| reply to Rob
Re: I agree.. said by Rob:A lot of people bought the iPhone from AT&T at the subsidized price of $199. Then they paid the ETF of $175, then turned around and sold the iPhone on ebay or craigslist for $600+. So yea, I think they are doubling the ETF to prevent this from happening with the Droid. Bad move, IMO. I never thought of it that way... It still sucks that there is an ETF and that they are doubling it. People who are buying smart phones are paying a premium on data services so Verizon is already making extra off them.
--
The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
CPL:IA;ASEL/AMEL. CFI:ASE/AME; IA |
|
| If someone owns a phone for 1 month, Verizon doesn't make a hefty premium on them.
To me it would seem to be the other way around - i.e. the ETF is necessary so that they don't lose that upcharge over the duration of the contract. |
|
| reply to snipper_cr
said by snipper_cr:said by Rob:A lot of people bought the iPhone from AT&T at the subsidized price of $199. Then they paid the ETF of $175, then turned around and sold the iPhone on ebay or craigslist for $600+. So yea, I think they are doubling the ETF to prevent this from happening with the Droid. Bad move, IMO. I never thought of it that way... It still sucks that there is an ETF and that they are doubling it. People who are buying smart phones are paying a premium on data services so Verizon is already making extra off them. Not if the user cancels and pays the ETF within the first few months, which is what this is designed to prevent. |
|
|
|
