Chances Apple offers unlocked no commitment iPhone 5 on release?

[goosnarrggh]

Of course they did. Whenever the local laws allowed it they "sold" the iPhone only through one carrier for years. In Germany Deutsche Telekom.

Guess why. WARNING: it's really difficult to figure out why.

Then, with the iPhone 4 they changed this milk cow strategy all of a sudden.

Again: guess why.

As for "subsidized" (LMAO) and locked phones - what a ridiculous scam: you probably really think you paid just $199 for the phone.

I think SavMBP15 shows signs of clearly understanding the fact that they'll be paying for the remainder of the iPhone's purchase price (and even more) through fact that they're contractually obliged to purchase service from the telco for the next 24 months.

But, if consider: a typical customer probably would have continued to purchase phone service continually over the course of several years regardless of whether or not they were contractually obliged to do so, and they likely would have willingly paid about the same price from most of the major carriers to receive that service, with or without the subsidy.

Under those circumstances, it only makes sense that such a customer would end up in a better position if they accepted a long-term contract and paid a lower up-front equipment price.

 

[twitt3r]

In the UK, guaranteed.

 

[MaxBurn]

My question is this:
Why would someone who lives in the U.S., and never travels internationally, want to buy an unlocked iPhone brand new (like from Apple, or in another country)? Lets pretend they know what carrier they will use as well. Just go in the store and buy a subsidized phone and use it for 2 years.

Because if you buy an unlocked iPhone for $649 from Apple right now, you'll be paying the same rate plans from AT&T & T-Mobile or Verizon than if you bought the phone for $199 with a 2 year contract. The only difference is your unlocked phone actually costs you more in the long run because rate plans are the same for everyone, regardless of where you bought your phone.

ATT go phone prepaid is why. If you are a fairly light user you can save a bundle. But no contract means no subsidized phone. True I don't need an unlocked phone for that and I don't currently have one but it is nice for the resale.

 

[Schweitzer]

I think SavMBP15 shows signs of clearly understanding the fact that they'll be paying for the remainder of the iPhone's purchase price (and even more) through fact that they're contractually obliged to purchase service from the telco for the next 24 months.

But, if consider: a typical customer probably would have continued to purchase phone service continually over the course of several years regardless of whether or not they were contractually obliged to do so, and they likely would have willingly paid about the same price from most of the major carriers to receive that service, with or without the subsidy.

Under those circumstances, it only makes sense that such a customer would end up in a better position if they accepted a long-term contract and paid a lower up-front equipment price.

The customer has no idea whatsoever what he paid for the phone, while Apple and the carrier both know exactly what he paid for it.

And there's a very good reason for this.

That the customer is even lead to believe that the paid only $199 is a joke - about which both Apple and carrier laughed for years.

You see, if you don't even know what you're paying you have no possibility to compare prices.

The ideal customer, locked in for years.

Apple and ATT really, really love their customers.

For realz now.

 

[kid0]

hmm.. were people in canada able to pre order the "unlocked" iPhone 4s last year on the apple website? or only carrier locked ?

 

[profets]

I think they'll be available unlocked in the US. The only logical reason they weren't until recently was because of the exclusivity with AT&T.

hmm.. were people in canada able to pre order the "unlocked" iPhone 4s last year on the apple website? or only carrier locked ?

They were available unlocked from day one.

 

[EddyP]

I think they'll be available unlocked in the US. The only logical reason they weren't until recently was because of the exclusivity with AT&T.

I agree (or I hope ).

If the multi band radio rumors are true, it just seems like it would be much easier to offer them unlocked. What a pain to have one design of a phone and other "versions" locked to the many US carriers who it looks like are going to have the phone. It's easy now with ATT / VZW. They are two different phones.

We'll know more when it's released. Until then it's wishful thinking.

 

[goosnarrggh]

The customer has no idea whatsoever what he paid for the phone, while Apple and the carrier both know exactly what he paid for it.

And there's a very good reason for this.

That the customer is even lead to believe that the paid only $199 is a joke - about which both Apple and carrier laughed for years.

The customer very easily can compute their own anticipated total cost of ownership for the phone: The up-front price, plus the monthly service fees * the number of months the customer maintains a service contract, plus any buyout fee if the customer ends the service contract earlier than he might have agreed to.

It really doesn't matter what portion of this total cost ends up in Apple's hands, and how much of it ends up going to the carrier. What matters to the customer, is the total amount of dollars that leaves the customer's wallet.

If the customer chooses to go for the "subsidized" phone, agreeing to a 24 month service contract, then their total cost of ownership can be easily computed to be one of two formulae: (Limiting our discussion to AT&T in the USA for the moment, because that's the country this thread is talking about...)

1) If the customer maintains the service contract for the full 24 months (assuming a typical price plan), the TCO is $200 + ($70 * 24) = $1900. Every customer can predict this very easily.

2) If the customer chooses to terminate early, after only N months, the TCO = $200 + (70 * N) + (325 * (24 - N)). Again, this is very easy to work out if the customer knows ahead of time that they'll need to cancel their service. If the customer doesn't know that they'll need to end their service early, then they'd be better off assuming they'll need to pay the full $1900 computed above.

Similarly, if the customer plans on buying the unlocked iPhone, and use it on AT&T (because that's the only carrier in the USA with the technology and frequency bands capable of using it to its fullest extent), it is very easy to work out what their TCO will be. It will be:
$660 + (70 * N)

Now, if they choose to only use their phone for 1 month and then give it up, then their total cost of ownership for "subsidized" phone would be (200 + 70 + 315 =)$585. For the "unsubsidized" phone, their TCO would be (660 + 70 =)$730.

Clearly, they're better off going for the "subsidized" option. The value proposition only gets better for the "subsidized" option the longer they remain on the contract.

The value for the "unlocked" option only really comes into play with a customer who knows that they need to switch carriers while keeping the same phone. And in the USA, that effectively means that they know that they'll need to leave the country sometime soon.

Now, any customer who decided it would be a good idea to buy the "unsubsidized" phone through AT&T instead of buying it direct from Apple (in which case it's still locked to AT&T), was a complete fool. Because in that case they'd get all the price disadvantages of not accepting the subsidy, but without any of the convenience benefits of being able to connect the phone to another telco.