Conjecture on what France might tell us about Apple and the iPhone

[Madame Defarge]

It wasn't that long ago that many plans were local or regional and you did have to pay roaming charges when travelling outside your area.

So, I guess that means we're making progress after all. No reason, why we shouldn't continue down that road, as far as I'm concerned.

Apple has not only made hundreds of millions of dollars off of the sale of the iPhone (in less than three months, mind you) it's taking a cut of the monthly charges from AT&T, too. Of course it wants to keep it's business model!

When you consider all of the issues with the iPhone, on top of the price and 5 year contract with AT&T, I think Apple has lost it's soul. You're welcome to think otherwise, but thousands of angry and upset Apple fans are beginning to see the company in a different light.

 

[PDE]

Yes Education is free, but look at the quality...

Why not look at the quality of the U.S. education system instead? take any international study of literacy and math skills, for example, and take a look at how the U.S. ranks compared to France. It might surprise you. The higher up you go, the better the U.S. system is, but up until university it is not good.

as for the Health care system.
It also is abysmal, it takes in almost 6 times the ammount of money that it needs, and is the only country that does not allow organs to be harvested when the individual died of natural causes, even unrelated, as a result killing almost 1,000 people a year.

And how many people do think suffer or die per year in the U.S. as a result of not having insurance or having inadequate insurance? Wake up! Most international studies of health care systems show France at the top in terms of quality and money spent on healthcare. The U.S., on the other hand, spends much more on healthcare than any other industrialised country and yet has almost 50 million uninsured and many more underinsured, not to mention the highest infant mortality rate in the industrialised world. My personal experience in the U.S. is that health care and the tremendous insurance hassle is pretty abysmal. I'd choose a French hospital any day over what I've had in NYC and San Franciso. Or go look at the hospitals in Scandinavia - superb care, superb facilities. And REMEMBER: health care is NOT free in any of these countries, it's just financed differently and more equitably by all citizens.



I'm just speechless....

 

[sananda]

as for the Health care system.
It also is abysmal

france comes way ahead of the US in the world heath organisation's league table.

 

[Madame Defarge]

Re: I'm just speechless....

Totally! Thanks for replying to that mind boggling post!

 

[Mackan]

I definitely think the Euro and Asia release of the iPhone will challenge Apple's decision to lock phones. Unlike the US, the majority of users around the world use various methods such as pre-paid phones for carriers.

Now the question is whether our US phones can go to these other countries and use the SIM cards from their official providers (such as O2 in UK or Deustche-TMobile) or if we are stuck with AT&T no matter what.

I don't think Apple's ideology will work well in Europe. I can't imagine many people buying and paying full price for the iPhone, as well as being locked up for a long term contract to one single carrier, and not being able to unlock the phone. That will just be considered insane.

 

[Madame Defarge]

Clarification on French issue with iPhone

This might clarify things.

From ITWire

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/14767/53/

France Telecom CEO Didier Lombard's announcement that the company's Orange operation will sell iPhones may have been premature.

French newspaper Les Echos reports the relationship between Apple and Orange is not going smoothly.

While there is a suggestion that Apple CEO Steve Jobs took offence when Lombard made the announcement without him, a bigger stumbling block seems to be a French law that prohibits any requirement that a product and a service are purchased together. This threatens Apple's plans for a single iPhone carrier in each geography.

Despite Apple's professed dislike of handset subsidies, one possibility would be to offer an unlocked iPhone in France at a price significantly higher than that of the phone plus two years service. That might have a sufficient deterrent effect without falling foul of the law, but it could also make France the centre of an international grey market in iPhones.

According to Les Echos, a source at Orange said “The risk we are evaluating is that Apple crosses France [off the iPhone list]. We have a plan B. There is still a chance that we have the iPhone, but we are very close to the limit where the company's plan is endangered."

 

[Devil's Refugee]

Apple has not only made hundreds of millions of dollars off of the sale of the iPhone (in less than three months, mind you) it's taking a cut of the monthly charges from AT&T, too. Of course it wants to keep it's business model!

When you consider all of the issues with the iPhone, on top of the price and 5 year contract with AT&T, I think Apple has lost it's soul. You're welcome to think otherwise, but thousands of angry and upset Apple fans are beginning to see the company in a different light.

Unfortunately, the reality distortion field is starting to falter. I for one won't be buying a UK iPhone until perhaps v2. I'm coming up for renewal on my contract and sadly there's nothing really to tempt me above the iPhone, but I refuse to bend over for Apple on this one.

In a way, I really hope France decline to host the iPhone and show Steve how incredibly arrogant he has become, and that he's completely misjudged the european mobile market.

 

[eddiebrock]

A part of me seriously hopes France refuses the iPhone, it's only going to make the PR nightmare worse for the company regarding unlocking.

Perhaps eventually they'll realize that their greed (getting a percentage of the carrier revenue through these exclusivity deals, something they could have easily passed on) will cost them in the end.

The longer this goes on, I predict an AppleTV like failure here.

 

[j26]

It's funny to see Apple as the problem, when in my opinion, the problem is that the EU and the Eurpopean countries are simply actively offering protectionism of their local wireless providers.

In a sane world, You could buy an iPhone in Europe and use it in any country in Europe; the same way you use it in your home country.

Think of the absurdity of it all if Apple had to negotiate with Sprint in California, AT&T in Texas, T-Mobile in Florida...but wait New York state won't allow you to sell phones that are locked to only Verizon. Now Apple has to choose between selling iPhones in NY and offering unlocked ones!

My point?

If the EU really cared about the consumer in this case and not protecting national fiefdoms, they would mandate coverage across all EU countries with no roaming.

Apple could then negotiate with one carrier and you'd know it would work across the continent with no extra fees.

You don't seem to know a lot about Europe.

It's not a single country, so the example to illustrate your point is meaningless. Could or even should NAFTA mandate that there should be one mobile carrier for the (North) Americas?

 

[CWallace]

And yet one of the goals of the European Union is to help turn Europe into a more cohesive economic, political, and social entity. A common - or at least more common - telecommunications system strikes me as something that would be helpful to bring about that goal. You would still have competition through the various wireless providers being able to branch out beyond their home countries, especially with a unified wireless standard.

 

[Sobe]

You don't seem to know a lot about Europe.

It's not a single country, so the example to illustrate your point is meaningless. Could or even should NAFTA mandate that there should be one mobile carrier for the (North) Americas?

The Analogy is:

State:USA :: Country:Europe

NAFTA and the Americas have nothing to do with it.

With the EU and the Euro, etc doesn't it make sense that if you have service in Paris that you should be able to use that same service in Berlin, Bern, or Barcelona and not be killed with roaming fees?

In the US, I can go from Washington DC to Philadelphia to Chicago, to Los Angeles and I don't pay anything different from using it in my own kitchen and without swapping sims.

I am suggesting that it would be advantageous for the people of Europe to have similar freedom.

And yet one of the goals of the European Union is to help turn Europe into a more cohesive economic, political, and social entity. A common - or at least more common - telecommunications system strikes me as something that would be helpful to bring about that goal. You would still have competition through the various wireless providers being able to branch out beyond their home countries, especially with a unified wireless standard.

Exactly. Thank you.

 

[sananda]

And yet one of the goals of the European Union is to help turn Europe into a more cohesive economic, political, and social entity. A common - or at least more common - telecommunications system strikes me as something that would be helpful to bring about that goal. You would still have competition through the various wireless providers being able to branch out beyond their home countries, especially with a unified wireless standard.

the eu have issued a directive limiting the amount the phone companies can charge for roaming within the eu.

each country deals with it's own licensing but i suppose there's nothing to prevent companies from offering europe wide tariffs.

 

[sananda]

The Analogy is:

State:USA :: Country:Europe

NAFTA and the Americas have nothing to do with it.

With the EU and the Euro, etc doesn't it make sense that if you have service in Paris that you should be able to use that same service in Berlin, Bern, or Barcelona and not be killed with roaming fees?

In the US, I can go from Washington DC to Philadelphia to Chicago, to Los Angeles and I don't pay anything different from using it in my own kitchen and without swapping sims.

I am suggesting that it would be advantageous for the people of Europe to have similar freedom.




Exactly. Thank you.

still don't understand why you think the eu is being protectionist.

 

[j26]

The Analogy is:

State:USA :: Country:Europe

NAFTA and the Americas have nothing to do with it.

With the EU and the Euro, etc doesn't it make sense that if you have service in Paris that you should be able to use that same service in Berlin, Bern, or Barcelona and not be killed with roaming fees?

In the US, I can go from Washington DC to Philadelphia to Chicago, to Los Angeles and I don't pay anything different from using it in my own kitchen and without swapping sims.

I am suggesting that it would be advantageous for the people of Europe to have similar freedom.




Exactly. Thank you.

Again, Europe is not a country. It is a union of independent states, and bears no relation to your concept of state as constituted in the USA. I still need a passport to travel between different states, so your comparison with New Jersey and Florida is meaningless, and the NAFTA comparison is more appropriate.

What gives you the idea that the EU has the authority to compel different states to operate one telecoms market? The competencies of the EU are clearly set out in a series of treaties.

On the other hand I'd love to see a single market, but it won't happen for a while yet.

 

[OllyW]

I'm afraid it's Apple, not French or European law which is the problem.

None of the other mobile phone manufacturers seem to have any issues selling their phones in Europe.

 

[Sobe]

still don't understand why you think the eu is being protectionist.

Perhaps pinning it on the EU is a poor characterization.

They have taken steps with the Eurotariff afterall.

My point is that each country will protect its own local phone companies.

 

[Sobe]

Again, Europe is not a country. It is a union of independent states, and bears no relation to your concept of state as constituted in the USA. I still need a passport to travel between different states, so your comparison with New Jersey and Florida is meaningless, and the NAFTA comparison is more appropriate.

What gives you the idea that the EU has the authority to compel different states to operate one telecoms market? The competencies of the EU are clearly set out in a series of treaties.

On the other hand I'd love to see a single market, but it won't happen for a while yet.

Of course it isn't a country. Good lord.

I'm suggesting that at least in terms of wireless phone use, if it were, the European people wouldn't have to deal with the situation that the Eurotariff tried to address.

But hey if you prefer swapping sims and roaming, enjoy.

 

[sananda]

Perhaps pinning it on the EU is a poor characterization.

They have taken steps with the Eurotariff afterall.

My point is that each country will protect its own local phone companies.

they tend not to be local phone companies though. in my country (UK) o2 is owned the spanish company telefonica, t-mobile is owned by germany's deutsche telecom, orange is owned by france telecom and only vodaphone is british. i think the companies could have europe wide plans if they wanted to.

 

[j26]

Of course it isn't a country. Good lord.

I'm suggesting that at least in terms of wireless phone use, if it were, the European people wouldn't have to deal with the situation that the Eurotariff tried to address.

But hey if you prefer swapping sims and roaming, enjoy.

Who suggested it was preferable to swap sims or have roaming?

My problem with your posts is that they are a serious mischaracterisation of what the EU actually is.

 

[seedster2]

I hope Apple falls on their face with profit sharing approach in EMEA and Asia regions

I am still waiting to see how signing exlcusive agreements is revolutionizing our cell phone experience. Visual voicemail is the only reason why the iphone cannot function fully without a dedicated provider and to be honest it's not a dealbreaker by any stretch of the imagination.

It is apparent it has more to do with filling pockets than any user end benefit. I foresee them skipping regions where they cant exercise this model rather than having unlocked models make their way into places where they have agreements in place

 

[teamturbo]

France's rebellious islamic youth can't afford iPhones.

 

[paulo999]

Perhaps pinning it on the EU is a poor characterization.

They have taken steps with the Eurotariff afterall.

My point is that each country will protect its own local phone companies.

I'm not sure your understanding is as good as you might think - or it's me that's misunderstanding you.

You are in some posts talking about roaming charges, and others about protectionist legislation (at the national, not EU, level).

Are you saying the roaming charges are a product of protectionist legislation?

 

[Fast Shadow]

France's rebellious islamic youth can't afford iPhones.

We must raise taxes in order to address this social injustice.

 

[Sobe]

Who suggested it was preferable to swap sims or have roaming?

My problem with your posts is that they are a serious mischaracterisation of what the EU actually is.

I'm quite aware of what it is. "The EU created a single market which seeks to guarantee the freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital between member states.[2] It maintains a common trade policy, agricultural and fisheries policies, and a regional development policy.[3] "

Thanks wiki.

Surely, cell phone service can be considered a good or a service and be reflected in that single market.

I'm not sure your understanding is as good as you might think - or it's me that's misunderstanding you.

You are in some posts talking about roaming charges, and others about protectionist legislation (at the national, not EU, level).

Are you saying the roaming charges are a product of protectionist legislation?

I can't really say with any certainty what the people who write the laws are thinking. So the laws may not be protectionist in design.

I think the system as a whole is protectionist and not particularly customer friendly.

Just look at this for example.

Maybe it's just a situation where the companies are not positioned to offer continental service. I don't know if that's the case or not.

All I am suggesting is that one the one hand we have people who want unlocked iPhones (or phones in general) and one of the reasons is that you can swap sims for other countries.

It would be nice (and certainly advantageous to a company like Apple of course) if they could just sell the phone to one carrier like we do in the states and get continental coverage for one monthly fee.

 

[sananda]

I can't really say with any certainty what the people who write the laws are thinking. So the laws may not be protectionist in design.

I think the system as a whole is protectionist and not particularly customer friendly.

Just look at this for example.

how is the eurotariff protectionist? roaming charges were high. the eu put a cap on them. how is that not customer friendly? it doesn't force any company to charge for roaming at all, it merely caps the charged if they do so.

perhaps i am being thick, but i really have no idea what you're saying.