AT&T Exclusivity Expires in 2010, AT&T Asking for Extension?

[Lancelot9201]

We Won't Ever See the Unlimited $45.00 Per Month T-Mobile Offers.

If Apple renews this contract AT&T will never lower their pricing to compete with T-Mobiles $45.00 unlimited minutes program. Yes, they do have one & it's offered to loyal customers who have had service for a year or more. Their unlimited data starts at $25.00 -- This pricing is a 50% savings over AT&T's raping of iPhone users..

 

[mikes63737]

Apple needs to make them bend on things for the privilege to exclusively carry the iphone.

Yes. It is a privilege. I would switch to Verizon in a heartbeat if AT&T was not the exclusive carrier. So would probably 60% of current customers.

 

[jimmygb102]

Wtf

Why does everyone say they want it on verizon because its cheaper......It's NOT!!! its the most expensive. Sprint has the better one with the simply everything plan. Don't play the better network BS ...that creeper with glasses on the commercials has ingrained it into your brain. All US cell networks have so-so service depending on your location. Its hard to cover a massive country like the US. Nobody knows if verizons network could handle the iPhone, you cant assume it does because of the couple crackberry users that might use the internet. iPhone users use over half of all browsing done on a mobile phone in the U.S.

 

[jimmygb102]

If Apple renews this contract AT&T will never lower their pricing to compete with T-Mobiles $45.00 unlimited minutes program. Yes, they do have one & it's offered to loyal customers who have had service for a year or more. Their unlimited data starts at $25.00 -- This pricing is a 50% savings over AT&T's raping of iPhone users..

Why do you compare At&t charging people for using their service like all companies do, to a disgusting act done upon women, and some men. it's pretty ignorant.

 

[jimmygb102]

Has anyone looked at those Verizon phone prices, voice, and data plans? Just the data plan alone is higher than AT&T. I was an OG way-back AT&T wireless user that switch to Verizon a few years ago. After about a year, it was more economical to switch back to AT&T. Now with the economy in even greater peril, I'm looking at saving funds.

To be clear, I was on a family plan without data on Verizon. I jumped over to AT&T pre-iPhone with a family plan for less. Then I had a PDA then BB with data on AT&T. Still looking at less bottom line and the AT&T phone prices are much cheaper.

T-mobile data is too expensive too. Ugh. A hot mess.

If they do start selling across all carriers, I wouldn't switch.

I admit that when I traveled a lot all across the country, Verizon phone service worked EVERYWHERE and AT&T did not. I don't travel anymore.

Thank you......you actually understand At&t is cheaper than verizon.

 

[naman34]

1 reason why apple should stay stuck..

I can't for the life of me understand why some here would HOPE that Apple stays with AT&T exclusive. Uh, what? Why? Just because you're on AT&T and you're cool with it? Everyone's situation is different. Expanding to other carriers would benefit the iPhone greatly, and would dramatically increase its market share, while giving people options.

Some people legitimately cannot use AT&T for one reason or another, however much they want the iPhone. I don't see how the iPhone being lmited to 1 carrier is a GOOD thing for you, or for Apple.

well, dont know if you realise, but the iphone is only available for $200 because, of at & t, and as soon as it goes multi platform, there will be no reason for at & t to continue this subsidy, and iphone prices will go straight to $600, and if you want to pay that much, iphones are already available unlocked for that much these days.
and now that i read that at&t might actually be cheaper, i dont kno what u ppl are crying about.
I'm frm india and Ive not been able to buy an iphone simple because its on 2 platforms here and i cost about 600 us$

 

[andrew upstairs]

I'm glad that I switched to AT&T for the iPhone. I hated Verizon.

 

[3282868]

I never knew so many people hated AT&T. I've always found them to be pretty good, both in cellular and TV/Internet (U-verse). Ive had Alltell and T-Mobile cell phones before and I've experienced dropped calls and bad coverage with ALL of them. Nobody is perfect. But from what I've been reading, Verizon is the be-all-end-all of service providers. They are the gods of the cell phone and telephony world and Apple should absolutely terminate their deal with AT&T and cling to Verizon's balls immediately.

All I know is, I have 5 full bars of 3G on my iPhone as I sit, and my coverage only drops down if I go out into the country.

Is AT&T really THAT bad? Really?

It's not, and I highly doubt Apple would have staked their entry into the mobile phone market on a service provider if their service was as atrocious as some paint. For some reason, people take these "issues" personally and resort to defending their service provider as though it were a member of their family. This argument of which mobile carrier is the "*****" creeps into such arguments as the recently beaten [again] dead horse of Mac OS X versus Windows OS. It's lame but some people use the anonymity of the internet to strong arm people in discussions in order to gain some personal superiority they lack in daily [average] human interaction. Yawn.

 

[jimmygb102]

I'm glad that I switched to AT&T for the iPhone. I hated Verizon.

I got bitched out by a supervisor from verizon when i was trying to get my 9.99 line cancelled on verizon the day before the iPhone was announced. I was using the them raising rates thing that technically according to their contract says allows you to get out. It was my dads line techinically, so she called him and lied to say i called her a bitch. She caved in and let me cancel it.

Dont give me the, thats wrong you signed a contract so you get cheaper phones ****. i paid 300 for the first enV. come on....and it was 9.99 a month.

 

[JimAtLaw]

Don't play the better network BS ...that creeper with glasses on the commercials has ingrained it into your brain. All US cell networks have so-so service depending on your location. Its hard to cover a massive country like the US. Nobody knows if verizons network could handle the iPhone, you cant assume it does because of the couple crackberry users that might use the internet. iPhone users use over half of all browsing done on a mobile phone in the U.S.

Uh, no, the commercials have not embedded it into our brains. Many of us ACTUALLY HAD Verizon, switched to AT&T for the iPhone, and now have 10x the number of dropped calls, many more uncovered areas, including in high traffic zones where you would not expect them, etc. It's not marketing - I WISH AT&T's network was even remotely comparable to Verizon's, but in California, it most assuredly isn't.

 

[kdarling]

Thank you......you actually understand At&t is cheaper than verizon.

How so? The PDA voice and data plan prices look identical, with the only difference being ATT has rollover minutes and Verizon has the choose five friends plan available.

well, dont know if you realise, but the iphone is only available for $200 because, of at & t, and as soon as it goes multi platform, there will be no reason for at & t to continue this subsidy,

Subsidies have been, and always will be, available for phones that are on many different carriers.

For example, Verizon, Sprint, ATT all carry the HTC Diamond Pro. And it's subsidized on all.

 

[mikecap]

End exclusivity!

Apple would be foolish to extend exclusivity further - they're losing so many hardware sales due to people being locked into contracts with other providers, it would make zero sense for them to limit their explosive sales growth by continuing AT&T's monopoly.

 

[jimmygb102]

http://www.verizonwireless.com:80/b2c/store/controller?item=planFirst&action=viewPlanList&sortOption=priceSort&typeId=3&subTypeId=50&catId=947


Verizon 99.00

At&t 90.00


hmmmmmmm.......................
The usual iphone plan....450 mins. unl. txt, data.

 

[NoExpectations]

Apple would be foolish to extend exclusivity further - they're losing so many hardware sales due to people being locked into contracts with other providers, it would make zero sense for them to limit their explosive sales growth by continuing AT&T's monopoly.

It does make sense. If Apple can sell every phone that they can make right now (up to factory capacity), then go with an exclusive agreement with a carrier to get the highest possible 'kickback' subsidy. If Apple opened it up to all carriers, think Moto Razr and low kickbacks. Why would any carrier offer a $400 kickback that is not exclusive to them?

 

[applefan702]

I have no problems with AT&T. They all suck equally for what its worth.

-I totally agree. Every phone carrier has it's ups and downs.

 

[Caralvarez24]

well, dont know if you realise, but the iphone is only available for $200 because, of at & t, and as soon as it goes multi platform, there will be no reason for at & t to continue this subsidy, and iphone prices will go straight to $600, and if you want to pay that much, iphones are already available unlocked for that much these days.
and now that i read that at&t might actually be cheaper, i dont kno what u ppl are crying about.
I'm frm india and Ive not been able to buy an iphone simple because its on 2 platforms here and i cost about 600 us$

That is so incorrect it is not even funny. All carriers subsidize phones. Actually all carriers usually do not even make money on the phones. That is why you get locked into contracts. Contracts allow them to make back the money they lose on subsidizing he phones and then make a profit. I have done two lengthy case studies involving the cell phone industry and carriers etc. If expanded to all carriers the iPhone would ATLEAST stay at the same price point as now. I could see someone dropping the price to try and get people to switch to them.

 

[applefan702]

Extend to more carriers

I personally think that Apple should extend their iPhone to a variaty of carriers.
~At&t
~Verizon
~T-mobile

​

 

[Caralvarez24]

I personally think that Apple should extend their iPhone to a variaty of carriers.
~At&t
~Verizon
~T-mobile

​

agreed, competition is always good for the consumer

 

[ant-macyourself]

Despite the popular hate towards AT&T, you have to give them credit for working with Apple in the first place. Verizon was offered the iPhone first and THEY declined it. Apple didn't pick AT&T, they were the 2nd choice after Verizon told Apple to beat it. They blew it and now their customers are suffering for it.

Not to mention that AT&T is giving Apple quite a bit of special treatment. Visual voicemail required some changes to their system. They've ramped up network capacity a ton since the iPhone came out. Even more importantly, AT&T let Apple sell iTunes downloads over EDGE and 3G. Verizon would never allow such a thing because they force V-Cast on all their partners.

I think what it comes down to is Apple being satisfied with how much AT&T is letting them get away with and AT&T being happy with how many new subscribers are coming in. Their coverage may be crappy in some areas for some people, but it makes total sense from a business perspective. And that's what they are - businesses.

 

[scottness]

I have no problem with ATT. I was pleasantly surprised at the better coverage compared to Sprint and TM--in my area. Different story when I travel, but I am mostly home, so that matters most to me.

 

[DougB541]

In NYC, AT&T is very weak.

I have had sprint for 6 years and honestly, if the iPhone had come to them, i would've easily picked it up (though i've had some concerns of the phone but most are being addressed with Version 3.0)


As of now, i'm sticking with Sprint and their awesome 3G service and prices and getting a Palm Pre.

 

[hypmatize]

Be warned, you a terrible reception in Rohan. Even worse in the mines of Moria.

That is fine as long as I get service in Gondor its all good.

 

[JimAtLaw]

I don't have a problem with AT&T. I get maybe 1 or 2 dropped calls per month. Verizon did about the same. FWIW, AT&T's done a fairly good job at keeping up with Apple so far. AT&T's desire to "do anything it takes" to remain tied to Apple can only benefit Apple.

I often get 4 or 5 a day, and that's in a zone with 4 bars. AT&T is wretched. On Verizon I could count the number of dropped calls in a year on one hand. With AT&T, that's the count for a week at most, and often only a day or two, and we're talking about in major metro areas and on major traffic arteries. AT&T's coverage is unacceptably crappy, and Apple's own image is being tarnished by association - I love the iPhone interface, but I think it that as a practical matter, it often sucks as a phone because it gets such sporadic coverage and drops calls constantly.

 

[-hh]

Petition to.... who exactly?

They're not doing anything illegal. They own the towers, they own the signals, according to the contracts in many cases they even own the phones...

You may not like it, but they're not doing anything unlawful. Gotta love capitalism

Actually, if you compare the USA to other Markets (eg, Europe), you'll find that the US Government's "hands off" policy ... deferring to pure capitalism ... has resulted in higher costs to the consumer, since the result was that we've built out a couple of redundant yet incompatible networks (eg, GSM, CDMA) which ultimately have to be paid for by the consumer. Ditto for future upgrades, too.

So basically, someone please show me how competition has made this better. The only competition that worked out was at the extreme low end. For people who would like about 200 minutes/month with all the rollover and stuff from AT&T and then adding a very limited data plan, THERE IS NO OPTION. Why would opening the iPhone to all carriers be any different?

I agree: it wouldn't be any assurance of pro-consumer. The USA mobile carriers are in some ways an Oligopoly, since very few of them step out of line. For example, if you want a minimalist cost service, you're effectively forced to go to the hassles of a pay-as-you-go. Since none of them are interested in making their money through a $25/mo "100 minutes" plan, they've effectively conspired to put the minimum cost of convenience in services at $50/month (after taxes).

Couple of things surprised me:

1) That there is no term limit in which, once you have owned the phone for a given period of time you can then unlock it.

Interesting. Given the not-just-a-phone utility of the iPhone, I'll have to remember to see if I can see about having that written in as a contract purchase requirement.

Verizon's coverage is best on the East Coast so that's understandable why you would want it.

I've had both a Verizon and an AT&T phone here on the East Coast for the past couple of years...I don't really see any real difference.

The big thing people are missing here with the exclusivity contract is this - there is no other GSM provider in the U.S. that would be able to use the phone with a traditional GSM frequency band for GPRS, EDGE, and 3G. T-Mobile uses an entirely different band that would kill connectivity in most parts of North America.

And you would then still have to dual-band if you wanted it to work in Europe too. How much size will that add?

Thank you!!! By far my biggest complaint about AT&T's California coverage. How the hell do you not have service on a MAJOR corridor through the state?! I was shocked to see my phone dropping to Edge and then no-service driving from Anaheim to Santa Cruz. No service on I-5?? The Hell?!

Strongly recommend that you provide this feedback to Apple (website was previously posted). Make sure to say in your feedback that Apple should bring this up in their negotiations with AT&T. Do it Tonight.

Thank you......you actually understand At&t is cheaper than verizon.

And even if one wants to argue that they're not...there's not really a huge difference to really debate. From a practical perspective, unless AT&T/Apple can get the monthly bill for an iPhone under $50 total, I'd just assume drop my personal cellphone entirely, keep my work blackberry (its "free") and pick up an iPod touch to replace my nano. This reconfiguration will pay for itself for me in <6 months and the loser will be the mobile company...and Apple's share of the monthly fee thereof. Afterall, an iPhone is going to be a lot more profitable for Apple than just a Touch.

...and versus the currently excessive monthly rates, I can take that extra money saved and buy myself a brand new Expresso machine...annually.

Currently, both of my service contracts are beyond their 2 year locks, so I have plenty of flexibility. If the economy is supposedly so bad, we should be seeing wonderful deals being offered by these cellular providers, if there really is true competition in the marketplace. Gosh, I'm still waiting.


-hh

 

[Digital Skunk]

In NYC, AT&T is very weak.

I have had sprint for 6 years and honestly, if the iPhone had come to them, i would've easily picked it up (though i've had some concerns of the phone but most are being addressed with Version 3.0)


As of now, i'm sticking with Sprint and their awesome 3G service and prices and getting a Palm Pre.

Same here for the same reasons including insurance on the phone. I will forever say that I am a clutz, and need that insurance to protect me from myself.

Not to mention that Sprint has already been rolling out 4G since the end of last year, with (supposedly...) 4G phones coming at the end of 09.

I hope that the Pre isn't fubared up by either Sprint or Palm. If it's not the cat's meow, then I fear Palm will have lost all of its fire... what little it had left after the Foleo.