Apple Card Monthly Financing No Longer Available for SIM-Free iPhones

[MacRumors]

Apple today updated its U.S. Apple Card Monthly Installment plan to require those who use the feature to purchase an iPhone that is linked to AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile. With this change, the Apple Card Monthly Installment plan can no longer be used to purchase a SIM-free iPhone.

All iPhones purchased through the Apple Card Monthly Installment plan are unlocked so carrier switching is available at any point, but at purchase, customers will need to have a plan with a supported carrier. Buying a SIM-free iPhone and linking it to a carrier like Mint Mobile will no longer be possible using installments.

Apple announced these changes in an updated support document back in June, and the monthly installment plan has officially been updated. Prior to now, Apple Card installments could be used to purchase an iPhone online with the option to connect to a carrier at a later date, which allowed customers to buy an iPhone and then link it to any carrier of their choosing.

Apple already required customers using Apple Card installments to choose one of the main three carriers when in stores, and now the online policy matches the in-store policy.

With the Apple Card Monthly Installment plan, Apple Card holders can pay for their devices over a 24-month period with 0% APR and 3% Daily Cash back on payments.

Apple today is also changing the monthly installment term for the Apple Watch, and customers will be required to pay off the device over 12 months instead of 24 months. Apple now uses a 12-month term for Apple Watch, Macs, displays, and iPads, with the 24-month term limited to the iPhone.

Article Link: Apple Card Monthly Financing No Longer Available for SIM-Free iPhones

 

[bmolands]

We're so close to losing 0% on new Apple Products. I wouldn't be surprised with the iPhone 15 launch if Apple Card Monthly Installments move to a non-zero APR. Something like 0.99 or 1.99 wouldn't be surprising.

 

[sunny5]

Wow, seriously? I just checked online and for those of you using SIM free iPhone will have to pay iPhone in full price only! What a jerk. Can't even pay it monthly.

 

[stark93]

wtf … Why? This was almost the only reason I have an Apple Card.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

Crazy that the carriers have this much pull with Apple.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

Does this fall under Anti Trust?

 

[AlinomyTomy]

Jesus, I’m sitting here with my Apple Card anxiously awaiting the new phones to replace a backup 6 I’ve been on for the last month, and Apple pulls this? The Apple Card just lost a ton of value to me, personally.

 

[jz0309]

That’s a really stupid move, have been buying unlocked phones for a long time…

 

[jent]

Would Apple choose this change for a particular reason or is this being strong-armed by the wireless carriers? Apple has so much influence that I don't see how the latter option would play out but I can't imagine any other scenario.

 

[sw1tcher]

What was the length of time before for the watch? 24 months?

2nd to last sentence of the post...

Apple today is also changing the monthly installment term for the Apple Watch, and customers will be required to pay off the device over 12 months instead of 24 months.

 

[bmustaf]

Is the "all phones are unlocked" statement a new thing? Because ATT was most definitely locking iPhones on their network that they had no other entitlement/right to lock as late as last week because mine I purchased using this option was most definitely locked and would not accept another SIM without calling ATT to get them to follow the rule (and law in this case, you cannot market a phone as unlocked and then SIM lock it).

ATT has consistently been very aggressive about locking phones they have no actual right or business locking IME. They will unlock it when you call them out on it, but, really, that is unethical and sleazy to say the least.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Dumb move!

Sounds like Apple wants consumers to pay for the Sim-Free iPhones up front.

 

[profwafflez]

Does this fall under Anti Trust?

I'm not sure of the legality of the label, but in spirit I certainly agree. Card just lost a ton of value.

 

[xxray]

This is really frustrating. Us prepaid users always get the bottom of the barrel when it comes to stuff like this. Reminds me of when sim-free iPhones weren’t available until a month or two after launch. What’s the logic behind this move?

 

[AlinomyTomy]

Is the "all phones are unlocked" statement a new thing? Because ATT was most definitely locking iPhones on their network that they had no other entitlement/right to lock as late as last week because mine I purchased using this option was most definitely locked and would not accept another SIM without calling ATT to get them to follow the rule (and law in this case, you cannot market a phone as unlocked and then SIM lock it).

ATT has consistently been very aggressive about locking phones they have no actual right or business locking IME. They will unlock it when you call them out on it, but, really, that is unethical and sleazy to say the least.

All the ones Apple sells have been unlocked, even with a SIM included, but carriers and big box stores do sell locked versions.

 

[msackey]

So why is the ability to have an installment plan linked with needing to be tethered to one of those carriers? Are the carriers supplementing this installment plan? Is that why?

 

[surfzen21]

Dumb move!

Sounds like Apple wants consumers to pay for the Sim-Free iPhones up front.

Yeah, this is a bad move IMO.

I have a feeling I will get a better deal though a carrier like ATT which I may choose to do.

 

[nylon]

In Canada 0% financing from Apple's financing partner has already gone the way of the Dodo.

 

[jz0309]

What is driving 24 months for iPhone? Competing deal with the carriers? Not understanding the logic…

I did purchase my 13PM sim-free on 24 months 0 interest, which was attractive, now, with Apple Card I’m just getting 3%, which is decent but far less attractive.

And I will never sign up for carrier financing anymore even though I’ve been with VZ for over 10 years…

 

[GMShadow]

Crazy that the carriers have this much pull with Apple.

This is potentially Goldman pushing for it.

Does this fall under Anti Trust?

This has literally nothing to do with antitrust law.

Is the "all phones are unlocked" statement a new thing? Because ATT was most definitely locking iPhones on their network that they had no other entitlement/right to lock as late as last week because mine I purchased using this option was most definitely locked and would not accept another SIM without calling ATT to get them to follow the rule (and law in this case, you cannot market a phone as unlocked and then SIM lock it).

ATT has consistently been very aggressive about locking phones they have no actual right or business locking IME. They will unlock it when you call them out on it, but, really, that is unethical and sleazy to say the least.

ATT is a substandard carrier, so I'm not surprised. Verizon's phones are unlocked by default.

 

[nikhsub1]

Does this fall under Anti Trust?

Don't think so...

 

[kol77]

Hmmm... I will assume that third party billers/accounts - such as Xfinity Mobile, Spectrum Mobile - don't qualify either though they ride on Verizon network. Not a real "Verizon" account. Bummer.

 

[hockeyfan81]

We're so close to losing 0% on new Apple Products. I wouldn't be surprised with the iPhone 15 launch if Apple Card Monthly Installments move to a non-zero APR. Something like 0.99 or 1.99 wouldn't be surprising.

we already did in Canada.

 

[averagenerd81]

I was considering an "upgrade" (the 13 Pro is still awesome) but will no longer. I'll wait a few more years since the "free money" has dried up.

 

[mknelson]

I'm not sure what the situation is in the US, but in Canada the commission for activating a phone on a contract far exceeds the margin on an iPhone.

That's the pull the carriers have.