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

Vodafone Gets Restraining Order On T-Mobile's iPhone Sales

I'd be quite interested to see the exact details on this - there seem to be no solid reasons given as to why such a court order should have been granted, other than Vodafone realising they made a silly mistake by passing up on teh iPhone.

If I am wrong, and there is documentation, someone please point me to it!
 
alFR said:
Looks to me like Vodafone have got the idea that the iPhone is selling well (maybe got a lot of people calling for PAC codes, eh?) and want a slice of the action. "Helping the consumer" my ass, they're just protecting their bottom line.
Click to expand...

I left voda for o2 :)
 
Hi
Me. Me. Me. W-a-a. W-a-a. W-a-a. ... Sheesh!

I'll start out by saying that I'm for unlocking and fair openness but that also means that certain DRM and SIM-locking is fine with me, as well. FairPlay ( Apple DRM ) allows me to play all of my purchased music on any iPod, on all of my computer ( we have less than five ), and still make a few CDs. What's so bad about that? So you can't use a Zen or Zune. "The sky is falling!" I can't use WM-DRM files in iTunes or within the Mac OS at all. I can't purchase a T-Mobile, Sprint, ... exclusive phone because I use and enjoy AT&T. Eh? So what? There are more than enough similar alternatives. Stop complaining!

Not everything revolves around you [or me]. It's called compromise and I'm all about fair rather than one party getting more than another. Fair means everyone is just as happy [and angry, sad, ...]. Greed means one group is happy and another is quite the opposite. What's so good about that?

Some examples on how much greed is spiraling out of conrol...It's the "I'll sue you..." syndrome.

• I'm stupid and spill coffee on myself or just did it because I want easy $$$. No one has easy $$$ and you're no different buddy. Stop poorly attempting to be creative / sneaky. ( McDonald's lawsuit )
• I'm just too lazy or stupid and don't understand that batteries eventually don't hold charge but I have replaced them in my T.V. remote for ages without complaint ( iPod battery class action )
• I'm too lazy to work / feel I'm somehow special and shouldn't need to work like everyone else. I'll try to get $$$ I don't deserve by using Photoshop to create an image showing my T.V. has been damaged by a product that is supposedly improperly designed ( Wii commotion )
...And on and on and on....

Do you remember any time in the past where a game console manufacturer has sent out so much free stuff ( Wii jackets, Wii wrist straps ) because of stupidity / greed? I don't but maybe there is an incident I'm not recalling.

In conclusion. Sure I'd really enjoy being able to do whatever I want instead of being forced to do labor for someone ( job ) but that's just not how our society is designed and either you get a job like everyone else or you live in a dirt hole. Have fun!

P.S. If you couldn't tell, I haven't decided 100% whether the intelligence level has gone done os far or people are just that selfish. Either one astonishes and disappoints me.

P.P.S The above examples are of a small number of 'loud' people but still...
 
Whilst i disagree with locking it to a carrier I can see why Apple have done it - money and the additional services (mainly visual voicemail) that can be developed.

I also don't see how this can be banned anywhere - after all they're not forcing anyone to get an iPhone: there are plenty of other phones out there where you can swap the sim card, and you're not tied to anyone!
 
bigandy said:
I'd be quite interested to see the exact details on this - there seem to be no solid reasons given as to why such a court order should have been granted, other than Vodafone realising they made a silly mistake by passing up on teh iPhone.

If I am wrong, and there is documentation, someone please point me to it!
Click to expand...

Clearly the law in germany is clear enough, otherwise the judge wouldn't have issued the orders he did (firstly stopping sales, then amending it only allowing sales of unlocked phones).

This was much talked about prior to the iphone launch but I always thought it would be the consumers who would start the legal ball rolling not a rival company.

Each country in the EU has slightly different laws regarding locked phones... they basically enact laws based on the EU directives that are passed.
Try http://www.ictregulationtoolkit.org/en/PracticeNote.aspx?id=2588 for a link to the EU legislation (particularly the last sentence - the iphone breaks this rule by not allowing unlocking at the end of the contract or if you buy your way out of the contract..).

Interesting thing about reading that. O2 must tell you the amount of any iphone subsidy, if any. Should be fun getting that out of them...

In the UK we have an almost exact mirror of the EU directive - http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/Oftel/publications/mobile/2002/sim1102.htm

Clearly germany went further than was required. Unfortunately my searching of google.de is hampered by a complete absence of any ability to speak german :p
 
EagerDragon said:
Seems like this contract with VodaPhone may become null and void after the suit.
http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/20/vodafone-to-have-exclusive-rights-to-3g-iphone-in-q1/
Click to expand...

Which of course is still only rumor anyhow.

Still, as I understadn the injunction, Vodafone is more concerned about the principle of lockin to one supplier rather than the iPhone exclusivity. They are concerned that if a phone is linked to a contract, as in iPhones case, then the mobile market will become fragmented and static. Customers would not be able to upgrade (or replace lost) phones without extending their contracts. This in turn could lead to a reduction in the sales and development of new phones.

In addition, they claim (rightly) that the customer should be able to choose any plan offered by the carrier and not be obliged to accept one of a limited number offered.

Is is sour grapes? I dont know. Does anyone had a definative answer to why Vodeafone dropped out of negotiations? Maybe the current case is directly related to the demabnds off apple, and not that the contract went to T-mobile
 
seedster2 said:
The desire to have complete control may work in computers, but I am not sure the same approach can be applied successfully in the cell market. Owners are constantly looking to customize and make their phone new again. It's a great device that was hyped so much that many aren't going to wait for Apple to rape another telecom, they'll just get an unlocked one and use it right away.
Click to expand...
Huh, it already exists in the cell market.

Apple can do quite few things to lock down the iPhone and they haven't yet. But if push comes to shove trust me. They can lock it down and force the consumer to brick so easy.

What's funny is that companies like Apple and Google are trying to change the cell phone industry, yet many consumers just don't see it.

Maybe Apple should just not sell their products in certain countries and just concentrate on those markets that are will cooperate with them.
 
whatever said:
What's funny is that companies like Apple and Google are trying to change the cell phone industry, yet many consumers just don't see it.
Click to expand...

Google might be (it's all just press releases at the moment though, and may never translate into actual hardware).

Apple certainly aren't. They're trying to make the phone industry *less* open. Not more.

The phone market at the moment is pretty open all things considered.. you have the option of buying a phone outright, buying a sim separately and doing it that way, or getting a cheap (normally free these days) phone and accepting a limited term lockin. Apple want to remove that choice.
 
csimmons said:
This is a classic example of sour grapes from a company who missed out on a good thing and are regretting it.

It does, however, raise a very interesting question: what happens when your 2 year contract runs out, and you want to switch carriers? You have to resell your iPhone to a T-Mobile user, or you're screwed. This is the only reason I hope they are able to get T-Mobile to take the SIM Lock off of the iPhone.
Click to expand...

I don't personally care much whether Vodafone has other motives, in this case it most certainly benefits the customer.

Although I wouldn't think that restrictions around reselling an iPhone would be a driving factor - being able to choose the best carrier up front is the big issue. Not everyone is in the US, not everyone has good local coverage with AT&T (or the lucky national iPhone carrier)...removing the SIM lock makes the iPhone infinitely more attractive to a lot of people.
 
EagerDragon said:
Be ready to tack another 500 to the price of the iPhone if it has to be unlocked. Apple sold it at a particular price with the condition of a 2 year contract with a particular cell-phone provider. This provided them a source of revenue for a 2 year period that they worked into the formula used to price it for you.

If you eliminate the contract, then Apple will price it for you with no cantract and no lost of revenue to them, so you are looking at 500 more and that will hurt sales as the unlocked phone will cost close to $900 US and more overseas.

I love how people don't seem to take this into consideration before they shout Hurray.
Click to expand...

Hang on, Apple sell the Touch 8gb in the UK for £199, and I assume they make profit on that?

What makes you think they make no profit on a £269 iPhone, which after all is a Touch with a £20 (or less) modem chip inside?

Kev
 
TonyHoyle said:
Google might be (it's all just press releases at the moment though, and may never translate into actual hardware).

Apple certainly aren't. They're trying to make the phone industry *less* open. Not more.
Click to expand...

And how is that.

By wrestling control away from the actual phone companies.

As it stands now the hardware vendors are at the mercy of the phone companies. The first company to break this strangle hold is Apple. By creating a phone with features that they want to promote and then presenting the phone to different carriers.

No the phone industry was closed before the iPhone and now Apple is changing the rules.
 
whatever said:
As it stands now the hardware vendors are at the mercy of the phone companies. The first company to break this strangle hold is Apple. By creating a phone with features that they want to promote and then presenting the phone to different carriers.
Click to expand...

With respect... Utter tosh.

If Nokia/Motorola/Anyone else want to create a new phone they create a new phone. They aren't at the 'mercy' of anyone and you do *not* have to go to a telco to buy one of their phones - although that's obviously the most common route.

In fact there's so much competition to have the 'latest and greatest' phone it's actually the other way around - the telcos are fighting with each other to be first to get the phones to market.

Apple's response? To give AT&T a monopoly.
 
SPUY767 said:
Looks like abuse of the legal system to me. A company makes a deal with a supplier in order to get an in demand product, then company B which invested nothing in the rwelease of said product cries about it to the high court and all of a sudden they get to use the device as well with no investment.
Click to expand...

Wrong SPUY767!!!

Germany is NOT a capitalist market! It is a regulated social market economy.
Companies can't just do what they want. Heck, I remember Walmart wasn't even permitted to sell their merchandise at their desired low prices - the state and courts forced them to comply to the state imposed prices.

Heh... Capitalists... Think their system applies for every western country.

Even though I consider the iPhone some worthless piece of junk, it's a good thing to hear that they can't just do what ever they want to...
 
ogee said:
Which of course is still only rumor anyhow.

Still, as I understadn the injunction, Vodafone is more concerned about the principle of lockin to one supplier rather than the iPhone exclusivity. They are concerned that if a phone is linked to a contract, as in iPhones case, then the mobile market will become fragmented and static. Customers would not be able to upgrade (or replace lost) phones without extending their contracts. This in turn could lead to a reduction in the sales and development of new phones.

In addition, they claim (rightly) that the customer should be able to choose any plan offered by the carrier and not be obliged to accept one of a limited number offered.

Is is sour grapes? I dont know. Does anyone had a definative answer to why Vodeafone dropped out of negotiations? Maybe the current case is directly related to the demabnds off apple, and not that the contract went to T-mobile
Click to expand...

Yes, actually this is the official reason why Vodafone is going this step.
To be honest, they are right. Nokia a selling tons of mobile phones and now Apple is comming and deciding which carrier they like and they still receive a percentage (rumous say 30%) of their monthly plans.

They want to avoid Nokia, SonyE. to come up with same requests.
 
TonyHoyle said:
Google might be (it's all just press releases at the moment though, and may never translate into actual hardware).

Apple certainly aren't. They're trying to make the phone industry *less* open. Not more.

The phone market at the moment is pretty open all things considered.. you have the option of buying a phone outright, buying a sim separately and doing it that way, or getting a cheap (normally free these days) phone and accepting a limited term lockin. Apple want to remove that choice.
Click to expand...

1. Apple has not allowed the iPhone to be branded by it's carrier partners.

2. Apple has not allowed it's carrier partners to dictate how the iPhone software should work.

3. Apple is (IMHO rightly) getting a chunk of the data plan revenues, since the data is being accessed over the device they created. I akin it to a record company getting paid for having their songs sold on iTunes.

These are not anti-choice, anti-consumer decisions. Why are you defending the carriers in this case?
 
Romano said:
Yes, actually this is the official reason why Vodafone is going this step.
To be honest, they are right. Nokia a selling tons of mobile phones and now Apple is comming and deciding which carrier they like and they still receive a percentage (rumous say 30%) of their monthly plans.

They want to avoid Nokia, SonyE. to come up with same requests.
Click to expand...

That scares me a bit. If Nokia did it as the most powerful mobile phone company they could basically dictate terms. Probably never occurred to them before.. getting kickbacks off the telcos. Ugh.
 
Sounds like Vodafone

csimmons said:
The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that as many as 5000 Vodafone Germany customers have bought iPhones. That's 5000 customers who could have otherwise purchased a Vodafone Qbowl - which was released in Germany the same day as the iPhone - and Vodafone is NOT happy about that. Vodafone has not done this in the interest of the customer, they've done this to stem the tide of customers defecting to T-Mobile. If you look at the plan that they offer for the Qbowl, the terms are even worse than T-Mobile's plans for the iPhone, plus the Qbowl is exclusive to Vodafone. Problem is: nobody cares about the Qbowl.

This is a classic example of sour grapes from a company who missed out on a good thing and are regretting it.

It does, however, raise a very interesting question: what happens when your 2 year contract runs out, and you want to switch carriers? You have to resell your iPhone to a T-Mobile user, or you're screwed. This is the only reason I hope they are able to get T-Mobile to take the SIM Lock off of the iPhone.
Click to expand...

Yep this sounds like Vodafone. Since Orange Nederlands was brought by T-mobile (Netherlands), 7 weeks ago. For the past few months, Vodafone was spaming Orange customers via sms with offers and deals to switch to their network. Since than, Orange NL blocked vodafone NL from sending sms's from specific numbers to Orange customers. This is actually illegal but it goes to show how far Telco's will go to try and keep there customer base.
 
csimmons said:
The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that as many as 5000 Vodafone Germany customers have bought iPhones. That's 5000 customers who could have otherwise purchased a Vodafone Qbowl - which was released in Germany the same day as the iPhone - and Vodafone is NOT happy about that. Vodafone has not done this in the interest of the customer, they've done this to stem the tide of customers defecting to T-Mobile. If you look at the plan that they offer for the Qbowl, the terms are even worse than T-Mobile's plans for the iPhone, plus the Qbowl is exclusive to Vodafone. Problem is: nobody cares about the Qbowl.

.
Click to expand...

As I understood, Vodafone said they had 5.000 iPhones in their Vodafone Network.
 
edesignuk said:
Guardian.

I think they just might be able to afford it. What they won't like is giving Apple a big slice of the pie, and rightly so.
Click to expand...

Well yes, in that sense they can afford it, but once they've paid for Apple's slice of the pie, and for the marketing / support / other overheads pie slices, if there's no pie left for Vodafone, then they can't afford it.

Even if you're as rich as Vodafone, you can't afford customers that actually loose you money.

But you are right. 'tis "Rightly So". :)

SL
 
So to clear everything up-

If an unlocked iPhone came to the UK it would cost the same as what o2 are charging, minus their fees?

Chances are I'll be with o2 since they offer unlimited internet. but it's nice to know that I can swop out to my Vodaphone sim and call my girlfriend for free on a top of the line phone :)
 
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