Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Just more bullying tactics to make you think its harder to switch. They have all moved to 36 month agreements to get credits for ‘free’ device. They want to keep you upside down on the device as long as possible to were the thought of being billed the remaining balance keeps people from switching.
 
Is pretty much a lock that Verizon will get their wish from this anti-consumer FCC. Is actually cheaper to buy unlock phones and not be chained to the carrier.
 
Yeah, the only reason Verizon is doing this is because they're losing subscribers faster than the speed of light
Verizon used to the be best, but something happened over time. Imo, they all became sloppy and lazy. Dont see the value of what vzw offers today.

I buy my unlocked phones directly from Apple.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: rmadsen3
Two totally different things.

If you buy a phone that is locked to Verizon it’s $30 cheaper but they will charge you an activation fee.

No, Apple rebates the fee VZW charges if you activate a phone in store; my guess is the $30 is paid to the store and Apple just rebates it.

If I buy a phone and don’t connect it to any network ever Apple charges $30 more. If that’s an activation fee, it doesn’t make sense because why am I paying an activation fee for a phone that’s not connected.

You aren't, the phone is sill $829 (which btw is vzw's online price as well), Apple is giving what I'm guessing they get from the carrier for the customer they activated.

I’m sure it’s some scheme Apple and the networks worked out to push you to them. What if I want to use an MVNMO? If it’s just supposed to be a rebate for the activation fee, why don’t carriers just not charge an activation fee?

Money. My guess I sthe fee is paid to stores, such as Best Buy or franchised VZW stores, for doing the activation. Apple choeses to give that back to you in the form of a rebate.

But activation fees are a bit of a scam to push you to using the carrier's website or phone line to activate and get the upsell chance; Apple just chooses to give the money back to the customer because they want to control the whole customer experience and make sure the customer has a working phone when they leave.
 
Last edited:
It's blindingly simple; if you want a subsidized phone you get one and agree to the contract, or buy an unlocked one and are free to do what you want.
Ok, now apply that logic to Verizon agreeing to *their* contract to offer unlock early in exchange for more spectrum and merger/purchase approvals, or is it only consumers you feel should stay on agreed to contracts?
 
  • Love
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Ok, now apply that logic to Verizon agreeing to *their* contract to offer unlock early in exchange for more spectrum and merger/purchase approvals, or is it only consumers you feel should stay on agreed to contracts?

No, and I posted earlier I think VZW should be held to the terms of their agreement as well and not lt off the hook. You ign a contract or agreement, both sides needs to honor it. If one side wants to change it, then it needs to be negotiated as well to something both sides agree on.

In VZW's case, they got spectrum in exchange for certain conditions. Want to change those ocnditions? Give up spectrum. You don't get to say I want to be let out of this but keep everything you gave me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
Is pretty much a lock that Verizon will get their wish from this anti-consumer FCC. Is actually cheaper to buy unlock phones and not be chained to the carrier.
Not everyone has $1200 cash, or wants to hand it over directly to Apple/elsewhere.

Carrier-based financing is more common than you're probably aware.
 
Ok, now apply that logic to Verizon agreeing to *their* contract to offer unlock early in exchange for more spectrum and merger/purchase approvals, or is it only consumers you feel should stay on agreed to contracts?
Verizon wants to renegotiate their contract. Consumers often try the same.
 
Let's be honest: the US is the only country where this nonsense exists. The rest of the world doesn't lock their phones nor charge the ludicrous monthly fees US carriers impose.
Their strong arming even goes so far as to commission Apple to design a US-only variant of their iphones that omit the physical SIM tray, unlike the versions the rest of the world gets, specifically to limit a user's ability to pick their preferred carrier without several extra steps.
I bought an International variant iPhone 14 specifically for the ability to swing by a convenience store as soon as I land in whatever country I'm traveling to, and pick up a SIM card with unlimited talk and data for 20-30 bucks rather than stick with ATT and add another zero to that cost. Same for when I visit parts of the country where Verizon or T-Mo are king and ATT is zero bars. Not everyone shares my use-case, but they should have the same freedom I do.
Teleco's worried about retention should have to keep customers loyal the old fashioned way: by offering the best service for the lowest price rather than being forced to through multi-year long contracts.
To be fair, eSIM is more convenient and faster to enable, especially once you have set everything up with a global provider. You may pay a few % more, but this is negligible compared to the total costs of traveling and the convenience benefits. A tray for physical SIMs is no longer a necessity.
 
No, you have to check the regular 16. Apparently it’s not on the 16 pro for some reason.
I see that now. But apparently it’s not Apple charging $30 more for the unlocked iPhone, but that carrier give Apple $30 to discount the most basic iPhone if is tied to them. $30 is really nothing, it’s just the actual cost of the iPhone without the carrier paid discount. Apple advertises the basic iPhone as starting at the lower cost using an * to indicate it includes that carrier discount.
IMG_2854.jpeg
 
Yes, let’s focus on locking people to their network instead of actually making a network people want to use. In the Reno area AT&T and Verizon are abysmal. They’re backbones are for 3G. They’re 5G pull like anywhere from 1mbps to maybe 15 MBps down. Upload .5 maybe 10 and they want to sell us that as 5G!? Who do these companies think they are? They should be forced to advertise on their backbone and not on their frequency. It’s absolutely ridiculous what they’re doing in Northern Nevada. So I disagree. I don’t think they should not be allowed to lock anybody to any network for any contract cuz of how lousy of a network product they provide.
 
Yes, let’s focus on locking people to their network instead of actually making a network people want to use. In the Reno area AT&T and Verizon are abysmal. They’re backbones are for 3G. They’re 5G pull like anywhere from 1mbps to maybe 15 MBps down. Upload .5 maybe 10 and they want to sell us that as 5G!? Who do these companies think they are? They should be forced to advertise on their backbone and not on their frequency. It’s absolutely ridiculous what they’re doing in Northern Nevada. So I disagree. I don’t think they should not be allowed to lock anybody to any network for any contract cuz of how lousy of a network product they provide.
You know who owns the spectrum (capacity, speed) in Northern Nevada?

The US government.

The telcos bid and lease spectrum (from the government), when it becomes available, and deploy capacity to offer to customers in the 210 DMAs in the USA.

Sometimes the telcos can get good spectrum in certain DMAs, sometimes they cannot. Many times, there are factors (financial, technical, regulatory) that are out of their control.

I promise you, the telcos want your money. And they know that your neighborhood might be underserved from a coverage standpoint. If it's an easy fix, they're already working on it.
 
Let’s be honest: No legitimate customer has a problem with phones being locked to the carrier given unlocking is a consumer right nowadays. The dishonest people crying and screaming are buying phones form one carrier to take advantage of some amazing deal or using it as free distribution (instead of buying it from a store that will sell to them unlocked) and hence finding it difficult to unlock. No one is stopping these undesirables (because carriers make money from service, not phone sales) from going to the manufacturer and paying their MSRP that rarely goes down. But of course these are cheap, lazy, and dishonest people trying to cheat their way into a discount, what exactly did they expect?

And yes, carriers and phone locking (at least for some short period) enable those of us carrier customers to get good deals on phones, if only for some period on a time horizon that you have to look at to see when is it optimal to upgrade or change to a competitor.
In EU Iphones are unlocked, and you can swap carriers as you want.
This creates competition on the market, and you can find really cheap mobile plans.
I for example, pay 15EUR each month in Sweden for 5G, free calls/Text and 25gb of data and a "data pot" that increases up to 100gb if I don't use my 25gb each month. This plan works in the entire EU for me with GREAT coverage.

There is no reason to lock in the phone to a carrier, just because you buy a phone with a carrier plan!
Ofc you have to pay that plan untill its end, and pay off the phone for the duration of the plan you sign.

But the fact that you can find such cheap plans, also makes buying phones with a plan much cheaper.

Competition is good! The only reason to lock you up like this is to eliminate competition!
 
how do
In EU Iphones are unlocked, and you can swap carriers as you want.

You have the same option in the US, you just won't get a subsidized iPhone.
This creates competition on the market, and you can find really cheap mobile plans.

So does being able to lock and subsidize - users get to chose what is best for them.

I for example, pay 15EUR each month in Sweden for 5G, free calls/Text and 25gb of data and a "data pot" that increases up to 100gb if I don't use my 25gb each month. This plan works in the entire EU for me with GREAT coverage.

In the US, you can get unlimited talk/text/data for 25-30$ month; there are more plans than just the major's premium ones, that have great coverage because they all use the same networks. If you want to pay for a year, they can be as low as 15-20$.

Can you move from Sweden to Germany permanently and still use your phone and not get caught up in fair use provisions becasue you have moved and now are using your phone primarily outside of the original service area? In the US, carriers treat, except possibly some low costs ones, the entire US as one big market, none of this roaming/fair-use junk; so people can keep a number no matter where they move or work without hitting caps.

There is no reason to lock in the phone to a carrier, just because you buy a phone with a carrier plan!
Ofc you have to pay that plan untill its end, and pay off the phone for the duration of the plan you sign.

You have the option to pay off the phone whenever you want to unlock on the major carriers. Locking the phone ensures you stay with them while they are paying you a subsidy.

But the fact that you can find such cheap plans, also makes buying phones with a plan much cheaper.

Competition is good! The only reason to lock you up like this is to eliminate competition!

Considering carriers will pay off switching costs if you switch tells me they compete in subsidized and non-subsidized markets pretty heavily.

People act like locking in was the only option, you have the choice to BYOP and have an unlocked phone. It's really simple, if you don't want to be locked in don't get the 'free' phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sbailey4
1. You failed
2. There's this thing call a "contract" that ties you to the carrier provider, it's this contract that creates the obligation to pay, not the sim-lock
3. If you fail to pay, your debt will be sold to a 3rd party collections firm and these have a lot more power to chase you down than a carrier

Source: I work in debt collections.
4: If your phone is locked to their service, you cannot use it when they try to skip to another carrier while IGNORING debt collectors such as yourself.
 
4: If your phone is locked to their service, you cannot use it when they try to skip to another carrier while IGNORING debt collectors such as yourself.
That's right, the sim-lock doesn't prevent the next person from using the phone with a Verizon sim-card. Which is brilliant for the provider of course, because means that if the phone remains unpaid and locked even after the contract expiry, they won't unlock the phone and will have another person who bought the phone from the debtor locked to their network become a Verizon customer. In reality, it's all about competition, it has nothing to do with some liability nonsense the other poster was so poetic about.
 
"Lame excuse?" Wow, you are out of touch with the reality of this subject. Phone fraud related to purchases of devices and locking is costing tens of millions of dollars if not $100 million a year and guess who pays? We do through higher prices for service and future products.

Lame ... I can't stop laughing at that claim . One more thing, why should Veriaon be subject to different rules that the rest of the corporate behemoths?
Because that was part of them being able to buy spectrum? Phones shouldn't be locked at all. If the fraud is as bad as you and verizon claim, then they should be able to implement other means to prevent it.
 
1. You failed
2. There's this thing call a "contract" that ties you to the carrier provider, it's this contract that creates the obligation to pay, not the sim-lock
3. If you fail to pay, your debt will be sold to a 3rd party collections firm and these have a lot more power to chase you down than a carrier

Source: I work in debt collections.
Contracts don’t matter to the thieves that steal identities to secure phones from carriers/Verizon with $0 down, and immediately resell them.

Happens every single day, even though the carriers have entire teams dedicated to fraud prevention.
 
Not really. I’m a legitimate customer and I would like the ability to add another carriers eSIM.

It’s too bad there isn’t a way to lock the original eSIM and allow an additional one still. That would be nice for international travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ELman
Carrier locking is illegal here AND carriers offer free and highly discounted phones
Quite a few comparisons to US market vs Europe. I know the mobile phone plans are quite cheap / competitive in Europe compared to the US. Part of the European advantage for the carriers is that there is high population density, compared to the US. So all things considered, you need less cell towers to provide full coverage to more people - vs the US, where there's 400M people across more than twice the area (quick google check shows EU has 470M ppl in 1.7M square miles, vs US is 400M ppl in 3.8M square miles). Canada is even worse - huge land mass, only 40M ppl.

Other thing, I'm genuinely curious, in Europe, where phones come unlocked... you're saying you can get free / highly discounted phones, does this include the latest iPhone generations? Or are these older phones?

In the US, pretty much every carrier will give you a free current generation iPhone (sometime iPhone Pro also), basically for every line you bring (eg. bring 4 lines/numbers, get 4 free latest gen iPhones). Now, part of the "cost" is that you have to sign up for the carrier's more expensive plans. And also that the "discount" is spread over (was 24, now 36) months. But the deals for new subscribers is quite significant.
 
Contracts don’t matter to the thieves that steal identities to secure phones from carriers/Verizon with $0 down, and immediately resell them.

Happens every single day, even though the carriers have entire teams dedicated to fraud prevention.

Sim-lock also doesn’t seem to matter to them, they can easily resell the phone to someone with a Verizon card. Still, it’s the contract that seals the deal and obligation to pay, not the sim-lock like the other poster claimed.
 
Sim-lock also doesn’t seem to matter to them, they can easily resell the phone to someone with a Verizon card. Still, it’s the contract that seals the deal and obligation to pay, not the sim-lock like the other poster claimed.
No, they can’t resell the phone to someone on Verizon…. Verizon will blacklist the IMEI (they always know which phones were stolen) so overseas the phone goes!

Again, a contract doesn’t matter if you used stolen/false identity to secure the iPhone in the first place. Like the thieves are scared if Verizon waives a 14-page document at them :D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.