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.
Audited by ATT via text because of illegal data plan on iphone 3g
- Thread starter aneftp
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I guess one of those "bigger fish" is to make annoying, immature posts deriding other people for something you have no involvement with...
The post you replied to was about dropping the data plan for the 2G iPhone.
The initial OP's problem is being audited for using the 2G plan for a iPhone 3G--entirely different.
Same thing happend on 2/4 lines
Well.... Ive been receiving these texts, and emails for some time now.
Even before we had gotten 3G iPhones, I was given the go-ahead to be using the 15 dollar media net plan on my phones, by an ATT rep...
They will not do anything, or charge you extra. They just see that the IMEI registered to your # doesnt match up, and want you to switch and make them more money!
Well.... Ive been receiving these texts, and emails for some time now.
Even before we had gotten 3G iPhones, I was given the go-ahead to be using the 15 dollar media net plan on my phones, by an ATT rep...
They will not do anything, or charge you extra. They just see that the IMEI registered to your # doesnt match up, and want you to switch and make them more money!
What ticked me off was that I have to pay more for the 3G coverage with my iPhone than I did using my Samsung Sync (also 3G). Same service, what is the difference?????
Are you actually getting the "save service"? Are you actually getting an always-on, unlimited, direct TCP/IP connection to the Internet? Or are you getting a proxy server filtered, WAP-based version of the Internet?
You didn't violate the TOS by doing that per se, and the TOS's wording doesn't state that anything punitive would happen -- one poster's suggestion that one of AT&T's options would be to suspend service and charge you the ETF is way out of line with any likely outcome.abiyng87 said:
AT&T's TOS plainly states that they "reserve the right" to detect the presence of iPhones (specifically iPhones, rather than simply any type of Smartphone) which are not subscribed for a data plan, or which are subscribed for any data plan other than the iPhone's prescribed plan. Their sole corrective action in such a case, according to the TOS, is to automatically add the prescribed data plan.
By the way, this is part of the generic TOS, as amended, which has been signed by every post-paid AT&T customer, not just by those who happen to have purchased iPhones. A customer's continued use of their equipment following notification of amendments such as this, acts as their implied consent to be bound by the revised TOS.
The difference is that the Samsung Sync isn't considered a smartphone, so you didn't have to pay for a smartphone data plan. If you used as much of AT&Ts data network with that phone as you do with an iPhone, my hat's off you to.
If the 'ridiculously priced' iPhone contracts are making AT&T billions of dollars, why would they issue a statement stating the iPhone 3G deal would put pressure on their margins and earnings until 2010?
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=25791
Well of course it's going to put some pressure on their earnings, they have to get off of their backsides and invest in some new technology!
I can't believe how that press release is worded. It's like, "Waaaaaaaaagggggghhh, we now have to subsidise these phones! Waaaaaaaaagggggghhh, we have to actually do something now to make our network work with these devices!". Well my heart goes out to them. I somehow think that they'll get through it, what with the billions of dollars they must have made on the iPhone 1st Gen sales.
I can't believe how that press release is worded. It's like, "Waaaaaaaaagggggghhh, we now have to subsidise these phones! Waaaaaaaaagggggghhh, we have to actually do something now to make our network work with these devices!". Well my heart goes out to them. I somehow think that they'll get through it, what with the billions of dollars they must have made on the iPhone 1st Gen sales.
How do you figure?I somehow think that they'll get through it, what with the billions of dollars they must have made on the iPhone 1st Gen sales.
If you take the original iPhone and figure the cost to AT&T as $15/month in lost revenue (for the discount over normaly monthly rates they gave) + the revenue sharing with Apple, the total cost to AT&T for the original iPhone was more than the cost to AT&T for the iPhone 3G (given as the subsidy).
IMO, the difference is that the cost for the original iPhone was spread monthly over the life of the contract, whereas with the iPhone 3G, the cost is incurred all-at-once (when the user buys the device) and is recouped monthly through the price of the data plan over the life of the contract.
Either way, I don't see where AT&T's making a killing per iPhone user. It looks like they're making a small profit per iPhone user and are hoping that volume will carry the whole thing through.
If one wants to ditch the iPhone data plan, that's cool. I just think that basing it on "AT&T makes billions on iPhones, so screw them" is false logic.
So it is OK for AT&T to use loopholes in their ToS to screw over customers when required, but customers aren't allowed to try save a few bucks on a similar loophole?
Oh I see how it is, so it's OK to pay less than the specified plan for iPhone 3Gs, and at the same totally okay to complain that AT&T isn't investing enough in rolling out the 3G network and improving it.
Are you one of those types that pigs out at the All You Can Eat buffet, then finds a reason to complain to the manager to get out of paying?
Oh, spare me. You're old enough to post here, surely you're grown-up enough to read a contract, and choose to go elsewhere if it doesn't suit you. There are plenty of "iPhone killers" on other carriers that I hear are quite good.
Learn the rules - those who write the contract can make loopholes for their own benefit. You, as the party entering the contract, know that this occurs and need to learn how to not force them to use it.
I doubt they're going to cancel anyone's account. It's more likely that they'll just scare people in to getting the data plan
That's probably true. Canceling someone's account means trying to get a new customer, and phone companies don't want to lose customers, it costs them a lot. They might go ahead and add the real data plan to the bill, they're good at that. I've gotten some of those "we added this fee because we can" on a few bills.
Firstly, the fact that AT&T needs the release of a product in 2008 to kick their backsides into gear in getting their 3G network sorted out is just shameful. The UK has had 3G now for over five years, and there are huge parts of AFRICA that have better 3G networks than the USA. The US networks should have their tails between their legs. The lack of investment in AT&T's cellular network is finally catching up on them.
Secondly, let's make it quite clear what I'm actually saying. I am not advocating 'service theft'. I am taking issue with the fact that AT&T charge iPhone customers more for their data than non-iPhone customers. I am saying that, if there is a way around paying the iPhone tax on data, it's hardly surprising that people are trying to pull a fast one.
I don't quite know how you reached that conclusion, but no. I do try to make sure I get my money's worth though.
Forgetting how much money the networks make on sales of the devices (trust me, the quantities they are buying, AT&T won't be paying anywhere near what you think for these devices), there is probably well over $200m in subscriptions alone rolling into AT&T's bank accounts every month from iPhone customers.
Those parts of the world also tend to pay more for the plans than the US, and haven't really gone the "unlimited bucket" route until recently. Are you suggesting we following the UK pricing models, and pay more for data? You seem to not like that idea very much. But again, you're comparing better networks that cost more, yet insist on paying less.
I didn't accuse you of being a thief. Yet you seem to be defending yourself pretty vigorously. You protest too much.
No they don't. They pay just as much as anyone with a BlackJack, WM or other non "dumb" phone would pay. If anything, we were paying LESS than those people when the 2G came out. Now you're just complaining because you aren't spoiled anymore.
Yeah, they're actually paying more and subsidizing part of the cost to us.
You should probably check out the UK pricing because they are actually cheaper than the US tariffs (and all of them include unlimited data, unlimited WiFi hotspots, some degree of texting, plus those prices already include 17.5% tax).
Not protesting, simply happy to have a debate. I haven't attempted to go down any other route than a legitimate iPhone tariff because I consider what I'm getting to be good value.
Sorry, I've misunderstood then. I thought the OP was saying that he was on a cheaper data tariff.
Hmm, yes. That does appear to be what the networks are claiming.
So how much are you thinking they get these devices for?
AT&T's yearly results have never shown them making a profit (much less breaking even) when it comes to sales of devices.
http://www.att.com/gen/investor-relations?pid=282
(from their 2007 annual report)
Does the UK not have the ability for citizens to check the financial records of their companies?! If AT&T is not subsidizing the price of the iPhone as much as the analysts say, it'll be readily apparent the next time they release their quarterly earnings.
Yes, there is, aristobrat, but if US reporting requirements are anything like UK requirements, there's not an awful lot of detail to be able to really dig into the earnings/costs of an individual product.
Oh, I have no idea. But I would be amazed if they were paying more than $199 for each unit. AT&T will know exactly how much Apple are paying Foxconn to manufacture each device. And I'm fairly sure Apple and AT&T would have worked together on setting a price point. They're all working together in order to get as many devices sold as possible.
The way I read that quote from their annual report is that AT&T have had to invest in hardware to roll out the iPhone 3G, not that they are losing money on each unit sold. And the bit about "sale of handsets below cost" due to promotions, etc. doesn't refer to iPhones, does it? There haven't been any promotions on iPhones, have there?
I don't know what it's like in the US, but in the UK you can get pretty much any phone for free on a reasonably cheap contract. Indeed, you can get an iPhone for £0 on the £45/month tariff upwards. So yes, I would take that whole "AT&T buckling under iPhone subsidies" thing with a big box of salt, because O2 are able to literally give away iPhones and still turn a profit!
Yeah, they don't break it down to a product level here either, but when you're talking about their flagship product, it'll be fairly obvious to see it's impact.
Market analysts disagree and think the subsidy will be substantial.
"NEW YORK (Reuters) - AT&T Inc will suffer lower earnings this year and next year as it plans to subsidize the price of the latest iPhone from Apple Inc in a bet it can help it boost data services and steal customers."
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0926011020080610
Barons - "AT&T (T) is paying a subsidy of $325 for the new Apple (AAPL) iPhone 3G, according to Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner. He notes that the typical smartphone gets a subsidy of about $200."
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtrader...e-oppenheimer-says-att-iphone-subsidy-is-325/
Computerworld - "Although much has been made of the iPhone 3G's $199 price -- and attention has focused on how mobile carriers will subsidize purchases to bring the consumer's cost down"
"The bottom line, said Howe, is that even at $199, subsidy or not, Apple's not selling the iPhone at a loss to gain share." and "
http://www.computerworld.com/action...articleId=9097858&taxonomyId=163&pageNumber=1
USA Today - "Stephenson, who became AT&T's (T) chairman and CEO a year ago, championed the idea of paying Apple (AAPL) about $300 per device, analysts estimate, to help hold down the retail cost. The subsidy, which replaces another arrangement that gave Apple a portion of iPhone service revenue, will dilute earnings through 2009, AT&T says."
"We believe that over the long term, the subsidized iPhone 3G will drive increased sales volume and revenues among high-quality, data-centric customers," telecom analyst Tom Seitz of Lehman Bros. recently wrote in a note to investors."
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/phones/2008-07-31-att-iphone-stephenson-apple_N.htm
That sentence reads "AT&T sells handsets below cost to customers who committed to one-year/two-year contracts or in connection with other promotions." Everything to the left of the "or" applies to the iPhone. The only way you can buy and iPhone 3G now is by agreeing to a contract. If you agree to a contract, AT&T sells you the device below cost.
Right, because you can directly compare the profitability of O2 (that covers an island of 60M people that's smaller than the state of Oregon) to AT&T (that covers 5x more people spread out over 38x more land). Definitely an apples to apples comparison there.
Amazing that this all stemmed from your "Have a guess how many billions of dollars AT&T are making on selling ridiculously priced iPhone contracts to US consumers" comment.
I'd rather agree to the contract and then do everything I can to get around it, which I've done. I now get a 25% discount (FAN, thank you) a bonus 200 minutes (promo code I'm not entitled to) 1500 text messages for 8.99 (ditto) and a discounted data plan.
If AT&T catches me, fine. If they don't, fine. But I've got a feeling they won't.
Loopholes benefit everyone! They can take advantage of them and I will take advantage of them, and so far I'm the one winning.
Anyone with half a brain will just tell AT&T that this is what the rep told them they could have - worst case, they release you without the 175 fee. Nothing to lose.
Not wishing to flog a dead horse here, but Telefonica has a much more complicated network than you imagine.
In fact, I'm pretty sure they are a much larger supplier of iPhones than AT&T are. They have 245m customers spread across 25 countries, 16 of which they are selling iPhone 3G exclusively in, which means huge 3G investment across a large part of the globe, not one contiguous country. And yet they give away fully subsidised iPhones and still make a profit on every contract sold.
AT&T truly do have a crappy network, in terms of 3G coverage at least, and that whole "challenging geographical area" that US cellular providers always seem to bleat on about doesn't wash. It's not the only country in the world to have mountains and a widely spread population, you know! Massive under-investment in new technologies for the last decade = a possible cause for AT&T to report losses.
The only thing that AT&T's publicly warned about potentially causing a impact on their earnings is the subsidy that they're paying towards the cost of the iPhone.
They've been spending CAPEX money on rolling out 3G for the last several years with no reported loss. Don't see why you'd speculate there'd all of a sudden be one now.
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=25791