PDA

View Full Version : AT&T Halts Online iPhone Sales to New York City Market




str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 06:31 PM
http://consumerist.com/2009/12/att-customer-service-new-york-city-is-not-ready-for-the-iphone.html

A call from The Consumerist to AT&T online sales:

Daphne: Welcome to AT&T online Sales support. How may I assist you with placing your order today?

Laura: Hi, I was looking at the iPhone 3Gs and the system tells me that I cannot order one in my ZIP code. My zip code is 11231. (Brooklyn, NY) Is this true? Are iPhones no longer available in New York City?

Daphne: I am happy to be helping you today . Yes, this is correct the phone is not offered to you because New York is not ready for the iPhone.

Daphne: You don't have enough towers to handle the phone.

Laura: Thank you for your help. So the phone is not available to people anywhere in the city?

Daphne: Yes this is correct Laura.
-----------

This is an effing joke. You are actually trying to stop paying customers from using your service? AT&T, you're an embarrassment. Apple had better make sure this exclusivity ends next year. This is about as ridiculous as it can get.



dukebound85
Dec 27, 2009, 06:34 PM
simple fix

buy it outside nyc

UngratefulNinja
Dec 27, 2009, 06:35 PM
Interesting. Wonder if they've pulled them from the Apple stores there too.

LIVEFRMNYC
Dec 27, 2009, 06:48 PM
LOL ...... Your right.

I put in my Zip Code (Queens, NY) on the AT&T website and click on the Iphone and it said not available in your area.

So I did an ONLINE CHAT :D .........................

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/7954/attiphone.jpg (http://img37.imageshack.us/i/attiphone.jpg/)

NinjaKid
Dec 27, 2009, 07:02 PM
Best Buy and Radio Shack both have iphones in stock and for sale, kinda funny AT&T made a mistake like that when trying to order one.

Applejuiced
Dec 27, 2009, 07:11 PM
That's beyond rediculous.
NYC is banned?

dynamo22
Dec 27, 2009, 07:16 PM
My sister bought her iphone 3gs about 2 weeks ago on 61st and lex at an AT&T store in Manhattan.

This can't be right..

appleguy123
Dec 27, 2009, 07:17 PM
What type of fraudulent activity?

renewed
Dec 27, 2009, 07:17 PM
That's beyond rediculous.
NYC is banned?

Read the chat. They say online cannot be done. You can still purchase one in store.

So in other words: It isn't banned.

Applejuiced
Dec 27, 2009, 07:19 PM
Read the chat. They say online cannot be done. You can still purchase one in store.

So in other words: It isn't banned.

Interesting. I wonder if it's just a warehouse shortage for that area or carrier struggle?

renewed
Dec 27, 2009, 07:23 PM
Interesting. I wonder if it's just a warehouse shortage for that area or carrier struggle?

Seems fraud is the reason from what that rep said in the chat. Maybe we have started to solve the mystery to this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=613734). ;)

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 07:26 PM
Read the chat. They say online cannot be done. You can still purchase one in store.

So in other words: It isn't banned.

No it's not banned. They are intentionally trying to make it more difficult for you to buy it. You have to do the footwork yourself to get it. It is unprecendented for a company to want to make their product more difficult to buy.

Seems fraud is the reason from what that rep said in the chat. Maybe we have started to solve the mystery to this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=613734). ;)


This has already hit Gizmodo. At the time of The Consumerist post, they were already trying to reach AT&T Public Relations. The fraudulent claim is to divert attention away from the original reason.

As for eBay iPhones, you can find any of these for any cell phone under contract on eBay. This, or fraudulent claims, wouldn't be a NYC specific problem.

alent1234
Dec 27, 2009, 07:34 PM
What type of fraudulent activity?


Id theft

find Ssn number and order iPhone
ssn owner fights the bill
thief resells the iPhone

thelatinist
Dec 27, 2009, 07:40 PM
I have to say that LIVEFRMNYC's chat makes more sense than the Consumerist's. Fraud would certainly be reason for preventing only online sales. My guess is that the Consumerist got a typically uninformed call center employee.

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 07:57 PM
I have to say that LIVEFRMNYC's chat makes more sense than the Consumerist's. Fraud would certainly be reason for preventing only online sales. My guess is that the Consumerist got a typically uninformed call center employee.

Why would that make more sense with one city? The fraudulent claims would have to be more than the iPhones they sell online in NYC. There are more iPhone users here than any other city in the world.

Also you would have to say the Consumerist (well-respected blog) is lying and AT&T isn't. Do you really believe that? The original reason the Consumerist went after this story was that people were having this problem and they initiated their own investigation.

appleguy123
Dec 27, 2009, 07:59 PM
Id theft

find Ssn number and order iPhone
ssn owner fights the bill
thief resells the iPhone
Seller cannot change the zip code it's sent to? To go through all these hoop you'd they would.

LIVEFRMNYC
Dec 27, 2009, 08:03 PM
Why would that make more sense with one city?

Same reason most online stores don't ship to Nigeria.

If statistics show problem online fraud areas in a much higher percentage than other cities, it makes sense to temporarily curb it.

alent1234
Dec 27, 2009, 08:08 PM
Seller cannot change the zip code it's sent to? To go through all these hoop you'd they would.



A lot of illegal rentals here which probably doesn't play nice with verification systems

renewed
Dec 27, 2009, 08:09 PM
Same reason most online stores don't ship to Nigeria.

If statistics show problem online fraud areas in a much higher percentage than other cities, it makes sense to temporarily curb it.

+1. This whole signal is at fault thing is really getting old.

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 08:21 PM
Same reason most online stores don't ship to Nigeria.

If statistics show problem online fraud areas in a much higher percentage than other cities, it makes sense to temporarily curb it.

You're talking about a whole country. As it is right now there are more iPhones in NYC than anywhere else. In order for this to be true it would mean tens of thousands of NYers, at least, are having their personal info stolen. Also, why only the iPhone? Wouldn't these thieves with all their stolen info just move onto another AT&T phone that costs just as much? Such as BB? Why hasn't any other telco stopped onlines sales of any of their high priced phones in NYC? Surely these thieves wouldn't just buy one phone.


To believe this you would have to jump through many conclusions, some being illogical.

scaredpoet
Dec 27, 2009, 08:35 PM
You're talking about a whole country. As it is right now there are more iPhones in NYC than anywhere else. In order for this to be true it would mean tens of thousands of NYers, at least, are having their personal info stolen.

Why is that not unrealistic? NYC has 8.3 million people as of 2008. Even if 99,999 people had their identities stolen for iPhones, that's only 1.2% of the population. Consider that as of 2003, 4.6% of the population were victims of ID fraud according to the Federal Trade Commission.

I think it would take less than 99,999 cases in a concentrated area for AT&T to consider potential fraud a problem. Even 50,000 iPhones and accounts lost due to fraud would cause about $15 million in losses, assuming an average $300 subsidy per iPhone.


Also: it's not just ID theft that could be the issue here. there are other ways to scam iPhones off AT&T and resell them.

Also, why only the iPhone?

Because it's a hot item, and continues to outsell other smartphones quarter after quarter?

Because lots of people are looking to buy "nearly new" iPhones on eBay and cragislist, and are willing to pay more in some cases than retail for them?

Because it's easy to jailbreak and unlock, and can be sold that way at a premium to countries where it's in short supply or not yet sold?


Wouldn't these thieves with all their stolen info just move onto another AT&T phone that costs just as much? Such as BB?

Because BB's aren't as easy to unlock, the BB PINs are traceable by the Blackberry network regardless of carrier, and they're just not as much in demand. People don't stand in lines for Blackberries. They have for iPhones.

Why hasn't any other telco stopped onlines sales of any of their high priced phones in NYC?

See reasons above.


To believe this you would have to jump through many conclusions, some being illogical.

I haven't listed conslusions. I've only listed facts.

Meanwhile, to believe your conspiracy theory is to, well, manufacture a conspiracy.

LIVEFRMNYC
Dec 27, 2009, 08:44 PM
I think somebody stole our Kool-Aid.

thelatinist
Dec 27, 2009, 08:53 PM
Also you would have to say the Consumerist (well-respected blog) is lying and AT&T isn't. Do you really believe that? The original reason the Consumerist went after this story was that people were having this problem and they initiated their own investigation.

No, I said and say nothing of the sort. What I said is that it sounds like the Counsumerist talked to a call center employee who didn't know what was actually going on. The Consumerist was not lying, nor was AT&T lying; the call center employee wasn't even lying...s/he was just talking out of his or her ass. Call center employees are underpaid and under-trained, and half the time I think they're just trying to BS their way through the day. It has happened many times before that a low-level employee who is not even close to the loop has said something that has to be walked back by management. Always such things become gospel and remain fodder for conspiracy theorists. This strikes me as one of those cases.

scaredpoet
Dec 27, 2009, 08:57 PM
Also you would have to say the Consumerist (well-respected blog) is lying and AT&T isn't. Do you really believe that?

I believe the Consumerist will be more than willing to hype incorrect information it has received from an uninformed rep if it means increased site traffic, especially if it furthers the aim of hyping up a theme that's en vogue right now. It's a blog with a business interests and it receives revenue based on traffic, and that means it, like any other blog with business interests, has an agenda to pursue.

So like every other "news" source on the internet, I take what I read with a grain of salt.

alent1234
Dec 27, 2009, 09:05 PM
You're talking about a whole country. As it is right now there are more iPhones in NYC than anywhere else. In order for this to be true it would mean tens of thousands of NYers, at least, are having their personal info stolen. Also, why only the iPhone? Wouldn't these thieves with all their stolen info just move onto another AT&T phone that costs just as much? Such as BB? Why hasn't any other telco stopped onlines sales of any of their high priced phones in NYC? Surely these thieves wouldn't just buy one phone.


To believe this you would have to jump through many conclusions, some being illogical.

NYC has so many ethnicities, people probably ship them to other countries

alent1234
Dec 27, 2009, 09:08 PM
You're talking about a whole country. As it is right now there are more iPhones in NYC than anywhere else. In order for this to be true it would mean tens of thousands of NYers, at least, are having their personal info stolen. Also, why only the iPhone? Wouldn't these thieves with all their stolen info just move onto another AT&T phone that costs just as much? Such as BB? Why hasn't any other telco stopped onlines sales of any of their high priced phones in NYC? Surely these thieves wouldn't just buy one phone.


To believe this you would have to jump through many conclusions, some being illogical.


all BB network traffic goes through RIM's datacenters making them easy to trace

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 09:22 PM
Why is that not unrealistic? NYC has 8.3 million people as of 2008. Even if 99,999 people had their identities stolen for iPhones, that's only 1.2% of the population. Consider that as of 2003, 4.6% of the population were victims of ID fraud according to the Federal Trade Commission.

I think it would take less than 99,999 cases in a concentrated area for AT&T to consider potential fraud a problem. Even 50,000 iPhones and accounts lost due to fraud would cause about $15 million in losses, assuming an average $300 subsidy per iPhone.


Also: it's not just ID theft that could be the issue here. there are other ways to scam iPhones off AT&T and resell them.

Hold on. ID theft is not nearly as commonplace as 1.2% in NYC and it wouldn't mean that half of them would get iPhones. Operations that large have IDs from all across the country, if not the world. It is rather strange that AT&T's timing is right during the holiday season when a huge amount of people would be purchasing an iPhone and it is not like these thieves would be waiting til the holidays to use this info. You would have to believe that AT&T is willing to lose all the online sales from the iPhone on Christmas to stop some thieves.




Because it's a hot item, and continues to outsell other smartphones quarter after quarter?

Because lots of people are looking to buy "nearly new" iPhones on eBay and cragislist, and are willing to pay more in some cases than retail for them?


Because it's easy to jailbreak and unlock, and can be sold that way at a premium to countries where it's in short supply or not yet sold?






Because BB's aren't as easy to unlock, the BB PINs are traceable by the Blackberry network regardless of carrier, and they're just not as much in demand. People don't stand in lines for Blackberries. They have for iPhones.

It doesn't matter if it's a BB or not. It could be any number of smartphones. Where are the instances of the Verizon doing this with the Droid? The Droid is selling well. If I was a thief, I would be ordering phones off of at least two carriers. It's not like these thieves are going to stop because they can't get the iPhone so it is really stopping nothing.



Meanwhile, to believe your conspiracy theory is to, well, manufacture a conspiracy.

LOL, my conspiracy theory? I pointed you to a well-respected blog and a story that has been picked up by major tech sites. The funny thing is that you think that AT&T wouldn't do this. They have already said they have problems in NYC and that they are considering tiered data services amongst other "incentives".

Your post was not filled with facts. You're assuming how many possible people have had their IDs stolen while puchasing iPhones with no facts.

You say that thieves would go after the iPhone first. That may be true but it would make no sense to stop there and it would make more sense if AT&T issued a blanket policy for all smartphones considering they have more smartphones than any carrier.

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 09:39 PM
I believe the Consumerist will be more than willing to hype incorrect information it has received from an uninformed rep if it means increased site traffic, especially if it furthers the aim of hyping up a theme that's en vogue right now. It's a blog with a business interests and it receives revenue based on traffic, and that means it, like any other blog with business interests, has an agenda to pursue.

So like every other "news" source on the internet, I take what I read with a grain of salt.

Surely you must have proof of them using sensationalism (such as TechCrunch) rather than siding with the telcos who consistently lie and overcharge for services like SMS? As far as I know The Consumerist has been around for years blogging about consumers rights and unlike AT&T who Astroturfs against net neutrality.

LIVEFRMNYC
Dec 27, 2009, 09:43 PM
It is not like these thieves would be waiting til the holidays to use this info.

You can't be serious. The Holiday season is when online fraud is at it's peak, especially in places like NYC.


I don't believe those PINs are activated before you recieve them and the BB is currently outselling the iPhone. Where are the instances of the Verizon doing this with the Droid? The Droid is selling well. If I was a thief, I would be ordering phones off of at least two carriers. It's not like these thieves are going to stop because they can't get the iPhone so it is really stopping nothing.

Droid is not even close as a hot or marketable after market item as the iPhone is. And BB is currently outselling that iPhone but is one specific model outselling the iPhone. ;)





LOL, my conspiracy theory? I pointed you to a well-respected blog and a story that has been picked up by major tech sites.

Sorry, but they should have done more homework on this instead of just relying on one chat. Maybe they would have gotten a differ response if they did another online chat. The type of more reasonable response that I got.



Your post was not filled with facts. You're assuming how many possible people have had there IDs stolen while puchasing iPhones with no facts.

Doesn't matter. That FACT is, it can be purchased in stores all over NYC. I personally don't think the restriction of iPhone sales online will make any differ with overall sales being that it's so easy to get to a AT&T store in NYC.

I bet more than 70% of NYC purchased an iPhone in person vs online anyway, which mutes any excuse of AT&T trying to free up data as it's excuse for this online restriction.




You say that thieves would go after the iPhone first. That may be true but it would make no sense to stop there and it would make more sense if AT&T issued a blanket policy for all smartphones considering they have more smartphones than any carrier.

:apple:

scaredpoet
Dec 27, 2009, 09:49 PM
. You would have to believe that AT&T is willing to lose all the online sales from the iPhone on Christmas to stop some thieves.

They wouldn't lose ALL online sales, just the ones from certain zip codes where it believes fraud is high.



It doesn't matter if it's a BB or not.

The people who prefer iPhones to other devices would disagree with you.

It could be any number of smartphones. Where are the instances of the Verizon doing this with the Droid?

Again, the Droid isn't selling nearly as much as the iPhone.

LOL, my conspiracy theory? I pointed you to a well-respected blog and a story that has been picked up by major tech sites.

tech sites that are basically re-linking ONE source of information.

The funny thing is that you think that AT&T wouldn't do this.

Not sell the iPhone online in certain zips codes you mean? no, I KNOW for a fact they're doing this. I simply disagree with you as to the reason.

If they were really concerned about network issues, the iPhone would be unavailable for sale in stores as well. But it still is available there, so that makes little sense to me that this is due to network issues.

New York has a lot of zip codes, and a lot of people moving in and out of various zip codes. Not to mention influxes of people who commute there from Connecticut, New Jersey and PA. So, doing this solely to manage a network constraint wouldn't be effective, nor would it make sense.

If the iPhone were mysteriously unavailable for sale throughout the entire tri-state region, then I might be inclined to believe this.

Your post was not filled with facts.

You are rejecting those facts because they don't fit with your conspiracy theory.

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 10:16 PM
You can't be serious. The Holiday season is when online fraud is at it's peak, especially in places like NYC.

Again that may be true, but it would not offset the significant gains mAde through online sales.




Droid is not even close as a hot or marketable after market item as the iPhone is. And BB is currently outselling that iPhone but is one specific model outselling the iPhone. ;)

That is not the point. They could hav easily purchased this as well as an iPhone. While the iPhone is a hotter product, they will go after whatever sells. The Droid is selling. It is not as if they will stopped because they're hopes were dashed in not getting an iPhone.





You can't be serious. The Holiday season is when online fraud is at it's peak, especially in places like NYC.

Again that may be true, but it would not offset the significant gains mAde through online sales.




Sorry, but they should have done more homework on this instead of just relying on one chat. Maybe they would have gotten a differ response if they did another online chat. The type of more reasonable response that I got.

You mean the chat you had after the story was broke for hours? Orafyer when they said they were trying to contact AT&T's Public Relations?




I bet more than 70% of NYC purchased an iPhone in person vs online anyway.

I don't know the percentages and neither do you. What I do know is that many businesses are struggling because of online purchases so it is an important factor.

str1f3
Dec 27, 2009, 10:16 PM
They wouldn't lose ALL online sales, just the ones from certain zip codes where it believes fraud is high.

There are more iPhones, Macs, etc. sold here than anywhere in the world. There is a reason why Apple has so many stores here. iPhones are more prevalent here than anywhere.





The people who prefer iPhones to other devices would disagree with you.

I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.



Again, the Droid isn't selling nearly as much as the iPhone.

Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.


tech sites that are basically re-linking ONE source of information.

Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website? They have a track record.



Not sell the iPhone online in certain zips codes you mean? no, I KNOW for a fact they're doing this. I simply disagree with you as to the reason.

If they were really concerned about network issues, the iPhone would be unavailable for sale in stores as well. But it still is available there, so that makes little sense to me that this is due to network issues.

New York has a lot of zip codes, and a lot of people moving in and out of various zip codes. Not to mention influxes of people who commute there from Connecticut, New Jersey and PA. So, doing this solely to manage a network constraint wouldn't be effective, nor would it make sense.

If the iPhone were mysteriously unavailable for sale throughout the entire tri-state region, then I might be inclined to believe this.

What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period. It's not incidental that they happen to live within the city. This tactic wouldn't be effective but remember this is a company whose tactics are screwed up to begin with. It is fully within the realm of possibility that they would do something this stupid because they would try to lessen the load of an already poor network in this area.


You are rejecting those facts because they don't fit with your conspiracy theory.


Now you're getting me pissed. Don't give me this conspiracy theory nonsense when AT&T has acted at their worst whenever possible and I've provided links from a respectable website. You have cited no facts and no links to back up your beliefs. Where you came up with 50,000 iPhone being stolen with IDs, I don't really know nor do I know where you came up with 1.2% of NYC ID thefts.

LinMac
Dec 27, 2009, 10:48 PM
Let's stop for a moment and think about this without any knee jerk reaction against at&t.

The at&t network in New York City is not able to handle any additional network traffic. It makes sense due to the amount of users in such a small area.

What should at&t do?

I think it is reasonable to temporarily stop selling the iPhone considering the network in New York City. They can resume sales after the network has been upgraded to handle the additional traffic.

at&t has not sunk to a new low. They are finally taking responsibility for their network by not overloading it with any additional data heavy iPhone users.

Note: This post is based on speculation about speculation. Please take it how it was intended. :)

LIVEFRMNYC
Dec 27, 2009, 10:56 PM
If this was based on network traffic, They would stop sales in stores too. There are more than enough AT&T stores in NYC and other places like Bestbuy that New Yorkers can easily just walk or take a quick subway ride too. Stopping online sales will not deter any New Yorker from purchasing an iPhone.

Fraud seems like a reasonable explanation, anyone who believes otherwise is reaching for the stars.

scaredpoet
Dec 27, 2009, 11:06 PM
There are more iPhones, Macs, etc. sold here than anywhere in the world.

Where are your figures to back this up?



I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.

I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.

Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.

Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.

Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?

The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.

On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.

What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.

They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.


Now you're getting me pissed.

Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.

jbernie
Dec 27, 2009, 11:07 PM
No it's not banned. They are intentionally trying to make it more difficult for you to buy it. You have to do the footwork yourself to get it. It is unprecendented for a company to want to make their product more difficult to buy.

oh my.. poor baby... such a hard life you lead... having to actually go do something yourself, next you will tell us how you have all of your mail hand delivered to you on a silver platter and your butler or maid reads it all to you.

Given how many members of MacRumors don't even have an Apple store in their city let alone state or country you come of as a whinger who needs sympathy when in reality you have nothing to complain about in the first place.

Maybe the truth is you are complaining about losing your easy way to get iPhones through fraudulant means and selling them for a profit? I mean, why else would you suggest that AT&T is lying about fraud as potential reason for blocking online purchases in your area?

Go take a walk, you can probably hit 5 AT&T resellers of some sort or Apple stores throwing a baseball from your front doorstep.

scaredpoet
Dec 27, 2009, 11:29 PM
By the way, the iPhone Blog has something a bit more rational and realistic (http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/12/28/iphone-nyc-att-periodically-modifies-promotions-distribution-channels/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheIphoneBlog+%28The+iPhone+Blog%29):



TechCrunch doesn’t seem to be having too much trouble finding them and simply suggests AT&T’s online system pulls from a different warehouse and seems to be out of stock in the area:
So if you really want to buy an iPhone in New York City, go to an AT&T store, or an Apple Store. Or try Apple’s website. That seems to be taking orders for New York City residents just fine ( I got up to the checkout).
TiPb contacted AT&T PR and got the following, which we’re grateful for given the holidays, the weekend, and the late hour, though it is a tad on the cryptic side:
“We periodically modify our promotions and distribution channels.”

It would appear that a little independent research will show that getting an iPhone in NYC is still very possible.

And, the Consumerist has once again proven in a different story that panicky reporting can be bad (http://consumerist.com/2009/12/next-time-you-fly-prepare-to-be-patted-down-and-computerless.html).

thelatinist
Dec 28, 2009, 12:09 AM
Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.

I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.

alent1234
Dec 28, 2009, 07:15 AM
the Consumerist was recently bought by Consumer's Union. The "non profit" organization that sells the magazine Consumer's Reports. the same rag that has different testing standards for different products to push the snobby/elite/more expensive ones.

last year they tested some child car seats differently to say the cheaper ones were deadly

MacRumors
Dec 28, 2009, 08:36 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/12/28/atandt-halts-online-iphone-sales-to-new-york-city-market/)

The Consumerist reported (http://consumerist.com/2009/12/att-customer-service-new-york-city-is-not-ready-for-the-iphone.html) over the weekend that AT&T has quietly stopped offering online iPhone sales to customers located in the New York City market. Responding to a reader report, The Consumerist verified the extent of the issue:I went to the AT&T site to verify what Stephen said. Sure enough, the iPhone was available to zip codes in San Francisco and other major cities. It was not available to purchase for people living anywhere in New York City, or any of the suburban zip codes in Westchester County or northern New Jersey that I tried.There seems to be some confusion, however, over the cause of the move, with a customer service representative initially stating that "New York is not ready for the iPhone" and that it doesn't "have enough towers to handle the phone." Such an explanation, while a bit surprising, was not considered completely illogical, as New York City has been a common source of complaints from consumers regarding network performance, and AT&T has acknowledged (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/09/atandt-addressing-network-performance-in-manhattan-and-san-francisco-high-bandwidth-users/) that it is looking to improve service there.

Follow-up comments from AT&T, however, have cast doubt on that explanation, with an official response noting only that AT&T may "periodically modify [their] promotions and distribution channels." Other customer support representatives, such as those contacted by Gearlog (http://www.gearlog.com/2009/12/att_nixes_online_iphone_sales.php), have cited "increased fraudulent activity" from the area as the reason for removing online iPhone sales in the region.

Article Link: AT&T Halts Online iPhone Sales to New York City Market (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/12/28/atandt-halts-online-iphone-sales-to-new-york-city-market/)

tigertazz
Dec 28, 2009, 08:58 AM
Sweet Baby J, will the problems with AT&T never cease

Good job I'm in th UK









Sorry:D

dusty59
Dec 28, 2009, 09:13 AM
"AT&T may 'periodically modify [their] promotions and distribution channels.'"

Not so much doubt cast, unless one believes that such periodic modifications are random and mercurial.

AT&T sucks, plain & simple. They've been allowed to score big w/ their exclusive iPhone contract, and think that marketing will remedy the problem.

Wake up Apple.

apple101
Dec 28, 2009, 09:14 AM
My towns on the list. North Jersey (in Bergen County) town. Awesome.

How does Apple let AT&T get away with this.

macduke
Dec 28, 2009, 09:16 AM
Haha, I can already see the next Verizon ad! This is pathetic. Surely Apple has worked out a deal with another carrier for 2010? At least AT&T doesn't completely suck where I work and play. Well, except my mother-in-laws house, which really sucks because what else am I supposed to do there? They don't even have wifi. I should have bought them a router for Christmas.

Ambrose Chapel
Dec 28, 2009, 09:17 AM
Wake up Apple.

I'm pretty sure Apple is well aware of how royally ATT is screwing things up. The only questions are: 1) when does ATT's exclusivity actually end, and 2) which other carriers will Apple partner with.

countrydweller
Dec 28, 2009, 09:24 AM
Why all the complaining? If this is a move to increase the quality of service in NYC, isn't this a good move till they upgrade their towers? If it's truly because of fraud, that's understandable. AT&T should be truthful about reasons for their actions, maybe they have been.

dynamo22
Dec 28, 2009, 09:26 AM
rockland county is not affected

AlphaAnt
Dec 28, 2009, 09:28 AM
2) which other carriers will Apple partner with.

If it's Verizon or T-Mobile, I wouldn't consider it a step up. I might consider going back to Sprint now that they've considerably improved their customer service and prices. For me, Verizon would be a lateral move, as their customer service, prices and billing are a serious detractor, and their network is actually worse that AT&T's here where I am.

Verdict: All American cell companies are garbage, period. Just another reason I'm considering moving overseas.

alent1234
Dec 28, 2009, 09:29 AM
you can still buy the phone in a store in NYC

AT&T has the worst marketing/PR ever. people complain about Apple, but at least every someone speaks from Apple they are on the right message

nagromme
Dec 28, 2009, 09:38 AM
This just means everyone in NYC is about to get a free iPod Tablet with lifetime 3G service and video calling. Hang in there.

SiriusVector
Dec 28, 2009, 09:43 AM
This just means everyone in NYC is about to get a free iPod Tablet with lifetime 3G service and video calling. Hang in there.

Both you, and Apple, need to wake up!! :D

Slip Jigs
Dec 28, 2009, 10:05 AM
This may just be the beginning. The article in Wired talks about "Data Hogs" and how ATT has been trying to get them to throttle back their usage. How, I don't know. I've been noticing more and more dropped calls on 3G as of late, so much that I have to disable it just to be able to make and complete a call.

Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.

I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.

But, if it was really about fraud in certain areas - wouldn't that mean that you can't purchase ANY phone from ATT online? Why would it only apply to the iPhone?

jfreak623
Dec 28, 2009, 10:57 AM
it was so annoying when i visited NYC that I could never access my 3G internet as the service was horrible. I couldn't believe how bad it was. There is no way i would own a iphone in NYC. Just my personal Experience.

strike1555
Dec 28, 2009, 11:07 AM
I found this interesting, apparently people can't buy an iphone online from AT&T delivered to NY. However, you can still get it at stores.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/28/iphone.sales.nyc/index.html

What do you guys think? Fraud? Just a glitch? Or desperate measure by AT&T to stop the congestion?

Slip Jigs
Dec 28, 2009, 11:12 AM
I found this interesting, apparently people can't buy an iphone online from AT&T delivered to NY. However, you can still get it at stores.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/28/iphone.sales.nyc/index.html

What do you guys think? Fraud? Just a glitch? Or desperate measure by AT&T to stop the congestion?

Umm - did you read any of this thread at all?

kmiahali
Dec 28, 2009, 11:32 AM
This is another one of AT&Ts stupid moves alongside their battle wit Verizon and their boring commercials with Luke Wilson...

crisss1205
Dec 28, 2009, 12:35 PM
http://consumerist.com/2009/12/att-customer-service-new-york-city-is-not-ready-for-the-iphone.html

A call from .........]AT&T, you're an embarrassment.[/B] Apple had better make sure this exclusivity ends next year. This is about as ridiculous as it can get.

This is old news I have been trying for over a month and a half to look at iPhone prices on AT&T's website and have had the same thing.

digiguy23
Dec 28, 2009, 01:17 PM
All the other Cellular providers is no different. I cancelled Verizon because of the lack of customer support in their stores and I had constant dropped calls.

As as for buying the iPhone, I replaced my iPhone 3G with the 3GS through the Online Apple Store. Came to my front door in 3 days. NO headaches, NO problems.

str1f3
Dec 28, 2009, 01:26 PM
This is old news I have been trying for over a month and a half to look at iPhone prices on AT&T's website and have had the same thing.

Yeah I just realized that yesterday. Also I tried using a Long Island zip code and it still would not work. Apparenty they are blocking all of NY state.

Kwill
Dec 28, 2009, 01:27 PM
In other words, no one asked really knows the reason but could not keep their lips from moving.

rdowns
Dec 28, 2009, 01:29 PM
AT&T now selling iPhones to New Yorkers again (http://www.9to5mac.com/)



http://www.9to5mac.com/files/Screen%20shot%202009-12-28%20at%201.43.17%20PM.png

str1f3
Dec 28, 2009, 01:49 PM
AT&T now selling iPhones to New Yorkers again (http://www.9to5mac.com/)



http://www.9to5mac.com/files/Screen%20shot%202009-12-28%20at%201.43.17%20PM.png

But...But what about the frauds and ID thefts? :rolleyes:

rdowns
Dec 28, 2009, 02:05 PM
But...But what about the frauds and ID thefts? :rolleyes:

Seriously, who really cares about this?

panzer06
Dec 28, 2009, 02:25 PM
This may just be the beginning. The article in Wired talks about "Data Hogs" and how ATT has been trying to get them to throttle back their usage. How, I don't know. I've been noticing more and more dropped calls on 3G as of late, so much that I have to disable it just to be able to make and complete a call.


snip

I regularly disable 3G so I can make calls. On long road trips I drive with a Verizon powered WiFi Access Point so I can have data (wifi) and AT&T's Edge network. Way, way, way. way too many dropped calls on 3G. No way to get through a 20 min con call using AT&T's 3G network (though I suspect the iphone itself may cause some of these drops).

Cheers,

kdarling
Dec 28, 2009, 03:00 PM
Seriously, who really cares about this?

Right.

CNN putting a news link on their home page must mean nobody is interested.

:rolleyes:

rdowns
Dec 28, 2009, 03:16 PM
Right.

CNN putting a news link on their home page must mean nobody is interested.

:rolleyes:


This is nothing more than manufactured non news.

kdarling
Dec 28, 2009, 03:59 PM
This is nothing more than manufactured non news.

You're right. So is most stuff on this forum.

It doesn't stop people from being interested in reading about carrier fumbles. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.

scaredpoet
Dec 28, 2009, 04:12 PM
It doesn't stop people from being interested in reading about carrier fumbles. It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.

Nor does it stop people from letting their fingers fly on the keyboard before they know all the facts. :rolleyes:

jo0
Dec 28, 2009, 05:45 PM
at&t just confuses me... :confused:

str1f3
Dec 28, 2009, 05:53 PM
Nor does it stop people from letting their fingers fly on the keyboard before they know all the facts. :rolleyes:

LOL, yeah facts…Like you saying The Consumerist was lying for web hits even though AT&T brought out the girl to recant her statement. Or you coming up figures that say 1.2% of all NYers are subject to credit theft and assuming half were so thieves could buy iPhones. Or summizing that this was the real problem only for AT&T to change their policy a day later. LOL, yeah facts…

ablack774
Dec 28, 2009, 08:03 PM
AT&T should have really have sorted out all those problems by now considering the length of time the iphone has been out. Just about everywhere in the world exclusivity has ended or just about to end, hopefully Verizon will get the iphone. AT&T has really damaged the iphones reputation and probably put more people off buying the iphone and going for a alternative. :apple:

jimmyjoemccrow
Dec 28, 2009, 11:29 PM
No, I said and say nothing of the sort. What I said is that it sounds like the Counsumerist talked to a call center employee who didn't know what was actually going on. The Consumerist was not lying, nor was AT&T lying; the call center employee wasn't even lying...s/he was just talking out of his or her ass. Call center employees are underpaid and under-trained, and half the time I think they're just trying to BS their way through the day. It has happened many times before that a low-level employee who is not even close to the loop has said something that has to be walked back by management. Always such things become gospel and remain fodder for conspiracy theorists. This strikes me as one of those cases.

This was the correct answer on the first page. The thread should have ended there tbh.

Call Centre staff are given a set of answers to the most common problems that occur and they aren't paid enough to troubleshoot a problem (in fact their performance is usually judged by how many queries they can handle in a day). They will simply give the first answer they can find from their list that sounds like it answers the query.

wonderbread57
Dec 29, 2009, 12:11 AM
This is the stupidest POS news. AM I RIGHT? Can't buy an iPhone ONLINE in NY for a day and something is interesting about this? I can't believe CNBC is so anxiously awaiting tablet and new iphone news that they think this is significant.

str1f3
Dec 29, 2009, 12:52 AM
This is the stupidest POS news. AM I RIGHT? Can't buy an iPhone ONLINE in NY for a day and something is interesting about this? I can't believe CNBC is so anxiously awaiting tablet and new iphone news that they think this is significant.

This has been going on for a long time. You could not order an iPhone for at least for the past month from AT&T in New York state. I know. I tried and family members have tried as well. I thought it was a website error originally until criss1205 had mentioned it. It's just that nobody had checked this out until a couple of days ago.

alent1234
Dec 29, 2009, 07:43 AM
But...But what about the frauds and ID thefts? :rolleyes:


some other blog said this was all a scam by apple to get people into the 20 or so apple stores in the NYC area to upsell them crap

poohbear67
Dec 29, 2009, 11:41 PM
I worked for what was then called Cingular and was in the New York section, and I can honestly tell you New Yorkers are a breed of their own. We got calls constantly about dropped signals, but when probed it was because they were in a subway. Towers are abundant in the NYC area so it is amazing they have discontinued them.

New Yorkers probably and appreciate the iPhone more than anyone else who has them.

davelanger
Jan 3, 2010, 11:43 AM
My towns on the list. North Jersey (in Bergen County) town. Awesome.

How does Apple let AT&T get away with this.

Its simple, if Apple wants out of their contact with ATT, then let them do things like this, where Apple can say ATT is breaching their contract and making apple lose sales. So because of this apple is going to break their contract legally.

alent1234
Jan 4, 2010, 10:47 AM
I worked for what was then called Cingular and was in the New York section, and I can honestly tell you New Yorkers are a breed of their own. We got calls constantly about dropped signals, but when probed it was because they were in a subway. Towers are abundant in the NYC area so it is amazing they have discontinued them.

New Yorkers probably and appreciate the iPhone more than anyone else who has them.


lately i'm getting a signal in a quite a few places in the NYC subway on my iphone. i'll be waiting for the train and next thing you know my phone vibrates.