| reply to RARPSL
Re: Fair EFTs Quite simply because recovery of the cost of equipment has very little to nothing to do with the ETF and more to do with locking in a "unit" of profit for the next X amount of time.
I have said and will continue to say that phones being tied to a carrier and them "subsidizing" them needs to end. They should implement a system that requires you to purchase the phone outright through either a cash price or a finance plan. In addition, a phone should be able to be used on any courier that it is compatible with at any time a customer decides to take it there.
However, there are 2 things that work against this and thus against the consumer. 1.) Carriers wont be able to lock in customers and they will be free to leave if unhappy and actually have an option 2.) The inflated cost of phones will not be as profitable to the carriers or the manufacturers. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | said by Skippy25:I have said and will continue to say that phones being tied to a carrier and them "subsidizing" them needs to end. They should implement a system that requires you to purchase the phone outright through either a cash price or a finance plan. No thank you. I like my "no additional cost" phone. |
|
| Glad you put that in quotes because you and I both know that the phone cost you as you pay for it outright or through the inflated price of the service.
You may feel better about buying things that you have no idea how much you are paying for, but I prefer to know what exactly I am paying for the item I am buying. |
|
|
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | The difference is that I look at it like I'm paying for a service that includes a device for the service. I don't need it separated, nor do I really care how much the device costs. |
|
