A New iPhone Will Cost You More than Ever Before

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by JWSandi, May 7, 2012.

  1. unlimitedx, May 7, 2012
    Last edited: May 7, 2012

    unlimitedx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    #2
    i will gladly pay the full price for an iphone if they offer rate plans that are LOWER for BYOD, similar to tmobile's value plans. but it seems like the carriers want to keep charging existing rates (which are supposedly higher to make up the subsidy) while discouraging phone upgrades..
     
  2. Leonard1818 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2011
    #3
    already a thread on this. not gonna happen (easily).
     
  3. aneftp macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #4
    Once again the author of the article is an idiot.

    He makes example of iPhone costing $200 now on contract.

    Than he says with Verizon's new $30 upgrade fee. New iPhone will cost $230.

    Hello? The $30 upgrade fee applies to all upgrades. Like the Gnex is $199 on contract. It will now cost $230 also. What a idiot writer. It seems like these tech writers are trying to write to people with a 6th grade education.

    Also. If Verizon wasn't happy with the subsidy. They can elect to sell the subsidized iPhone at $299 16gb instead of $199. It's Verizons call. The ball is in their corner. That's what the CEO gets paid to do. Make the decision. Who blinks?

    Go ahead and reduce the subsidy. See what happens. It's a free world and capital market. I think the CEO has no balls to make that call. He knows he will lose subscribers if that happens. Shareholders (I am both AT&T and Verizon shareholder) like me understand it's a love/hate relationship with apple. But it's a necessary deal they have to make with Apple.
     
  4. nuckinfutz macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #5
    I hope they do

    If they succeeded in eliminating subsidy then I'm free to take my phone to whatever carrier I want.
     
  5. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #6
    Likely wont happen because it would hurt the device manufacturer's business too much. Many of us would not be getting a new iphone every 2 years for $699. People are still using their original 3g and 3gs. And the rate at which android devices are pooped out would slow down drastically.

    Besides, we pay the subsidy with their outrageous prices. $30 for texting? Really? It costs AT&T tenth's of a penny to send a text message. Talk about a large profit margin.
     
  6. bandofbrothers macrumors 601

    bandofbrothers

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Location:
    Uk
    #7
    It's a matter of disposable income.

    I personally prefer not to be locked into any long term contract and purchase mine on payg or sim free.
     
  7. Apple fanboy macrumors P6

    Apple fanboy

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Behind the Lens, UK
    #8
    I do the same. I'm free to switch when I want to, and sell on when I want to. £15 a month is all I have paid for the length of time I've owned an iPhone. That suits me and makes financial sense when you add it up.
     
  8. aneftp macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #9
    People here just do not understand the USA subsidy game.

    Verizon and other carriers only pay $450 in bulk for high end android devices. They still try to sell those same devices on contract for $199-299. Like Verizon prices LTE flagship new phones for $299 on contract.

    So Verizon really is subsidizing you $150 for the LTE galaxy nexus when it was released in December 2011.

    Verizon is subsidizing the iPhone at $400.

    Sure amazon may sell the galaxy nexus for $99 or less on contract. But that requires a 181 day data commitment and some of us keep ghost lines and will not want to pay $99 for a gnex cause it will end up costing us $180 for 6 months of mandatory data from amazon.

    So Verizon doesn't want and say its the iPhone that's causing these profits to erode. But it is the iPhone.

    But at the same time. If Verizon can't sell these high end android devices for $199/299 on contract. And we've seen them all lowered to as little as 1 penny on amazon. That means Verizon still ends up eating $400 plus to move an android device that isn't selling that they have committed themselves to.

    It's like the GM vs Lexus model. GM (android) can sell more. But more GM cars still sit on the car lot for more days. And GM can only more cars with heavier subsidies.

    Whereas a Lexus may cost more. But Lexus cars are designed to sell quickly so dealers do not have to discount any more than the selling subsidized price.

    ----------

    You cannot take a Verizon iPhone to any carrier. In the USA CDMA carriers like Verizon will not let you do that. Short of illegally flashing a phone to use on some prepaid carriers that also use CDMA. It's a pain in the butt to use a Verizon phone on another network.
     
  9. nuckinfutz macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #10
    The 4S supports both CDMA and GSM and if i'm not getting a subsidy i'm not buying a locked phone.
     
  10. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #11
    You'll be surprised with how much power Apple COULD have. I wouldn't be surprised if they tell Verizon what they are going to sell it for.

    A lot of companies do this. You'll look for a deal but find it for the exact price no matter where you look. It's because the manufacture set the price. Like life proof cases, 79.99 on amazon, lp's web page, at best buy, doesn't matter. LP set the price. It's annoying when bargain shopping.

    Cobb Motorsports was another one. I had to do a back room deal to get a couple parts from them at a discount from one of their venders. Very hush hush and very dumb but it was something to do with an agreement to sell their products.
     
  11. aneftp macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #12
    You do not have a choice with Verizon. There is no way to buy an unlocked full price iPhone 4s and use it on Verizon. Verizon locks down the iPhone 4S to their network in the USA. Verizon will unlock it for gsm outside the USA. But you cannot use a Verizon iPhone 4S on any gsm carriers in the USA.
     
  12. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #13
    Edit : then again Verizon may just want to stay competitive.
     
  13. aneftp macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #14
    Verizon also has the choice not to carry the iPhone. US Cellular the sixth largest carrier made the decision not to carry the iPhone.

    Verizon CEO. Stop complaining about subsidies. He can easily end the contract with apple. The real issue is Verizon needs AT&T to team up and go into the bargaining table with Apple. But the FCC will frown if they find AT&T and Verizon are teaming up against Apple. That could lead the FCC to force AT&T and Verizon to break up valuable assets they have acquired the last 10 years.
     
  14. Arnezie macrumors 65816

    Arnezie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2011
  15. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #16
    No one is forcing these carriers to have the iphone

    Clearly, these carriers are benefiting from the iphone, even before they raised rates.....or they wouldn't have the iphone

    They are raising rates because they want more money and people will pay. Nothing to do about the iphone breaking the carriers
     
  16. chiefpavvy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    #17
    Good. If you can't afford to buy the phone outright ($599 to $799?) you should not have one to begin with. Just my opinion.

    I don't do contracts and I laugh at the fools who keep going in like clockwork for their "$99 phone", apparently math wasn't their specialty.
     
  17. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #18
    So what do you do? Pay full price every year while using the same network? Not like you get cheaper plans for not having a subsidized phone
     
  18. aneftp macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #19
    In the USA post paid carriers charge same monthly price regardless if you buy full price vs subsidized price. There is no incentive to buy full price phones.

    For individual plans it's the worst ripoff to be on a post paid plan. Individual not on a family plan are better off paying full price and using on a prepaid carrier like straight talk.

    But for those that prefer Verizon network. They are stuck paying high prices. And only way to reduce those prices is be part of a family plan. Which 60% of Verizon subscribers are part of family plans.
     
  19. Leonard1818 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2011
    #20
    yeah, I was with you for the first part:

    I can't tell you how many people I see who can hardly afford to feed/clothe themselves and I see them on a(n) (current) iPhone. Ridiclulous.

    BUT when it came to the second part:
    sorry, I don't get it... why NOT let Verizon pay for $400 of my phone? I don't intend to go to a different carrier... so why would I go out and buy one on my own and continue to use Verizon when I could have had them subsidize the cost? I really don't get it... apparently "logic" and "elaboration" isn't your specialty.... :rolleyes:
     
  20. lilo777 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    #21
    Which device manufacturers? Nobody gets this level of subsidies but Apple. Wireless providers are unhappy specifically with Apple subsidies and if they reduced subsidies for iPhone that would only be fair. Apple makes enormous profits at the expense of wireless providers. Their profits would decrease but they would still be doing just fine.
     
  21. chiefpavvy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    #22
    Well 50% ain't so bad :D

    I agree - see a lot of folks who obviously can't afford iThings. But here in the USA we are "entitled" to it, whether we can afford it or not. Or so we think.

    For your situation with Verizon I agree - just realize they aren't really paying $400 of your phone. You are paying them what $2400 to $2800 every 2 years for service...guess how inflated that is and how much profit they rake in...

    I prefer to spend the $700 or $800 up-front, no chains, no commitments. I can use whatever prepaid flavor of the day suits me for pennies compared to Big Red or Big Blue. Just my use case I realize it is different for every one.
     
  22. Xgm541 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #23
    If getting rid of subsidizing would mean paying $649.99 for an i4s or $549.99 for an HTC one, it would likely mean that people would be reluctant to upgrade their devices every two years. Apple and HTC both get paid the full price regardless if its subsidized or not. People buying devices less frequently means less profits for device manufacturers, I hope this isnt an incorrect assumption...

    Although I do understand apple's profit margins are huge compared to wireless providers, I somehow do not feel cheated by Apple whereas I feel cheated that my unlimited data plan is now capped at 3gb and slowed to a crawl thereafter. If perhaps no subsidy meant lower monthly bills for customers then I would surely agree, but even with subsidy the wireless carriers end up making that money back in their overpriced plans.
     
  23. hotboy macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    #24
    I could be wrong, but don't they require a 2 year commitment with a minimum data & voice on all iPhones leaving the store?

    I asked about this at both ATT and Verizon. :eek:

    That said, if i could... I would just use the data only to text and skype.
     
  24. babyj macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    #25
    There didn't seem to be much in the way of actual subsidies in the UK the last time I checked. It worked out pretty much the same whether you bought the phone yourself and got the lower monthly SIM only rate, or bought the phone cheaper and signed up for a 12-24 month contract.

    Sure the network covers the cost upfront but they get that back via higher payments over the length of the contract.
     

Share This Page