Carriers making us pay full price

[anthonyfellows]

Well my choice was ...

AT&T Next - 125/MO and Loss of Unlimited Data
Contract - 100/MO + $40 Upgrade Fee - Keep Unlimited Data

Not a difficult choice for me to make.

Paying full retail wouldn't have mattered. Phone would have been worth way less in two years when I upgrade again and I'd still be paying the 100/mo for my plan.

Another two year contract gives me the new phone for $240, allows me to sell it in two years for about the same price, and I get to keep my current plan.

I'm not sold on Straight Talk or Cricket just yet. Straight Talk is supposedly on the AT&T network, yet I know people who have it that constantly have problems with the data speed and coverage area. And we live in a major metropolitan area.

 

[accountforit]

Couple things...

First, if reception is "just a few minutes on the phone", why bother signing up for the thing anyway? If you just want the device, get the device and forget the monthly fee, no? Some people actually want/need service. While I don't talk on the phone an excessive amount, it's very nice, for more reasons than one, to know that if I need to make a call or someone needs to reach me, that will actually happen. Not to mention the fact that having data wherever you are is a good thing.

Also, you save $900, the price goes up, then what? This is what Sprint is counting on. They get you as a customer... and then you have a phone you can't use on other networks, so you can start paying the same for less with Sprint, or you can go elsewhere (again). For me it's certainly not worth the hassle to hop from carrier to carrier, getting subpar service to save some money.

I absolutely agree that $900 isn't nothing, but it's also not enough based on first hand experience of Sprint service in major metropolitan areas. That was years ago, but based on people's gripes, it hasn't improved much at all. Sprint has simply made too muany crappy business decisions in too short a time for me to want to use their service for anything much more than free.

The person I was conversing with stated Sprint is "marginally better" than the service he chose....for one.

Two....hopping from carrier to carrier takes no more than 10 minutes on the phone and should be what everyone does. That is the premise of competition in a market that is way over priced and has been for years. Carriers put a limit on data, charge crazy rates, and lock you into contracts. You should use the one advantage you have....go to a competitor when it saves you money.

I check carrier prices and options at least each year, but usually switch every two years and save a ton each time. A simple phone call to port your number and your done.

 

[rui no onna]

The person I was conversing with stated Sprint is "marginally better" than the service he chose....for one.

Two....hopping from carrier to carrier takes no more than 10 minutes on the phone and should be what everyone does. That is the premise of competition in a market that is way over priced and has been for years. Carriers put a limit on data, charge crazy rates, and lock you into contracts. You should use the one advantage you have....go to a competitor when it saves you money.

Umm, no. Sprint is marginally better than the carrier I didn't choose (T-Mobile). AT&T, which is my current carrier, has much better signal where I work and that's where I use my phone 80% of the time. Well, basically AT&T and Verizon actually have signal whereas with Sprint and T-Mobile, I'd have to go to the roof or parking lot to even get signal.

Also, that's a $900 savings but it'll be eaten up by $3,000 in new phones. After the promotion expires, I'd probably need to buy new phones again in case I decide to switch since the current Sprint iPhones may not be covered by the unlock agreement taking effect in February 2015. If I'm switching, I'd rather go T-Mobile than Sprint. Practically same price and service and they have no trouble with BYOD.

Unfortunately, if I actually want to be able to use my service, so far it's either AT&T or Verizon for me and both carriers are expensive.

 

[lordofthereef]

The person I was conversing with stated Sprint is "marginally better" than the service he chose....for one.

Two....hopping from carrier to carrier takes no more than 10 minutes on the phone and should be what everyone does. That is the premise of competition in a market that is way over priced and has been for years. Carriers put a limit on data, charge crazy rates, and lock you into contracts. You should use the one advantage you have....go to a competitor when it saves you money.

I check carrier prices and options at least each year, but usually switch every two years and save a ton each time. A simple phone call to port your number and your done.

Well, the person chimed in and negated your point one...

But anyway, hopping from carrier to carrier is what we should be doing? Do you also check the rates of your cable, electric, gas, etc. constantly to make sure you are getting the best rate for the moment in time?

Sorry. I would rather stick with a carrier that has proven to me that they can provide rather than hop over to save some cash and then regret it later. I am guessing that is what most people do. If Sprint happens to be doable for you or any one person, great. I (and I would say MOST people) find Sprint as having to give up more than is gained in savings. A LOT more.

They aren't $900 cheaper over the span of their current offer because they are able to compete. They are $900 cheaper because they want to stay ALIVE. Sprint has been promising wonderful changes for how long? Not shocker they are dead last in customer satisfaction.

 

[newone757]

The penalty was always there, but hidden. They're just now being honest enough to both show it and allow you ways to get out of it.

That's a good thing.

Well yes and no. While they aren't hiding the subsidy penalty anymore they also revised the plans in the most asinine way possible. Trying to make you pay for way more data than you actually need if you are a light/moderate user.

For instance my wife and I used to get by on 4gb of data shared per month. with the new plans and att next I would pay $120 per month. 4gb might be tight so lets say I need 6gb-- that's $130 per month...the same price as 10gb per month. That makes no sense to me. There's no way I costs the company the same amount to provide me 6gb vs 10gb. That tells me that their profit margin on the lower amounts is ridiculous and they could, and should, be charging less for the 6gb plan. But because I bet the majority of people would be fine with 6gb per month they pump the price up and instead give you 10 to feel like your getting a deal.

They have millions of customers and usage statistics to suggest what the average data usage for their customers is. So they raise the price of that "average" tier to maximize profits and lower the higher ones to trick us into thinking its a good deal to step up. Basically we pay a premium for the exact amount we need or we pay the same amount for more data that we never use in the 1st place. Very slick. I really do have to applaud them. Business is booming

 

[accountforit]

Well, the person chimed in and negated your point one...

But anyway, hopping from carrier to carrier is what we should be doing? Do you also check the rates of your cable, electric, gas, etc. constantly to make sure you are getting the best rate for the moment in time?

Yes, actually I do. It's called being smart.

Sorry. I would rather stick with a carrier that has proven to me that they can provide rather than hop over to save some cash and then regret it later. I am guessing that is what most people do. If Sprint happens to be doable for you or any one person, great. I (and I would say MOST people) find Sprint as having to give up more than is gained in savings. A LOT more.

You are being paranoid and the carriers all love you for it. Sprint is more than capable in most areas. I don't use Sprint currently, but would if they offered a plan that beat the one I just switched to. I don't have a family plan so the offer I was referring to doesn't help me.

They aren't $900 cheaper over the span of their current offer because they are able to compete. They are $900 cheaper because they want to stay ALIVE. Sprint has been promising wonderful changes for how long? Not shocker they are dead last in customer satisfaction.

How many times have I had to call Straight Talk over the past 2 years....ummm....let me think.....NONE. A company that is known to have NO customer service....just great rates. I assume Sprint's customer service would be a moot point as well. Not to mention, the ability to pay the ETF and cancel when/if they disappoint. I would rather take a small inconvenience than to pay someone $900 that I don't have to. Invest that $900 in a Roth IRA at an average 8% return and let me know what you think about that $900 30 years from now....or was that over your head?

 

[kokonutz]

Yes, actually I do. It's called being smart.


You are being paranoid and the carriers all love you for it. Sprint is more than capable in most areas. I don't use Sprint currently, but would if they offered a plan that beat the one I just switched to. I don't have a family plan so the offer I was referring to doesn't help me.



How many times have I had to call Straight Talk over the past 2 years....ummm....let me think.....NONE. A company that is known to have NO customer service....just great rates. I assume Sprint's customer service would be a moot point as well. Not to mention, the ability to pay the ETF and cancel when/if they disappoint. I would rather take a small inconvenience than to pay someone $900 that I don't have to. Invest that $900 in a Roth IRA at an average 8% return and let me know what you think about that $900 30 years from now....or was that over your head?

I live in Silicon Valley and I lose reception 2x where they list strong coverage area. I went to school in OC, zilch reception, or slow reception. Dropped calls, I could live with, but the data...the data...

Looking for the address to a restaurant that you decided to go to? Let's take 5 minutes sitting at 1x to load a page, or 1 minute on 3G. That 1 minute? Missed an important exit and I have to waste another 3-5 minutes driving back. Great. 4G at 5mbps is OK for this, but I rarely get 4G. It is intermittent. If I stream a song on Spotify, you can bet it will freeze at least once.

One starts to wonder, what's the point of unlimited data if the experience is horrible? Sure, I have infinite data, but it's a severe annoyance to use it.

I would never ever think about going back to Sprint. It is awful, and the Silicon Valley is a major metropolitan area that SHOULD have flawless service.

I suppose I should be more clear:
Just because they SAY they have high coverage in that area, does not mean they do.

 

[rui no onna]

But anyway, hopping from carrier to carrier is what we should be doing? Do you also check the rates of your cable, electric, gas, etc. constantly to make sure you are getting the best rate for the moment in time?

Sorry. I would rather stick with a carrier that has proven to me that they can provide rather than hop over to save some cash and then regret it later. I am guessing that is what most people do. If Sprint happens to be doable for you or any one person, great. I (and I would say MOST people) find Sprint as having to give up more than is gained in savings. A LOT more.

For me, cable, electricity and gas are moot points since those are pretty much monopolies in my area. However, I'm pretty close to broadcast towers and get good reception so I've cancelled the TV portion of my cable service.

Like accountforit though, I do evaluate insurance and wireless service options yearly. Well, the wireless, I only started evaluating when the iPhone became available on other carriers. I've found T-Mobile's rates are usually cheapest and even before this whole uncarrier spiel, they already had deeply discounted plans for BYOD (called Value plans actually). Unfortunately, their coverage just wasn't available where I needed. Before these new plans, Sprint was at times cheaper and at times more expensive than AT&T but the difference was usually within $10-20/mo. Again, same problem as TMo, no coverage where needed and I didn't like the fact that it's harder/more expensive to switch to/from CDMA-based carriers due to needing new devices. Verizon was always the most expensive whenever I checked.

----------

One starts to wonder, what's the point of unlimited data if the experience is horrible? Sure, I have infinite data, but it's a severe annoyance to use it.

I have the same reception issue with T-Mobile amd Sprint. Unlimited or 20GB data sounds nice in theory but they're pointless if you're not able to actually use data because of bad reception. I'd be better off saving the money and cancelling wireless service altogether.

 

[lordofthereef]

Yes, actually I do. It's called being smart.


You are being paranoid and the carriers all love you for it. Sprint is more than capable in most areas. I don't use Sprint currently, but would if they offered a plan that beat the one I just switched to. I don't have a family plan so the offer I was referring to doesn't help me.



How many times have I had to call Straight Talk over the past 2 years....ummm....let me think.....NONE. A company that is known to have NO customer service....just great rates. I assume Sprint's customer service would be a moot point as well. Not to mention, the ability to pay the ETF and cancel when/if they disappoint. I would rather take a small inconvenience than to pay someone $900 that I don't have to. Invest that $900 in a Roth IRA at an average 8% return and let me know what you think about that $900 30 years from now....or was that over your head?

How am I being paranoid? You make the erroneous assumption that AT&T is all I have ever experienced. I tried Sprint both in Iowa where I lived before as well as here in Boston metro. Also tried TMO. TMO is actually what we moved to Iowa with and it was so bad and I had to pay an ETF; thier customer service was phenomenal, waiving all fees for me completely. Sprint was just as bad. So no, no paranoia here. In fact, I started a thread about my surprisingly terrible experience (with TMO as I tried that most recently) in Boston despite the fact that everywhere I frequent is completely lit up on their maps.

I have no idea how many times you have called straight talk (guess I do because you told me). WHy are you projecting your experiences on everyone else? And what does straight talk have anything to do with the Sprint topic? By and large the majority of people are disappointed with Sprint's services. It's wonderful (really) that they work for you. From your own words, you equated reception to "a few minutes on the phone". That was either a gross exaggeration, or it tells me you don;t use your phone for as much or as often as I do (or you have no idea because you aren't on Sprint). Obviously that's more than fine as well. You SHOULD be saving money on a service you use less of, whether it's because you can't often use it or don't.

You seem to have this need to belittle in your responses though. Not even sure why I responded to this. Do what you will with your money. I will do what I will with mine. Believe me, I am not hard up and know a thing or two about investing (as if I even need to justify this to you). I could certainly save the $900. But if I did that, I may as well save the entire bill at that point because the competing services are not good enough for me. IMO, that is the smart thing to do.

----------

For me, cable, electricity and gas are moot points since those are pretty much monopolies in my area. However, I'm pretty close to broadcast towers and get good reception so I've cancelled the TV portion of my cable service. .

You may not know this, but you have the right to buy utilities from anywhere. For example, you may have to go through one company to buy your power, but you could buy the power from another (it will still generally show up on the same bill).

 

[myscrnnm]

Okay, so I am currently off-contract with AT&T and pay $75 a month (before taxes and fees; 40 for voice, 30 for unlimited data, and 5 for texts). I have preordered a 16GB iPhone 6 Plus with 2-year contract at $300.

Am I to understand that I will see an additional $25 charge on my phone bill over the next 24 months, for a total of $600 over the next two years, effectively making a $750 phone $900?

 

[kokonutz]

Okay, so I am currently off-contract with AT&T and pay $75 a month (before taxes and fees; 40 for voice, 30 for unlimited data, and 5 for texts). I have preordered a 16GB iPhone 6 Plus with 2-year contract at $300.

Am I to understand that I will see an additional $25 charge on my phone bill over the next 24 months, for a total of $600 over the next two years, effectively making a $750 phone $900?

No. That's only for AT&T next.

I believe AT&T had individual user = 60$ for 2gb right? I'd stick with unlimited data though, seems like people get to keep it.

 

[rui no onna]

Okay, so I am currently off-contract with AT&T and pay $75 a month (before taxes and fees; 40 for voice, 30 for unlimited data, and 5 for texts). I have preordered a 16GB iPhone 6 Plus with 2-year contract at $300.

Am I to understand that I will see an additional $25 charge on my phone bill over the next 24 months, for a total of $600 over the next two years, effectively making a $750 phone $900?

No, old plans are unaffected. The loss of $25 discount only affects subscribers who are on the new Mobile Share Value Plans (which became available Feb/Mar 2014).