Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

sananda said:
how is the eurotariff protectionist? roaming charges were high. the eu put a cap on them. how is that not customer friendly?
Click to expand...

It's not and I didn't mean to suggest it was.

That it is needed and was adopted/passed/ratified or whatever they do is, in my opinion, a reflection of the protectionist nature in general.

The Eurotariff itself is not. If I made it look like it was, it's probably because I have been up since 3 am working on a hemorrhagic fever virus paper for a class :p
 
Sobe said:
It's not and I didn't mean to suggest it was.

That it is needed and was adopted/passed/ratified or whatever they do is, in my opinion, a reflection of the protectionist nature in general.

The Eurotariff itself is not. If I made it look like it was, it's probably because I have been up since 3 am working on a hemorrhagic fever virus paper for a class :p
Click to expand...

i think you're going to have to clarify your position. who or what is providing protection? and how?


hope your paper's going well :)
 
Sobe said:
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 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.
Click to expand...

There's quite a few providers these days that have their own presence in multiple EU countries.

So the split in Apple awarding contracts isn't because it's not possible to have a consolidated deal.

What I suspect is that Apple can get a better deal by working with the individual territories (O2 are a prime carrier in the UK, but not in Germany. T-Mobile is vice versa. It's the market share leaders with the best 'reach' who are best placed to give Apple what it wants, financially).

So yes the consumer is being disadvantaged by the partially fragmented market in the EU, but it's not actually down to either EU or national interest legislation. It is, I believe - just like the roaming charges - down to company self interest.
 
Mmm

cal6n said:
Absolutely!

How dare the French Government put the interests if its own people ahead of those of the global (read: American) multimedia corporations. What on Earth are they thinking of?
Click to expand...
When governments restrict such things as the media, they are not protecting the people form anything... To assume that being American should invite an embargo of some sort is silly.

And it tells you that the French gov't does not trust its citizens to deal maturely with media content. Quite an insult to the populace!
 
As it turns out, the French law that is at issue, has to do with forcing consumers to buy both the product (cell phone) and the service (connection) through one company. Apple forces the consumer to use only one carrier, which hands over them a percentage of the usage fees.

A good analogy might be if you wanted to buy a Toshiba LCD TV, but the only way you could get one in your area, would be through your cable provider.

The French aren't being protectionist towards the US. This is about protecting their consumer rights.
 
rjwill246 said:
When governments restrict such things as the media, they are not protecting the people form anything... To assume that being American should invite an embargo of some sort is silly.

And it tells you that the French gov't does not trust its citizens to deal maturely with media content. Quite an insult to the populace!
Click to expand...

The problem is not the populace. It's the media channels which would drop French in favor of American content in order to maximize the audience.
 
rjwill246 said:
When governments restrict such things as the media, they are not protecting the people form anything... To assume that being American should invite an embargo of some sort is silly.

And it tells you that the French gov't does not trust its citizens to deal maturely with media content. Quite an insult to the populace!
Click to expand...

what is the french government restricting? it seems to me they are against restrictions as madame defarge sets out below.

Madame Defarge said:
As it turns out, the French law that is at issue, has to do with forcing consumers to buy both the product (cell phone) and the service (connection) through one company. Apple forces the consumer to use only one carrier, which hands over them a percentage of the usage fees.

A good analogy might be if you wanted to buy a Toshiba LCD TV, but the only way you could get one in your area, would be through your cable provider.

The French aren't being protectionist towards the US. This is about protecting their consumer rights.
Click to expand...
 
There's a minimum quota for French content in the media, that's the restriction.
 
surely the French could get the phone if they offered it on 2 carriers? that gives the consumer a choice. this really is a gray area as i don't think the French mobile carriers would have bid for it if they knew that it wouldn't be sold without contract and that they could potentially get fined for being involved.

ultimately, and coincidently my opinion on this matter and unlocking / 3rd party app's / bricking is, if you don't like the T&C's involved in owning an iPhone, don't get one.

but i wish i could put my ringtones on. :D
 
herodian said:
surely the French could get the phone if they offered it on 2 carriers? that gives the consumer a choice.
Click to expand...

the point about choice is that there has to be an option of the handset being sold without any tie to any network. offering two separate tie ins doesn't do anything.
 
cube said:
There's a minimum quota for French content in the media, that's the restriction.
Click to expand...

Restriction on trade - prevention of dumping swamping a countrys artistic and cultural heritage.
Different sides of the same coin. The French have decided that some element of protection of their culture is more important that absolute wealth.
 
rjwill246 said:
When governments restrict such things as the media, they are not protecting the people form anything... To assume that being American should invite an embargo of some sort is silly.

And it tells you that the French gov't does not trust its citizens to deal maturely with media content. Quite an insult to the populace!
Click to expand...

In the U.S. there's no need for those kinds of media restrictions because there is essentially no foreign programming at all and there never really has been. Is this the choice of U.S. citizens, or is it the choice of media corporations in order to maximise profit by providing programming based on the lowest common denominator? At this stage or marketing, can the two even be separated anymore? As a 'European' living in the U.S., I'm appalled at the poor quality of television programming, except for public television.


I totally understand that there are certain 'quotas' in France, otherwise garbage U.S. programming would take over there too (it probably already has? I haven't watched French tv in a long time). Regrettably, whoever has the most money and marketing budget will win and that is often U.S. companies.
 
sananda said:
the point about choice is that there has to be an option of the handset being sold without any tie to any network. offering two separate tie ins doesn't do anything.
Click to expand...

stop baffling me with yo legal jibba jabber :D
seriously though.. how can they get round this one?

actually, how about iPhone, phone function removed but all other features available and you pay Apple X amount per month to roam/select all networks for EDGE with Apple getting billed by the carriers? if you use it.

i suppose you could include the phone function and do the same thing, but it would be a bigger business risk.
 
herodian said:
stop baffling me with yo legal jibba jabber :D
seriously though.. how can they get round this one?

actually, how about iPhone, phone function removed but all other features available and you pay Apple X amount per month to roam/select all networks for EDGE?

i suppose you could include the phone function and do the same thing, but it would be a bigger business risk.
Click to expand...

i don't know how they get around this one. i didn't even know until i read the les echos newspaper article that france has a law about this. i'm surprised apple are even considering selling iphone in france with that law in place. maybe les echos are not accurate about the law. but if they are accurate, i can fully understand france telecom thinking what is the point of their sharing revenues when the other networks will not be sharing (since the customer can buy the iphone and use it on any network). and also people like me will be buying supported warrantied unlocked iphones from france which will have o2 very annoyed.

something's going on. france telecom announced they would be selling the phone from november. but no date and no confirmation from apple.
 
sananda said:
i don't know how they get around this one. i didn't even know until i read the les echos newspaper article that france has a law about this. i'm surprised apple are even considering selling iphone in france with that law in place. maybe les echos are not accurate about the law. but if they are accurate, i can fully understand france telecom thinking what is the point of their sharing revenues when the other networks will not be sharing (since the customer can buy the iphone and use it on any network). and also people like me will be buying supported warrantied unlocked iphones from france which will have o2 very annoyed.

something's going on. france telecom announced they would be selling the phone from november. but no date and no confirmation from apple.
Click to expand...

maybe they hired Nick Freeman :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman
 
Apple's business model will simply prevent them from selling in regions where the laws are pro consumer.

I dont foresee them selling anywhere they cannot sign an exclusive and subsequently request their "additional cut" of the monthly tarriffs.

Although it's the carriers who elect to sign up with this agreement, I fail to see how this approach is revolutionizing our user experience:rolleyes: - making Steve richer yes but visual voicemail isnt a great benefit when you have to pay roaming
 
french quotas / restrictions

The law in France concerning the regulation of English speaking content being used in the media in general was put in place strictly to "protect" the French language.
More and more in the eighties then beginning of nineties, french language was being "english-ized" - more and more english words used in everyday vocabulary and enven french words used with english looking spelling etc... it's been observed form young people in school up to adults on Tvs, movies, etc.
Also, so much English speaking content was put on the radio that French creativity took a hard hit.
The law put in place created quotas by which media in general had to put a certain amount of french content on radios, TV, print, advertising.
Perceived as ultra-protectionist (only grand parents approved of this socialist-created law), it resulted in a boom in the french culture - you can listen to a lot of french speaking artists nowaday that would never have had a chance 15 years ago. So in the end, a law that might be perceived as stupidly protectionist, anti american by people who don't know about how poor the french language was 10 years ago, is actualy a GOOD measure made and maintained by a government that did exactly what a governement is supposed to do: serve its country, its people.
Secondly, and almost in the same spirit, the problem apple has with the iphone is that the government is actually protecting consumers against. The iphone supposes a closed, binding contract between the consumer and the phone company. It is a model that is still in effect in the US, but that is disappearing little by little in the EU – ever had to wait the expiration of a two year contract befor switching provider? ever had to pay huge, unjustified fees if you had to before its expiration? ever felt that because it is dominant in your area, your phone company is charging waaaayyyy too much ?
thanks to this law, that sucks for Apple, you do not have such problems in france. France Telecom/Orange, had, by the way to pay one of the largest fines in the telecommunication industry for price fixing in its cell phone division, and for many other practices that were proven to be working against consumers.

But I'm sure that Apple/Orange will find a solution (it seems they already have ..)
 
Gross Mischaracterisation

megfilmworks said:
France has a history recently of restricting freedom of thought and enterprise.
The movie and TV industry is a perfect example, they put a quota on how much foreign (US) content can be shown and distributed thus restricting the freedom of choice for the French consumer in an attempt to line the pockets of the struggling French film and TV industry.
Mon Dieu!!
Click to expand...
This is a gross mischaracterisation of the facts.

Either you are completely uninformed, or just "anti-French."
If you are a US citizen, I suppose you might be considered to have both of these bases covered. :)

France has a long history of freedom actually, much longer than the US will ever boast. They started that whole "Enlightenment" thing, remember? I hear it caught on in the rest of the world. :rolleyes:

It's actually France's insistence that it's citizens have greater freedom of choice in cell phones and cell-phone service that is the whole issue here isn't it? What a colossally ridiculous spin to put on things to imply that France is not "free" just because they refuse to air US sitcoms.

It's also completely off-topic.
 
As mentioned by someone in another thread, Apple will only rent the phone to people residing in France (not sell it). That way, Apple can have a contract and lock the phone since the person using it doesn't own it.
 
Plutonius said:
As mentioned by someone in another thread, Apple will only rent the phone to people residing in France (not sell it). That way, Apple can have a contract and lock the phone since the person using it doesn't own it.
Click to expand...

was that speculation or had that poster heard something?
 
sananda said:
was that speculation or had that poster heard something?
Click to expand...

He didn't say. It may only end up being speculation but it does sound like a way of getting around the contract / locking issue. It will be interesting to see what they end up doing.

I'm curious if anyone would consider getting one if it was only rented / leased ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back