Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

T-Mobile Launches New Ad Calling AT&T's 'Next' Upgrade Program 'Calculating, Sneaky, and Underhanded'

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,489
30,727



Following the introduction of T-Mobile's "Jump" and AT&T's "Next" early upgrade programs, T-Mobile has launched a new anti-AT&T ad campaign that calls the company's Next policies "calculating, sneaky, and underhanded," reports AllThingsD.

First introduced last week, Next is AT&T's answer to Jump, a T-Mobile program that allows users to upgrade their phones at regular intervals with a $10 monthly fee. Like Jump, Next provides AT&T users with an option to upgrade their phones more frequently, but its $32.50 monthly charge is on top of standard monthly fees, ultimately causing customers to pay double for their devices.

A comparison of the two plans reveals that a T-Mobile customer using Jump would pay $518 for a 16 GB iPhone 5 over the course of a year while a customer using Next would pay $630, a premium of $112. With both plans, customers have to trade in existing devices and pay the monthly fees in order to obtain an upgrade.

T-Mobile CEO John Legere has been vocal about AT&T Next since its debut, releasing a number of tweets condemning the program. The company's newest ad includes a quote from The Verge that Legere highlighted last week: "AT&T's reaction to T-Mobile's transparency is to be more deceptive than ever."

tmobileantiattad.jpg
Verizon has also introduced an upgrade program called "Edge," which shares similarities with AT&T's Next program. A 16 GB iPhone 5 costs $565 on the plan. According to T-Mobile marketing chief Mike Sievert, Verizon will be targeted in ads set to run later this week.

"There are real and material differences between what we are doing and the so-called upgrade programs that AT&T and Verizon are doing," he said.

T-Mobile and AT&T have an ongoing feud that originally began in 2011 after AT&T was unable to purchase the T-Mobile network due to objections from the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice.

Tensions ramped up in January after Legere called the AT&T network "crap," leading to an advertising war between the two companies as T-Mobile unveiled its "Un-Carrier" policies, designed to decouple device fees from service fees.

Article Link: T-Mobile Launches New Ad Calling AT&T's 'Next' Upgrade Program 'Calculating, Sneaky, and Underhanded'
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/23/t-mobile-launches-new-ad-calling-atts-next-upgrade-program-calculating-sneaky-and-underhanded/
TheShinyMac

TheShinyMac

macrumors 6502a
Apr 3, 2009
660
0
AT&T has really been horrible recently for me,

Noticeably slower, crappy support, all while being with them for years!
 
G

grassfeeder

macrumors regular
Jun 9, 2009
121
50
Because attacking your competition in the media looks really good to consumers.

I'd shy away from them just because of their ad stance.
 
3

3282868

macrumors 603
Jan 8, 2009
5,281
0
This **** is turning into an episode out of "Melrose Place." Aaron Spelling would be proud.
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_mlrwo7jyoW1rfno67o5_250.gif
    tumblr_mlrwo7jyoW1rfno67o5_250.gif
    1.4 MB · Views: 3,594
Last edited:
Caliber26

Caliber26

macrumors 68020
Sep 25, 2009
2,325
3,637
Orlando, FL
I've owned every iPhone since the 2nd-generation but this year I will not upgrade regardless of what "incentive" these companies are offering. I signed up for a new 2-year agreement last September, when I got the iPhone 5, but I don't want to pay a penny more to AT&T (on top of the phone subsidy) for an iPhone 5S. I'll gladly sit this one out and wait for an iPhone 6 and not pay ridiculous fees.
 
S

slrandall

macrumors 6502
Jun 15, 2011
412
0
T-mobile would be a lot more enticing if their coverage wasn't so terrible where I live, and if I actually felt the need to upgrade my phone more often than once every two years.
 
KdParker

KdParker

macrumors 601
Oct 1, 2010
4,793
998
Everywhere
I hope Verizon and AT&T both bring down the cost of these plans and/or reduce the data plans cost with the plan.

So how I doubt that will happen.
 
zemaker

zemaker

macrumors 6502
Nov 25, 2011
284
164
When my contract expires w/ AT&T this year, I am moving to T-mobile...

AT&T is truly a greedy corp, not that all companies aren't but AT&T is truly the worst of the worst.
 
S

sesnir

macrumors 6502
Sep 21, 2008
366
287
Paying that much and still having to turn in the phone is a deal breaker on any network.
 
R

rickdollar

macrumors 6502
Mar 12, 2007
473
24
grassfeeder said:
Because attacking your competition in the media looks really good to consumers.

I'd shy away from them just because of their ad stance.
Click to expand...

In most cases I would agree with you. I've been a happy AT&T customer for years (I know, SHOCKING!) but they really do deserve to be called out on their Next program.
 
N

newdeal

macrumors 68030
Oct 21, 2009
2,510
1,769
Wait so you have to pay $630 for an iphone 5 AND then you have to trade it in at the end of the year? Seriously? That is absurd
 
L

Lord Hamsa

macrumors 6502a
Jul 16, 2013
698
675
I'm liking T-Mobile's attitude more and more as time goes by. If I can be convinced their network is in good shape, I may just switch to them next year when my contract with AT&T expires.

A bold new approach to data usage would seal the deal. My proposal: drop bandwidth-based data plans and go with unlimited data with priority-based throttling. Based on your amount of usage, the system could throttle your bandwidth on as as-needed basis during peak times, while giving you essentially unlimited unthrottled use during non-peak times. I mean, why should data transmitted over a virtually empty network at, say 4am be treated the same as heavy usage time during the middle of the day?

With such a scheme, those who make the heaviest use during peak times would see their speeds throttled accordingly to give other folks a chance, but be perfectly free to go with heavy use in light periods. True power users could pay for a premium level of service that increases their base priority or limits the amount of throttling they can be subject to.

It's simpler and fairer for the customer, and there's no reason this can't be built into any kind of modern computing system.
 
J

jackwagen0

macrumors newbie
Jul 23, 2013
3
0
Had AT&T for a year after the iPhone 4 came out. Went back to Verizon once they got the iPhone. AT&T is seriously that bad.
 
jahsavi

jahsavi

macrumors member
Oct 3, 2007
98
12
I'm recently engaged and will have to start my own family plan soon when I'm free of contact in less than a year. I will be considering T-MOBILE or the StraitTalk network (which is basically t-mobile)..
 
Last edited:
Derekuda

Derekuda

Suspended
Oct 2, 2004
370
1,382
grassfeeder said:
Because attacking your competition in the media looks really good to consumers.

I'd shy away from them just because of their ad stance.
Click to expand...

That just proves you don't know anything about advertising. Were you just born yesterday?
 
D

drewyboy

macrumors 65816
Jan 27, 2005
1,385
1,467
Lord Hamsa said:
I'm liking T-Mobile's attitude more and more as time goes by. If I can be convinced their network is in good shape, I may just switch to them next year when my contract with AT&T expires.

A bold new approach to data usage would seal the deal. My proposal: drop bandwidth-based data plans and go with unlimited data with priority-based throttling. Based on your amount of usage, the system could throttle your bandwidth on as as-needed basis during peak times, while giving you essentially unlimited unthrottled use during non-peak times. I mean, why should data transmitted over a virtually empty network at, say 4am be treated the same as heavy usage time during the middle of the day?

With such a scheme, those who make the heaviest use during peak times would see their speeds throttled accordingly to give other folks a chance, but be perfectly free to go with heavy use in light periods. True power users could pay for a premium level of service that increases their base priority or limits the amount of throttling they can be subject to.

It's simpler and fairer for the customer, and there's no reason this can't be built into any kind of modern computing system.
Click to expand...

Sounds good in a Utopian world but this is AT&T we're talking about. They'd throttle everyone just to save bandwidth. Their "algorithm" would be a trade secret so no one could technically pin it on them.
 
P

pk7

macrumors 6502
Sep 27, 2011
441
64
They speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

That being said, T-Mobile isn't always the cream of the crop either.
 
Last edited:
J

jebbe

macrumors 6502
Jun 16, 2009
490
8
Louisville, KY
zemaker said:
When my contract expires w/ AT&T this year, I am moving to T-mobile...

AT&T is truly a greedy corp, not that all companies aren't but AT&T is truly the worst of the worst.
Click to expand...

I'm jumping ship too, I'll take somewhat spotty service(in my area) versus a higher bill for no real reason. Also don't want to give anymore money to AT&T and their garbage they keep spitting out.

Also my service has been iffy lately with them, sometimes I can have 5 bars of "4g" and can't even get on Facebook or load a webpage in a rural area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom