i know that but for whatever reason there is always a time constraint with my purchases. just my luck i guess. I need the phone by a certain date and att didnt have any..walmart didnt have any and i refuse to walk into a best buy. so my options included the apple store. i did make plans with the primary account holder to carry my hand and walk into an apple store in a few days...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Screws Me Twice: Won't Let "Authorized User" Upgrade
- Thread starter SuparShadow
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i know that but for whatever reason there is always a time constraint with my purchases. just my luck i guess. I need the phone by a certain date and att didnt have any..walmart didnt have any and i refuse to walk into a best buy. so my options included the apple store. i did make plans with the primary account holder to carry my hand and walk into an apple store in a few days...
I walked into best buy got 2 32GB 3Gs. Plopped down $100 in reward dollars from Christmas shopping, paid the rest on debit and in 20 minutes was walking out.
I would rather go to best buy than the chaotic apple store. Well both 3gs phone are back in their boxes we reverted back to the 3G phones because of jailbreaking abilities. The 3Gs's haven't seen daylight sine june 20th
I think you should have your mom order it for you online from Apple and have it shipped to you...scratch your gift card and give her the code so you can use that....
I'm not sure that you completely understood some people that said your old phone will be completely useable until you personally activate that new phone when you get it in the mail...
Secondly, I would suggest asking people in your area on Macrumors, what store they went to where they were allowed to upgrade their phone without being the primary..it is possible you just go to a store that follows the rules more carefully and maybe another will be better...how bout asking if you can have your mom on the phone when you walk in to authorize the purchase.
Those are my suggestions, eventually you have to stop railing against the stupidity of the policy and just accept that you have to work around it to solve your problem.
I'm not sure that you completely understood some people that said your old phone will be completely useable until you personally activate that new phone when you get it in the mail...
Secondly, I would suggest asking people in your area on Macrumors, what store they went to where they were allowed to upgrade their phone without being the primary..it is possible you just go to a store that follows the rules more carefully and maybe another will be better...how bout asking if you can have your mom on the phone when you walk in to authorize the purchase.
Those are my suggestions, eventually you have to stop railing against the stupidity of the policy and just accept that you have to work around it to solve your problem.
So let me try to get this big mess understood properly.
Apple is not going to magically change the way it interfaces with AT&T to appease you.
- The OP wants an iPhone 3G S
- He is qualified to get it for $200
- Apple won't let him because he isn't primary (which isn't the Apple's fault mind you)
- He wants to use a 10% off coupon on a already discounted phone (which I guess he understands, but still included in his angry email)
- He wants to use his $25 gift card
- He won't order it himself through AT&T because he wants to use his $25 gift card and values the $25 gift card over the time he has invested ranting on this issue?
- He is unaware AT&T is doing some cracking down, and having the last 4 digits of the social is no longer enough at MANY AT&T places. Someone went to go get something done and they had my last 4 digits and that wasn't enough, they needed me there.
- He is authorized, even though that doesn't carry over to Apple stores
- He thinks ordering a new iPhone 3G S will deactivate his current phone until the new one arrives? Not true.
Apple is not going to magically change the way it interfaces with AT&T to appease you.
bruinsrme said:
Then you'd better not add anyone as an authorized user on your account, because AT&T will let them do precisely that.
AT&T is the one with the liability here, not Best Buy, not Apple, etc. AT&T is the one who risks having an invalid contract on its hands and losing money through the subsidy it pays on the phones and the profits from the data plan, not Apple. It's not going into unknown territory; there's no financial, legal, or physical reason that Apple needs to impose this policy when even AT&T doesn't, and AT&T has already set a precedent for permitting it.
Not to mention that, for the sake of argument, I could still just go on apple.com,order the phone myself, and extend the contract on my line without ever letting the accountholder know. So the "consumer protection" argument is a little shaky, considering it's not implemented very consistently.
bruinsrme said:
What are you talking about? His post says he's married; in most jurisdictions, you have to be at least 18 to pull off that feat. You keep harping about age, but that has nothing to do with anything. The Apple Store employees don't know what my relation is to the accountholder, and they don't know have the accountholder's DOB, so they can't tell whether the accountholder is 3 years older than me or 35 years older than me.
uberamd said:
1. How are we deciding that it isn't Apple's fault? AT&T will let me waltz into a store and do it, Best Buy and Wal-Mart allow customers to do the same... seems like the lone holdout here is Apple.
2. Considering the 10% coupon was given to me as compensation for poor customer service in the first place, and the manager who gave it to me said it was good on anything in the store, yeah, it's worth including in my e-mail. Now, okay, apparently it turns out it isn't good on anything in the store, but someone should have probably clarified that when they were sucking up to "make things right" after my problems at the Genius Bar.
3. I don't know how your account is set up, obviously, but you need the last 4 digits of the SSN and must be listed as an authorized user to make changes at an AT&T store. Was your friend listed as an authorized user? Because from everything I've heard, AT&T stores won't give them (and haven't given me) any problems regarding this, so I don't know where you heard they're "cracking down."
4. I know ordering a new iPhone online won't deactivate my current phone until the new one arrives. The iPhone specialist suggested having the accountholder physically visit an Apple Store in California, buy a phone there, and then ship it to me (privately and at her expense) to New York. That would have rendered my phone useless because the new one would have been activated upon purchase in California.
But that's a moot; I'm not upgrading for the hell of it, I'm replacing a broken phone. My phone is already nonfunctioning, and the longer it takes to get a new one, the longer I'm without a working phone — activation issues notwithstanding.
Xtgirl said:
That is what I'm going to do. Although I can order it online myself, since the online store doesn't require anything but the SSN on the account to verify whether I'm authorized to do so. (Which is why this policy is so stupid in the first place; if the workaround is so simple, then what's the point of having a physical retail store? apparently not convenience.)
Xtgirl said:
No, I got this. And if I were simply upgrading because I wanted to, that'd be fine, but I'm replacing my existing phone because my current one is broken and out of warranty.
To be honest, I had been dragging my heels on the 3GS (and never upgraded to a 3G) because I didn't think it offered that much more over my iPhone, I didn't particularly want to extend my contract again, and the 3G data plan is going to hike my bill by $10 each month.
Do I have to get an iPhone? No. And that's where Apple fails — I now have more incentive to go out and by a Blackberry or some cheapo phone instead. I'm not going to, I'm going to get an iPhone anyway, because it's the best piece of technology available for my needs and Apple is its only manufacturer, but it's lousy business sense to rely on that monopoly to make money.
Xtgirl said:
uberamd said:
I think this is the mentality that's driving me nuts here (although you've been more polite about it than several other posters). This kind of issue isn't always as simple as "if you don't like what we have to offer or our rules, buy from someone else." Can I get the rule changed? Can I get someone to make an exception for me? Probably not, and even if I could, it'd probably just extend the hassle of the whole mess to begin with. And I certainly never expect to have exceptions made for me.
However, that doesn't mean that, as consumers, we should also just lie down and let companies walk all over us with assbackwards rules and policies that: 1.) don't make sense and are at our inconvenience, and 2.) are ultimately poor business practice for the company involved.
And I'm sure some of you will complain about how whining about my "convenience" is "acting entitled" or spoiled or whatever, but the fact of the matter it hat convenience is what they're selling. Apple, in particular, markets itself on its products' ease-of-use, simplicity, consumer friendliness, and advertises its retail stores as a unique and efficient customer experience. This particular policy pretty much goes against all of those principles.
Letting Apple know that isn't necessarily synonymous with "bitching and moaning." It's giving them a heads up to say: "Hey, this policy is stupid and unnecessary, and I'll deal with it because I have no other choice, but unless you have a compelling reason for keeping it in place, maybe you should think about changing it."
I had the same issue when I went to purchase the 3g on launch day last year. But before I went to the Apple store, I called both Apple and AT&T to verify that I as an authorized user could make the purchase at Apple. I was told yes and went ahead to the store where I waited for four hours. I was next in line when I found out that no I could not purchase because I was an authorized user. I was upset not because I was the authorized user but because I was told yes up until the very last minute. I solved my problem by speaking to the manager and having my mother call in as well and we worked out something. Fast forward to this year, I went through the same steps and found out I couldn't. I was able to purchase at AT&T. Apple cannot allow you to sign a contract without the main account holder there. I am fine with that rule. Just order online or go to AT&T and order there.
Well the 3G S is much better than the 3G and 2G. The speed boost alone (even though many people here call it a minor update) makes the device worth it.
If you wanted a blackberry, where would you go? To an AT&T store? Probably, and they are willing to help you. See what I am saying? Its not like you can walk into the nonexistent Blackberry RIM store and have a superior customer service experience. The policy is in place, and to be honest I have heard 500 good experiences at Apple stores regarding the iPhone for every 1 bad one. AT&T gives Apple the interface, so its not Apple's fault that they cannot operate in a specific way with AT&T.
uberamd said:
Yes, I could go to an AT&T store or shopblackberry.com. And either way, Apple gets no money or further business from me. The Apple policy causes a major inconvenience where there should be none, and as far as I'm concerned, if that means even one customer abandons ship to purchase a product from a competitor instead, that is a serious failure on Apple's business model. And if Apple doesn't care because they're still moving millions of units out of inventory, well, fine, good on them for continuing to make a profit, but it demonstrates a very disappointing commitment to customer satisfaction and a lack of appreciation for its customers' loyalty.
uberamd said:
I find it hard to believe there's no way to implement a workaround in-store, though. They can't call up AT&T and confirm someone's authorization to sign the contract by phone? They can't work with AT&T to develop an interface that lets them see authorized users in the first place? Really? It can't be done? A technological impossibility? That doesn't really inspire much faith in either one of these companies' abilities....
you could not be more incorrect.
im not the primary account holder, im an authorized user. never had any problems whatsoever. please dont offer incorrect information to others if you are not sure of the answer
well this whole thread is about people who are authorized users getting turned down because they are not primary account holders....
it basically comes down to the store manager...thats the conclusion...some dont care.. as long you are an authorized user you are fine, other store managers wont even let you touch a box without the primary holding your hand.
I know its stupid, its very very stupid, but policies are in place for a reason and store managers are not high up enough to side-step corporate wide policies. Thats the way the business world works, suits upstairs sat around strategizing a plan of action and implemented it. Getting those decisions changed on a case by case basis would be a hassle, and defeat the purpose of having a policy in the first place.
I agree completely with this. If your business model denies customers for what boils down to a clerical inconsistency there needs to be some changes. Full account priveleges is just that.
I hope Apple is reading these boards because my experience was a nightmare too. They were so incompetent. I wasn't a primary but authorized (why is there a difference anyway?). After getting into a spat at the apple store, I went to the ATT Store in the same mall and they told me I had all the privelages on the account to make any changes and I could have gotten a phone right there. WTF I would have if it weren't for my $100 rebate I used towards the phone. Anyway I ended up having to get the primary account holder to switch over in my name which caused hours of wasted time for he and I. THANKS APPLE
I hope Apple is reading these boards because my experience was a nightmare too. They were so incompetent. I wasn't a primary but authorized (why is there a difference anyway?). After getting into a spat at the apple store, I went to the ATT Store in the same mall and they told me I had all the privelages on the account to make any changes and I could have gotten a phone right there. WTF I would have if it weren't for my $100 rebate I used towards the phone. Anyway I ended up having to get the primary account holder to switch over in my name which caused hours of wasted time for he and I. THANKS APPLE
And again, its inconsistency on the side of AT&T, not Apple. The sad thing is that the issue is never, ever as cut and dry as we on the intertubewebs like to make it seem.
I agree, it definitely has to do with the store managers. When my wife upgraded to a 3G earlier this year she was an authorized user and told by an AT&T store I had to be present. She walked into a Best Buy got a new phone no problem. So it all depends on who you talk to and whether they are having a good day.
well one could make the argument....
the phone service is through att...
apple is just selling the phone, so why are they penalizing users when they say you need to be primary to buy the phone? that deals with att contracts, not apple contracts. and att says authorized users are fine. so apple is clearly going against the grain with this ultra strict policy.
So you think Apple and every other business needs to cater to every single whiny forum posters whim? Get real dude.
Welcome to the real world where you don't always get things your way.
terp26 said:
I believe the only real difference is that only the primary accountholder can close the account, and only the primary accountholder is held legally responsible for the account (since its his/her SSN and credit information that's on file, and is thus the one held accountable if the account goes unpaid or is closed, etc.)
uberamd said:
I might buy this if I was complaining about the limitations of a third-party POS software that a merchant is using (i.e., this local restaurant can't substitute this side dish for another on my meal because the third-party POS they contracted doesn't have an option for it)
But AT&T and Apple are in an exclusive, long-term agreement to sell this phone and its service to new and pre-existing AT&T customers. AT&T and Apple also both happen to be giants in the technology and telecommunications industries. If they can't come together to design a software/hardware/database interface that lets them solve what is certainly a common occurrence, then... jesus, why should I trust either company's hardware or software offerings again?
chriszzz said:
It's called public relations. Businesses need to keep their customers happy in order to stay in business. Apple is fortunate to have the monopoly on a great product, but there is something seriously wrong when a company becomes so self-satisfied that it thinks it can pick and choose its customers and be outright indifferent to their concerns or frustrations. That's not doing good business, that's saying "We know you don't have the balls to take your business elsewhere, and because we're so sure you'll come groveling at our feet for our products, we can throw conventional customer relations principles out the window and not give a damn about you one way or the other."
It takes the customer for granted and sends a message that the company doesn't value you. Not the best strategy if you're trying to build brand loyalty and convince people to buy a $2500 laptop to compliment their $200 MP3 players and cell phones.
Left unchecked, that kind of attitude is going to lead to a major decline in the quality of service (if it hasn't already, considering certain Genius Bar horror stories I've heard...), and eventually that's going to drive customers away.
And, believe it or not, there are people who are paid for the sole purpose of, if not making customers happy, listening to their input. It's their 9-5, 5-days-a-week job. Its precisely what departments like customer service, relations, and public relations are for.
But why would Apple come up with that policy on their own? I don't see them wanting to willfully complicate matters for themselves. That makes no sense to me, sounds like AT&T wants more control or something. Who knows, I am just speculating. We all are.
That is incorrect.
AT&T requires an authorized user, and Apple requires an authorized user and the last 4 of the SS# of the primary account holder.
Unfortunately I don't believe that this policy has been properly relayed to their employees.
Is there a written policy on Apple's web site? Where does Apple "state" this? And yes, you do have to use the Apple store because most resellers are out of stock indefinitely.
ddavid said:
Yes, apparently it is official policy. The AT&T CSR on the phone and the Apple Store employee he spoke to both looked up the policy, which said "If purchased in Apple Store, primary accountholder must be present."
Apple's website lists the same policy:
http://www.apple.com/retail/iphone/
So it sounds like the "official" policy is that the primary accountholder must be present; and anyone who's just an authorized user and still managed to snag one just got lucky.
uberamd said:
Except AT&T doesn't impose this policy on any other retailer that's empowered to act as its proxy for extending service agreements. (Best Buy, Wal-Mart, non-corporate AT&T stores, etc.) I mean, obviously it's a policy that Apple and AT&T probably agreed upon, and there's no way to know which party pushed for it without being privy to those negotiations/discussions, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for AT&T to impose a stricter standard through Apple than it does through its other retailers. It's not like Apple is higher-risk or any more likely to let an unauthorized customer purchase a phone and sign a contract than any of the other authorized retailers.
The only difference is that Apple's access to AT&T account information seems to be more limited than Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc's. Why this wasn't corrected for when their little handheld interface/OS they use was designed, I have no clue. But it's a pretty stupid oversight.
And, as far as I can tell, that's the only basis for this stupid rule.
If you do not think age plays a factor in such situations, I can understand that.
The DOB and SSN are both on the account, part of the initial contract form and credit verification adn requirement. If a credit report is pulled anytime during a purchase not only DOB and SSN appear but a whole slew other things. The ATT rep doesn't see all of it but remember they have to enter such info to get an approval.
Each time I have called ATT I have been asked DOB and last 4 of the SSN for security purposes. It was on the initial application.
Authorized users. I deal with the cell phone account and there isn't really any need for additional authorized users. Again, you can say age doesn't play into anything but she has walked into verizon and AT&T and picked out new phones without being on my accounts. My son hasn't been so lucky.