Couple of iPhone Thoughts (100 Credit/Sim Unlock)

[carfac]

A couple thoughts I had regarding these two major iPhone areas of discussion. I have a bit more to add to these already ober-discussed topics, but hopefully some points not yet made.

1) The whole 599 to 399 price drop thing. I am in the group that is convinced that Apple had this all planned well before the initial release of the iPhone. A two hundred dollar/33% price drop- who could not predict that would cause an outrage. Apple is crazy like a fox, getting tons of publicity out of this (first bad, then positive), and for what looks like peanuts in actual cost. They still get to keep 75% or more of the early adopter fanbois tax. Note that the price drop was done just in time to kick sales over 1 million.

My observation is this. That Fanbois tax is also almost an anti-ebay tax. Consider the price was high enough to keep all but the most dedicated fans away. If priced at 399 originally, it would have been like the x-Box, Wii or cabbage patch kids- it would have sold out immediately, and STILL WOULD have sold for 699 (or more) on eBay, but Apple would have only seen profit from 399.

The high initial price does a few things- one, it keeps the initial demand down to their projected production levels (thus making sure there was no or manageable outages of product), and thus undercutting any secondary market on eBay. Two, it puts what would have been the "scalper" price into the pockets of Apple instead of the eBay hucksters.

Throw these thoughts into what we already know about the iPhone rollout, and I think the idea that it was ALL planned to go this way is nearly inescapable.

2) Regarding the sim unlock, it has been two weeks since this first became public. Don't you think it strange that we have not heard ANYTHING from the party most effected by this- ATT? I guess what I am saying is IF they had a legal leg to stand on to prevent this, or a real way to stop it, we would have seen something by now.

But nothing.

Nada.

Silence.

I think this lack of response speaks very loudly.

Just some thoughts I had while playing soduko at work....

Dave

 

[fishkorp]

of course AT&T has no legal say, in the US a user is allowed to unlock a phone by law, but the locked carrier is in no way obligated to unlock it for you and there is no law against them or the phone vendor relocking it, which is my guess as to what Apple will do. they probably have a pack of iPhones unlocked with each of the software methods right now and are working on patches to the 1.1.1 firmware that will relock the phones and possibly plug whatever it is that allows them to be unlocked in the first place. it hurts Apple too since they get revenue sharing from AT&T's voice and data plans.

 

[gceo]

It appears as though AT&T can't do anything to the end user, but I'm sure somewhere in the Att/Apple agreement there is something that states that Apple has to patch all possible holes with SW updates. That way it is an agreement between them two, and bypasses AT&T going after the end user.

 

[gkarris]

Well, AT&T is NOT subsidizing these phones. So, when you buy it - it's yours and yours to do what you please, including unlock it.

The European launch is not to far away anyways, which means they will have to provide a means of unlocking it for that part of the world...

 

[carfac]

EXACTLY MY POINT!

If ATT had ANY leg to stand on against an end user, legally, they would have done something by now. The lack of ANY reaction by ATT should point to them knowing there is nothing they can do.

So now maybe all the copyright infringers will be quiet????

 

[kdarling]

Well, AT&T is NOT subsidizing these phones. So, when you buy it - it's yours and yours to do what you please, including unlock it.

AT&T does subsidize it, from their viewpoint. Where do you think the ~$175 bounty to Apple (plus the monthly royalty) comes from? That's money that usually goes to you, the user, by way of a cheaper phone price.

Instead, Apple gets the subsidy, plus the hardware profit, plus the early buyer "fanboy tax".

That's why you would still owe a $175 early termination fee if you left the contract. AT&T has already paid that part of your subsidy to Apple. (Personally, I think Apple should pay the ETF.)

 

[carfac]

AT&T does subsidize it, from their viewpoint. Where do you think the ~$175 bounty to Apple (plus the monthly royalty) comes from?

What???? Does that 175 you mention (which I have never heard of up to this point, but I will grant you for the sake of this argument) mean that ATT pays Apple 774 (at 599+175) or 574 (at 399+175) per phone? I REALLY doubt that. ATT pays Apple something less than retail (we call it a wholesale price in the real world), and makes some profit from every phone. If ATT gets the iPhone for even a dollar less than retail, they make a profit on every sale, thus, no subsidy. Or, if ATT pays 175 OVER retail, ATT is VERY stupid!

A subsidy would be a 200 dollar phone, which wholesales at 100 to ATT, that ATT passes on at 50 to the customer. ATT eats 50, but makes it up over 2 yewars. NOT the case (unless I am VERY mistaken!) with the iPhone.