognize, is what will further their cause"
-Ronald Reagan-
|
|
jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA | reply to sonicmerlin
If U.S. consumers are dying for unlocked phones, then why do so few firms offering them? There are 4 independent nationwide cellular companies and dozens of regional ones. Are companies just sitting by ignoring massive profit potential? |
|
| reply to wifi4milez
said by wifi4milez:Good luck telling the average person to drop almost a half months' salary on a cell phone then....... That is the point. The prices will be forced down to at least what you currently pay with a contract. |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by insomniac84:said by wifi4milez:Good luck telling the average person to drop almost a half months' salary on a cell phone then....... That is the point. The prices will be forced down to at least what you currently pay with a contract. Why? That hasnt happened anywhere else in the world. Non subsidized phones cost the same here as the do in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. I used to have a side business selling unlocked phones on Ebay. Sure I marked them up a little because I bought in bulk, but they still cost me a few hundred dollars each. Check any overseas cell phone website and you can verify this yourself.
--
"The only morality they recognize, is what will further their cause"
-Ronald Reagan-
|
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to wifi4milez
said by wifi4milez:said by insomniac84:Because of exclusivity deals subsidizing phones, the average consumer can't afford good phones. SIGH.... thats totally incorrect. The carrier subsidies are actually the only thing that DOES allow people to afford cell phones. What most people (that live in the US) dont understand is that non-subsidized phones, even the most basic ones, cost a few hundred dollars. "Smart" phones (such as Blackberries and iPhones) have retail prices of up to $1000. That's flat out false. On Verizon with my last handset (the i760), removing this middleman reduces non-contract handset prices by about a third right off the bat (from $600 to $400). And you can find several stores that will sell you a non-subsidized phone for $20 -- I bought one less than 6 months ago and lit it up on the T-Mobile network.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5 |
|
| reply to wifi4milez
Nice cherry picked website. From an engadget article dated June 12th 2008 (that's over a year ago):
This morning we're getting a first look at unsubsidized prices for the iPhone 3G in Europe. Vodafone Italy has set an out-of-contract price for the iPhone 3G at 499/€569 ($773/$881) for the 8GB/16GB models, respectively. Subscription rates have not yet been announced. While steep, those prices are actually smartphone-reasonable in Italy (and around Europe) where an HTC Touch Cruise with its WiFi, tri-band HSDPA data, GPS, and touchscreen sells for €549. Capisce?
The iPhone especially is marked up in price. The hardware that powers the device is hardly top of the line. It's the software and Apple-specific applications that attracts people to it. Other phones with similar specs are priced significantly below that tier. Again, its high cost relative to its mediocre hardware is one of the reasons the iPhone isn't hugely popular in Asian countries.
The super high-priced phone you mentioned are not made for the mass-market. We can go even higher than that by talking about gold-plated, jewel encrusted phones made for Saudi Arabian oil barons. My point, while exuberant, is that Europeans consider phones in the $700-$900 price range to be extremely expensive.
You also seemed to misinterpret my comment about phone plans and their costs. Since you're incapable of reasoning it out for yourself, I was implying the thousands of dollars extra people pay for smartphone voice + data plans over the life of their subsidized contracts represents far more than they'd have to pay upfront for mid-range smart phones in the EU. Basically wireless telephony is cheaper in the EU and Asia because monthly plans are cheaper.
And finally, you keep on saying people in the US wouldn't be able to handle upfront costs. But what groups like Free Press want to do is ban *exclusivity* agreements. People will still be able to purchase subsidized phones with contracts provided by carriers if they like, but every phone will be available with every carrier (as long as the phone is compatible with the network the carrier uses) and consumers will have the option to use whatever phone with whatever carrier they'd like. |
|
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to funchords
said by funchords:That's flat out false. On Verizon with my last handset (the i760), removing this middleman reduces non-contract handset prices by about a third right off the bat (from $600 to $400). How exactly is that false then? The subsidized version of that phone would have cost you under $200, possibly as low as $99. I never said buying direct from the carrier was the cheapest way to get non-subsidized phones.
said by funchords:And you can find several stores that will sell you a non-subsidized phone for $20 -- I bought one less than 6 months ago and lit it up on the T-Mobile network. Thats some good work on your part. Anyone can buy an old, refurbished, or 1999 era unlocked cell for $20, however we arent talking about that. Consumers in the US dont want that kind of phone, people want iPhones and they want them for between $100 and $200.
You certainly can buy a cheap unlocked phone. Here is a link to one that costs $30.
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···75209167
However you should note that its 2 years old, doesnt come with a manufactures warranty, and suspiciously comes loaded with "9 African languages". The problem is that if we end carrier subsidized phones, then this is all people will be able to afford.
--
"The only morality they recognize, is what will further their cause"
-Ronald Reagan-
|
|
 AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | reply to wifi4milez
said by wifi4milez:SIGH.... thats totally incorrect. The carrier subsidies are actually the only thing that DOES allow people to afford cell phones. Give the man a prize. This is 100% correct.
A bottom-line example. If AT&T didn't subsidize the iPhone in return for a contract, everyone pays $500+ for it from Apple.
Simple as that. |
|
| reply to sonicmerlin
You are wrong. As cell phone contracts are on average 18months long overseas. |
|
 tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Both of you are wrong.
First of all:
»www.t-mobile.de/iphone/
16GB 3GS for as low as 1 euro on contract.
Second, while their up-front pricing is technically cheaper, they nickel and dime you, and have a very complicated rate system
»www.t-mobile.de/iphone/tarife
They charge you different rates if you're calling within TMO's network, calling other mobile users, or calling landlines. Same goes for MMS/SMS charges. Those rates are all higher than what we charge in the USA. Their data caps are equal to or lower than our own (10GB and on down), and are frequently tied to your monthly rate (the less you pay for minutes, the less data you get too).
No such thing as MyFaves. No Friends and Family. No Rollover Minutes. No Unlimited Everything (at least not for as cheap as we have it).
Their consumers have 2 major advantages:
Since everyone there uses GSM on 2 frequencies, all phones sold in europe are compatible on all other euro networks. The only barrier is a simple SIM lock.
They typically have better competition and connectivity due to the smaller sized networks needing to compete on price rather than coverage.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA | reply to sonicmerlin
The reason exclusivity agreements are so popular with carriers and phone makers is because they are the best proven method of funding the massive R&D investment needed to design, market and manufacture innovative smartphones like the iPhone.
While banning exclusivity deals wouldn't stop carriers from continuing to subsidize handsets, it would make it harder for phone makers like Apple to recoup the investment required to create devices like the iPhone. Why would AT&T pay Apple $17 per month per iPhone subscriber, as it currently does, if there were no guarantee that doing so would enable AT&T to pick up new subscribers? |
|
| reply to insomniac84
said by insomniac84:Because of exclusivity deals subsidizing phones, the average consumer can't afford good phones. All they do is remove any competition outside of getting contracts with carriers. And with most people getting phones with contracts a retail market for phones doesn't really exist. Phones basically carry supper high retail prices to make it seem like there is value in an exclusivity contract. Cell carriers should be banned from interfering with the retail phone market. That way people can afford goods phones without having to sign a contract. It's a big problem when a simple phone without a contract is $300, $400, $800 retail. There is no way that these phone are so expensive. It's just a crazy markup. One can purchase more powerful electronics for 1/10th the price. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by insomniac84:Cell carriers should be banned from interfering with the retail phone market. That way people can afford goods phones without having to sign a contract. That is the way it is in the EU. And there smartphones run $500 to $800 each. The US way is better for a lot of people where the phone is amortized & subsidized by the cell service provider thru the use of 2 year contracts. And now that ETFs are prorated, there isn't even a big disincentive not to switch carriers. Not that I think consumers wouldn't be smarter to avoid paying for costly smartphones & expensive data plans if they can't afford it. But that is the American way. Spend more than you can afford. But whose fault is that but their own. ETFs should NOT be allowed! There is something amiss here in USA wireless land... |
|
1 edit | reply to wifi4milez
Prices can't drop in europe if the american market is keeping prices up. |
|
