Apple did what it did before, and now its changed its business model, its not playing anyone, its simply exsisting in the business world.
Thank you for restating my point.
Apple changes its business model (cause), AT&T readjusts prices on its end accordingly, using a model it's used for years (effect), and yet the majority of the complaints about pricing are directed towards AT&T.
I was specifically replying to drchipinski's comment about "playing games with AT&T."
If you wish that there was an option to buy a $399 iPhone 3G and a $20 data/MMS plan, then aim your ire at Apple for having changed the rules of the game.
My guess is that AT&T was quite happy with the old rules (where they lost a total of $360 in lost data/SMS income per iPhone customer over the 24 month contract) vs the new rules (where they lose $300 on day one of a persons contract when the person buys a subsidized $199 iPhone).
JML42691 said:
but there should have been an option for the EDGE data plan or the 3G
FWIW, I haven't seen a national carrier that charges more or less based on how fast your data speed is. 3G for smartphones is the same price as the slower data service.
If AT&T kept the $20 data plan as an option, then that's $15/month in lost income for them. Over a 24 month contract, that lost income totals to $360. Nothing wrong with that. They've been doing that for iPhone owners for the last year.
Here comes the problem. In addition to the $360 of lost income (which they've been swinging), they iPhone 3G is also losing them $325 in subsidy cost. They buy the iPhone 3G from Apple for $525 and sell it to you for $199 and eat the loss.
Do you think there's any business sense for AT&T to essential lose $685 (data income loss + subsidy) per iPhone sale when the loss (subsidy) for the sale of other smartphones is said to only cost them ~$200?